It's too early to make any assumptions. But it would be nice to see Nintendo re-invest an appropriate amount of the profits they're generating into next gen R&D. If they want to repeat this generation's level of success, they will.

Most of those improvements should be a given, but only if Nintendo is able to keep production costs extremely modest. In other words, they can't release a next gen system for over $250 and expect it to have the same level of success as the Wii.

Figure by the time the next gen Nintendo console is released, HD capabilities, media playback and robust online features should all be possible at that price point.

Sony and MS will have copied the Wiimote by the next gen, and probably improved upon it. All 3 console manufacturers will be looking for the next "wii-mote" like concept to stand out in the coming generation. I think Nintendo has proven this generation that novel innovation is the most important factor in the console wars.

i would like to see 1:1 motion control.

1. Equal to or less than that of the PS3 I'd bet

2. PS2 had that

3. I'd say the PS2 appealed to casual and hardcore

4. Equal to or less than that of the PS3 again, I'd say

5. Okay, i'll give you this one.

6. PS2 had that

7. PS2 again

So basically the next wii will be (according to you):

A high definition PS2, with better online, more memory, 3rd party support, and some kind of new innovation?

Price is most important. If Nintendo goes in higher next gen, they'll cut off a sizable percentage of those who picked one up because it was the thing everyone wanted at the price most were willing to pay.

1:1 control would be the best feature they could add (I see HD display, media playback, online functionality all as a given). The engineering challenge comes in making it just as simple to use without making implementation excessively difficult for developers.

Imagine something like a motion capture suit (impractical for a mass consumer device due to sizing, cost, etc.) or even just a pair of gloves, booties (again impractical due to sizing) or maybe just a set of adjustable belts (wrist straps, waist or chest strap, head band, ankle straps) with motion capture sensors on them. Sounds good so far. Easy and relatively cheap to manufacture. Console comes with a front mounted camera to capture motion sensor movement. Still good cost wise.

Now from the developer's standpoint. How do we implement all that sensory information allowing for fully independent movement matching on screen animation and action? And do it cheaply?

Well... actually it can technically be done. It's just the cost/difficultly issue.

Using proxy motions that are close to character animations that the player pantomimes could easily be used. But then it's an issue of how much action can the developer make the player execute to play through a typical game session, and how much of a market is there for people who really want something this sophisticated when most are happy with two hand held controllers that create on screen action when moved.

Why do you guys see the next nintendo console being so weak. They always make a very capable system the following year after their innovation. Such as the NES> SNes. Then nes was 5 years behind in technology from the computers, and other consoles, yet it still suceeded. I very well see this console being as capable graphically as the next microsoft or sony console. Oh and about the price thing if you bring that up. The gamecube was superior to the ps2 graphically, but it was $100 dollars cheaper, and almost never lost profit. Nintendo knows how to make some very capable graphics technology out of cheap products. The console I believe will be far superior to the ps3 in this area.

I doubt far superior. Of course cost to performance is simply measured by time. The longer you wait, the cheaper you'll be able to produce the same product.

Within the next few years, it should be very possible to produce a PS3 equivalent hardware unit for anywhere between $200-300 (retail cost, not manufacturing cost, allowing for a reasonable profit margin per unit).

Speaking for myself personally, if the next gen Nintendo console had the same graphical capabilities as the PS3 or 360, even three or more years from now, I'd be satisfied.

Besides, Nintendo's successful angle this generation was not on the basis of making the most technically advanced system. I see no reason why they'd decide to change policy next generation and try to sell the most technologically advanced console yet seen at a price few are willing to pay. That was Sony's angle with the PS3, and no one will argue that was the winning ticket.

As long as it improves on what's working in every way, I'll get it. The problem is, the system can't pull the same card twice and present graphics highly inferior to its competition. I'm not sure if the press and such wouldn't blow it out of proportion. Plus, common knowledge necessities like memory and Convenient online cannot be ignored.

I agree, but nintendo doesn't want people complaining TEH GFX ARE LAST GENZ. I think they will also try to keep close to their competitiors in terms of graphics, just so 1 we don't get ports from this gen 2 more 3rd parties that care about graphics will make wii2 games. Anybody who says it will be = to or > than the ps360 are kidding themselvses, because even the wii is an improvement over last gen, and the next gen console will be too. 

Way to early to talk about the next consoles.