I honestly think the "software is everything" mantra is actually kind of false these days.

Every system has or will eventually have more good games than any reasonable person (ie: a person with any kind of life) has time to play.

So that really isn't the sway point it once was. There aren't systems like the 3DO, Jaguar, 32X, Sega Master System, etc. anymore. If the library is everything then Wii U should be outselling the PS4 easily as the PS4's library right now is nothing to write home about. 

You have to have a lot of the other details right. And the NES did beat the Sega Master System, but the NES didn't beat the Genesis ... because Nintendo brought out the Super NES to take on the Genesis. Being a generation behind the existing machines is something that isn't a winnable formula unless you have some kind of disruptive gimmick like the Wiimote to change things up.

Which the Wii U doesn't have (tablet pad is a huge failure in this respect).

Wii U really isn't competing with the PS4/XB1 anyway at this point. It has no sway with that demographic.

The arguement for a price cut I think would center more around the Amiibo stuff ... a cheaper system would be preferable for getting more kids to buy one.

A $249.99 bundle with Super Smash Bros. U + 2 Amiibo figures packed in as starters for example is probably where you want to get to as Nintendo as quickly as possible, but at the same time the only thing worse than a system that has a low LTD is a low LTD system that also bleeds a company dry financially (like the Saturn did to Sega).

After this gen though Nintendo is really going to have to review their hardware design policies, in particular a few people from their hardware division should be ashamed of themselves. A system that's only moderately more powerful than a PS3 should not be costing Nintendo this much money to mass produce in 2014. 

If Yamauchi was young and still around running the company IMO he would be very displeased with this, far too much time and money was spent making a system with low electrical usage (a feature no one cares about).

1) It's your own uninformed opinion that the Wii U is a console closer to the power of the PS360. There's already plenty of evidence that proves that the Wii U is several generations ahead of the PS360.

The Wii U isn't as powerful as the PS4 and the Xbone, but that doesn't mean it should be priced similar to those older machines because of your misinformed opinions.

2) This is your opinion. It's not impossible to add value to any product. Look at the PS3 and the 3DS. Both of them got off to very rocky starts. Both of them received an initial price drop just like the Wii U did. After that, they were given good games - games that added value to the systems they were on. 

I'm starting to realize that economics isn't exactly your strong point.

3) You must be very very young. I feel like an old fart right now. I say this because your argument completely ignores the video game market's history in its entirety. First off, the system with the best graphics nor the cheapest system was the system that won a console generation. It was the system with the best and most compelling software. This has been proven time and time again, over and over and over and over. 

The NES won the 3rd generation, despite the Sega Master system being a superior system. The NES was more expensive and it was weaker than the Sega Master system, but it still outsold that system. Why? Because of it's software library. You can argue that the PS4 has more 3rd party support, and therefore, provides a better library than the Wii U. However, nowadays, there are very few exclusive 3rd party games this generation. Multiplats have never really made or broken a system. The exclusives are what sets a system apart. Sony knew this with the PS1 and the PS2. It had the most (key word here) 3rd party _exclusives_. The PS2 was a more expensive and inferior system compared to the Xbox and the Gamecube.

4) Price has nothing to do with it. Even if the Wii U was free, you still wouldn't buy one. This could have more to do with bias or perhaps the Wii U's library doesn't feature games you want to play. Whatever the case may be, price has nothing to do with it.

I'm sorry, but this post is so full of ignorance, I find it hard to believe you really think this way. You seem not to understand at all what you're talking about.

@1 - wtf? It's several generations ahead? PS4 is one generation ahead of PS3, how can Wii U be several generations ahead of PS360? It's a generation ahead of the Wii, which basically was two Gamecubes duct taped together. It's not a generation ahead of PS360, just like Wii wasn't a generation ahead of PS2/Xbox/GCN - all in terms of performance obviosly. Wii U is more powerful than PS360, but it's not even close to PS4One. Look at what multiplat games look like - they are just a little bit better than the PS360 versions, and are nowhere near PS4One versions. This is fact.

If you think that PS360 cost $230-250, then you are obviously the misinformed one (duh!). FYI - a brand new PS3 costs 135 Euro in Europe.

@2 - Both these consoles were in totally different spots than the Wii U is, so you can't put them as examples for Wii U to follow. PS3 was cutting edge and had all the Sony 1st party games and all multiplats. 3DS became dirt cheap and got a constant stream of games (1st and 3rd party), which were easy to develop thanks to how simple the graphics are on the system. Wii U? It's the most inferior console, gets next to no 3rd party games and will only be getting less of them in the future, on top of that Nintendo struggles like hell developing 1st party games, cause they ignorantly underestimated what HD development means. And it's not even cheap.

I have no idea how knowledge about economics fit into this argument of yours - care to enlighten me?

@3 - You can check my age in my profile, old fella It's cool you know the history of the industry, pity that you don't understand it, even the stuff that you wrote here. You know that the key is library? Good. Now take a look at the Wii U's library. It's only Nintendo games and only a handful of them. The future looks rather bleak, as the few 3rd parties that were present on Wii U thus far are leaving it. Look at the competition - it's Sony/MS games AND 3rd party games. Every console in history that won its generation had 3rd party support. Even Wii had many 3rd party games that sold millions. You know which console was in a similar situation to Wii U? Dreamcast. It was the least powerful console, 3rd parties have left it, it pretty much only had 1st party games - which were great, but still the console ended the way it did.

The library is and always will be a problem, it will never be on par with PS4One - no matter what Nintendo does. They can't take on the whole gaming world. On top of that, the casuals have left home consoles and are now on tablets/smartphones. The only thing that Nintendo can do is turn the Wii U into a companion second console that core gamers buy only to play Nintendo games. But in order to convince numerous gamers to go that way, the console has to be cheap on top of having great games. These two things come together, one just won't suffice.

All this is obviously true only if we assume that Nintendo still wants to invest in Wii U and believes it can turn it aroung, at least to some extent (+/- GCN sales). If they made the decision not to commit and just wait this generation out with minimum loses, then they obviously should always be selling Wii U at a profit. But if they do that, they'll never get anywhere near GCN sales.

@4 - I'm struggling really hard not to call you an idiot here, but it's tough. Try to think this over again. I have bought the Wii as my first consoles last gen, for the full price. I have a DSi and have never owned a PSP. Now please take back and stop with your ridiculous "bias" bullshit or the absurd "you wouldn't take a free Wii U". It's just pathetic.

I see that you are so pro-Nintendo that you ignore reality, but this is the truth - if Wii U cost around 200 Euro, I'd already have it, especially since my gf wants me to buy one ever since Nintendo killed online in MK Wii (I have even made a thread on it ). It may be hard for you that I'm neither a Nintendo fanboy, nor a hater either, but a person who just likes their games and as a result sees the reality the way it is.

1) You seem rather confused. I'm talking about the Wii U's graphical power. The GPU inside the Wii U is several generations ahead of the previous systems. 

Source: http://mynintendonews.com/2013/05/29/shinen-says-wii-u-gpu-several-generations-ahead-of-current-gen/

Also, the Wii U's graphical prowess is closer to the PS4/Xbone than it is to the PS360.

Source: http://dcpgamer.wordpress.com/2014/01/16/wii-u-developer-the-wii-us-gpu-feature-set-is-a-lot-closer-to-the-ps4xbox-one-rather-than-xbox-360-and-ps3/

2) The 3DS didn't get a constant stream of 3rd party games - at least not western 3rd party games. Your memory is a bit foggy. Western 3rd party support on the 3DS has always been subpar. What boosted the 3DS wasn't just the price cut, nor was it Japanese 3rd party support, but rather,  the steady stream of 1st party games. I can stand here right now and tell you that you cannot name a single 3rd party game (Western or otherwise) that helped boost the 3DS when its sales were in the slump.

As for the PS3... The PS3 was $600 dollars, and it didn't get every 3rd party game initially. The Wii U was in the same boat. Only difference is that the PS3's slump lasted for 3 long years.

As for economics: you prove you honestly don't know much about it. When you say it's impossible for Nintendo to add value to a product, that shows your lack of understanding of just basic economics... Either that or you're just extremely bias. Listen... Any company can add value to a product that's available on the market. To add value means to add features or options that would make the product more desirable to the consumer. Ever see a commercial about a product and then you'd hear, "And if you act now, we'll even throw in 3 extra items for free!"? <--- This is what it means to add value. 

3) Library does indeed determine a good system. However, even though you say this yourself, you don't seem to want to apply this logic to your own argument. If library is so important, then what makes a system any better than the next if it gets the same library as its competitor? If McDonalds and Burger King both served the same Hamburgers and Fries, what would the incentive be to go to one over the other? See? It's about exclusives - Experiences you cannot get on other systems. The PS1 and the PS2 had 3rd party exclusives. The PS4 and the Xbone do not have many of these exclusives at all. Because of this, their library suffers. Take a look at Metacritic and look at the PS4's exclusives. Notice how the PS4 doesn't have as many as the Wii U and notice how the Wii U has a higher number of higher rated exclusives. This quality actually shows in the PS4's software sales as well. Just look at the highest selling games on the PS4 and then look at the Wii U's highest selling games. NSMBU sold more than any game on the PS4. Super Mario 3D World outsold every single exclusive PS4 title, even though the PS4 has 8 million consoles sold.... Yes, library does determine a good system. If we go by the PS4's library in terms of both metacritic ratings and software sales, then the PS4 really isn't as good as you'd want it to be. Of course, if we go by just hardware sales, then sure! The PS4 is the most awesome console ever!

4) You claim you're not bias, but your statements seem to prove otherwise. I can admit that I have a bias toward Nintendo. You can see it in my avatar. However, I can also admit the truth. I'm not saying the Wii U is flawless. I'm not saying Nintendo didn't drop the ball this gen (which they obviously have). I'm just simply calling out some of the incorrect statements you've made; and boy have you made a lot of incorrect statements. You see, the difference between you and I is that I research the things you say. I also research the things I want to say to make sure they are valid before I type them to you. If you were correct, I have no problem stopping and calling you the victor. However, in this sense, you are not correct - and the fact that you refuse to research the things you are saying proves that you are bias. Plain and simple.

Dude...

1) You are calling me confused? I was talking about the power of Wii U, you said it (the console as a whole - as that's what we were talking about) was generations ahead and now you claim you are talking just about the GPU? Talk about confused. I know what I'm talking about - can't be said about you. I'm calling you out on the bs you say and now you're trying to spin everything and call me confused? Grow up.

There are raports saying it's closer to PS360 and ones that say the opposite. Nintendo still keeps the specs a secret, but what matters to me is what the games look like and so far they are closer to PS360 quality in terms of visuals.

2) I said pricecut + 1st and 3rd party games. First you move the goalposts to just 3rd party games. Then you go as far as going to just Western 3rd party games. If you do things like that you can prove anything, but you are not arguing my point. You want me to name a 3rd party game that helped move 3DS in 2011 - the year of the cut? Monster Hunter Tri, Profesor Layton, Super Street Fighter IV. Here - you were wrong. There were also other games like Lego Star Wars, Rayman 3D, etc. Year 2012 also came with some nice games - Resident Evil, Kingdom Hearts DDD. After that came Dragon Quest games and the massive MONSTER HUNTER 4. You were asking for one, I hope you're satisfied. And to remind you, MH is a franchise that can make or break a handheld - as we see with Vita. What saves a console is pricecut + games. Nintendo is slowly starting to deliver games (but is still struggling more than it should) but is totally failling to adjust the price of the product to its quality. Both parts have to come together, but if you are struggling at one with no chance of ever becoming truely competitive at it, you can still compensate with the other part of the equation. Nintendo fails to do that and what do we get? It's below XO again, getting closer and closer to PS3 again.

Wii U has never been and never will be in the same boat as PS3, stop deluding yourself. PS3 didn't get every 3rd party game? No console ever has got every single 3rd party game, so what kind of an argument is that? And don't forget that the "3 year PS3 slump" you're talking about would be considered a glorious return and shockingly good sales for the Wii U. These consoles aren't even remotely close in any single way. What was a slump for PS3 seems like a pipe dream for Wii U.

@remark at my knowledge of economics - ok. Here you are, spinning everything again. Seriously, GROW UP. I haven't said it's impossible for Nintendo to improve the value of Wii U. I have said something different. Let me quote myself: "it's impossible for Nintendo to improve the value to truely compete with PS4One". To truely compete with PS4One <- to make it easier for you to notice the important part that makes your whole patronising rant pathetic. Nintendo can't improve the value of Wii U to reach the value of PS4One. It's impossible for the reasons I've stated. Wii U only offers Nintendo games, which are a small part of the gaming market nowadays. Quit spinning and trying to manipulate what I say, it won't take you anywhere.

 3) The thing you fail to understand is that every single PS4One multiplat counts like an exclusive title against the Wii U. Cause it's not there. You are ignoring reality when purely comparing N games vs. Sony/MS 1st party games, when in fact it's N vs. Sony/MS + 3rd party games. Will a Wii U gamer be able to play GTA 5, GTA 6, Witcher 3, Dragon Age: Inquisition, FIFA 15, Destiny, The Division... The list goes on and the answer remains the same. For a Wii U owner, there is no difference between these games and Uncharted 4 or Halo 5. They are just as exclusive for him. And just as unavailable on Wii U.

Are you seriously thinking you get any kind of an argument from the sales of a bundled game (NSMBU) that has been on the market for over a year longer longer than PS4 itself? It's what, +/- 20 months vs. 8 months of sales? Do I even have to remind you about the massive drought that Wii U experienced? NSMBU had no competition for such a long time, unlike PS4 games, which already have to fight for the consumer. VGC already shows 261 PS4 games and 270 Wii U games. With a year headstart - that means a bloody lot, doesn't it?

If you want to compare Wii U vs. PS4 don't compare just the exclusives, cause you're blinding yourself and moving the goalposts to a place in which nothing makes sense. Compare every single game that's on the Wii U and isn't on PS4 to every game that is on PS4 and isn't on Wii U. Now you get the proper comparison of what the difference in value between Wii U and PS4 is. And remember that many games shared between these consoles are better on PS4. Compare the upcoming games using this method. Future does look kinda bleak for Wii U, doesn't it?

4) I'm not biased. I appreciate a good product (as I did with Wii and DS) and am critical of bad or average ones. I can judge that Wii U hasn't got a chance to give me even remotely as much as PS4 can in the years to come. It's not even close, so I can't justify paying a similar price for these products. Wii U will be (cause I will buy it at one point - believe it or not) a secondary console to play Mario Kart with my gf from time to time, play Zelda, Metroid or the one or two RPG they decide to make. And that's pretty much it. Nintendo will never secure enough content to compete with PS4One. Never. So they can't charge just as much, especially if the hardware is so inferior. Wii U satisfies just a little particular niche, but fails to satisfy the main gaming need and people do take this into account. So should you and Nintendo.

Also note - I do not own a PS4 and don't plan to buy it any time soon. Cause? I don't see a reason to pay the current price for what it has to offer at the moment. And I still have a massive Vita/PS3/Wii backlog. Unless N cuts the price nicely, I'm gonna get a PS4 at one point as the first next gen console. At this point they still have a chance to be the first pick (my gf really wants MK8), but have to make a move.

So far "my" incorrect statements are results of you spinning or manipulating what I say. Also, even if you do make research, you clearly make it in a way that doesn't give you objective results. I know what I'm talking about, I'm not sure if you can really say the same, as you seem confused at times.