Firstly, what exactly is a 'hook'? Which consoles have had 'hooks'. Are some 'hooks' more significant than others? You seem to agree that motion controllers and the Wii U's touchscreen are hooks. So, is a hook merely a hardware trait exclusively found on one system. Or is it any exclusive perk? I think having a superior online interface is as important, if not more important, than having a touchscreen and asymmetrical gameplay (what the hell is that anyway?).
Secondly, we do not know how significant a 'hook' is. We only have one generation with a clear correlation between a hook and success. The Wii was the only generation-winner with a hook. Every other generation-winning console sold because of a conjunction of software and pricing. That's not enough evidence to make any confident assertions of how significant a hook is. Also, the Wii had plenty of other things besides a hook. The WIi had an incredibly low price in comparison to its conpetition. Some might even argue that it had compelling software. The Wii's hook was definitely a significant factor to the Wii's success. But considering the Wii's additional factors for success, it's difficult to know how significant the hook was. It definitely helped. But how much did it help? Would the Wii have been a failure without the hook? With it's software and pricing, I don't think it woud have.
Thirdly, You need to clearly define what you mean by 'fail'. At the moment, everyone's just using assumed definitions of failing/succeeding, which makes many of the posts here meaningless. By 'fail', you could mean that the PS4/720 will be outsold by the Wii U. In that case, I cannot argue against you. The Wii U's hook may be so significant that it propels the Wii U above the PS4 & 720's sales. I could see that happening. I really don't know what will happen. And I doubt you know either, but I cannot say with any confidence whether you're wrong or right.
However, when you say 'fail', you could mean that the PS4 & the 720 will be financial disasters and will fail to create sustainable profit. If that's what you mean, then I will have to disagree with you. Before this generation, there have been many successful consoles without a 'hook'. Similarly, there were also many failed consoles with a hook. Looking at past generations, there seems to be no strong correlation between a 'hook' and success. The only evidence that suggests hooks increase success is the Wii. But that's only one incident. That's not nearly sufficient evidence to counter all the examples of successsful consoles without hooks and failed consoles with hooks. Sure, you could make the argument that the market is changing and hooks are becoming a necessity for success. But, with the Wii as your only supporting evidence, your argument is weak. Firstly, the Wii is your only example. Secondly, it only suggests that a hook improves success; Not that it's necessary for success. There's a difference. Even this generation, the Xbox 360 garnered an enourmous sum of profit. I don't think the Xbox 360 had a hook - At least not any hooks that the X720 won't also have.
So, using this generation as evidence, you could argue that a hook improves success. I would agree with that. But if you're saying a hook is necessary for success, then that would be unjustified. Thus, claiming the X720 and PS4 will fail as a result of lacking a hook, is also unjustified. Of course I'm is assuming that by 'failing', you mean being a financial disaster and failing to create sustainable profit. So, you really need to clarify what you mean.
