This is why I like Nintendo life.

That controller is the only thing i'm mad about because they ripped off IPad 2 by like holding it sideways and only ONE touch screen.

DS ripped off iPad 2 because you hold it sideways and it has only ONE touch screen. Shame on Nintendo for copying Apple before Apple could release the totally original, one and only portable device which is held sideways and has one touch screen!

And I might add all those tablet PCs, smart phones, airport kiosks and other touch-based devices are totally shameful for copying iPad 2 before it came out as well.

You know the concept of the Wii U was initially developed in 2008 if I'm not mistaken, so Nintendo never copied Apple.

Thanks everyone I am glad to be here.

@MrMushroom987
and @ HolyMackerel how did they copy apple. Nintendo always gets their ideas for consoles a long time before anyone makes a device like an ipad. Plus How can they copy ipad2 when the ds came out way before even the 1st ipad?

@thegamemonkey28: 'Nintendo always gets their ideas for consoles a long time before anyone makes a device like an ipad. '

i may be in a particularly dense state today (it happens) but i don't understand this sentence at all...

@K8sMum Oh I am sorry I should have written it more clearer I just was responding to them to guys saying nintendo copied ipad 2.

I just was saying how could they copy ipad 2 when nintendo had the touchscreen idea a long time before apple probably ever had it.

@TheGameMonkey28: HolyMackerel is taking MrMushroom987's comment to its logical conclusion — MrMushroom987 was the one complaining that Nintendo ripped off Apple.

That said, Apple has had touchscreen devices for waaaaaaay longer than the DS has been out — anyone else remember Newton?
_{Newton devices were held vertically, though, so i guess Nintendo can't be seen as ripping them off with this one :3}

So, the Wii U is 'confirmed' to be no more powerful than the PS360.

Course, it has also been 'confirmed' to be more powerful than the PS360.

Nobody knows, do they?

Can someone just confirm that nobody knows? Thanks.

Well, I can confirm that nothing is indeed set in stone. Anything can change.

I feel like Nintendo revealed this a tad too early, but that's just me.

Wow, an "argument" over who invented the tablet? I mean really, Apple doesn't own the tablet or the smartphone. I'm a computing grad, I hang around people who are as obsessed with new tech as I am all the time.

I remember in 2005 me and my friends laughed at one of our other friends because he spent something like $2000 on an 11" laptop that didn't have an optical drive. He claimed that he didn't have any need for optical disks in 2005. He owned a very expensive netbook before we knew what a netbook was. At about the same time (remember the iPhone launched in 2007) about two or three people I knew had "PDA Phones". PDAs.... that included a phone.

Now tablets are another story entirely. I think before the iPad I had only seen one or two tablets "in the wild". They were there but they weren't exactly popular, a bit pretentious I thought. People who had a tablet were idiots with more money than sense and.... I guess that's still true! I remember reading an article in 2002 about how Windows XP was going to allow the tablet PC form factor to take over the world. Who would've thought a mobile OS and Apple of all companies would get us there!

Oh, and here is an article where WaltzElf and my ideas go hea...

For all the buzz around mobile and online gaming in Los Angeles this week, no-one is predicting the demise of consoles any time soon.

"It's not going to happen in the short term. There's still a massive reliance on physical goods and retail product, its not going to suddenly be abandoned," said Steinberg.

Philip Asher of games developer Trendy Entertainment said: "I don't think consoles are going to disappear, just evolve. Their function will be media, not purely games, and their input may be completely different."
"That said, I believe mobile games are completely changing the industry and directly competing with console games," he said, adding that games will have to evolve so they can cross between platforms.
"Many of these platforms will be able to play with each other; so, you can start your game on your console, continue it on the bus in your phone, and play it later in the office on your PC.
"Gaming will become more about content and less about the platform that content is on."

I'm fairly sure that Philip Asher was talking about cloud computing there. As attractive as the idea of cloud computing taking over gaming is, and it is a really cool idea, I think that hardware is getting cheaper and cheaper too quick for it to destroy the console market. I would expect that downloadable titles will eventually beat retail but, eventually, I would think that the hardware for a console at the plateau of graphics that we're rapidly reaching will be off the shelf stuff. Really cheap, like buying a new printer where the new printer is almost cheaper than the ink.

why would I hate Wii U?

The iPad's development began before the iPhone's, but that comparison is still ridiculous. Touch screens have been around for a long time, and iPads can be used horizontally, too.

Heh, that was the first thing i thought of back when Apple originally annouced the iPhone: "oh, so it's a Newton with a phone, huh?"

@TheGameMonkey28 Uh, FYI it's impossible for the DS to have ripped off the iPad 2 since it came out a good 7 years before it. I disagree with MrMushroom987 and was pointing out how silly his stance was. _{Unless you're insinuating that Nintendo is capable of time travel. The plot thickens!}

There is no argument about that here. Just pointing out how ridiculous it is, at this stage of consumer technology, for anyone to say a touch-based device ripped off the iPad 2. By the above logic, even iPad ripped off iPad 2.

Ahahaha so true!

People who had a tablet were idiots with more money than sense and.... I guess that's still true!

I guess I must be stupid to have found a solution that's lighter, more useful, and cheaper than a reasonable laptop then.

I'm fairly sure that Philip Asher was talking about cloud computing there. As attractive as the idea of cloud computing taking over gaming is, and it is a really cool idea, I think that hardware is getting cheaper and cheaper too quick for it to destroy the console market. I would expect that downloadable titles will eventually beat retail but, eventually, I would think that the hardware for a console at the plateau of graphics that we're rapidly reaching will be off the shelf stuff. Really cheap, like buying a new printer where the new printer is almost cheaper than the ink.

Well, you are right in that he's talking about cloud computing (and other things, buy primarialy Cloud). I don't understand the rest of what you're on about. Commoditisation of hardware simply means that it will be easier to deliver cloud gaming services. And we're already seeing it happen with Sony Microsoft and smaller products, like OnLive.

Hardware already acts like printers - companies already sell them at a loss, and make it back on software licensing (or ink, to continue you analogy).

Cloud entertainment in general is, in the medium term, going to dominate.

@ZackNormandin, I do agree with you, but then, how would Nintendo compete vs Sony? Sony is already almost losing money for every PS3 they sell, but they can live with this, their traditional business is in TVs, DVDs, BRays, Cell phones, laptops ... This is not the case of Nintendo, and probably Nintendo already understand they cannot fight face to face vs Sony. Wii was being sold in Europe by 250€ when its building cost was 60$, building cost of PS3 was over 300$ and its price was almost lower than it. You cannot fight against this unless you aim to a fully different community, the casual players and these that says WOW when they see 3D in a handheld or when they play golf with the wmote. Do not expect anything else for the WiiU, tons games that are built based on a controller that Sony doesnt have yet, where the key is the controller and not the game itself.

Yup, you sure are

I didn't say that cloud computing wouldn't do well in the medium term and I have a feeling you misunderstood my "will be like printers" point. You can buy a low end printer for $40 including ink and ink the ink costs $20. It's almost cheaper to get a new printer when you run out of ink rather than buying the ink. We'll get to that point with game consoles.

The main attraction of something like Onlive is that you can get the power of a high end console for almost less than you pay for a game. In the US they sometimes even bundle the console with the game (rather than the game with the console). Do you think this can't happen with a full console eventually?

What happens when we get to the point in gaming hardware, which were getting really close to, where improvements in visuals are trivial. Presumably when we reach that point the first company will launch their console (PS4/720) and it will be at about the same price as we expect to pay for consoles now. What happens five, ten years after that? You'll have a console that'll sell at maybe about the price of a modern day Wii that'll do near photo-realistic graphics. Why would people care about a cloud service like OnLive? The era of gaming on-the-cloud will be almost over before it starts

After Wii U, it'll be PSU.