The advantage of having won the previous generation is relative I would say though. Not that I disagree that Nintendo has an advantage in launching first, but the Wii being the best selling home console this generation is only an advantage if the Wii owners are prepared to "upgrade", and I'm not sure that many Wii owners want to upgrade.

This is purely speculation, but I don't think the Wii U will hold the same appeal as the Wii. The Wii got hyped on the premise of new ways to control games, but the Wii U is presenting something people already know. We know tablets and we know "old" controllers. Combined with the fact that Wii owners spend less time on their consoles than their PS360 counterparts (in the US at least), and I don't think many people feel like they will need to buy the Wii U, at least for a while.

Whether PS360 owners feel any different is of course important to know in this discussion, but assuming that all three will essentially put the same console out, I think PS360 owners are likely to choose something they already have a commitment to, in the form of achievements or trophies perhaps, or downloadable games.

I reject that reasoning from both of you; based on this generation and others, I have no reason to believe that there's such a thing as carrying over console loyalty for a large crowd. If there was, PS3 wouldn't have taken this long to really get going, and the 360 wouldn't have done as well as it did.

The Wii will not determine the success of the Wii U; the Wii U will determine the success of the Wii U.

I think you both misunderstand what the advantage of having a larger userbase is ... What I'm really talking about is brand loyalty and vendor lock in; and the more generic and interchangeable the products are the more these factors matter.

Regardless of whether you're looking at beverages, vehicles, or household cleaning products people have a demonstrated track record of buying products based on brand loyalty. It can't compensate for releasing a system that is $200 too expensive, or to protect you against a much more exciting and inovative product that has been released to specifically target a large portion of your userbase, but it can sway people to buy your system when all other factors are practically equal.

I simply have never been presented a convincing argument for brand loyalty in the context of video games. It didn't help the N64, it didn't really help the Super Nintendo, it damn sure didn't help the PS3, it wasn't what propped up the DS or the Wii.

From what I can discern, brand loyalty in the gaming sphere takes a firm backseat to compelling software. For most gamers, the brands might as well not exist.

I would actually argue that brand loyalty helped both the N64 and PS3 substantially ... The N64 sold 66% as many units as the SNES and was the best selling console that wasn't the market leader until this generation; and the PS3 may be on tract to being the second place console, and best selling second place console to date. With both these systems it is highly likely that they would have been market failures within their first couple of years had they not had the massive established userbase from their previous generation system.

You're trying to look at brand loyalty as a "magic bullet" that guarantees a "win", when what I'm saying that it is an advantage that helps a system sell better than it would have otherwise. Product loyalty, vendor lock-in through backwards compatibility, and being first to market are not the most important factors in what systems people choose to buy but do have an impact; especially when there is little difference between the systems otherwise.

I most certainly do not think of brand loyalty that way; rather, you seem to be framing it that way, even in the first paragraph. I'd sooner attribute the growth of the N64 and the PS3 - well, growth of the PS3, and then whatever sales the N64 managed to get - to their libraries. Brand loyalty might have something to do with it, certainly, but framing it as a major contributing factor feels disingenuous.

And my speculation relates to the kind of loyalty Nintento gained from the part of the market the Wii expanded into, people who haven't done much in gaming before. They were attracted to the Wii because of the new ways it allowed you to play, but as the Wii U doesn't seem to offer any "revolutionary" gameplay, why should these people upgrade?

I'm simply speculating that the Wii U won't have the same impact with that crowd as the Wii had, partially because of the lack of revolutionary features and partially because the Wii has their needs covered. That depends on how those game time numbers are interpreted of course. Are people not playing a lot because they don't have the content they want? Or are people not playing a lot because they only take it for occasional use, like Mario Kart when buddies come over, or Wii Fit when you want to get your heartrate going a bit?

@ Khuutra

I completely agree that the Wii U will make its mark based on its own merits. I'm arguing with Squirrel why Wii owners won't be a great help for the Wii U.

If you're referring to my speculation on the PS360, I'll say that it is wildly speculative, but PS360 owners may have more to entice them to go with the same manufacturer again than Wii owners do, through their online accounts. I have no idea if it's the kind of thing that might matter to PS360 owners.

And yet the exact same could be said of the Nintendo DS, and the 3DS has become (one of) the fastest selling consoles of all time ...
On top of that the same could be said of the Playstation, and the PS2 became (one of) the fastest selling consoles of all time ...

There are countless reasons why people upgrade to the next generation, and these reasons have been proven time and time again to be as valid for new gamers as they are for established gamers. Why would this generation be different?

The 3DS is still nowhere near the sales of the DS, so whether the DS audience will buck the speculation is unproven. The PS/PS2 example may be correct, though I think the demographics are quite different from the Wii. No hard data, but I can't imagine either the PS or PS2 held the same kind of appeal to their demographic as the Wii has to the part of its demographic we've been discussing.

I'm not saying the Wii hasn't managed to capture an audience that will want to upgrade to the Wii U, or another system for that matter. But I think a part of the Wii demographic isn't going to be particularly enticed to upgrade. Whether that group will have a noticable impact on the Wii U sales is a different matter.

Next gen all the consoles with similar features and targets -> ZOMFG, RED OCEAN!!! -> Consoles D0M3D!!!!!

So everybody stop wasting precious bytes already, might as well stop discussing consoles right now and begin talking only about PC gaming.