Any proof for that claim? Cause of course you mean games that are multiplatform between PS360 and Wii U, not some games on PS360 that weren't released on Wii U, which would make the comparison plain stupid, right?

This is fine to me. It gives smaller developers somewhere to make money. If they have been making games on PS360, and don't have the cash/resources yet for PS4/Xb1, they can stay with Wii U and make some good games for the next few years.

Unfortunately with how the media is unjustly bashing the system (no one is whining that the PS4/X1 is running under 2GHz) and mis-informing the public on how underpowered the system is even compared to PS360; this would be a compliment.  It's funny how they view Espresso so underpowered to Xenon when it's more efficient per cycle than X360 CPU. (this is coming from a big Xbox360 fan)

All games on Wii U run at least @720p. Blacklist, for exemple, only run @720p on Wii U.

Great to hear that, that's not the point though. How onilink presented it, would show that there are games on Wii U that run 720p while they run on lower resolution on PS360 which is not the case (I think at least, I will be happily proven wrong) Cause what is exactly the point to compare for example Crysis 3 on PS360 which runs on a sub-HD resolution to Blacklist on Wii U that runs 720p? For all we know Crysis 3 on Wii U could have run on 480p resolution. It's just a flawed comparison that he made, if he doesn't mean multiplatform PS3/360/Wii U titles only.

the PS3 actually runs " In light of Saints Row 4's sub-HD blurriness on Sony's console, it's a shame to see that image quality in Blacklist also falls foul of a curtailed internal resolution. To our pixel count, the PS3 weighs in at 1152x648 - an awkward figure for the PS3 to resolve in the upscale, and results in the fuzziest image quality of all the versions available."

While the Wii U is running:  "Interestingly, the Wii U version puts its best foot first by producing a full 1280x720 internal framebuffer, backed up by 2x multi-sample anti-aliasing (MSAA) [Update: on taking a closer look at the assets, we're now more inclined to go with an FXAA variant for all console versions - similar to the Driver: San Francisco implementation which shades geometry edges in a manner very similar to MSAA). This is an astonishing feat given that Splinter Cell: Conviction ran at just 1024x576 for its 360 release three years ago, and shows great proficiency in the Toronto team's handling of new hardware. "

all this already running above PS360 while also running a 480p image in real time.  Wii U also is more stable in terms of screen tears (which is important to me) while running a higher resolution.

source: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-splinter-cell-blacklist-face-off

Sorry if I confused you.  I hope everything is clear now.  My point is that the Wii U is MosDef above the PS360, especially considering it is also rendering an additional 480p found on the  Wii U gamepad.

Ok point taken, you're right. 

Although from the same article "But there are gripes to consider before jumping in bed with the Wii U version. Most significant is the degradation in texture quality, the muddiness of which matches the 360 release without its HD texture pack install. Surfaces can look flat compared to the game running on PS3 and 360 with full installs, and the lack of any similar optional install on Nintendo's platform means pop-in flares up while in wide outdoors areas. Curiously, in terms of sheer playability, Sony's hardware achieves the most consistent frame-rates during combat, with 360 taking middle ground here, and the Wii U suffering from more regular dips to the low 20s, perhaps explaining the omission of split-screen gameplay." 

So it's not all that rosy.

Don't get me wrong, I don't want to argue that Wii U is inferior to PS360 cause it is not the case, but especially since it also outputs to the gamepad, I think that the difference in visual quality will be marginal, especially with straight ports, not highly optimised for Wii U which I still belive wouldn't make that big of a difference.

Which is probably why Nintendo is pushing hard to get Indies on board.  They actually have the best approach (with Sony a very close second) regarding Indie game development.  I heard that their dev-kits not only are the cheapest of the 3 next-gen systems but also includes Unity engine for no additional charge above what Sony and MS is able to do at the moment. It's understandable as PS4/X1 has massive support from 3rd parties and sees indies as a secondary support for the system.  Wii U could be the independet developer's choice out of all systems Ouya, PS4, and X1 this gen esp with their hands off approach to game develpment (non restrictive).

Ubisoft is saying that the Wii U will look worse than the other two, not better lol.