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

Lots of excellent points being made which I pretty much agree with all of them to some extent.

Primarily - WiiU is misnamed because it's much more of a Gamecube 2 than a Wii 2. I don't mean in sales (although that's reflective) I mean in principal. Wii was all about getting rid of the dual analog controller to bring gaming back to the masses by lowering the barrier to entry. Which worked wonders which Apple/Android and to a lesser extent Kinect are now benefiting from. By bringing back a dual analog controller, with a touch screen that serves no obvious purpose (aside from the under-advertised off-tv play) Nintendo lumped Wii2 back into the same basket that PS3/360 are in - to it's detriment because those systems have the same features - often better and WAY more games for a lot less and they are cheaper systems.

With Wii, it made sense to own a Wii and an HD system because they offered different experiences (aside from Mario/Zelda games). WiiU is basically a PS3 with an added touch screen but no games. Why would I buy one if I already own a PS3/360 or buy one over a PS3/360?

The best thing Nintendo could have done to answer the threat that mobile devices presented is to create a system that did things mobile could never do (take the Wii idea of simplicity, motion, fun, up to the next level). Not incorporate the same functionality as mobile - poorly on a controller that ditched Wii's main premise and then turn around and name it WiiU.