I think what he means is that the system is probably capable of some intense graphics if they're struggling to get "full game streaming" to two controllers simultaneously.

Ok I see what he means.

Still doesn't make sense - the resolution determines the bandwidth of the streaming, and that remains fixed.

Bluetooth 1.0 through 3.0 are very low-bandwith wireless connections that are inadequate for the straming of video (even standard definition video) ...

Bluetooth 3.0 + HS, and Bluetooth 4.0 are newer versions (far newer than the PS3) and have the bandwidth to stream video, but I believe their bandwidth is split between all connected devices and I doubt any one Bluetooth controller could support streaming on more than 2 devices at the same time. You could (possibly) use multiple Bluetooth controllers, but then you would run into processing power problems when trying to render to so many devices at the same time.

Sounds like a 1 UP to me!

good!

The fact that it wasn't powerful enough (or capable enough) to support 2 or more "tablet" controllers shows how incredibly short-sighted (and cheap) Nintendo is.

On the positive side, now that we know they are shooting for at least 2 tablet controllers per console, the extra boost in hardware will hopefully translate to the software side as well.

Ideally I'd like to have 2 tablet controllers that can work independent of one another... i.e. player 1 could be playing a game on the main TV on the Wii U itself, while player 2 could be playing a simple game on the tablet's screen like the Othello game shown off at E3, or even just surfing the web or something.

I TOTALLY get that streaming 4 unique full HD screans is probably never going to happen. That's why I said it should be left to the developers since I can easily imagine uses for 4 tablets without the need for each of them having HD streamed straigth to them.

Get what I'm saying? I don't see a need for Nintendo to put a limit on that - it should be up to the dev.

That's what i'm wondering. While there are a lot of issues rendering multiplayer games graphically, i can't imagine there'd be an issue making 4 simple GUI's to serve as additional buttons for plotting strategies (like in Madden) or whatnot

Nintendo could put a strict limit on the amount of V-RAM the Wii U can process and that would put an effective limit on how much could be streamed out

I don't know the implementation details, but from my understanding the tablet is just a "dummy" device and I wouldn't be surprised if it doesn't (really) have any processing power or memory on it; and it only displays the data that is streamed to it. If this is truly the case, I wouldn't be surprised if the system uses up the same wireless bandwidth to display a static image of buttons as a detailed real-time rendered image.

The reason to take this approach is to keep the cost of the controller down because (outside of the cost of the screen) the tablet controller would be about as complicated and expensive as a conventional controller. With how inexpensive touch screens have gotten, it is possible that Nintendo could sell these controllers for $10 to $25 more than a conventional controller where it would be substantially more expensive to make them "smarter".

The problem isn't the fact that the Wii U can't handle more than one tablet, because it should be able to. The problem is managing two HD quality streams to two different tablets while still processing the "the most up-to-date HD images" on TV at the same time. After all, didn't Reggie/Miyamoto/Iwata say that it can support two different controllers at once after E3? 

The tablets working indepently of each other sounds like a plan, but I doubt that developers will take advantage of it until Nintendo does themselves, and I doubt they will.