Let me start this out with saying that I looooooveee Nintendo, but this is bothering me.

The Super Nintendo and Nintendo 64 were the most powerful consoles of their respective generations..The Gamecube was also more powerful than the PS2, though not the XBOX. In the N64 and Gamecube cases only the game medium's storage capacity was a problem. What's happened to Nintendo?

http://kotaku.com/5962603/mass-effect-3-on-xbox-360-vs-ps3-vs...
http://kotaku.com/5920931/the-wii-us-power-problem
http://kotaku.com/5961547/report-wii-u-cracked-open-system-me...

What made Nintendo abandon their long-standing policy of being a comparable game console? The Wii U won't compete graphically with Sony and Microsoft's upcoming consoles when it can only compete with two 6 and 7 year-old consoles right now thanks to a very weak CPU and questionable GPU!
I don't care about hard drives and that, I think Nintendo's made the right, more inexpensive choice with Flash memory (kind of like the Gamecube days), but at least let developers do what they want! The Wii was constantly lacking 3rd-party hard core title support due to its weaknesses and now the Wii U is getting these titles from day 1 and as soon as the PS4 or next Xbox come out the Wii U will be left in the dust there again. Graphics aren't everything, but even Nintendo-exclusive developers like the old Rare (RIP), Factor 5 (went to Sony then RIP) and Retro Studios pride/prided themselves on pushing hardware to its absolute limits. Although this often resulted in lag that a lot of gamers today would complain about, I'd happily take a questionable frame rate for better graphics.

graphics > gameplay

Better graphics dont make better games

Well it's like half the game

Eh, well what i mean is, gameplay is more important

Sorry, not seeing it. Where's the better gameplay? NSMBU = uninspired and easy, just like the other NSMB games, nor do I want to pay 50+ dollars for a 2D platformer... Both Galaxy's as 3D platformers I was more than happy to throw my money at though, fantastic games and along with Donkey Kong Country Returns (2D but at least it was hardcore! and the graphics were very impressive for Wii) and maybe Brawl are the reasons I don't regret buying a Wii.

Nintendoland....pass

3rd-party titles that will soon disappear from the system once the PS4 and next Xbox come out and can't be ported to Wii U because Sony and Microsoft's new systems are much more powerful...pass.

I am really interested in what Retro Studios might do though, as well as that new Star Fox game and hopefully another 3D Mario.

Well, hideous graphics can be bothersome, and if the only difference in a video game between consoles is superior graphics, I'll probably want the version with better graphics.

I do think they need to improve their hardware more. If the next gen consoles have all the appeal of the Wii U besides first-party games, then Nintendo is gonna run into some serious problems.

The Wii didn't have HD graphics because it was too expensive at the time to implement them. Sony and Microsoft gambled by using it then, but it didn't pay off until years later. I think Nintendo has realized that continually pushing the limits on graphical capabilities does not make a winning console (the Game Cube was out sold by the Playstation 2 and Xbox). It is now trying to reinvigorate gameplay instead of just putting a new coat of graphical paint on it.

I am really excited about the new tablet controller though, with more buttons and 2 analog sticks, which is what I wanted, combined with the cool, if gimmicky touch screen idea from the continuing DS line.

Well, it has worked in the past.

Genesis does what Nintendon't didn't work once people realized the Genesis was far weaker in every single category except a faster CPU, which didn't matter much when that chip was outdated as hell along with the rest of the system compared to Nintendo's powerful new 16-bit hardware.

In North America particularly and to a lesser extent Europe, two regions where RPG's are less popular, the N64 carved out a still large chunk of market share, despite being considered a "kiddie console" by the ignorant. Rare in particular helped and Goldeneye is the best-selling N64 game in North America, ahead of Super Mario 64 and Mario Kart 64 (again, only in North America, the other two sold more internationally)! Banjo-Kazooie sold just under 2 million copies in North America alone. Super Mario 64 was an instant classic, as was Super Smash Bros.

The Gamecube was however haunted by so many 3rd parties leaving due to the very low capacity of the N64 cart and without Rare's enormous and insanely multi-genre niche in Western markets was doomed to fail, even with the amazing first two Metroid Prime games courtesy of the far less prolific "new Rare", Retro Studios.

The Wii was lucky in that it captured a lot of casual gamers with its very low cost and innovative controls,but sales have since plummeted in the last 2 years and Nintendo pretty much has the entire casual market dried up, while looking back at hardcore gaming with this Wii U. As such, I'd expect a true next-generation leap....not this.

@BanjoThreeie
How would you even define "hardcore"? How would you define a next "true next-generation leap"?
Also, graphics mattered more back in those days because many systems differed quite little except for their graphical outputs.

I understand with N64 and Wii, but GCN never really had 3rd party problems. Some people think they did but...no. Not enough to complain at least. Mainly because most of the worthwhile 3rd party titles that generation were multi-console. So GCN got all the cool multi-console stuff, MGS3 and GTA games aside.

also, Nintendo's failures with 3rd parties were that they just weren't treated to be anywhere near as important (more often than not at least) as Nintendo's own games and nothing sold on Wii that wasn't Nintendo or super blatantly casual gaming. Like I remember like a year or less after Wii came out a bunch of big publishers were talking about how they were changing things up for their games just because of the success of the system. And most of those games, again outside of the ones that were horribly blatant at pandering to a casual audience, sold horribly. If you want to know why the Nintendo Wii failed despite being the clear winner...there you go.

MGS and GTA games were a huge piece of the pie, especially during the generation the Gamecube was in. San Andreas sold 18 million copies on PS2 alone, when the Gamecube sold less than 22 million units worldwide.

a very weak CPU

People tend to forget so fast but Nintendo has always used cut-down versions of existing CPU's for their consoles. The NES and SNES weren't very powerful either but it is the combination of finely tuned hardware and custom "operating system" that make a platform. And it's the games that ultimately make a console.

Guys, guys guys....

Yes, graphics is not everything, but they should be "on par" with the next next gen which will launch in about a year with MS and Sony's new consoles.
And even if you pull your "gameplay and innovation saves the day"-card. Where is it. The gamepad is lackluster. No analogue input triggers (racing games anyone?), lackluster battery life, a touch screen thats more unresponsive than the 3Ds one, mandatory use of "off-TV" play on gamepad, framerate issues (for me personally those distract more than generally lower graphics quality), no headset jack on pro controller, bad use of gamepad in the first wave of games, "asymmetric" gamelay for me is just a bad excuse for not being able to handle 2 gamepads at once, no true 1080p yet in most games - still just upscaled 720p like in current gen consoles of MS and Sony, Nintendo account cannot be used on another console, the low SD-card memory on basic sets, etc... I just mean even in the things the WiiU should accelerate - it doesn't. Im no Nintendo hater, quite the contrary, but "asymmetric" gameplay would be possible even on old Wii, just by using different input methods and assigning different roles to the players, make it over online (so your seperate screen is no problem) and you could do that "asymmetric" gameplay anywhere. Like on PC games where one guy plays the "commander" and the rest are the 1st person field soliders (Savage anyone?). I just don't see the power, the innovation NOR the graphics. Still, if you love Nintendogames and want to play them, it's your only option. I for my part will stay with my 3DS XL (which I deeply love, even though most games, especially on eShop are trash at the moment, can't wait for MH3U though). Just my 2 cents.

Oh yeah one more thing. POWER DOES matter. Even if graphics won't make a big leap with new systems of Sony and MS (and I think they WILL, I don't think it's needed but hey there are 4K-resolution displays already, don't think they will go without use with the next gaming generation and PC gamers have LONG surpassed 1080p resolution already) the general power will make a big leap, and that power means more cars on track, bigger environments, environmental destruction, better AI, more bots, better textures, etc... and it sucks for developer/nintendo/customer if it's the WiiU again that will either NOT get that precious port at all or get a lackluster port that will look like the PC version of the game with all details set to low and maybe even gameplay elements missing due to restriction of memory/processing power. In no way I can see the WiiU lasting another 5-8 years. It will be badly outgunned in about 3 years when the major 1st party titles helped it for another soar into the sky before it plummets to the ground. Reason is simple. The casual market is saturated and seperated between Wii-gamers (they already HAVE a Wii and won't see too much reason to upgrade to WiiU since they're casuals) tablet gamers and I also see the Ouya playing a big role in the future. So basicly speaking I think Nintendo is it's own biggest competition with it's Wii. Casuals won't go too much for WiiU, the "hardcore" (people that go for complex games that take longer to complete, want to participate in online matches and do see difference in texture/graphics quality, enjoy cinematic and/or clever experiences and enjoy games beyond angry birds) will possibly wait for MS and Sony delivering their next ugly baby or go PC anyways. What's left is the loyal Nintendo fans that have this only option to see their beloved mascots in HD and cross-platform gamers that won't a slice of every cake. Which all in all will be not enough to even remotely reach the success of the Wii. That's just my personal opinion without any hating and I definitely don't want to step on anybody's toes.

NES was the most powerful system at western launch and the SNES was the most powerful console of it's generation, (3DO, Jaguar, etc. belong to 5th generation). So you're wrong.

Guys if graphics matter so much, just wait until you know your 60+ and get the current best graphical game out ATM and play that, because what your playing now will look like crap in 40 years

Its not the graphics I'm worried about, it is the new game engines that will rely on the U's weak CPU that I'm worried about.

That's why the GPGPU exists.

The graphics race used to make sense to me but now... Well, the improvements are too small to matter to me. I love the Wii U but I will admit it has its shortcomings (but every console does). Graphic capabilities are not one of those shortcomings, games can look beautiful without pushing a system to its very limit. The lack of third party support on the Wii was because Nintendo wrote themselves into a corner. The Wii was marketed toward casual gamers early on and the core gamers began abandoning it, hence third party companies had only a tiny core market. The Wii U... Nintendo has hardly advertised, so a majority of adopters are not casuals. I thought Nintendo Land was for casuals but after playing it, I retract that opinion. It's a love letter to the most loyal of Nintendo fans. Once a system hits HD, graphics become less important except for the stubborn fanboys that insist they see a big difference. The reason Microsoft and Sony hadn't announced a new system is because they didn't know what to do other than up the CPU and graphics a bit more. Now that Nintendo has made a move in changing up gameplay, I think the new gen has started. No doubt Microsoft and Sony will release more powerful systems. It'd be foolish for them to knowingly underpower a competitor. Nintendo's only advantage now is to build a large base of core games before then to persuade consumers to stick with them before the other next gen consoles hit.

No doubt the Wii U will not match the graphics of it's upcoming competitors. They already set a bar that the other companies obviously will be expected to surpass.