Yes, a Nintendo fanboy. One of the sort who thinks that series like 3D Mario and Zelda were held back by PlayStation dominance and that if Nintendo keeps pushing those games, then they will eventually be Nintendo's topsellers.

Zelda instead of NSMBU wouldn't have made a difference. The Wii U was always poised to fail, because of the system itself. And the cause isn't processing power, it's Nintendo's terrible message that runs contrary to what they preached only a few years earlier.

Yes, kinda like that. Only that the expectation is of course that this hardcore Nintendo is much more successful than during the N64/GC days.

One of the core messages for the Wii was that controllers got too complicated and thus the barrier to entry became too high. Many people wouldn't even try to play video games. That's why Nintendo introduced a simple controller that didn't look intimidating to create a new starting line for gaming. The market response was strong, because if gaming was truly for everyone, then naturally more people would be interested in a system than if you declared it an exclusive hobby.

When Nintendo unveiled the Wii U in 2011, they went on stage and told people to forget about the Wii. They presented a traditional controller with a touchscreen on it (something that was rumored to be the Wii's controller before Nintendo showed the Wiimote). Nintendo went back in time to the pre-Wii days. They also made it a point to appease the hardcore gamer, because Nintendo thought they left them out with the Wii. Reggie said something along the lines of: "Wii" meant "we", but there should also be a place for you, the hardcore gamer. That's why we are putting "you" in the name of our new console, the Wii U.

It was a horrible speech all around and a slap in the face for all people who liked the Wii. A few token games don't change the underlying message of a console, so even though Nintendo would have liked for people to believe that the Wii U was a true Wii successor, it really isn't.

There's no chance for Nintendo to make a sustainable hardcore console. More powerful hardware will lead to a high price (even when sold at a loss) and the ensuing lack of sales will result in third parties abandoning the platform. Nintendo will always be screwed if they attempt such a direction.

Kinect has fizzled out despite Microsoft trying to support it. There's not much real interest in Kinect on its own, because controller-less gaming is greatly limited in versatility. I don't expect an improved version of Kinect to drive hardware sales because of this. A more extreme example would be THQ's uDraw. It was a hit for one holiday season, but once consumers became aware of its limitations, it died a quick death. Kinect has at least a couple of genres going for it, but I don't think it's enough to make people buy a new console. Similarly, Wii Fit U and Wii Sports 3 alone won't make the Wii U successful. But to Nintendo's benefit, the Wii U is capable of much more than that (just like the Wii was).

Additionally, Microsoft needs to come up with a plan to really sell in mainland Europe and Japan, if they ever want to achieve huge sales. Their Xbox brand is a double-edged sword. It's beneficial in the USA and the UK, but detrimental pretty much everywhere else.

I usually find his vids quite insightful :P seems like he knows his stuff