I was convinced that Nintendo was going to invest a lot of that gaudy profit of Wii, and put it back in horsepower, just to take away an advantage from competition. I think near-ish Xb1 specs, selling for $399, (with the gamepad) would have done a lot better, as the sole next gen option for a yr. The best of both worlds, a truly well rounded console. There would be no doubt about the upgrade from PS360, superior ports on grunt a lone, etc...& I think many who were eager to make the jump to next gen, would have, instead of "waiting" for PS4xb1.

Now for Nintendo games, it may not need such high specs for now (future 1st party games reported 1080p native), so it makes you wonder, why cripple yourself again? Is it to remain cheapest option...or...maybe they simply do not care about 3rd party. I believe its more the latter, b/c with 2 companies already doing the same thing , Nintendo doesn't want to fight for (more or less) 33% of the pie. if we want to see Nintendo "Power" again, one of MS or Sony would have to exit the market. I believe even if Wii U 'fails", they will continue their conservative route, using the cheapest/unique combo strategy for home consoles. The results of the gamecube gen. left Ninty scarred for life.

100% agree.  Last gen I went Wii/360 for price concerns ($600 for PS3 wasn't happening for me, and I wasnt' going to wait around for price cut to have a second system).  This gen I might go Wii U (already have) and PS4 for same reason.

No.

It'd be more expensive, and it wouldn't have a "retro" feel to it. These are the two main reasons I end up buying Nintendo consoles.

I don't think it would have to be more expensive.

The Wii U is expensive already, most because of the controller and the custom chipset that Nintendo insisted on having such a low power draw on (pointless for a console IMO, but whatever).

Had they compromised with a larger console casing and let AMD put something in there that consumed a still power efficient 50-60 watts, they'd have something a heckuva lot more powerful.

No, but I wish it didn't have the gamepad and Nintendo used a better software strategy.

Seems like an odd question, since even without the online DRM requirement, XBone is clearly the most unconventional console of the this generation. It's bundled with a far more radical interface than Nintendo's tablet controller, and places an unprecedented focus on interactive television.

The Wii U is substantially more "normal" than the Xbox One.

just a hint. even if they sold the controller at a profit, the retail price would still be bellow $100. that means it costs about $70 tops to manufacture, only $50 more than a regular controller. and as I said, wii u can run any 8th gen game with it's curent specs, raising them would only mean waste of money, like sony and MS did.

it might have been nice, but i respect that they choose to be different

"The consensus was (in Nintendo) that power isn't everything for a console. Too many powerful consoles can't coexist. It's like having only ferocious dinosaurs. They might fight and hasten their own extinction."




-Shigeru Miyamoto

It all started with the N64, this being different kick. It didn't fit into what we expected or thought of when we considered new consoles. This continued with the GameCube with their heavy focus on making the controller as accessible as possible rather than having a generic button layout which was common for PC and the PlayStation gamepads. Follow that up with the DS and the Wii and of course the Wii U and 3DS, it's about not just buying a new box with more horsepower. It's about buying a new experience, something that means more to the end user than the typical polygon count nonsense which has lead manufactures astray in my opinion.