To be honest, the WiiU, on paper, is a legitimate sequel to everything the Wii was. It offers unique entertainment proposals to the casual audience, and a more solid proposal to the core audience. The launch is well played on the casual front, with a focus on a revamped Wii Fit, a NSMB on launch and a collection of minigames coated with the themes of some of the most lucrative franchises in videogame history.

On paper, on the casual front, I would say it's looking ripe.

But that's on paper. There are two things going against the WiiU:

1) The new threat of casual gaming on much more viral devices (tablets and smartphones, cloud gaming, etc. etc.)

2) The "fool me once" mentality. It is still uncertain whether consumer, after having bought into the Wii, are convinced their purchase was a good one.

The WiiU is a huge business gamble, it'll be very interesting to see if it flies or flops. BUT, one thing is certain, Nintendo has BIG BALLS (to use the right terms).

And that's just on the casual front. The core is a whole other conquest on its own. I see less risk here and I think Ninty is off to a good start on the core front.

Thanks for asking!

Very fucking interesting question.

2 options: (j/k)

1) Nintendo sides with Sony (Japanese solidarity)

2) Nintendo sides with Microsoft (Venge sims)

3) Nintendo offerings vary by manufacturer. (À la Sega)

I wonder who would have joined in other than MS had Nintendo exited.

I also don't know if they would have joined SONY since it would have been argued that their refusal to join them got them killed.

lol bro, that's why I put option 2.

But yeah, it does beg the question, who would fill Nintendo's shoes? But few can honestly, even today.

1)The video does say that in so many words- "will this be nintendos last christmas?"

2)Yes, Sega dropping out has very much to do with today. Sega made good games, but ultimately went out because of poor business decisions. You could say that both microsoft & sony make fairly poor business decisions- sony is bleeding money & failing meserably with the vita, and microsoft has the "let's just throw money at it" business model, do you think they'll be ok with taking a huge loss on their 720 (like they did with the 360). Bad business practice 101.

3)Sony picked up where Nintendo brought them. They had a partnership which fell through, but it makes you wonder how much sony learned from nintendo when then created their system. There's no knocking the success of playstation 1 & 2. But the advancements of cds, and then dvds, both played a huge role in sonys success. Bluray will not be their saving grace like those media were.

4)This i pretty much agree with, except your definition of "core". There are many "core" experiences on the wii, but the lack of several AAA 3rd party titles was terrible for nintendo. In this way, they really have to come correct with wii U. That being said, Nintendo is still the most innovative & sustainable of the 3 current players in the video game wars.

I don't think Nintendo will ever go out of business (they have too much money in the bank to begin with). Furthermore, it would be hard to visualize the video game industry without Nintendo's (they contributed the most in the video game history in my opinion no?). If Nintendo fails, then Sony and Microsoft will soon follow suit. If ever they do fail in the hardware business (lets hope not), they have the strongest IP's out there and will go the same was as SEGA only more profitable.

1)The video does say that in so many words- "will this be nintendos last christmas?"

2)Yes, Sega dropping out has very much to do with today. Sega made good games, but ultimately went out because of poor business decisions. You could say that both microsoft & sony make fairly poor business decisions- sony is bleeding money & failing meserably with the vita, and microsoft has the "let's just throw money at it" business model, do you think they'll be ok with taking a huge loss on their 720 (like they did with the 360). Bad business practice 101.

3)Sony picked up where Nintendo brought them. They had a partnership which fell through, but it makes you wonder how much sony learned from nintendo when then created their system. There's no knocking the success of playstation 1 & 2. But the advancements of cds, and then dvds, both played a huge role in sonys success. Nintendo's gameboy line did help through difficult periods, but they still turned profits and sold millions of home consoles over that period. They weren't even close to being "out of the game".

4)This i pretty much agree with, except your definition of "core". There are many "core" experiences on the wii, but the lack of several AAA 3rd party titles was terrible for nintendo. In this way, they really have to come correct with wii U. That being said, Nintendo is still the most innovative & sustainable of the 3 current players in the video game wars.

I would haz a sad if they didn't side with SONY or SEGA.

^haha, yeah it would have been crappy because imho Sony and Sega bring more to the industry than MS does. But still, MS does give alot to the industry so I'm a little divided. :$

i love how you bring up sega first, and when i counter, you're like "sega is irrelevant to TODAYS conversation"

and then i say microsoft & sony CURRENTLY employ unsustainable business practices, you say- well who cares about today, what about when sony did well in the ps1 & 2 says....

so on one hand, history doesn't matter, unless of course, it's serves the purpose of your argument at any given moment?