Wii U should be included on that list too as came to the market much later than 360 and PS3 but had much weaker performance overall with lower CPU and GPU resources. Most if not all multi-platform games ran worse on Wii U than those much older consoles and loading times were much longer typically mainly because there wasn't a hard drive to cache from. Often games felt worse too as the Wii U removed analogue triggers so many shooting and driving games didn't feel as good as the versions on PS3 and 360. Also I suppose you can make the case too that many of their portable systems were underpowered however I always wanted that. Yes the PSP and Vita were nice but on a portable system I want longer battery runtime and I felt that was the big benefit of Nintendo handhelds. I was a huge fan of DS and 3DS years ago.

Wii U had more RAM than 360/PS3. A better GPU but a much worse CPU. Basically the Wii/Gamecube CPU again

Wii U was a weird one in that it had a weak CPU due to using effectively three overclocked Gamecube/Wii cores for the purposes of backwards compatibility, and for some silly reason the hardware prioritised very low power usage despite being a dedicated console, so it was short on raw grunt.

On the flipside, it did alleviate the biggest bottleneck of PS3 and 360 by having more than twice as much RAM, which showed in games like Need for Speed Most Wanted where the Wii U version had better textures than the 7th gen twins.

It was very much a console in the Wii/Yokoi philosophy of "lateral thinking with withered technology", the problem was that unlike the Wii its central hook wasn't appealing to the mass market, and so it fell flat.

You can see with its successor that they pivoted more towards hardware that was quite capable and competitive for its time/form factor.

Yokoi philosophy is all over the place too and his reputation as "father of the Game Boy" is actually more fantasy than truth. 

He didn't want to make the Game Boy a system with swappable cartridges like the Game Boy was, he wanted some weird disposable toy thing like the Game & Watch with far worse specs than the final Game Boy that would have swappable screens for different games and no 3rd party games (lmao) because he hated the Famicom console entirely. It was basically going to be Game & Watch 2 only you could change the games by changing these really cheap screen overlays. In fact he had to be yelled at in a huge fight with a co-worker at Nintendo at a fight to change his mind. 

The real father of the Game Boy is probably actually a gentleman at Nintendo named Satoru Okada who I believe yelled at Yokoi to stop being a dumb ass and basically forced him to adopt the idea of a portable (well) Famicom like system with swappable cartridges, 3rd parties, etc. Basically they had a huge fight yelling at each other and Yokoi basically told Okada to do whatever he wanted, and essentially Okada then created the Game Boy we know.  Yokoi hated the success of the Famicom because it undermined his past with the company (toys and Game & Watch) and also flat out refused to allow the system to be called something like Famicom Pocket, which would have made sense. 

Yokoi was then gone by 1995 from the company entirely after the Virtual Boy flop, so he never really even iterated on the Game Boy at all, by that time Nintendo was working on a very powerful Game Boy successor called Atlantis, it just never got down in price/size/battery life to release. 

The making of the Game Boy is actually fairly fascinating and probably not what people think. 

Wii-Wii U was just Nintendo chasing casual consumers, it's an unpredictable demographic so they hit once and then failed the next time terribly. Nothing too much more complicated than that. Specs are not a priority for a casual game system. 

Yokoi may have been long gone by the Wii U days but his philosophy was still very influential in Nintendo long after he left, that being the use of cheap technology that hooks people through innovative concepts rather than being cutting edge.

He's not really the "Game Boy's father" though that really is Mr. Okada. If Nintendo had released what Yokoi wanted I don't think people understand how basic that would have been. 

He wanted to release a Game & Watch basically with replicable cheap plastic overlay screens that could be thrown in the trash after a year or two and only gave up on this idea because he got yelled at and let Okada take over the project essentially. He hated the concept of what the Game Boy was (which was basically a portable Famicom, cheap screen or not). 

Then he basically made the Virtual Boy after that and got himself fired. 

Also as a funny aside the console division at Nintendo (R&D2?) hated the Game Boy and thought it was a piece of shit, lol. The system's product name (DMG) was referred to as something like "dumb game machine" by the Famicom/Super Famicom team at Nintendo. 

Where did I ever say he was? You're doing that thing again where you passionately rail against arguments nobody is making.

I'm just saying the Game Boy's history is a lot more complicated than people make it out to be and Yokoi had a lot less to do with it than people think. If he was allowed to make what he wanted, it may have been a temporary hit for Nintendo (given the success of Mario and Zelda in the 80s) but would have faded out of style probably in a few years. 

Nintendo is lucky Okada yelled and screamed at him until he basically gave up control of the project. 

If Yokoi had his way he would have destroyed the Game Boy, luckily for Nintendo he was stopped from releasing what he wanted to release. 

Even past all that, Yamauchi thought the system was underwhelming and cancelled it, lol. It's only because the Super Famicom got delayed that they released it. 

Wonderswan was cool tho. His last creation. He died the day he was to present it. Struck by a car.

I thought the Neo Geo Pocket was a better system honestly. The dual split d-pad on one side of the device was weird too. 

Like why.