EA is full of dunces if they think they have the right to say that.The Wii U has more power,and don't get me started on MySims.

EA Still hasn't made a hockey game that's topped.....Wait for it....

@WavesofSteel: Pretty much the best sports game ever made. As a kid I kept hitting reset on the NES just to hear the chiptune voice saying Blades of Steel!

Thing is, there is a different definition of "generation" when it comes to video games, but the definition has become a bit blurred over time. Originally, gaming generations were established during the bit wars, meaning that 8-bit consoles were a generation, 16-bit consoles were another... But after the Nintendo 64 (or possibly by the N64), bits became irrelevant. As such, current generations cannot be easily defined. Defining it in the order the consoles are released isn't always enough, because systems from the same generation aren't necessarily released the same year, so there can be overlaps. Also, it might be hard to determine at what point it's a new generation and not just a revision. As such, it's hard to determine if the Wii U is "next gen", It depends what the speaker means by "next gen" and is possibly an arguable point, especially when specs might be so drastically different.

My thoughts precisely. This thread was created for the fanboys but it sure is hilarious to watch.

You know that Waltz! That sly dog!

Personally I dont care what EA thinks, it doesnt stop me from enjoying the Wii U.

Also to add my two cents, if you think that the PS4 will be a super computer of a console and leagues ahead of the Wii U, you are living in a fantasy world. Sony does not have the money for that. There will be a moderate leap between the PS3 and PS4, but nothing remarkable.

I really do wonder what the console games industry will be like soon, and both Sony and Microsoft should somehow hint at it. If there will be modest performance gains, that could surprise many people. Other than Sony's GAIKAI and Microsoft's SmartGlass, what exactly will the other two console-makers do to differentiate the next era in general?

Quite simple actually. Microsoft is pretty much combining Kinect with their system. Nintendo put a screen in their controller. The way you play will certainly change, while the visuals will only get slight advancements.

I find it strange some people don't understand that. The reason games are so expensive is because you're paying for a license, not for some 50¢ DVD. That's why if your physical media is destroyed or lost you're still entitled to play the game you paid for.

Unless the next Xbox 360 and PS3 bring their controllers to next gen like Nintendo did, I don't think they will do that well. People already spent at least 2 times more than they should have on remotes for that console once they released motion controllers.
PS3=55x3+70x4+40=$485 in controllers alone if you bought new, and maybe somewhere around $375 if you bought used.
Xbox 360=60x3+100=$280 if you bought new, and maybe around $200 if you bought used.
Wii combos=40x3+20x4+20x4=$280 if you bought new remotes, maybe around $200 if you bought used.
Wii U=any cost you didn't pay before in Wii remotes, or if you buy Pro controllers, then it's 40x4=$160
Not many controllers are used for Wii U right now, because everyone's holding on to their new stuff 90% of the time. Then there's the cost of Xbox Live, and replacing consoles if they break, which will raise the cost.

These are just estimates I made from my knowledge... Wii U did a good thing by not making your Wii remotes immediately obsolete.

EA needs to make games for Wii U, and that's fact. If they're gonna wait for the next PS/Xbox, they're gonna be losing out on alot, especially if those consoles do end up adding a screen to their controller, too. Not everyone can aford a seperate tablet to use as a controller, and they need to choose a controller altogether and stick with it. Nintendo apparently has had their final controller done since 2009, while PS3 and Xbox 360 are still choosing between stuff. I would say if you're rich as hell, PS4 and Xbox 1080 are gonna be easy as hell to optimize in accessories, but not everyone can do that. If PS4/Xbox 1080 fail, and EA was waiting for that, they are gonna look even more stupid. People are already pissed at the ports for Wii U, but that's not really Nintendo's fault 90% of the time.

Devs need to make games for Wii U regardless. If they push Wii U that extra little bit it can, I'm sure it will no doubt help them move forward to those next consoles if they decide to or not. Make games for now, not later.

Sorry for such the long post, but there's already tons of people with game consoles now, and those are already expensive as hell still, especially in comparison to what Wii U can do plus more.

Blades of Steel is insanely fun. Played it in an arcade once. On subject, EA expects too much. The PS4 and Durango will likely have too hugh of developement costs to take risks. (Not to mention how expensive they will likely be likely resulting in a smaller install base. If $350 was too much for Wii U and Ninty was selling at a loss, imagine how much money Sony or MS might lose to sell their consoles at a reasonable price. Almost sounds like suicide.)

Not to be that guy, but I haven't played an EA game in...well, I can't even remember.

I'm fairly inclined to agree. They have to keep these cost efficient for the consumers after all. I don't know how well it would go over with them releasing another $500-$600 machine like the PS3 at release. Hell, I know people that are complaining that another system is 'already' coming soon, even though it's been ~6+ years.

Personally though, I don't care about visuals all that much when it comes to consoles. It'll be years (if ever) before consoles can compete with the PC platform in terms of graphical fidelity (for example, I'm running an i5 2500k @ 3.8GHz, 16GB DDR3 Corsair Vengeance, and a EVGA GTX 680). To me, it's the exclusives (Zelda, Mario, Metroid, etc. in the case of Nintendo) that matter to me.

Yep you're right. If Sony wants to avoid another "five hundred and ninety nine U.S. dollars" type situation, they won't put out another pricey system at the beginning of its life. Being released a year plus after the Wii U, I do believe the PS4 (as well as the NextBox) will have more power than Nintendo's current home console, but it'll only be a slight edge.

Considering Sony hasn't made a profit in a couple of years, their new system needs to be as affordable as possible.

I can't help but see the Wii U's "lower power" as more of an asset. Since $350 is already a little steep (by this economy's standards) and Sony and MS are going to have "more powerful consoles" the systems will cost more then Wii U and thus lose consumers since most folks can't afford another $600+ console these days.

Rumor has it the PS4, neXtbox, and Steamcast are all going to come out for cheap while also being upgradable for improved performance later. Anyone remember the SEGA CD?

EA should had just left it vague and said [insert any comment here that will outrage the Nintendo fanbase]

I don't count EA as a games company.

Wabam!

I was literally thinking this myself before I scrolled to your comment. That turns consumers away kinda, knowing there's a better way to play or use devices, when they are still new, but that's just being naive. I think we might see some Sega business strategies this time when it comes to Nintendo, and aparently the others if what you say is true. I could see Nintendo adding some extra hardware as a seperate purchase later on if they see fit. They could add more RAM, or anything really in an extra box. We already have to buy an ext. HDD to have more gamespace. It doesn't really bother me really to buy extra stuff it makes my stuff better, but there's plenty of people in other situations that woukd say different. You get Netflix for $8.99 for unlimited streaming, add more for DVDs and bluray. Same applies here.