TLDR version - Hardware is trying to follow Wii 'revolutionise the way we play' vision, Software is trying to be Gamecube 2.

I think we can all agree the gamepad has been a disaster for Nintendo. It serves a minimal function in most games, adds a huge cost in system production, increases the price of the system for consumers and alienates a huge percentage of the market with its awkward unintuitive design. (Sure, off-TV play is handy, but Vita sales should be a fair indication the market doesn't think it's worth hundreds of dollars for.)

Now Nintendo aren't stupid. They would have known of all of these problems prior to release but they must have had a reason for putting it in place regardless. I assume they initially planned to advertise a 'new' way to play Nintendo games using touch controls that consumers would find accessible and easy to understand.

The most obvious way to show this off would have been a touch exclusive 2D Mario game. Advertising could have focussed on this new 'touch based' way to play making it more obvious that this is a NEW Nintendo console. It would have convinced potential buyers that this new system will provide new experiences and not simply 'more of the same but slightly prettier' than what they already have on the Wii.

I think this vision has some merit, and you get an idea from games like Yoshi's Fruit Cart and Balloon Trip how it could have worked on a larger scale. An easy and intuitive control method to create simple titles that everyone can pick up, as well as more complex games. This would have made it a true successor to the Wii in terms of hardware philosophy.

But this vision of creating a new touch based way to play was neglected by Nintendo's internal software teams. Somewhere along the line they must have  decided that creating games on a touch screen was not a viable option or one they wanted to work with. So what you're left with is a device that has thrown most of its eggs in focussing on a dual screen touch based interface, which no developers want to work with. Not even internal teams. Mario Kart 8 has a horn. We've seen nothing from DKCR, Smash or X to suggest the touch screen contributes in any way. How can you expect third party developers to come up with anything when the team that supposedly asked for it can't think of anything?

I think going forward Nintendo have to engage software developers more heavily in hardware design. Especially their own. Iwata is ultimately responsible for making sure communication between R&D and his software teams remains open. He has failed. He has run a hardware division that is in open conflict with their software teams.

"It serves a minimal function in most games, adds a huge cost in development, increases the price of the system for consumers"

I stopped reading after that.

Why? Name the games that absolutely need the gamepad and I believe Miyamoto stated it adds close to $100 on the console. There is nothing inherently wrong with that statement.

Wow. I didn't think ANYONE was debating that. But fair enough. Thanks for playing.

This pretty much sums up why the WiiU hasn't caught on the way the Wii did.

Indeed, the motion controls on the Wii were designed with the intent of proving their appeal without requiring any explanation to begin with. That, more than anything, is what separated the Wii from the other two core-centric consoles, and why trying to bridge both markets at once with the WiiU has fallen flat.

I kind of agree with the premise of the OP. However the gamepad has the potencial add a whole new level of integration with it comes to mapping button, quick keys, maps, in game video chat (if possible of course), inventories, between others... The problem with the gamepad is the cost of it. Nintendo does not make the use of the gamepad mandatory for either 1st party or 3er party games, however hinders nintendo's ability to further reduce the price of the wiiU and thus make a very agressive campain.

I do admit that the Gamepad didn't WoW me as much as motion controls did but what would be the other option? Make a regular game console and have all 3 consoles be virtually the same? Nintendo did that with the Gamecube where it was more powerful than the ps2 with the best Controller ever... Did it sell? Hardly... which is what they are afraid of...

The gamepad to me is like the 3d on the 3ds... Neither really enhances to experience but its nice to have as a luxury item... Not a day has passed when I wake up and without getting up from bed, I turn on the wiiU and play games on it and I never regretted it since... Sure the gamepad isn't zomfg but I don't think its bad by any means...

Its the first "tablet" where it felt comfortable playing games with it... In terms of experience wise... I am glad Nintendo made this decision... In terms of business wise... They should have thought of something else

I think its too soon to say that the wiiU has been defeated... Lets see how well Smash and Kart sells before we pass that judgement

Absolutely. I probably didn't make it clear but I think the gamepad was the right way to go. Touch screen gaming is really popular and I think with the right software it could have appealed to a wide market. Those features you list too give it unique features that could be used in third party software and more traditational first party games. It would have made a nice alternative to the PS4 (and to a lesser extent the X1) which have cornered the "gamer" market.

I'm guessing though Miyamoto wanted a Gamecube 2 and set EAD in a totally different direction.

Nah I really like the idea of the gamepad. Nintendo need a unique feature. I have a problem with the way the software division decided it wasn't worth supporting and just make games that are better off played with a normal pad.

I still think a 2D Mario would have been the perfect game to experiment with touch screen gaming.

Too many facts huh?