I'll admit that I might be out-of-touch when it comes to this sort of speculation; for that matter, I'm not sure what the broader opinion on this topic is. But it seems pretty prevalent, and I wanted to address it. Basically, what it comes down to is that I have a problem with the idea that the name of the Wii U leads to it being confused as a Wii accessory, and this somehow negatively affects sales.
Let's assume that a significant portion of consumers think it's a Wii accessory, rather than an upgrade to the Wii. Let's further assume that these are people who own a Wii; otherwise, the point is moot, since to a non-Wii owner the distinction is largely meaningless. Finally, let's assume that these Wii owners have both a passing knowledge with Wii accessories and a working brain. Such a Wii owner would probably expect the accessory in question to be $80, $100 at the outside.
Now, let's divide this demographic into two groups: those who think it is a peripheral and will attempt to purchase it, and those who think it is a peripheral and don't want it.
For the first case, the confusion is fleeting. The go looking for a Wii U and find out it's a console, which takes the confusion out of the equation.
The second...this is a group that thinks that the Wii U is an add-on to a system they already own, and is almost 1/4 the price it actually is...and they don't want to buy it. How does telling them it's a much more expsneive stand-alone system make them more willing to buy it?
I'm not really interested in a broader discussion about the state of the Wii U; it's been done to death, and I'm not feeling up to a. But it's possible I simply lack perspective here, which is why I simply present the position and ask whether or not it holds water.
I believe in honesty, civility, generosity, practicality, and impartiality.
