So, Wii U for a greener world.

Or will get NO Wii U for even a more greener world.

This is based on a huge assumption that Sony and Microsoft are just going to duplicate the strategy of the XBox 360 and PS3 with their next generation of consoles ... Release a powerful gaming console for $400+, lose $100+ for every unit sold, and continue with conventional controllers and user interface devices.

When you start to consider the possibility that Microsoft might be aiming to sell the "XBox 720" with an advanced version of Kinect for $400 without losing a significant amount of money, or that Sony may be following a similar approach, it should be clear that processing power would be scaled back to reduce the manufacturing cost of the system by well over $100.

very nicely done!

Very entertaining post. I predict the PS4 to consume 1.21 gigawatts and have some sort of time travel feature with DMC as a launch exclusive.

actually the most well thought out joke thread I have seen a long time. Good job

>10... up to 20.

The point here is that Wii U is much more powerfull than his antecessor. If MS or Sony released a new console that was just an incremental upgrade over their existing ones, it would bom hard, really hard. Honestly, I expect PS4/X720 to be complete beasts.

I could've sworn you've done something like this several years ago.

But even this, is still excellent lol

I'm simply not convinced ...

Ignore the 5% elitest graphic-whore "squeeky wheels" for a minute and look at the systems that have been successful in the modern videogame industry; the NES, SNES, Playstation, PS2, Wii, Gameboy, Nintendo DS and 3DS all faced systems that were significantly more powerful than them and yet ended up as the market leading console. While everyone will say that they want better graphics, when it comes time to buy a system the processing power and graphical capabilities rarely factor in.

In the most recent generation graphics (probably) played the biggest role in system sales but this was because the market leader (the Wii) struggled to secure the third party support the market leading console generally gets. The main reasons for this were that Nintendo was expected to fail before the generation began, and Nintendo launched 1 year after the XBox 360, and the combined userbase of PC, XBox 360 and PS3 was larger than what Nintendo had with the Wii. Hypothetically speaking, if the Wii launched first with the XBox 360 and PS3 launching a year later and all systems sold as they had for the first 2 years, the Wii's massive lead would have forced third party publishers to give it better support; and its sales would have been stronger in later years.

Launching 1 year later and $100 to $200 more expensive to be the "graphics king" will likely result in far lower sales than launching a year later with only modest improvements in graphics, matching the price of the Wii U and having your own innovative improvement.