The Wii was a unique event in gaming history that will probably never ever repeat itself(Much like the DS).
 It's all about the novelty. Before Wii there simply was no motion control, nobody but Nintendo did even think of it. It hit the right spot with casuals, thanks to great marketing as well. Much like the DS which was also something completely new and unheard of and not to forget perfectly implemented.

WiiU is no novelty. Sure there is a touchscreen in the controller but that's something people already got in their smartphones and tablets. There really is no benefit for the mainstream consumer to get a WiiU because in the last 7 years they got different means of playing their casual games. Tablets and phones are more volatile and the games are considerably cheaper. There is just no chance that the WiiU could replicate something like the Wii.

Don't you find something contradicting about those two statements? Also, was the NES another "unique event"?

Wii and DS came approximately at the same time and served different markets. The Wii is practically the DS of home consoles or the other way around.

What's so special about the NES? Yes it practically established home console gaming and was a big success but being successful doesn't make you unique. What makes you unique is doing something special and new that will draw crowds of all demographics. The NES was an evolution whereas the Wii was a revolution.

Wii U doesn't really follow Wii or Gamecube's philosophy. Wii U was taking aspects of their successful handheld console and applying it to a home console. Nintendo is even doing the same thing with software releases as they do on handheld: no flagship software on after over a year, not until Mario Kart 8 comes out.

Wii was quite different in philosophy: it was to make an inexpensive console, and uncover new untapped markets while offering lots of flagship software for traditional Nintendo fans early on (launched with Zelda, Metroid soon after, and the heavily marketed and anticipated Mario Galaxy first year).
GameCube was just do what Sony is doing, except make it for kids.

neither. it would be WIi 2.0 if it didnt have the Gamepad. It has nothing to do with GC 2.0 either.
Its WiiU by its own right (which is the awesome gamepad)

nope. tell me what are these these sytem sellin games  that are coming out that rely on motion controls, i see nothing huge on ps4/xbone/wiiu where motion controls are the  selling point, it's just something nobody cares about anymore, sure its inlcuded but you could easily remove it from gaming and it wouldn't effect sales.

Do you realize how colossally stupid that would be? It wouldn't be like taking 3D out of 3DS. It would be like taking the analog stick off, or your mouse off your computer. It would break the interface for the OS and almost every game released on it.

I see nothing wrong with calling it a Wii 2.0. That at least imbues it with the grace of a full generational succession. You didn't take the route of calling it a Wii 1.5, so I must assume that you actually consider the machine to be a generational jump from its previous installment.

I wonder what the response would be if I suggested that the XBone or PS4 were a floating point above (or below) their previous notch.

The DS' success proves the Wii wasn't a "unique event", since both are based on Blue Ocean Strategy.

The NES was an evolution of what? It was launched after the video game crash of 1983, I'm talking about North America here.  There was no console market anymore in NA, Nintendo had to bundle the NES with ROB and the Zapper and market it as an entertainment system because retail stores no longer had faith in video game consoles.

This is a NES controller, this and this is what controllers looked like before the NES.

I could go on, but I have better things to do today.

Wii U FEELS like a Gamecube successor to me. Which is a good thing; Gamecube had amazing games and was a superb system. The Wii U has amazing games and is a superb system.

You may say that the same games are on it as the Wii, that it's underpowered, has a 'weird' controller etc. but ultimately you buy a console for the games, and the games are more along the lines of the Gamecube than the Wii. Ergo Gamecube 2.

In terms of philosophy I think that Nintendo planned from day one that the role of the Wii U was to bridge a gap between them and Sony/Microsoft; the Wii U enables them to catch up with the advances in networking, HD development, e-commerce etc. that the competition made in the last generation. And I suspect that the successor to the Wii U will hit in 2017; at least 2 years ahead of the competition, and again be a generation and a half in order to acquire the latter half of the generation's multiplats and build a user base before PS5 and Xbox Square Root of -1 launch.

Assuming both Sony and Microsoft's game divisions survive the generation (my money is on at least one casualty, probably Xbox being sold off to Samsung or similar).