I don't think the Wii U was even to begin to aim the success of the Wii, because it wasn't revolutionary as the Wii was - just an underused Gamepad that devs are too lazy or cost weary to implement. Since it's only half way through its cycle, it has so much room for growth.

As Nintendo says it, the hardware doesn't contribute much to its profit - unlike its software, in which it generates so much profit. They rely that much on what games they make. Unfortunately we have to wait this long for a Zelda, Star Fox, Metroid, etc.. They could have had the first year like THAT, but I guess Nintendo doesn't know the power of its console sometimes - take Ironfall for example.

I think in retrospect they should've just spun the Wii off entirely into a casual/fitness brand, with only casual and fitness style games along with maybe some Mario spin-offs (Mario Party, Mario Dance, etc.).

Things like Sin & Punishment, Metroid Prime 3, Xenoblade, Red Steel 2, Conduit, etc. never really sold great on the Wii even despite its mammoth userbase, Skyward Sword under-performed as well.

What I would've done in hindsight is released a "New Wii" around 2010, which would basically be the same as the original Wii with a new cheap GPU processor that would be able to run newer games in 720p (same visual fidelity more of less though). No tablet controller. New updated OS with more storage, better browser, eShop with hundreds of back catalog games available for download + easy access to Virtual Console. $169.99 at launch, scaled down to $129.99-$149.99 quickly.  

This would be a quiet/soft launch and I'd keep a small team at Nintendo to work on a handful of new casual games for the system yearly. All casual stuff. I'd turn Wii Fit into its own channel with updating fitness challenges and lifestyle reccomendations. 

In 2012, I'd launch a traditional Nintendo console that would be on par with the PS4/XB1 with a one year head start and devote the core Nintendo teams to making games for that. No gimmick controller (tablet pad), the audience and focus for this platform would be clear -- mainstream gamers who like to play deeper game experiences. 

Like Patcher said: Wii HD in 2010/11

But you're not going to beat Sony and Microsoft at their own game. If they wanted to branch off, the path would've just been to stick with the Touch Generations brand, since that's where the profit margins are.

I do think Nintendo could have actually finished a decent no.2 this gen above MS, if they utilized a year head start properly with an adequetely spec-ed machine that allowed for easy PC ports. Too late for this gen now though. 

I know I'd rather have 40-50 million "New NES" systems sold versus the 17-18 million the Wii U is going to crash in at, even if we assume the PS4 wasn't going to be caught, there was still plenty of room here for Nintendo to take advantage. But as usual they were asleep at the wheel and let Sony/MS just get away with 7 year lifecycles for no good reason. They could've taken advantage very easily, especially with MS' blunder of banking on Kinect for their first year. 

The casual market was always doomed long term anyway though IMO, once that audience was introduced to the concept of $1 apps/freemium to get their 20-30 minutes/every 2nd-3rd day gaming fix ... Nintendo never had a chance. So there goes your whole "where the profit margins are", Touch Generations games like Brain Training and Style Savvy flopped on the 3DS too because no one needs/wants a Nintendo platform for that type of experience anymore. 

You do realize that this entire thread and what I was referring to on my original comment was mostly about launch right...? Because them goofing up during launch is what sealed the fate of the wiiU

The wiiU did cost $350 during launch

The wiiU is a low powered console if you look at the specs... Heck, it can't even power a single external hard drive through one USB port... That is the meaning of low power... Even Iwata said that, that is exactly what they were going for

See the issue is, even if its not supposed to be used outside of the house, it can't even be used around the house... Cause in most cases, you can't even get it out of your room without it losing signal

And it did increase the price by a large margin. A replacement gamepad costs $150

http://www.destructoid.com/nintendo-selling-replacement-wii-u-gamepads-for-150-247205.phtml

Games are supposed to be installed because the Bluray discs can't read the textures and the data as fast as hard drives can... Thats why games get installed because hard drives are much faster than Bluray drivers hence why when a game gets installed to the hard drive, the console can access the data significantly faster than it can off of the Bluray drive which is essentially required these days

It was a) A laggy stream and B) A normal Direct with nothing special (apart from the games) where many would have rathered seen them do a press conference at e3 cause there was nothing unique about it (unlike e3 2014) and it gave a sub-par experience due to the laggy stream where as if they did a regular press conference, that laggy stream wouldn't have occured.

The triggers weren't a minor issue in 2012/2013 and it still isn't since both the ps3 and the 360 had way better triggers and so does the ps4/x1... It is a fail because a brand new next gen console missed some of the basic things that even last gen consoles had

And again, the title said "what should Nintendo have done to follow up the Wii's success?" which is mostly referring to the launch of the wiiU and how the wiiU failed to live to the wii's success. And while the day 1 update is now a minor thing, it was still quite a big thing during launch which (along with everything else) essentially sealed the fate of the wiiU.

Please do some research before you respond

"Failed"? Depends on how you look at it. In terms of producing good games, I think it's already one of the best consoles I've owned and I've been gaming for nearly 25 years, so I definitely don't consider it a failure.

Commercially, maybe. Although I wouldn't make that call until this generation is over. And even if it hasn't sold as many units as XO or PS4, the thing that matters most is revenue, not units sold. If Nintendo are making a profit, then it's not a failure.

Nintendo is not in the hardware business to sell only 20-million-ish consoles. Iwata said that during the GameCube cycle. They were not happy with that, I think they are bitterly dissapointed with the Wii U. 

The amount of time, effort, expense, manpower goes into pushing a console in the market is massive, just barely turning a profit after 5 years is not good enough. That's like spending two hours to squeeze a few drops of juice from an orange. 

I'd say it's a pretty safe lock to be their worst selling home console too. 

The GameCube has outsold the Wii U something like 24 out of 25 months that the two have been on the market (equivalent time frame) ... that's horrible. 

Anyone knows if this was a success for MS?

http://www.xbox.com/en-US/xbox-one/games/xbox-fitness

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xbox_Fitness

I think everyone is right to say that the Wii U never had a chance to live up to the Wii, but could have made a respectable showing the way the 3DS is.

The real issue is determining what the core problems the Wii U had are, and the way I see it there were 3:

1. Nintendo didn't make a viable position for third party developers. This is especially true of AA games, which was a major reason the DS succeeded and a lesser factor in the Wii's success. Think The Last Story, for example. Between being able to turn a profit with a $0 third party license fee and the lower production values people expect from other consoles, Nintendo has the keys to sway third party like nobody else, especially when we exclude AAA games.
2. Nintendo didn't make a real market-pitch for the Wii U's tablet function. The Wii had WiiSports, which made a fantastic argument for motion controls and was a great party game, but also showed dev teams what they could do with the hardware. The Wii U basically had nothing like that.
3. The Wii U lacked an elevator pitch. The PS4 is the generation's success story because it has one; this system is reasonably powerful and a cinch to develop for. The Wii U's pitch is "this is the Wii U's successor, it has a second screen no one knows how to use." That's an even worse pitch than the XBox 1 had.

So what do we do to fix this?

1. Completely clear expectations by making a new brand name. This lets you paint a fresh image of the console. Personally, I would have sold the Wii U as a second console rather than a primary one; it has a cheaper entry price with no online upkeep expenses, so it is much cheaper than the PS4 or X1. It doesn't need to hog the TV screen, which means it can complement an existing console rather than replace it. The Wii U was *almost* a new product category, but failed because it didn't have the necessary sales pitch.
2. Make a demo which really showcases what the hardware is uniquely able to do. Expect Sony and Microsoft to have more attractive hardware for a third party dev; why should they still develop for your console? What can they get from you that they cannot get anywhere else?
3. Change the launch library. Pikmin and Mario are great games, but they don't sell in a universe of "the average gamer is 35." Nintendo needs to fundamentally alter their IP offerings to keep up with the times. I'm not saying that they need to make a Mario horror game, but that you DO need to go beyond where they are now. Personally, I would add IP which attracts an older crowd.