Just forget that RISC vs. CISC stuff. x86 CPU's today have actually tons of RISC registers. As for cache, tjose octacore Jaguars have 4MB, Espresso has 3MB in total. But both Jaguar CPU's have tons of aditional registers, (much) higher FPU performance...

That said, i dont believe that Wii U's CPU is bad but it needs more optimization it did not get. Lat's take AC3 and AC4. AC4 has shorter load times, which is fine. But it actually runs with less frames per second. Funny, isn't it? It likely was far less optimized for Wii U than better optimized. I have both games, mainly because of off-TV.

Talks about WiiU and RAM
Compares it to arbitrary PC requirements.
Completely forgets that the PC requirements =/=  up to 8GB of RAM but up to 12GB because totally ignores that a PC also needs GPU RAM
(And therefore does not mention that a XB1 with a total of 8 GB of "normal" PC RAM can run games that need  up to 12GB on PC.)


Also this
"Far Cry 4 requires at least 4 GB of RAM on PC, yet it still runs just fine on a console with 256 MB of RAM (PS3)."

Etc etc etc...


I agree that the WiiU has a laughable amount of Ram. Because 4GB costs like 5€ or so (for a company like Nintendo) but you cant just  compare different systems without  also mentioning  that you need less ram for lower resolution textures etc etc. Or without talking about the ESRAM/EDRAM DDR3 DDR5 things etc.

What was iwata was thinking. I knew the difference between PS4 and Xbox One with Wii U will be great. Look at this article.

Wii U power debate: Iwata swears it will keep up with next-gen. Microsoft says 'it's a 360'

Source: http://www.gamesradar.com/wii-u-power-debate-iwata-swears-it-will-keep-up-with-next-gen-microsoft-says-its-a-360/

Don't even need to look at this. Wii U is not even near PS4One in terms of raw power. At best in terms of feature level. Should be at worst equvalent to DX10 and at best (according to some devs) to DX11.

That said, Wii U could have done better on many games.

Id rather actual developers talk about these things, particularily devs of games that wont appear on the PS3 and 360. You cant honestly think that the difference between 1GB and 5GB of shared RAM or 3 cores vs 7 has nothing to do with several big games being ported . Someone pointed out the Wii earlier, despite its sales how many big games apart from Call of Duty and licensed titles were ported over?  Despite the GameCubes poor sales how many games like Soul Calibur, Need for Speed and SSX were ported over? Games like The Witcher 3 and Arkham Knight could be scaled down to work on the Wii U, or PS3 or freaking iOS but at what cost. Better yet how could a company justify that over focussing on the new HD twins and PC? Same code, same assets, same GPU capabilities, everything just works.

And how is pointed out any of these things laughing at Nintendo?

It most certainly wasn't because the Gamecube wasn't powerful enough, considering its performance when compared with the PS2. 

There's a major point in Wii U and third parties from the beginning. Almost everyone owning a Wii U accepts that it is far below PS4, One and up to date gaming PC's.
RAM alone wouldn't help anything. If Wii U had 16GB, a 512Bit memory interface... it would still be nowhere near PS4One. It would just have far to much RAM.
Everyone should know that.

Still, there's been a nice history of third parties putting no effort to games, porting totally outdated stuff...

I mean, Mass Effect 3 (still one of the not so bad ports) was really a bad joke to Wii U owners. Other platforms getting Mass Effect trilogy at the same time, with Mass Effect being ported to PS3 just then, for a lower price tag.

The last of those strange decisions (hopefully) is Watch Hogs.

Developers are transitioning and I cant think of a single high profile game coming to the PS3 or 360 this year, despite huge their install bases and potential sales. PC games were also held back by 7th generation consoles and the minimum requirements for "8th gen only/not a 360 port" games clearly reflect that. Most multiplats last gen were built around the then "current gen systems". Developers would add a few effects, some anti aliasing and maybe even higher res textures on PC and then call it a day.  Games built around the X1 and PS4 will never see the light of day on PS3, 360 or Wii U. Even if the Wii U was selling like the Wii support would still die. Again take a look at the GameCube, the Wii and Wii U and tell me hardware isnt a factor. STAGE could have focussed on the CPU or GPU (thoe have been done to death) or all 3 and the outcome would remain the same.

The gamecube was able to compete with both the XBox and PS2, hence it got most multiplat games at the time. Many games even loaded faster and ran better than on the PS2, so much for "laziness".

Again, what are you talking about?