Pretty much this, besides the guy only says CPU speed and any person with a minimal knowledge on tech should know a processor speed isn't everything. Does that make the Wii U CPU ultra powerful? Of course not, but there are other factors that doesn't make the processor weaker or on par to the PS360. 

The Wii was the next generation system from Nintendo. It was different on a fundemental level from the types of consoles that were offered before. Next-gen of consoles have nothing to do with processing power.

You can talk about next gen of graphis cards and CPU if you like, but that's a different thing from the next wave of consoles. With your logic, the NES was gen 2 because every gaming computer at the time was 16-bit and SNES was gen 3 because it had a commodore 64 CPU.

I think the point is that the Zelda tech demo didn't really look next gen and that was already my (and probably some others) impression when they first showed it in 2011 and that was with the assumption of 60FPS and/or 1080p and before Sony showed off The Last of Us, Beyond and God of War Ascension and before Microsoft gave us the first Halo 4 gameplay scenes. Not even mentioning multiplats like Crysis 3, Castlevania Lords of Shadow 2, MGS Ground Zeroes and other impressive ones I might have forgotten.

The final game should look better than the tech demo or else it won't be very impressive graphically.

Great. Now stop talking and make games.

@Nirvana_Nut85: Nice cherry picking.

Yeah - Forza looks considerably better. Motion blur, higher res textures, reflections, higher resolution etc. Doom is just your standard low lighting mixed with bumps and bloom affair at a low res...

The way I see it the Wii U isn't meant to be a graphical 'next gen' beast. It's focus like the Wii is about innovation in the control method and bringing more people into gaming or at least nabbing some of that huge ipad/android gaming crowd. That's what the naysayers seem to ignore (at their peril).

But the diehard Nintendo fans are just as bad. They can't see that technically the Wii U is really quite standard. I mean competing against current 6-7 year old tech is nothing to write home about. Imagine if the CG was competing against the N64, or N64 against the SNES or SNES against the NES .....furthermore current gen had to go hi def against standard def of the previous gen which in itself required a huge power boost. Burnout Revenge on 360 looks far superior to the Xbox or PS2 versions.

Yes but isn't it nice to have a console manufacturer that has a point of difference with their
product? As cool as Nextbox and PS4 will be, with most titles coming out on both systems the difference
between the two will be almost insignifigant.
Don't forget in the last generation Microsoft and Sony both went down the motion control route (playstation move was laughable!) and Nintendoo stuck to their guns and outsold them both. I would be willing to bet that when the Nextbox/PS4 are announced they have some version of the tablet controller in some form....

So let me get this right.

You are saying from analyzing the over 20 million plus people that bought nsmbwii, 30 million people that bought MKwii , 10 million that bought the galaxy games, and however much that bought games like SSbb, DKCR etc, with your logic and reasoning that you came to the conclusion that they bought these games because they could help them exercise.

Is that what you were thinking when you wrote that post?

You cant compare race games to shoter games.race games allways look better because there is not much to them.