Nobody on here seems to have considered one thing that could be very important to how games scale. Native Resolution.

NextBox and PS4 are targeting 1080p as native resolution for all games, where as Wii U is targeting 720p Native for it's games.  It is entirely plausible that ports of PS4/Xbox games will be able to run on the Wii U's more modest hardware because games will be less resource intensive when running at lower resolutions, with either more compressed or lower res textures needing significantly less RAM.  It is afterall how most PC games are actually scaled.

My laptop is a perfect example. It is nowhere near the performance of say a high end gaming PC, it has a 1.5Ghz Quadcore AMD, an HD7670M and yes, admittedly 8GB of RAM, however; even when running games i've never used more than 3 GB and that is with a bloated Windows OS running.  I cannot hope to run games at max settings @ 1080p. Witcher 2 for example i get about 12FPS, but if i drop the settings to medium and the resolution to 1366x768p @ 30FPS i get something that looks inferior to max settings but is still a gorgeous looking game to play.  A game that at those settings (and even on low) still looks much better than the Xbox 360 version, running on a laptop whose specs are close to what is inside the Wii U.  In fact in a closed console environment the Wii U probably out performs my laptop games-wise.

So my question is if PC developers can scale games across such a huge divide in technological capabilities then why can't they for the "Next Gen" consoles?

Here are the specs for Metro Last Light http://www.destructoid.com/optimum-metro-last-light-specs-recommend-an-nvidia-titan-251890.phtml Now if 4A can scale across such a massive technological chasm then surely it is not asking too much for scaled ports on Wii U, yes they will be graphically "inferior" but not to the degree that people probably think and it will certainly not be a Wii vs PS3 situation this time round.  On paper the PS4 and Xbox will be 2-3x more powerful than Wii U, yes, but people don't seem to realise that the law of diminshing returns has kicked in for games developers, meaning that 2-3x on paper will not be 2-3x in practice because 1; large increases in computational power are only producing small visual gains and 2; devs (outside of those SONY or MS  funded) are quickly finding that they cannot be profitable with the amount of time, effort and money it takes to make games that will push PS4 and NextBox to the limits.  It gets to the point where things become so detailed that it takes too much time and you would be looking at Disney Pixar sized budgets, which EA and Square-Enix are finding simply not feasible.   

But we won't have to wait long really to begin seeing how things shape up.  The release of Watch Dogs on PS4 and Wii U will be a good barometer as to whether the gap between the two is as big as some are saying.  The ultimate comparison will be when Retro's new game (Metroid) is compared with something like KZ Shadowfall.  Only then will we see just how big this gap will be.

Yes. But does that change the fact that if a developer wants it can put a PS4 game onto tablets and smartphones? Because that's exactly one of the features UE4 will provide, even if it's not used. About Nintendo not giving a shit about 3rd parties, that wasn't what 3rds were talking before Wii U released. In fact:

http://www.officialnintendomagazine.co.uk/27673/bioshock-director-excited-about-wii-u/

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/gaming/2011/06/23/valve-interested-in-developing-for-wii-u/1

http://mynintendonews.com/2011/09/25/nintendo-wii-u-thq-say-buying-wii-u-games-is-like-buying-blu-ray-over-a-standard-dvd/

First link: was written in 2011...when no one knew the Wii U's specs.

Second link: hinted that Valve games might get ported and again it was written in 2011 before anyone knew about the specs.

Third link: THQ doesn't know what they are talking about and they haven't realized the potential of many of their franchises save for probably Saints Row (and thats not saying much). THQ doesn't really push tech and their products werent really selling as well as they should which is why they were liquidated. 

Many people were optimistic, until the Wii U launched up until the PS4 unveiling. Lets hope the sales pick up but the Wii U wont get games on principal that they never consulted with third parties about their aspirations for making next gen games. The demands are too high and they stated their case on the specs they needed.

http://www.nowgamer.com/news/1807753/nextgen_will_be_a_substantial_leap_over_the_current_generation_says_epic.html

“What we’re doing on high-end PCs is going to be representative of the future consumer gaming experience and it’s going to be awesome. It’s going to be a substantial leap over the current generation.”

Even with Capcoms new engine theres no way the Wii U is getting the games expected for the next gen consoles. Just look at their new engine running on the PS4. The Wii U is not capable of that

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=drGkHlrPuOM

twilight_link said:
there are several subgroups of gamers so i don't care about ill used and abused terminology.

"Too bad for their fanbase who has to now buy another console because..."

too bad for them, they must buy gaming PC for playing multiplatform games in acceptable quality, proper RTS and Flight Simulators, XBOX for Halo and even Playstation for some Japanese games too bad.

LOL...Yes....let them make it alone for PC with those large budgets and hope for profit. PC gamers must wait to get their seconds because the games are made for console audiences whilst PC gamers get the better version of the product. Not all multiplats go to PC as well. Just remember that.

"Nintendos constant arroange which never ends." and i hope so, you know Fortune favours the bold.

The Wii was indeed bold, but was actually the least used console throughout the gen. So much for utility. Its called a cash grab which is why at E3 all they could talk about was money instead of games until like 2011.

"Nintendo has made strides for third party titles despite what you're saying" well they probably know what kind of hardware Epic required for UE4, in case of 7th generation, there was no option unless they were crazy enough to join bleeding party with Microsoft and Sony.

Its obvious they either didn't know or didn't care. Wait...since when was Nintendo ever in the loop with Epic? Epic games are built for different audiences, sorry to say. Nintendo singled themselves out and now are percieved as something rather that the console that can encompass everything like their competition is going for.

"Nintendo hasn't been that successful in a while." well success is extremely relative, if the WiiU became profitable for them with great 1st and 2nd party games then is certainly success.

The profited, because they keep their consoles cheap. The Wii was a lightening in a bottles chance but it did it and because it was a gimmick the fanfare faded quickly. It was a momentary pleasure console. Nintendo knows they wanrt more for their legacy than that.
"The Wii used its gimmick and got a victory that was short lived and only lasted about four years."

whatever you wish but the gimmick known as Wii and DS secured them future and in this case it was well worth.

The DS isn't a gimmick and their handhelds have always been well taken care of. Thats where Nintendo will continue to gain their third party support on consoles that dont push tech and are cheap with higher profit incentive.

"This is a miss after their hit with the Wii." too early to tell but if their software became compelling enough, i'm sure the future is bright for them

I never worry about Nintendo profiting, as I said they make their products cheap to make sure profits come quicker. Problem is that Nintendo is going to rub people the wrong way who game exclusively to them despite what you might think by warding off the third parties. They have a talent for it.

Haters always seem to catch a good sensationalist story that helps fuel their propaganda, but miss it when another one comes out that debunks the first one.

http://www.vg247.com/2012/12/13/metro-last-light-wii-u-cancellation-not-due-to-horrible-cpu-claims-says-thq-rep/

The game is coming to PS3 and 360, but the Wii U can't handle it. You sincerely believe that those systems can handle it, but the Wii U can't?

Now this is my opinion, but I think the Wii U cancelation had more to do with THQ's financial woes and impending bankruptcy than the console being unable to handle games that the other ones apparently can.

*sigh* If you read the article instead of just the "sensationalist" heading, you'll find that he doesn't actually disprove anything.

“Our look at the Wii U extended to a very early look at some very early kits. We…we did some work on it, but we made a decision fairly early on that we weren’t going to commit further resource to it. So yeah, we didn’t go too far. Take any of the comments you’ve seen attributed with a pinch of salt – it’s certainly not been based on any kind of analysis of final hardware.”

Sounds like just the usual PR to me. Damage control at it's finest.

LOL where do I start:

1) My claim in performance is not "bogus."  The Wii U basically has a cut down 6570 with DDR3, that IS half the strength of a GTS 250 at least.  

2) If the Wii U gets "Optimized" performance gains, than so does the GPU in the PS4 making the gap just as wide and your point irrelevent.  

3)No matter how you dice it, EA, 4A, Deep Silver, and other developers and publishers don't think the Wii U's weak specs is worth their time.  Whether its because they are "Lazy," or the Wii U is a console built by drunks is up for debate, but the end result is NO GAMES.

4) I understand what you are saying and it is: ill-informed, naive, and lacks support.