yes they are. the mix of better graphics, native 720p and 60fps early on already proves this.

There's nothing on the Wii U that's "miles" beyond Halo 4. 

There's two games in XCX and Mario Kart 8 that really look nice, but it's not that much different from Rogue Squadron II/III or Resident Evil 4 looking better than anything on the PS2. 

Games on Wii U should look better. It has a better GPU even at 350 GFLOPS, that's a full 40% improvement over the 360 with double the RAM and triple the eDRAM. Xenoblade X should look better than anything on the PS3/360. But it's not a generational leap either. 

Quite frankly the jump from N64 to Dreamcast is considerably bigger. If you read the Iwata Asks on the Wii U's development, Nintendo's main priority was limiting power consumption to about 33 watts -- that's what they spent most of their time on. They could've gotten a much more powerful GPU from AMD most likely had they been willing to compromise on the size/electricity restrictions they put on the device. 

Even AMD's cheapo $120 GPUs at the time like the 4850 punch well above 500 GFLOPS and run circles around the Wii U being able to run many games with 360/PS3 level fidelity at 1080P/60 fps. The 4850 sure as hell wasn't fitting into a 33 watt power envelope though ... that was the problem. I suspect Nintendo was also hamstrung by having to incorporate Wii backward's compatibility rather than being able to simply choose the best tech. 

^ this.

Sounds like new system wont keep the "gamepad", or the same backwards compatibility with the Wii U.

Honestly? no biggie though.

I think this is for the best.

Dont make a new Wii U 2 or such, make it more powerfull. Drop the silly gamepad and games that make use of gamepads, and focus it on something differnt.

"but it's not that much different from Rogue Squadron II/III or Resident Evil 4 looking better than anything on the PS2. "

Yeah, no. as I said, graphics + resolution + framerate. those don't lie.

the jump from nintendo 64 to dreamcast is also way bigger than ps360 to ps4, x1 and wii u.

Yes I was,.... the new gamepad was as surprise.

Guess what? it made the consol expensive, for little to no reason and I dislike playing on the gamepad.

Microsoft tried being differnt, when they included kinect 2.0 in every Xbox1 at launch.... guess what? it made the consol more expensive than it needed to be, for little to no reason (gameplay wise).

are you seeing a patern here?

Being unique is okay.... surprises are fine, as long as their cheap as hell to do.

Want a good surprise? make a decent standart controller for us nintendo and have that ship with every consol instead.

Make your system useing x86 and a amd gpu apu, so you can get back all the 3rd party developers you lost with the Wii U.

There are a fair number of 720p/60 fps games on the PS3/360 anyway, it's not like that's anything super special in and of itself. 

Mario Kart 8 basically has no AA going on at all either. 

And yes I stand by it, I think XBox to PS2 is fairly the same thing as Wii U to PS3/360. 

Wii U is in no way, shape, or form in the same category as the X1/PS4. Nintendo could have had that class of system if they were willing to compromise on the 33 watt/console must be super small from day 1 thing ... they weren't. 

Halo 4 is better looking than any Wii U game save maybe Xenoblade X. I'd say its equal with Mario Kart. 

The majority of ps360 titles are sub hd 30fps, and the graphics are quite behind wii u's exclusives.

"Wii U is in no way, shape, or form in the same category as the X1/PS4"

By definition, each console is in a category of it's own, because they nowhere near equal in specs. with that said, wii u, x1 and ps4 are all 8th gen platforms with a comparable power range. the difference in raw specs proportion from wii u to ps4 is bigger than ps2 to xb, but diminishing returns make up for that when we look at the games.

"Halo 4 is better looking than any Wii U game save maybe Xenoblade X. I'd say its equal with Mario Kart."

Just checked, it's not. but it's indeed well above the x360 standard.

Do not give me any inovations cause that would induce me to thinking, and this hurts my head.

It's better looking than any game on Wii U outside maybe 2 or 3 total (one of which hasn't even been released yet). 

Xenoblade X or MK8 are not the "standard" looking Wii U title either ... more like something like LEGO City is what the average Wii U game looks like. 

Nintendo should've just ditched the Game Pad idea and made it an accessory (when you're 3 years in and you don't even have one killer app for a controller ... the controller was bad idea, sorry Nintendo) and just used a more modified PC GPU like the 4850 which was freaking 4 years old by the time the Wii U came out but would run circles around a Wii U. Maybe on a 28nm manufacturing process to reduce electricity. 

They would've had a system far more powerful than the Wii U. 

"I'm going to buy this console because it consumes less electricity" ... said no one ever, other than maybe the Greenpeace audience, who probably don't buy consoles to begin with. Stupid design decisions all around. 

3d world, bayo 2, tropical freeze, smash bros (less graphics but 1080p 60fps), zelda, star fox (possibly).

"a more modified PC GPU like the 4850 which was freaking 4 years old by the time the Wii U came out but would run circles around a Wii U"

since you are clearly underestimating wii u's gpu, that's also not true. and taking the gamepad away would just increase specs a little if the money was reinvested.