Wii HD or Wii 2

-No big ass tablet controller
~700gflops Machine
-Joycon like controller
-1st part games in full HD as a selling point
-$349
-Mario 3D world as a launch title instead of Nintendo land

Nothing because it led to the Switch. Their best console since SNES. Wii U was a necessary failure.

If the Switch was possible back then, then they should've release it.

By the end of the previous generation, you'd have a portable device that is more powerful than the two home consoles (PS3 and X360) and is already ready for the next gen, the dream machine

The same thing they did the first time as that resulted in the Switch sometimes a failure is necessary for a success.

WiiU should’ve been, and marketed as, an HD “pro” revision of the Wii. Released a year earlier and have Skyward Sword be playable on regular Wii, but have benefits from playing it on WiiHD. Wouldn’t even have had to be as powerful as PS3, but just enough to stretch the Wii out until 8th gen. Nintendoland, Mario 3D World and Pikmin 3 would’ve been Wii/WiiHD games, Mario Kart 8 delayed until Switch launch which would be a year earlier. Smash 4 only for 3DS then however I guess.

There were perhaps 5 people on the planet that actually thought the Wii U was an accessory to the Wii.

Calling it Wii U actually probably helped sales, Nintendo were trying to cash in on visibility of the Wii Name.
The problem was the novelty of the Wii had already faded and the gimmick off the Wii U (The pad) didn't hit the same notes with the consumers.

The Wii U could of been a decent success, selling 60+ millions

1. Release a year to 18months earlier
2. Release without the expensive novelty pad, which would of cut the launch price of the console $100

Actually, history shows 3rd-parties don't trust Nintendo when they do somethign similar to the others. They flock with their standard games to Playstation and maybe Xbox. So to succeed Nintendo must draw in the userbase on their own (and if they are successful some 3rd-parties may come). And Nintendo usually isn't played for the same games as PS and XB. So Nintendo need to do different games. And how to differentiate better than with a different input scheme. So no, if Nintendo had made just a powerful console with standard input, they had failed as bad as WiiU, maybe worse. They need to offer something different, so users see value in getting the device.

I partly agree with the people that say the WiiU was a necessary evil to get to the Switch. There are multiple points for this argument:

• Nintendo needed to make the step to HD development, obviously it was difficult as the slow pace of releases showed.
• Nintendo developed multiple games that helped the Switch succeed, either as sequel to a new IP created for WiiU, a cross-gen release or a straight up port: Zelda, Mario Kart 8, Mario Maker and Splatoon.
• Nintendo clearly learned the lesson, that 3rd-party development will never help them sell their device.
• They needed to open up to Indie devs, which already happened on WiiU. Many early Switch Indies had either their previous game on WiiU, or the same they released on Switch. The contacts were made in the WiiU era.

But there are some things that could have been changed, without impacting the Switch. As you see in the points above, there was no need of the gamepad to lead to the Switch. They could've ditched the gamepad in favor of packing in a slightly upgraded Wiimote. Many say motion gaming was dead, but this is untrue. My indicator is Just Dance, as Nintendo stopped releasing games, but Ubisoft consistently made yearly releases. Ubisoft never pushed the envelope, after they conceived the concept of Just Dance, they just stayed with the formula. So they didn't increase the userbase. But for this exact reason the sales of Just Dance show the efforts of other companies selling motion controls. Take a look at the Just Dance sales on Wii (according to VGC) over time just until the release of Switch (I bolded total sales and the major Just Dance release each year):

Remember, the Wii and Wii Sports started three years earlier in 2006, so according to most people on the Internetz, the fad of motion control was already nearly over as Just Dance started. I bolded important Nintendo titles here. As you can see, in 2009 Nintendo still supported the Wii with important releases like Sports Resort, Wii Fit Plus and Mario&Sonic (or this one was Sega). Later on the support dried up. But even with that, Just Dance was still pretty strong as the WiiU started. The complete lack of support and the availability of the successor to Wii brought on decline in Just Dance sales. But even with that, in 2013 it sold still more than half of the previous year.

So the motion gamers still were sticking to the Wii, although it was abandoned by Nintendo. So my argument is, that if Nintendo dropped the gamepad and instead packed a Wiimote as standard controller and launched with a simple motion game like Wii Sports, the WiiU could've been a lot stronger. Probably not Wii strong. But stronger than WiiU in any case.

All that was needed was Nintendo showing some level of support for motion controls and these 7 million Just Dance players could've come to WiiU. Instead Just Dance on WiiU never got to a million sales. And 7 million more users would have been significant to WiiU sales. Instead Nintendo was doing everything to show that WiiU isn't Wii: no motion controller packed in, no motion game until late (and even then it was an half-assed port of Wii Sports and selling it at a high price in single chunks download only - what was Nintendo thinking), a tablet as standard controller which basically made motion control impossible while holding (meaning each motion game needed the user not only buy extra controllers but abandon the packed in controller), a focus on more classical "hardcore" games. Nintendo was going out of their way to show motion gamers that they were unwelcome on WiiU.

So, for a different timeline that still ends up with Switch, all needed was:

• similar power level as the WiiU had (this was fine)
• HD
• no tablet controller
• packed in motion controls
• simple motion game as launch game

Ubisoft was obviously willing to port Just Dance. They did with the actual WiiU. So combined this would've drawn in at least part of this crowd, leaving Wii behind as they had a different newer option. The other games would have still matched such a device, I never saw a meaningful use of the gamepad. Even ZombiU could be ported to different consoles eventually. We would've still ended up with Switch, but Nintendo could have seen slightly better hardware and software sales in the meantime.

I agree with what most people have said already, but I think the thing that really put the Wii U beyond any hope of recovery was the hardware choices. They could have recovered from the confusion over the name (which, as many people seem to forget nowadays, they did with the 3DS), and possibly even gotten away with producing a gamepad-less version, but when the basic system architecture was so incredibly poorly designed, there was nothing Nintendo could have done. They should have just bought some off-the-shelf laptop chip from AMD, built the system around it, and just resorted to software emulation for the Wii's most popular titles.

A real competitor to the PS4/Xbox One with a head start, A console that continued support of the motion controls, whilst also pushing for the cutting edge & varied experience that people recall on the SNES/N64.

Essentially they should of had a head start to next gen, the same way PS2/PS1 had to the N64 and Gamecube.
Pushed actual "next gen" & shown off games only capable on next gen techology and not just say "HD tick!"
1tflop GPU/4GB/X86/Bluray/500GB HDD

The Wii U's 3rd party support was weird because its a system which had no future. It was still Power PC, had only marginally better specs than Xbox 360 so couldn't handle games of the future (which were already in development in 2011), whilst also offering no notable upgrade over current gen games whilst also having little/no strong USP for developers to create unique ground up titles like they did for wii. Essentially there was no reason for AAA developers to support it unless it was miraculously selling like hot cakes.

Ultimately the Wii U failed out the gate by failing to attract Nintendo Core audience, Otherwise it would of at least had great year 1 sales. And that could have easily of got the ball rolling for future support. An easy way to do this would have been to carefully consider how they commisioned their games;

For example

Year 1 titles:

Golden Eye (Launch Title)- (instead of wasting the game on the Wii in 2011, they should have worked with activision to have it as a next gen launch title, championing it as a return to core gaming and milking the nostalgia whilst also showcasing next-graphics, not possible on PS3/360.)

Majora's Mask HD (launch Window)
-A remake built from the ground up to deliver Zelda early in the systems life, introduce MM to many who haven't played it and give gamers a taste of whats to come. They could literally of outsourced this to any capable studio.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbMQfaG6lo8

Pokemon Spinoff (like a Pokemon Party game of something)

Because duh.


Honestly it feels like Nintendo had no idea what to do with all the money they made  between 2006/2010. They could collaborated with so many 3rd parties and delivered a killer new system in 2012/2013 but instead they flopped hard.