So, from a spec standpoint, all that was needed is what the WIi U did, and the developers who demanded as much RAM as the PS4 had, were full of it?

This line of reason ends up being: We don't need to go past this current generation, just have the Wii U sit on the high end and code to it, because extra RAM is pointless.

Im not worried about any limits the Wii U has. If developers can pull off exclusive games like The Last Story or Xenoblade on the Wii, then I am not worried about the Wii U because I know the exclusive games are going to be great. Besides graphics arn't everything, otherwise Vita would be destroying the 3ds right now. If I wanted a game with high graphics ill get it on my Pc which has a 680 lol So I think that the Wii U is fine with how it is!

Probably not, but I think Oblivion could have been a Wii game.

Seriously, I looked at the system requirements of Skyrim, and they're 2 GB of RAM minimum on the PC. The HD twins only have about 1/4 of that. The minimum requiremnts for Oblivion are 512 MB, about 6 times what the Wii has. Not that big a difference, especially when you realize that the SD visuals on the Wii would require less power. I suspect you might need to simplify things slightly for the Wii version, maybe remove a couple of larger enemies, depopulate a town or two, etc, but that would be nothing new for console ports of PC games.

Besides, if the GameCube could play Twilight Princess and the Wii could play Xenoblade, than how big a stretch is there to playing at least Oblivion?

i can guarantee you that WiiU will recieve poor ports that are nothing on its ps4720 counterparts

I think the 2GB minimum requirement on PC is mainly due to the fact that PC has a windows OS as well as other programs running in the background, while the consoles always have the 256MB or so dedicated to gaming at a given time. So I think a minimum of 2GB is essentially the developer making sure that you can at least make the game function even when you have all these background tasks.

As for Oblivion, I honestly haven't played it so I can't say what the major graphical or gameplay related differences are with Skyrim. I do have to agree with the TP and Xeno comparisons though. It's a classic example of how much a console's performance truly is by seeing the difference between a launch game and a game released at the end of it's cycle. If not the graphical fidelity of Xenoblade, it is a much larger game in terms of scale than TP, which is impressive in and of itself.

That's wrong, the PS3 had 256MB available total and about 200MB available for games.

Porting from 200MB to 88MB is nothing compared to going from 7GB to 1GB.

Games using 5GB (if they ever come out and deducting about 2GB for video use) will have to have integral features removed and watered down beyond belief and likely not even recognizable from the original.

You have to think that games using 200MB aren't going to be doing anything amazing on the memory level Vs massive open world type games that 5GB would be needed for, those games wouldn't even be possible in any context, watered down or not on a system with 1GB of RAM.

I'm with you.

Although if any are attempted, we're going to see even worse results than with the original Wii, the disparity in terms of power is even higher now than with the Wii->PS3/360.

So apparently a 20-22x gap for the Wii -> PS3/360 is smaller than the 5-7x gap for the Wii U -> nextbox/PS4?

Ok then.

I don't think Nintendo is worried about this. They've found numerous ways to outsmart the competition. It isn't much of how much RAM you have but what you do with that RAM. If your company is smart enough you might just try to make your game playable on all current gen consoles. It isn't like PS, hard core games sold well on Nintendo consoles in the first place. The Wii had a short cut yet prosperous life with its first party software alone. I don't think at all for a second that Nintendo doesn't need 3rd party support but they rarely depend on it.

20-22x? Where did you get that figure from exactly?