A controller with stereo speakers and microphone. Only thing missing compared to the X1 are the force feedback analog triggers.

An optional tablet controller wouldn't be feasible because it would require a change in actual system hardware. Microsoft and Sony understand this and are pursuing other dual-screen options, namely SmartGlass and Vita remote play. Those options aren't quite as robust or ideal as the Wii U GamePad, but that's probably as far as Microsoft and Sony will go during this generation. Wii U is set to be the gold standard for dual-screen gaming for the next several years, which is pretty much exactly what Nintendo wants. Anyone saying otherwise, actually, should be eating their words right now - before people start lining up at Best Buy demo kiosks during E3.

You underestimate the public. I know people who refuse to play PS3 games because they hate the dualshock design and only play 360 titles. It's not an uncommon viewpoint.

I agree with that and hope it stays true, without Sony or MS pursuing Nintendo in dethroning it because in my opinion the dual-screen thing with your TV and home console is well a lousy idea, being polite. I never really seen it's appeal in DS or 3DS but can see how dual screen benefits handhelds, but here I don't know. I think the general consumer will proove me right as the Wii U sales will stay mediocre in part because people don't see the dual-screen in this situation appealing or needed.

I also don't think the dual-screen idea is particularly useful for home console gaming. Handhelds, yes, because screen space is a major issue and the second screen isn't completely seperate in the first place. The GamePad's implications for the kinds of games one would find on other platforms are, unsurpsigingly, limited, leaving titles built from the ground up to put the controller and the hardware through its paces, like the Wii. Regardless, the control scheme does make porting much less of a hassle than before.

I find Wii U's off-TV play as a potentially excellent unique feature (especially in family-related situations), and the overall dual-screen concept can be a good hook for the party-style titles that Wii was known for (if Nintendo Land is any indicator). Given time, maybe it could become far more accepted and natural-seeming, like the DS (which also had a sluggish sales start). But there's something everyone can agree with - we'll never know unless Nintendo finally gets around to releasing games.

My thoughts exactly

To be honest the only thing that I think can be really awesome if used well is the local multiplayer (one of the few things I admire Nintendo for and Sony could definately take a bow to and follow) and the cross features.

This is more or less what I expect from Nintendo Wii U strategy. Both first-party launch titles were very multiplayer-oriented, and the slate of games to be discussed at E3 suggest a major multiplayer focus.

Mario Kart - One of the biggest multiplayer franchises in the history of gaming, both local and online.
Super Smash Bros. - The biggest fighting game franchise in the history of gaming, particularly known for local multiplayer.
X - Apparently an RPG featuring online multiplayer. Use of the GamePad as a keyboard seems like a no-brainer, and possibly the best way to implement the touchscreen that we'll see for a while. Also this game is the reason why I'm buying a Wii U.
3D Mario - Super Mario Galaxy 1 and 2 had some form of asymetric multiplayer, and since Wii U is designed with asymetric multiplayer in mind, I think we're in for something interesting.

IGN flip flopping as usual. They're essentially a poor man's Gamespot. They suck even more than Gamespot.

as others have said IGN is not a hive mind and the editors have their own opinions

Everybody has their own opinion, I myself think the Wii-u has a clumsy control but that is just me