By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

The 3D screen of the 3DS was supposed to be the big hook of the 3DS, and that has not yielded Nintendo big results, just because you slap a touchscreen on a controller (something Sony/MS could very easily copy) does not mean the Wii U is the second coming of the Wii.

The Wiimote, a wand like controller that mimicked movements of universal games like bowling and tennis were instantly understandable by a very wide audience of mom/pop/grandpa/sister etc. Non-gamers. This is where I'm sketpical, I don't see a lot of these people coming back with the same enthusiasm.

The Wii was a completely new concept for 2006 unlike anything most people had seen. Wii U is a traditional gamepad with a touchscreen in the middle of it. Apples and oranges if you ask me.

A control pad with like 20 buttons on it requiring people to look up at the TV and down the screen intermittently and being sold on concepts like "Metroid Blast" is not as universal/demographic breaking as playing Wii Sports with the Wiimote.

Kinect is a lot of ways IMO is the actual successor to the Wii concept, the natural step beyond a wand controller that can detect arm movement is a sensor that can detect full body movement. Wii U is Nintendo basically trying to move back from such an overly casual approach to try and get a better balance of core gamers because they know they can't just rely only on casuals anymore.

Microsoft is really honestly the only one that has a good balance of both core and casual players already. Nintendo basically ceded their entire presence in the core market, even with a 100 million userbase they can't even market/sell product like Xenoblade because there's no audience for that type of game on the Wii platform. Sony doesn't know what they're doing with PS Move so they're stuck with more of a core base. MS has the lead core audience in the West and also with Kinect successfully showed they could attract a good amount of casuals.