The hardware has improved as much in the period 2005 to 2012 as it did from 1999 to 2006, but the software has not; and the primary reason for this is based in business not technology. If the majority of game sales comes from console versions of your game you're not going to dramatically increase the budget of your game to push the latest and greatest PC graphics technology. High end graphics cards can run most of the same games as consoles at their highest detail settings, at resolutions far above 1080p and still maintain frame-rates above 100fps or 120fps.

To understand what I would expect from the Wii U based on this Dreamcast to Wii model, I wouldn't be surprised in the Wii U could run a game like Crysis 2 at the highest possible detail level at a resolution of 720p @ 30fps. Certainly, the resolution and frame-rate would be lower than people would desire, but I doubt people would be upset about the visuals produced:

Didn't read the OP?

I don't think it is necessary to have expansion slots at this point in time ...

My expectation is that any processing power improvement beyond the 4 times XBox 360 processing power level will mostly be used for technical features, not meaningful improvements. Certainly, Microsoft and Sony could produce a super high performance system but they would (probably) still play the exact same games at similar levels of graphical detail; and the Wii U would play these games at 720p@30fps with the more powerful console having higher-resolution, better frame-rate, and/or in 3D.

I suspect that the number of people who would spend $100 to $150 more to play a game at 1080p@60fps rather than 720p@30fps is actually pretty small; and the number of people who would pay $200 to $250 more to play that game at 1080p@60fps in 3D is almost non-existent.

I don't think it would cost $150. Projecting to late 2014, AMD will likely be able to give Nintendo a small, cool-running 2+ TFLOP GPU + more RAM for $60 (manufacturing cost is a lot different from the price you or I pay for a AMD GPU at the store), that they could turn around and sell at retail for say $79.99. Hell, you can buy the 6670 GPU reported to be in the XBox 720 for $70 from the store *today* (lol).

Then devs can make all those fancy-schmancy Unreal 4 engine games with the same fidelity on the Wii U. And if you are a more casual gamer who doesn't have the add-on, the game as you say can just scale down.

And I mean it's not some radical idea, pretty much all Nintendo consoles have had an Expansion Slot in the past, even if the Wii didn't, the Wiimote did which allowed for the addition of WM+.

It's a reasonable compromise with third parties that lets them put the Wii U in the same bracket as the PS4/720/PC, without Nintendo having to build a risky/expensive system for 2012.

I don't even think a Crossfire style port/slot costs much either ... even the cheapest of the cheap AMD GPUs have them nowadays.

lololol

OT - I don't really think there is any possiblility that the wii U's processing and such is actually anything less than the ps360 now.  but you do have to consider that since it supports streaming to the wii U tablet some of the extra specs are going directly to that.  how much?  no clue...maybe 10%?  more? less? so even if it is 2x better overall only 1.5x goes to actual onscreen improvements.  not much imo.

I think the best evidence we have is the zelda demo. that's the only real thing in a sea of speculation and rumor.  it looks quite nice no doubt but it's still basically on par with ps360's top games.  maybe that just means that even i have reached my limit of graphic whoreyness but when i look at the samaritan demo epic put out there i see a huge leap over current gen.  my assumption is ps4 and nextbox will be in that ballpark which to me means the wiiU is a gen behind techical specs wise.

I like my ps3 over my 360 but i'd in no way ever say or even try to imply that my friends should even consider getting a ps3 as an upgrade to a 360.  if the wii U is closer to the ps360 and gets only the multiplats from those systems....well i and about 100M households WW already have that in our living rooms already.  how can i really consider that an upgrade??

anyhoo...can't wait for E3 to get past this rumor phase.

but upset is purely a relative.  3DS specs launched and we had our posts about how 3DS is better speced than psp and it shows how nintendo is going for core and high processing power and all that jazz.  then vita announced a bit later and 3DS specs look laughable in comparison.

people will be happy with these visuals all the way up until something better comes along.  then it will look dated.  so the real question is...how long after wii U launches will sony/ms launch?   if it is only a year as many are specualating and they are actually targeting the samaritan level specs...people will definetly be upset about the visuals produced.

Hence why I think the add-on/expansion slot route is not a bad way to go for Nintendo. 

I suspect the first year of PS4/720 games will be a lot like 360/PS3 games running at 1080p + a good deal more effects, but by 2014/2015 is when you'll see games that are really built for that level of tech and then the situation will be more like CoD being a very different game on the 360/PS3 versus the Wii version.

Also something like this could also let developers actually do something with that Wii U controller screen other than just use it as a HUD/item select thing for graphically intensive games. With the upgraded chip, developers could do things like have say one player play Battlefield 3 on the big screen, but a second player playing at the same time on the sub-screen with no compromise in the engine fidelity. Or in the case of Mario Kart, you could have three friends over with their Wii U tablets, and then one person playing on the big screen .... all off one system without a hitch. That'd be nice.

i have to disagree.

historically developers don't like to support console add-ons.  whether it's the balance board, wii motion plus, move, kinect, a 360 hard drive, whatever.  you won't get a 100% adoption rate and therefore you will limit your audience.  developers always seem to trend to the lowest common denominator and gaurenteed adoption. 

that's actually part of why the wii U won't really be better even if it is better.  we've already heard the darksiders developers say it... "blah blah it's powerful hardware"  "blah blah no we won't be improving textures, ect". 

Here's the difference though ... to make a balance board game ... you'd generally have to make one from scratch or kinda segment the game all over the place for people who have the board and those who don't. 

To make a Wii Motion + game that requires a good amount of time too or the game has to be specifically made for it.

To make a Wii U version in feature parity with the PS4/720/PC versions is easier because they already have all the assets just sitting there. It's just a matter of transferring them over to the Wii U provided it's powerful enough to run said assets. If it is, then hey why not. If it sells you an extra 100k, 200k, 300k, 400k, etc. copies of the Wii U version, you're already making 3 versions, a 4th to squeeze in extra sales is no biggie.

The industry is going to have to squeeze every dollar out of these "blockbuster" game releases because their budgets are going to be so huge, I mean you look at the Wii userbase -- 100 freaking million users, but it can't run Mass Effect. Now if you could make a way for the Wii to run Mass Effect, even if only lets say 40 million of that userbase had the add-on required for it -- if I'm the Mass Effect publisher, I'm saying ... go for it, we want that Nintendo money too.

Also the N64 expansion pak was pretty well supported by devs back in the day, from its release in late 1998, the Expansion Pak was supported by about 50 N64 titles, which is a pretty large chunk of its library.

The problem now is that your still have to release the game with 2 sets of game assets.   1 that can designed to work with the GPU upgrade and 1 lower quality set of assets that is designed to run on the base console.    Or you can take the risky route by requiring the GPU upgrade and leaving out the base console market entirely.