The PS2's most successful games were "core" titles though. If you look at the PS2's top 10 you'll see three Grand Theft Auto titles (timed exclusive) , two Gran Turismo titles (exclusive), two Final Fantasy titles (exclusive), two Need for Speed titles and a Medal of Honor game. I don't see Nintendo securing major third-party core exclusives. Why would core gamers all of a sudden pick up Wii 2/HD to play Call of Duty and what not when they can play Call of Duty on their 360 or PS3? Because it has better graphics? You need more than just graphics to convince this crowd to defect (see the Xbox vs PS2) to defect. Nintendo's reputation is also really poor with that crowd. The Playstation and Xbox brand are associated with "core" gaming while Nintendo is associated with "kiddie" or "casual". The core demographic is not Nintendo's meal ticket. The type of core games that do well on the Wii are usually niche games with a cult audience (ie. No More Heroes). And it's games like No More Heroes why I bought the Wii in the first place but No More Heroes is not something that can appeal to the mainstream "core" (the gamers who only play popular shit like Call of Duty and Assassin's Creed). Nintendo will never win over the Call of Duty crowd.

You seem to view the gaming industry as stagnant. That isn't the case. The Xbox had terrible support from Japanese third party developers. The 360 has had strong support from Japanese third party developers. The year head start was key to that difference. Before you mention moneyhats, MS was throwing more money around during the Xbox era than the 360 era, hell they tried to buy Nintendo, Sega, and Square Enix outright. The difference was that they didn't have the headstart to gain a foothold.

lol what makes a game hardcore?

The Xbox brand was always associated with the 12-34 male demographic. So titles that appealed to this demographic like Grand Theft Auto, Call of Duty, etc. fit well with the Xbox brand. So the Xbox was able to take advantage of the advantages of being a first mover, having a platform that is easier to develop for and a cheaper console. I don't see the Nintendo brand winning over this same demographic like the Xbox brand has (actually I shouldn't say that because they probably will counter with $500-600 consoles and make a repeat of the whole PS3 situation again....)

Also the first mover advantage doesn't always work out. Look at the Dreamcast. Way more powerful than the PS1. But ultimately Sony fans decided to wait it out for the PS2. And after the PS2 hit it's stride after a slow start, the Dreamcast was annihiliated. I don`t see the so-called "core" gamer rushing out to buy a Wii 2/HD so that they can play a graphically richer ports of games they already enjoy on the Xbox 360/PS3. That's now how the Xbox beat the PS2. The PS2 software support had to dry up first for the Xbox to take advantage. I don't see Call of Duty, Grand Theft Auto, etc. releasing exclusively on Wii 2/HD. I just don't. These weren't exclusive on the 360 either but the PS3 launched at freakin $600. So as long as MS and Sony don't feel the urge to wave their dicks around and rush out a $500-600 console, they have nothing to worry about. Demand won't die for the Xbox 360 and PS3 anytime soon. I have a feeling that MS and Sony will screw things up anyway though. With Sony's insistence to make the same mistakes over and over again ($250 PSP launch, $500-600 PS3, $250 PSP Go launch, NGP probably costing an arm and a leg), who knows.

Dreamcast died because Sega ran out  of money. Among other things, like Sega pissing off Western and Japanese retailers and developers with their mishandling of the Saturn. It's launch in the US and it's early shuttering in Japan. They were 2 billion dollars in debt when they launched the Dreamcast. They were so short on cash they actualy cut the Dreamcast's RAM and fill rate in half.

As for you Xbox comments, you seemed to have completely missed my point. The Xbox went from having poor Japanese support to it having strong support in one generation. They did so because of the year head start. That's what gave MS the opening to strengthen their third part support. Sony and MS would be stupid to give Nintendo such an opening.

Don't forget that after how poorly supported the Sega CD, 32X, and Saturn were only Sega's most dedicated fans believed the Dreamcast could be successful.

You're suggesting that when fighting a competing console with similar specs, Sony doesn't have enough 1st party exclusives to maintain 'core' gamers?   You sound like the biggest Nintendo fanboy alive.   The only 'Core' games Wii2 is going to have are the exact same 3rd party 'core' games the PS3 has minus Sony 1st/2nd party games - which are great.

There will be a few techno-geeks who'll buy whatever the latest thing is, but that doesn't mean they'll sell their PS3.  They'll keep it for the exclusive Sony games.    

The only really 'core' game Nintendo makes are Zelda (which is coming out this year on Wii and won't be on Wii2 anytime soon) and Super Smash Brothers.  

Wii 2 is not about pulling core gamers from PS3/360, it's about keeping casuals from upgrading to those systems, giving the Nintendo core the Nintendo system they want (one with good 3rd party stuff) and giving the 3rd parties a system they can develop for without extra cost (like making a different version of X game for Wii).

Sure a lot of gamers will buy Wii2 cause it's new and cool. But that doesn't mean they stop buying Sony games.   Now 360 which doesn't really have many exclusives anymore....   That could be in some trouble.

At this rate, MS and Sony can wait a whole year after the Cafe to release their next systems. At this rate, itll be relegated to current-gen ports, but given how much of a big step forward MS and Sonys consoles will be, itll be another Wii situation.

Also, the 360 and PS3 will be dirt cheap by then with an extensive library of games, are we all forgetting the PS2 outsold the 360 in its first year?

this

also, if the rumors are true and wii2 will release late 2012, it will not be leaps and bounds more powerfull than the PS360. Why? It seams that people are neglecting to take into account the cost (ie development cost/production cost/cost of new tech). If the Wii2 were to be significantly more powerfull than the PS360, then It will sure as hell be significantly more expensive than either the PS3 and the Xbox360 when it launches. How much do you people see the PS3 and the XBox360 will be by the time the Wii2 releases? that price point of the PS3 and Xbox360 at the launch of the Wii2 will more or less be how much the tech in both systems will most likely be. Having significanlty higher tech on teh Wii2 would mean that it would cost a whole lot more. It would most likely pull a PS3 and sell like shit due to its high price.

Sure a nice game line up could help a bit, but bear in mind that MS and Sony wont be sitting around twidling their thumbs. Both will most likely be scrambling to put up one hell of a game line up when the Wii2 launches to counter sales. Not to mention, price offs and nice game bundles can help counter the Wii2s launch.

Now if Nintendo wants to be competative price wise, the Wii2 will have more power but not enough that it would render the current HD twins obsolete.

The way I see it, the Wii2 will just be like a WiiHD and 3rd party will just port games to the Wii2 or 3rd party games will have quality aimed at the least common demnominater of the 3 consoles waseting any advantage in power the Wii2 might have.

IMO, SOny and MS can take their sweet time in releasing their next console and not be bothered much by the Wii2.

Its been over 5 years since the XBox 360 launched, it has been "obsolete" technology for several years now, and by the end of 2012 the average netbook or tablet PC will have more processing power than the HD consoles. It is highly likely that Nintendo could (if they wanted to) release a system that was 6 to 10 times as powerful as the HD consoles and still sell it for a reasonable price without losing significant amounts of money in 2012 ... This isn't because Nintendo is "special", technology has just advanced that far.