because that is what they did with WIi and it turned out good for them

That really isn't concept though, it isn't the specs or how much more powerful a system is, it is what the system does and how you sell it. Granted the Wii U if it had a stronger specs would be much more attractive to Western developers (who essentially are driving the industry now) and it probably would make it easier to port things to all three consoles rather then require seperate  focuses. But the fact Nintendo chose to go with the hardware of this strength is still them just executing improperly just like how their ads for the system were bad in explaining what was new with the system besides the tablet.

Besides that particular method Nintendo has done successfuly with all of their handheld systems and most recently with the Wii. The difference is that the Wii had games that drew people's attention, one was the newest Zelda that people had been waiting years to see and the other was packed in which showed off the fun potential of motion control in gaming. Despite being fun and similar, Nintendoland is no Wii Sports (partially because it also highlights the flaws of a single tablet based multiplayer games making things not equal which can be a deal breaker with certain kids that haven't yet learned to share) and the price compared to current and future competiton doesn't make it the same bargain that the Wii was at the time when you do have the game bundled.

it worked wonders for the wii. either way, keep dreaming about that. who knows? you might even get Curé Syndrome.

I think really though, a lot of the problems with the Wii U stem from the reasoning that it's likely designed for the Japanese market first, a market that doesn't want home consoles anymore (I don't think the PS4 will do great there either, part of the reason Sony is considering not launching there this year at all).

Why a tablet controller? Because off-TV play. Why off-TV play? Because in Japan people play handhelds as their primary game "console" even in the home. Most Japanese homes have fewer TVs than Western homes and "privacy" of playing on a game handheld is valued. So I think Nintendo's hope with Wii U was that it would "reclaim" the gaming-at-home concept to a console in Japan, while the 3DS could remain the on-to-go game machine.

Why 33 watts? Surely, AMD could have given Nintendo a much higher performance machine probably for not even much more money at all. Yes probably. But in Japan, especially in the post-earthquake/nuclear meltdown, I think Nintendo was concerned with power consumption on a home console. As a result I think they capped the console's hardware at just a bit above the PS3/360 level performance but opted to spend their R&D on making sure the system was power efficient.

The system being so small is another Japanese centric design choice. The Wii/Wii U make the Western NES look bulky by comparison. But the West has never had problems with larger consoles.

I think if Nintendo recoginized that home consoles in Japan are basically going the way of the dinosaur as handheld machines (and cell phones I suppose as well) can provide more robust gaming experiences today versus 10 years ago, then Wii U would've been better off.

Wii U would be selling better right now worldwide IMO if the above design choices were tailored more to the Western markets than Japan. But I think they made it for Japan first, hoping that in the West the success of the Wii brand + Mario + more third party ports would be enough to sell the machine over here.

Pikmin 3 released over 2 weeks ago.

The matter of the discussion is wii u being more powerfull than ps360. that means a game having released or not is irrelevant to the point. those games will be on wii u and couldn't run on ps360.

Also, look at nintendoland.

that game could run on PS360, it wont look as good, but it could run.

so in the end you cant name a game, thats what i thought. I asked the question so you are not in a position to say what is relevant about my own question that I asked, just admit you couldnt answer it. Never said WIi U wasnt more powerful, just that the difference in power isnt significant and that shows in the games that are already out. PS3 is more powerful than Wii and that is a significant differance.

Nintyland is just an uprezzed Wii game, you much be smoking great stuff if you think that couldnt run on PS360

I'm surprised this thread was allowed to stay open. I just got banned for saying Wii U is underpowered. But you're calling it a failure?
I. Just. Don't. Get. It.

OT:
I'd say it is both. The Gamepad although it may be useful for off-TV play, it isn't easily marketable. In terms of execution, I'd say if released a year or two ago it would have done much much better and maybe even forced MS/Sony to rush the PS4/XB1. Nintedo was in a position of dominance and they let that slip away by alowing MS/Sony to take away some of their Wii audience(PS Move/Kinect) and establish their consoles as viable platforms for 3rd parties.

Theyve always established their consoles as viable platforms for 3rd parties and that looks to continue with PS4/X1 nothing has changed for them. THe only thing that has change is that alot fo the 3rd party games that WIi was getting(dancing,mingame comps)doesnt seem they are going to be made for Wii U