Because everyone wants their gaming platform to have high latency?

You're deliberately missing the point. He was talking about the graphical power of the systems and their capabilities. The things you bring up are true largely depending on the game developer, not the console. Furthermore most industry analysts expect the WiiU to be running UE3 and no one expects the '14 consoles to be running UE4 which will put all of them in a very similar boat graphically. Again he's talking processing power comparisons and you're talking physics engines and developer nuance. You're trying to make a false link just to backup your prejudices against the WiiU when no one knows either the WiiU full capabilities and certainly not the other two consoles that are still two years away.

No, I am not making any false links. The hardware in Xbox next and PS4 should be a lot more powerful than the Wii U. Why do you think those next generation consoles will not run UE4? That's a joke right? By 2014 they will have a lot more powerful hardware. Also, there is 0 chance that next generation PS4 and Xbox will reuse the same UE3 game engine. That would defeat the entire purpose of launching the new console.

You are also forgetting a ton of other engines in development - EGO 2 by Codemasters, Frostbite 2.0, Cryengine 3.0. None of the current consoles can use the features in those game engines.

Considering the Wii U is rumored to have HD4000 series GPU, it won't support any DX11 features, not next gen dynamic lightning, not tessellation. It'll be hopelessly outdated despite supporting 1080P resolution. You can believe all you want that next Xbox and PS that won't be any more powerful hardware wise despite launching almost 2 years after the Wii U. The same thing happened with the Wii vs. PS3/360, right?

Notice how Nintendo won't talk at all about hardware for their new Wii U? Look at the size of that console - it's tiny. That right there tells you it uses low-end components that don't consume a lot of power and don't require large heatsinks to dissipate all that heat.

The Wii U will have the worst looking games out of all next generation consoles, mark my word.

PS One didn't have a screen integrated in its controller. You have to had the console near you if you wanted to play without a TV. All with cables.

Ok but even if that's true, let's say the original Wii was 3-4x less powerful than PS3/360 and if the new one is 2-2.5x less powerful, his statement would be true. However, why would I go out and spend $300-400 on Wii U, have way worse multimedia capabilities (no Blu-Ray, Amazon Video on demand, Hulu etc.) and so on?

People keep forgetting but Nintendo always had powerful hardware up to N64. I am not saying hardware is the most important factor (Sega Dreamcast), but both the SNES and N64 had better graphics hardware their their primary competitors, Sega Genesis and PS1.

The Wii U may sell well, but if it's 3rd party mature gaming support is MIA like it was for Gamecube and Wii days, it will be just another failed console in the eyes of mature gamers. Thankfully the rumoured launch titles for Wii are looking good.

Still, I think MS has carved out an insanely loyal following in the US and Sony PS4 is almost guaranteed to have unique mature exclusives like PS3 did. Nintendo's competitive advantage are their own games but besides Zelda, I am personally bored of all their franchisees. The presentation for Wii U at E3 was not impressive, not even a little. There is no hype about this console.