You are far from an authority on that subject. Why are you still pushing this? The president of Epic Games, the same person whose quotes you use to back up your own argument, has stated that UE4 could definitely run on Wii U, and on 360. Epic being a company, the only reason they wouldn't do it themselves is if they don't think they'd profit from it, and I agree; there's no point putting UE4 on 360, which will only be receiving gen-gap multiplats from now on.

Of course UE4 wouldn't look as nice on Wii U as it will on PS4 -- but if that were what was stopping them, UE4 wouldn't be going to iPhones, and none of their engines would leave PC, where they will continue to look the best.

i unsterstand it will run on current gen  consoles but the reason they are not supporting current gen is  because of power not profit, considering most powerful pc's will support unreal 4 while weakers pc won't.

The only reason 3rd party software hasn't lit up the charts on Wii U, is because the console itself has sold slowly in the opening months. That's it, that's all. If you look at trends with the Wii, with the Gamecube, even the N64, it's about on par. Meaning Nintendo's game since N64 have always sold the most, the highest selling going many millions. There are 3rd party games on each of their consoles since that time that have been huge hits. But in general, even the hugest hits on Nintendo consoles still don't equal the sales of the hugest hits by Nintendo themselves. And the thing people are ignoring is that this isn't even unique to Nintendo. It was the same way with Sega. On all of their consoles, Sega-made or Sega-published games were almost always the highest sellers, even compared to big 3rd party hits on their systems. The problem is, even though Sony and MS have their "own franchises", it's a bit of a different beast. With the exception of perhaps Halo, their first party games don't often reach the same heights as big Nintendo hits do. Big third party games, such as Call of Duty, etc., tend to be the biggest sellers on Xbox and PS nowadays. And even going back to PS1, in general, third party hits were the biggest selling attractions. Like I said, it's just been a different beast.

When it came/comes to Sega and Nintendo platforms, while 3rd parties have and will continue to be successful (yes, we all know Sega's out of it now, I'm just comparing), people always wanted/want their First Party franchises the most. That's just how it's been, historically. I'm sure if you looked back, it was probably mostly the same way for Atari consoles, and I know that it the case for the Turbo Graphx 16 and Hudson Soft's games.

But regardless, circling back around to the original statement, the main reason third party games haven't sold huge on Wii U yet, is because A) many of them were ports, B) many of them have sold decently in digital downloads which aren't tracked nearly as well, and C) the Wii U itself hasn't picked up steam yet. Looking at Zombi U, you can see that it's sales, while not great, if you look at it from an attach-rate standpoint, as I said, is more on par with past Nintendo consoles. I think if the Wii U had sold a lot more consoles right off the bat, Zombi U would likely be a million seller right now, based on that. And I think it's pretty obvious games like Monster Hunter 3 Ultimate and Lego City Undercover are already shaping up to be substantial hits, that will help drive system sales, which will in turn help sell some of those other third party games.

It can run it.  And run it just fine.  You have no idea what a video game engine is, do you?

As for US3 and Wii, no, no games were ever developed on Wii with UE3.  NONE.   The two games you mentioned did not use UE3 on Wii.  UE3 was designed to be used with multicore CPUs and GPU's with programmable shaders rather than the Wii's TEV which uses a fixed function pipeline.  Wii utilized an upgraded version of UE2.5.  X-Men Destiny for Wii was developed by Other Ocean Interactive instead of Silicon Knights.   And they used UE2.5.  This is why the Wii version of the game was not included in the judgement against Silicon Knights last year.  TNA Impact on Wii also used UE2.5.  There was confusion that it used UE3 because of a LinkedIn profile that only listed UE3 under a guys summary.

Again, using US4 isn't just about graphics but the development pipeline.  Everyone one of you claiming the Wii U can't use it because of graphics is talking pure ignorance and it's time someone told you such. 

I'm sick of seeing what has become of this forum.  These aren't discussions anymore.  They are pages upon pages of ignorance under the guise of being truthful.  It's sad.  Very, very sad.

You're hilarious.

So let me see if I understand this right. This very smart business man wants to be snarky and so to win a few laughs with a quip he declares their technology will not only ignore the Wii U with a minimum of 4-5 million customers by next Christmas, but also will ignore 150 million PS3/Xbox360 customers, and 200 million or so smartphone customers. (UE3 ran even on the iPhone 3GS)

Dude is so awesome that he can turn up his nose at 355 million customers, then more power to him. I'm sure with a market that size that someone, somewhere will fill the gap. In the meantime I'm sure people will be lining up out the door to license an engine that will require a massive financial investment to make games for but apparently won't be able to sell or run them on much of anything since it is so amazingly "next gen".

Suppose both the next Xbox and PS4 have the perfect launch at the perfect price point. How big of a market do you think there will be for them by next Christmas? Does the smart business person turn their nose up at 355 million customers to declare how they have the best graphics for perhaps 5-8 million customers?

How smart is that?