Can anything save us from the "can anything save the Wii U" debates?

[Alby_da_Wolf]

DolPhanTendo said:

oniyide said:
People are going to move goalposts and change defintion to make things look better. Its nature. When WIi was winning nobody brought up the profit thing. They didnt need too. Numbers were clear. Now that they are on a fast track to dead last some wanna change the defintion of what a failure is.

The reason why they bring up profit because it was their cash cow. Everyone knew it was the GameCube with motion controls did not lose any money at launch because they spent little money into the hardware itself. 

Well, when they discovered that thanks to XB360 and PS3 prices they could even price the Wii $250 at launch instead of the planned $200 and still be the cheapest by far, they could have used 40 of those extra $50 to add some main RAM and make the WiiMote an actual WiiMote Plus, as they initial PR had hinted, befor they settled for the less precise original WiiMote. More main RAM would have made ports from other platforms easier and WMPlus capabilities since the start would have made its use appealing also for 3rd parties, allowing not only the most casual games, but also more hardcore ones, all this togeher could have allowed Wii to live one more year before replacement, not only selling more, but triggering also a virtuous circle for Wii U HW capabilities and costs and for the whole Wii brand name, as launching one year later could have allowed to equip it, for the same costs or a little lower, with more main RAM and a little more more computing power (again making ports easier, even not pushing graphics as much as competitors, so keeping native dev costs lower), while one year later also the Upad's screen cost would have been lower, thanks to economies of scale brought by tablets,phablets and lage smartphones, while a Wii brand still in a better shape would have granted Wii U a better start.