The XBox came out in 2001 and the 360 came out in 2005. Microsoft is the only company (other than Sega) to cut a console's lifespan short like that to try to jumpstart their new console. Nintendo usually has a 5 year lifespan, but has no motivation to kill the Wii with a new console while they are breaking every sales record in the world. Microsoft had a 4 year lifespan last time, and now 5 years later they're releasing Natal INSTEAD of a new console. After all the money they've dumped into Natal, they won't want to release a new console for a while, because that would kill all their Natal money. Same thing with Sony and the Arc.

There is no reason for any of the big 3 to release a new console in 2010 or 2011. Nintendo wants to milk this generation while they're winning, Microsoft wants to milk Natal and their XBox Live profits while they're establishing themselves as a great online community and finally making their first profits in the game business after several years in the red, and Sony wants to milk this generation while they try to break a profit and ride their awesome comeback momentum for as long as they can.

Nintendo has proven that new methods of control are far more important than leaps in hardware technology. New leaps in hardware power target the tiny tiny hardcore base, while new control methods target the whole world, which is now the market you want (compare sales of Crysis to Wii Fit). The last 3 huge leaps in technology lost a ton of money: XBox, 360, and PS3. The last 3 new control schemes made a ton of money: DS, Wii remote, balance board. Notice Microsoft and Sony have learned their lessons and are introducing new control schemes instead of new super-powerful consoles.

Nobody will release ANYTHING in 2010 or 2011. Except maybe a PSP2 and DS2 battle. Maybe.

With that said... by the time the next generation finally starts... all 3 will be at least a little more powerful than the PS3, because costs will have a few more years to decrease. But the generation will be based on controls, interface, features, community, stuff like that, instead of the "RAW POWER" baloney of yesteryear.

I know this all speculative but we are basing this on a theory that Natal 'might' cut into the Wii's marketshare? Natal is doomed because 360's core audience will not support such a thing. Natal is not at all a threat to the Wii. It's more like flattery through obvious mimicry. Same to Arc. LOL!

I hope for Nintendo fan's sake it's at least comparable to the PS4/720.

the next Wii will not come out before the next handheld but when it does its safe to say it will be at least more powerful than the PS3/X360. even now it's possible to put out a console at $250-350 US more powerful than PS3/X360 if you didn't use cutting edge tech.

More powerfull than PS3.

Also I am predicting that the next gen Sony and Microsoft consoles won't run for the real life graphics front. That didn't help them at all this gen.

The PS4 and X720 will be significant updates to the actual machines, like Gamecube -> Wii
And the next Wii will be a huge upgrade somewhat below the other two system or equivalent.

I hope so, but it doesn't have to be called Wii anymore. it's a lame name imo.

They'll want to offer the same main RAM as PS4 and XB720 as this avoids some possible difficulties porting multiplatform games.

yeah, it will be better than the ps3 and almost on par with ps4

PS3 is hard to beat with teh cell and blu-ray though.

The processing power of Nintendo’s next system will be determined (in a large part) by when Nintendo releases their console. While people will defend the honour of their console today and argue against it, over the next couple of years a processor like the Intel Atom paired with a low end laptop GPU will creep their way to being a more powerful system than either of the HD consoles; and a couple years after that an ARM processor and a mobile GPU will pass the HD consoles.

Now, if Nintendo was going to maintain (roughly) the same performance level in the next generation as they did in this generation I would expect a jump from the XBox 360 to the next Nintendo system would be roughly the same as the jump from the Gamecube to the Wii in 2011; and I would expect that the system’s overall performance would double every 18 to 24 months following that if it was released later.

I don’t (really) believe that the Wii was the "Best" Nintendo could do in terms of performance given the constraints of size and price; and I suspect that if they switched architecture and made more internal space with a laptop-DVD drive they could have (potentially) increased the processing power by more than double (possibly up to 4 times the processing power). The reason for this is that when the Wii was released IBM’s Power PC 970MP (the dual core processor of using a similar core as the Gekko/Broadway) was in use in laptops clocked at 2GHz; and a mid-range laptop GPU in 2006 would have been (roughly) equivalent to a Radeon X600. If Nintendo followed this route with their next system I would expect their next system to be 4 times as powerful as the XBox 360 in 2011; and I would expect that the system’s overall performance would double every 18 to 24 months following that if it was released later.

There is a third option, and Nintendo could return to conventional console hardware; which would be (roughly) the equivalent of a 2 year old high-end gaming PC upon launch. At the end of 2011 this system would probably be 6 to 8 times the performance of the XBox 360; and I would expect that the system’s overall performance would double every 18 to 24 months following that if it was released later.

Unless their next system is released this year, I expect their next system to be more powerful than the HD consoles; and given what Nintendo has done in the past it could be substantially more powerful than either console (depending on when it is released).