gaming Do You Consider the Wii U to Be a Current Generation Console?

[FaZe Vinyl 521]

So, another Wii U thread, but I feel this is a good question that I would like to hear your feedback on.

 

I didn't see a thread exactly for this, so if a mod decides it needs to be moved, then so be it.

 

 

 

   So, let's restate the question. Do you personally consider the Wii U to be a "Next-Gen" console, along with the X1 and PS4?

 

 

 

 

   So, there are some good reason to put it in the 7th generation. First of all, the graphics are very comparable to that of the 7th generation. I see no real graphical differences in the Wii U and the X360, personally.

 

   Another thing to consider is the online capabilities. I think it is a very universal opinion that the Wii U's friend codes are not good at all, and it is definitely not at the ranks of PSN or Xbox Live yet.

 

 

 

   On the other side of the debate, you have the release date. The Wii U was released in November 2012, over 5 years after the release of the Xbox 360 and PS3. The release is only a year behind the dates of the PS4 and X1, and was the first major home console release of the 2010s.

 

  

 

 

 

So, what are your thoughts on this? My personal thoughts is that, due to its graphical and online limitations, the Wii U is a 7th generation console. I would love to hear your thoughts and debates about this.

[DaFlash 13]

I'd say WiiU is along with PS4 and XBox1 considering it was only made like a year before the other consoles.

[Scootalove 10,689]

I think in terms of the release, the Wii U has to be considered a current generation console but in terms of graphics I wouldn't say that it is a current gen console per say.

[Batbrony 16,055]

Is the Wii U 8th gen?  Short answer (in my opinion): nope.

 

Nintendo already dug itself into quite a deep hole with the Wii back in the 7th generation.  Despite its initial outstanding popularity with both hardcore gamers and the mainstream public at large, its success was deceptive from the start; while its motion control was pretty revolutionary back in 2007, in hindsight, its astounding success can largely be attributed to the relatively simple, easy to pick up nature of its gaming and considerably lower price compared to the Xbox 360 and PS3, largely on account of its far simpler and cheaper hardware.  In the long run, it proved to be a bad investment; it might have had greater success if Nintendo understood the relevance of online gaming and had tried to make an online system capable of competing with Xbox Live and the PSN, but the company stubbornly continues to cling to the notion that living room gaming is the primary format of multiplayer gaming.

 

This outdated conception of multiplayer gaming, along with considerably weaker hardware compared to their rival gaming systems, has carried on into the Wii U's era, and both of these factors have done their fair share to drive more and more third party developers away from Nintendo to boot, adding to their woes.  All in all, it's really not the Wii that has contributed primarily to Nintendo's demise in console gaming, but rather the company's own business practices; they haven't developed hardware capable of competing with Sony or Microsoft, they are at least 5 years if not more behind the other two systems in online gaming, and they have almost no third party titles to speak of.  Unlike the Wii, the Wii U was considerably pricier than the former console upon release, and despite being released a year before the true 8th gen consoles (a sign from the start that Nintendo was desperate to try anything to get a leg up on the competition, although again, a very short-sighted decision; taking more time to develop their hardware probably would've paid greater dividends), it has failed to attract the casual consumers who made the Wii such an astounding success, and is even unpopular with many hardcore gamers.

 

Now we are at a point that 2 years ago even was unthinkable; if Nintendo continues to trend downward in the console wars, they may be forced to sell rights to their iconic first party characters to third party developers, and may even have to develop a brand new console that can actually compete with the other two systems.  If either happens, especially the former, it'll probably be the closest equivalent ever in the modern day console wars of a white flag.  Now don't get me wrong, Nintendo's not going anywhere; but very soon the company, whether for better or worse, may very well look virtually unrecognizable compared to how it looks and operates now.

Edited January 22, 2014 by Batbrony

[Fubz 300]

@Batbrony

I don't think Nintendo really have been trying to be in competition with the other new gen consoles, rather just something different. They've failed in selling themselves rather than trying to beat the competition.

[GrimCW 658]

Despite what they claimed prior to release about it.. no..

It can't even technically match the current/past/whatever you want to call them, gen consoles, let alone the newest.

 

While I'll give Nintendo props for innovation, the fact they don't personally make much use of it themselves is a let down. 

 

But the claims that its just as good or better than the 360/PS3 is as funny as those that claimed the 3DS was more powerful than it has proven to be.

While on a technical standpoint they might be, the fact is they aren't being utilized as such and can't claim it. Or they're trying to push to much and just can't reach the full potential of what the hardware could actually do.

[Simon 4,557]

It's neither.  It's a thing that makes no sense to me IDK what it is.

 

To be fair I don't have one, but the whole system came out of left field.  I honestly thought it was like an add on for the Wii for like 6 months.  I think when they released the Wii they moved from an actual gamer console to a niche console, so I think they're just off doing their own thing.

[Divided 1]

It is the first console of the eight generation. The PS3 came after the 360 by a year. They are both considered 7th gen. Nintendo has never been a company that emphasizes much on technology in terms of graphics or online play. They are more focused on the gameplay and the technology associated with gameplay. That is my opinion at least.

[Megas 27,726]

No it's a next gen consoles, I've never found power to be a deciding factor of determining a console's generation

[Discordian 6,015]

I dunno why this is even up for debate. It was released in the same time frame as the 3DS, Vita, PS4 and Xbone. It doesn't matter if it's comparable to the other consoles, the fact is that it's a step up from their last console which makes it a generation above that. Whether it's competing with the PS4/Xbone or not is irrelevant.

[Tigerpop198 696]

It would be considered a 8th generation console. Even though it's power is not even comparable with the Xbox One, and the PS4.

[Shanks 10,816]

Yes, Nintendo may be woefully behind in terms of online features and a lack of 3rd party support but is the first console of the new generation. Whether or not the Wii U is successfull will depend on if Nintendo remembers what made it successful in the past and realizes that it is the games that make the consoles. So far the Wii U's lineup is not that great and while the PS4 and Xbox One's lineup isn't the greatest either the Wii U did have an entire one year head start on them and should have had a few more games to its credit by now. The name itself is a rather unfortunate choice because a lot of people are under the impression that it is just another verison of the Wii, confusing customers like that is a seriously bad move on Nintendo's part but it isn't something that will kill them.

 

One trend I have noticed more and more is that the companies seem to really milk the previous generation by continuing to sell and even release games for that console a few years after the new one has already been released. It dosen't really make much sense to me because you would think they would make more money if they made more of a conscious effort for backward compatibility. This is one area where Nintendo outshines its competitiors is its backward compatibility, Sony used to be comparable with Nintendo on this until the later version of the Playstation 3 which dropped their backward compatibility with Playstation 2 games which was a dick move on Sony's part if you ask me.

 

The Wii U is not as behind in terms of power as the Wii was compared to the Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 but much of that is because there really isn't much of a difference between the current gen consoles and the last gen consoles. Sure there is a slight boost in graphics, sound and power but not anywhere near as much as compared to previous generations.

Edited January 22, 2014 by EarthbendingProdigy

[Batbrony 16,055]

@Batbrony

I don't think Nintendo really have been trying to be in competition with the other new gen consoles, rather just something different. They've failed in selling themselves rather than trying to beat the competition.

 

I think that's most definitely true to a great extent, and that's not a winning business strategy.  Yeah, Microsoft might envision Apple as its primary competitor right now as far as the Xbox One is concerned (rather than Sony), but at least they understand that they're in competition with someone.  Nintendo likes to pretend that it's insulated from the other two companies, that somehow they're trying to cater for completely different customers (and maybe the fact that their primary market is still the Japanese market hasn't helped, seeing as they're very far removed from the realities of North American and European markets it seems, far more so than their fellow Japanese company Sony), but the fact is that at the end of the day, all three of these companies are making games for gamers, that is their most reliable consumer.  In an age where money's increasingly tight, most gamers are only going to invest money into one console, and while Nintendo may have a game lineup that others cannot offer, they're also offering outdated hardware, a terribly outdated online experience, and a lack of third party titles.  Next to that, Microsoft and Sony are far more attractive to the average gamer, save for the loyalest of Nintendo gamers.  So yeah, I agree that Nintendo to at least some extent doesn't think of itself as being in competition with the other two companies, and if they want to turn things around, that'll be one of many changes that has to occur in their business strategy and overall vision.  Understanding the realities of competition help a company to keep in touch with consumers wants and what their rivals are doing for said consumers, and therefore more easily emulate or supercede said competitors.  Basically, competition pushes companies to be their best, but when you don't even think of yourself as competing with others, apathy is inevitably the logical conclusion.

[Fubz 300]

Pretty much why the Wii did so good, you'd buy a Wii as well as a Playstation/Xbox. Now we can only afford one of them (and a PC). Please try to make your writing more reader friendly

 

 

 

(and maybe the fact that their primary market is still the Japanese market hasn't helped, seeing as they're very far removed from the realities of North American and European markets it seems, far more so than their fellow Japanese company Sony)

 

[Forlong 1,726]

Is the Wii U 8th gen?  Short answer (in my opinion): nope.

 

Nintendo already dug itself into quite a deep hole with the Wii back in the 7th generation.  Despite its initial outstanding popularity with both hardcore gamers and the mainstream public at large, its success was deceptive from the start; while its motion control was pretty revolutionary back in 2007, in hindsight, its astounding success can largely be attributed to the relatively simple, easy to pick up nature of its gaming and considerably lower price compared to the Xbox 360 and PS3, largely on account of its far simpler and cheaper hardware.  In the long run, it proved to be a bad investment; it might have had greater success if Nintendo understood the relevance of online gaming and had tried to make an online system capable of competing with Xbox Live and the PSN, but the company stubbornly continues to cling to the notion that living room gaming is the primary format of multiplayer gaming.

 

This outdated conception of multiplayer gaming, along with considerably weaker hardware compared to their rival gaming systems, has carried on into the Wii U's era, and both of these factors have done their fair share to drive more and more third party developers away from Nintendo to boot, adding to their woes.  All in all, it's really not the Wii that has contributed primarily to Nintendo's demise in console gaming, but rather the company's own business practices; they haven't developed hardware capable of competing with Sony or Microsoft, they are at least 5 years if not more behind the other two systems in online gaming, and they have almost no third party titles to speak of.  Unlike the Wii, the Wii U was considerably pricier than the former console upon release, and despite being released a year before the true 8th gen consoles (a sign from the start that Nintendo was desperate to try anything to get a leg up on the competition, although again, a very short-sighted decision; taking more time to develop their hardware probably would've paid greater dividends), it has failed to attract the casual consumers who made the Wii such an astounding success, and is even unpopular with many hardcore gamers.

 

Now we are at a point that 2 years ago even was unthinkable; if Nintendo continues to trend downward in the console wars, they may be forced to sell rights to their iconic first party characters to third party developers, and may even have to develop a brand new console that can actually compete with the other two systems.  If either happens, especially the former, it'll probably be the closest equivalent ever in the modern day console wars of a white flag.  Now don't get me wrong, Nintendo's not going anywhere; but very soon the company, whether for better or worse, may very well look virtually unrecognizable compared to how it looks and operates now.

Nintendo could pay off all of Sony and Microsoft's debt with less than HALF the money they have.  Okay.  They are the ONLY console provider that has made money for the last...EVER!  For the last 30 years, they have had nothing but profit.  It will take more than 10 years of loses to put them in that state.

 

@Batbrony

I don't think Nintendo really have been trying to be in competition with the other new gen consoles, rather just something different. They've failed in selling themselves rather than trying to beat the competition.

 

 

Two games that won game of the year, and the first two of this generation to do so.  I wonder what it looks like when they are trying.

 

Despite what they claimed prior to release about it.. no..

It can't even technically match the current/past/whatever you want to call them, gen consoles, let alone the newest.

 

While I'll give Nintendo props for innovation, the fact they don't personally make much use of it themselves is a let down. 

 

But the claims that its just as good or better than the 360/PS3 is as funny as those that claimed the 3DS was more powerful than it has proven to be.

While on a technical standpoint they might be, the fact is they aren't being utilized as such and can't claim it. Or they're trying to push to much and just can't reach the full potential of what the hardware could actually do.

 

Okay, here's the specs of some consoles

 

7th generation

Xbox 360

CPU: 3.2 GHz, tri-core

GPU: 500 MHz

RAM: 512 MB @ 700 MHz

PS3

CPU: 3.2 GHz

GPU: 550 MHz

RAM: 256 MB @ 3.2 GHz & 256 MB @ 700 MHz (don't ask)

Wii

CPU: 729 MHz

GPU: 243 MHz

RAM: 27 MB

8th generation

Wii U

CPU: tri-core @ 1.24 GHz, 3 MB L2 catch

GPU: 320 shaders @ 550 MHz, max fillrate: 8.8 Gtexel/s

RAM: 2 GB @ 1600 MHz, 34 MB @ 550 MHz

PS4

CPU: octa-core, 4 MB L2 catch

GPU: 1152 shaders @ 800 MHz, max fillrate: 57.6 Gtexel/s

RAM: 8 GB @ 5500 MHz

Xbox One

CPU: octa-core, 4 MB L2 catch

GPU: 768 shaders @ 853 MHz, max fillrate: 40.9 Gtexel/s

RAM: 8 GB @ 2133 MHz

 

Notice a few things?  At BEST the PS4 and Xbox One have about twice the power of the Wii U.  However, the Wii, which NO ONE EVER HAD A PROBLEM CALLING A SEVENTH GEN CONSOLE, was laughably outclassed.  The Wii U is more than capable of competing with the PS4 and Xbox One, even with a little lower horsepower.  It also helps that they already have a Game of the Year for the thing.

Edited January 24, 2014 by Forlong

[Fubz 300]

Nice post, but I said "trying to be in competition with other new gen consoles" not trying to make amazing games

[Forlong 1,726]

Nice post, but I said "trying to be in competition with other new gen consoles" not trying to make amazing games

 

Yeah, who cares about playing video games on their game console?

 

Also, I believe that same post showed that the Wii U is nowhere near as heavily outclassed as the Wii was.  And, funny story, the "superior" PS4 and Xbox One seem to be having trouble running games as 1080p and 60 frames per second.  You have no argument.  Currently, the Wii U is running the best games with superior graphics.  Sure, down the line the PS4 and Xbox One will have better graphics, but graphics are nothing if you don't have great games to play.  Nintendo makes more great games a generation than anyone else.  Sony is the only company that even comes close.

[Fubz 300]

Oh shhhh you! But yeah how did I not make that connection :T man I've gotta sleep.

Edited January 24, 2014 by Fubz

[Abstract 832]

Instead of the Wii U, Nintendo could have taken SNES internals, put them in a slightly different case, called it the Super-Duper[b/] Nintendo Entertainment System, and it would still be an 8th generation system, because it was the successor to the 7th. The technology doesn't matter; the only things required to label a Wii U an 8th generation console, is that a generation had to have come before it, (Wii, 360 and PS3) and the competing games consoles must label themselves as of the same iteration. (Pretty sure nobody classifies the PS4 and One as anything but.)

[The Mane-iac 1,648]

It's an 8th gen because it is. Honestly all this caring about the power the console has is silly IMO, especially to classify what gen it is. All that should matter is good games. Quickly releasing games like Assassin's Creed or CoD stuff without anything really different between games just adds stagnation, but at least they look pretty?

 

Graphics don't make or break the game, and Nintendo knows this. I personally don't care about online play either, call me the odd one out. I want to just be able to hook my systems up and play me some good games. If they are pretty that's a bonus, but if they are pretty and have boring or repetitive game play then chances are they aren't going to hold me for long.

 

There were many times a few gens ago I'd start a game up on the XBox or PS2 and then 20 minutes later be on my GameCube because I found the games more enjoyable. My PS3 mostly just enjoys the life of playing Netflix and exclusives, the 360 just gets to play exclusives. My Wii gets more use then either of them though because the exclusives for it I find more engaging. More "hardcore" stuff like Metro or Bioshock, I take to the PC for the easier control IMO.

 

It's not unheard of to find me playing games on my DC or SNES or playing Ultimate Doom on my PC because they are fun. That is what people ultimately reminisce about, not how shiny. And I think this will start to hold true more and more since consoles are no longer being backwards compatible. You'll someday go back to your PS3 or 360 to play a game, you'll have a chuckle about the "horrible" graphics and then sit down to enjoy the game because the game play outshines the graphics. The sooner graphics hit their threshold, the better because game play will take center stage again and we'll start seeing meaningful competition.

 

Personally I don't have any "current gen" consoles and I won't until I see an exclusive that interests me. They've become too expensive to rush out and buy just because, especially when I have a PC with more power then any of the three and most games come out on console and PC.

Edited January 24, 2014 by The Mane-iac

[Radiance64 7,053]

Yes it's 8th generation, in a timeframe stance at least. It may not be the strongest but it's stronger than what was out last generation, by some margin, could be better I guess though, but it still outputs good HD graphics from what I've experienced(only kiosk demos really, don't own the thing yet).

[GrimCW 658]

Notice a few things?

 

Yes which is why I stated.

 

 

 

While on a technical standpoint they might be, the fact is they aren't being utilized as such and can't claim it.

 

 

They aren't USING it, or they're using it in ways that just isn't showing it. Graphically and gameplay wise even with games ported, it's showing off far weaker abilities for having such superior tech compared to last gen..

 

As for GoTY, who decided and when? Nintendo? some random magazine?

I recall a time when this had to actually be EARNED, and wasn't just randomly given. Something that had to be proven worthwhile by the players and not given just because its a new game in a long standing line of a popular title  like Call of Duty, or randomly labeled just because it has extra content packed in to a new version.

Nintendo of late has just been given a free ride, and both those games actually prove this with how little new those games bring to the front outside of their own series.

 

 

 

For the last 30 years, they have had nothing but profit.  It will take more than 10 years of loses to put them in that state.

 

Even so, the Wii U has blundered terribly, so terribly, the President of the company has been told by others that he should step down (He won't). He himself has even admitted that despite strong sales of the 3DS (something that IS selling), it was still considerably lower than hoped, and as such the company and its stock are suffering. That ten years of losses is upon them, and if they don't pull something better than a shovelware console out of the hat this next round, they may see it sooner than that.

 

TBH they should probably drop the home consoles and stick to hand helds. No idea why their hand helds are selling so well given the past few iterations have been such tiny upgrades of the previous and released almost bi-yearly, but people do seem to enjoy them. However this style minor upgrading isn't exactly working out well for the home consoles, even with the bigger leaps taken, they just aren't trying.

 

 

 

 

However, the Wii, which NO ONE EVER HAD A PROBLEM CALLING A SEVENTH GEN CONSOLE

 

 

TBH not sure where you were hanging around, but most barely considered it a game cube in sheeps clothing with new controls...

Hell, aside from broken tv's one of its most commonly complained about issue was how it wasn't able to hold itself as a "next gen" at the time.

 

The only reason that died down is because after the initial mass sales of it (pretty much only made for the Wii Sports game that had old people going nuts for it), and the eventual stagnation into shovelware hell, everyone pretty much forgot it existed.

Likely that the Wii U will also be essentially forgotten before long as well tbh. Cute console, but for all that it has, its losing to the other two as they add their own second screens and continue to push the bar for GFX, new titles, and not peripherals.

 

 

but graphics are nothing if you don't have great games to play

 

 

They are also nothing when your being given a free pass to go forward apparently.

The Wii U, high resolution aside, hasn't pushed its own bar yet, let alone gone beyond anything else. If it did try, I'd half bet it'd loose that full 1080. Which is really why the other aren't fully up there. To much emphasis on one angle, and not on the other.

 

The Mario 3D world there is a fine example. Its barely a graphical update from the not that old NSMBWU, let alone much more beyond anything the console has.

It's easy to make a cartoony looking game look good with its bright colors, and lack of need for actual shading and lighting.

 

While I agree that gameplay means a LOT more, the Wii U isn't even being given that, and most "gamers" are looking for graphics that wow, not ones that are simply smooth.

Edited January 24, 2014 by GrimCW

[Forlong 1,726]

They aren't USING it, or they're using it in ways that just isn't showing it. Graphically and gameplay wise even with games ported, it's showing off far weaker abilities for having such superior tech compared to last gen..

 

As for GoTY, who decided and when? Nintendo? some random magazine?

I recall a time when this had to actually be EARNED, and wasn't just randomly given. Something that had to be proven worthwhile by the players and not given just because its a new game in a long standing line of a popular title  like Call of Duty, or randomly labeled just because it has extra content packed in to a new version.

Nintendo of late has just been given a free ride, and both those games actually prove this with how little new those games bring to the front outside of their own series.

Of course game of the year doesn't count, because you say so. :okiedokielokie:

How about this:

GameRankings: 94.44%

Metacritic: 93/100

Destructoid: 10/10

Edge: 9/10

Eurogamer: 10/10 GotY

Famitsu: 38/40

Game Informer: 9.25/10

Games Radar: 4.5/5

GameSpot: 9/10

IGN: 9.6/10

Joystiq: 5/5

Nintendo World Report: 10/10

 

Even if you disregard the one Nintendo paid source, all the critics and gamers agree that this is an excellent game.  I've taken a look, and not a single PS4 or Xbox One exclusive is this well rated.  Resogun was the only game that even got close.  Nintendo publishes the most great games out of any company.  This isn't just a "Nintendo fanboy running damage control".  It's factual that more critically acclaimed games are published by Nintendo a year than anyone else.

 

 

Even so, the Wii U has blundered terribly, so terribly, the President of the company has been told by others that he should step down (He won't). He himself has even admitted that despite strong sales of the 3DS (something that IS selling), it was still considerably lower than hoped, and as such the company and its stock are suffering. That ten years of losses is upon them, and if they don't pull something better than a shovelware console out of the hat this next round, they may see it sooner than that.

 

TBH they should probably drop the home consoles and stick to hand helds. No idea why their hand helds are selling so well given the past few iterations have been such tiny upgrades of the previous and released almost bi-yearly, but people do seem to enjoy them. However this style minor upgrading isn't exactly working out well for the home consoles, even with the bigger leaps taken, they just aren't trying.

Yeah, then they would have to expect every single game they publish to sell over 10 million copies just to sustain their size.  That wouldn't be completely stupid.

 

 

 

TBH not sure where you were hanging around, but most barely considered it a game cube in sheeps clothing with new controls...

Hell, aside from broken tv's one of its most commonly complained about issue was how it wasn't able to hold itself as a "next gen" at the time.

 

The only reason that died down is because after the initial mass sales of it (pretty much only made for the Wii Sports game that had old people going nuts for it), and the eventual stagnation into shovelware hell, everyone pretty much forgot it existed.

Likely that the Wii U will also be essentially forgotten before long as well tbh. Cute console, but for all that it has, its losing to the other two as they add their own second screens and continue to push the bar for GFX, new titles, and not peripherals.

I'm getting Deja Vu.  Let me try some madlibbing here:

"Likely that the PS3 will also be essentially forgotten before long as well tbh."

Yeah, it sounds exactly the same.  Except that the PS3 didn't have any high-rated games at the time.  So the criticism is even dumber than it was then.

 

 

They are also nothing when your being given a free pass to go forward apparently.

The Wii U, high resolution aside, hasn't pushed its own bar yet, let alone gone beyond anything else. If it did try, I'd half bet it'd loose that full 1080. Which is really why the other aren't fully up there. To much emphasis on one angle, and not on the other.

 

The Mario 3D world there is a fine example. Its barely a graphical update from the not that old NSMBWU, let alone much more beyond anything the console has.

It's easy to make a cartoony looking game look good with its bright colors, and lack of need for actual shading and lighting.

 

While I agree that gameplay means a LOT more, the Wii U isn't even being given that, and most "gamers" are looking for graphics that wow, not ones that are simply smooth.

Okay, so you have no problem with Knack being a crap game because it's in 1080p?  You have no issue with KI being sh*t because it's at 60 frames per second?  However, Mario is a great game at 1080p AND 60 frames per second, and you don't think it's good enough.  Emperor Yoshiro, could you sum this up?

Thank you, your excellency.

 

Nintendo can compete graphically and technologically with the PS4 and Xbox One.  The PS2 was just as outclass as it is and ran circles around the competition.  Not only is the tech not as big an issue as you make it out to be, but Nintendo also has the best received and successful franchises.  You don't have to like Nintendo's games, you don't have to buy a Wii U; but don't go lying to everyone and yourself saying that Nintendo can't compete.

[Dr. Mechano 630]

The Wii U is the only current-gen console I own, actually. Gotta have my Mario and Zelda.

[deadprofile 1,122]

The specs and what they can do are one thing.  The facts which show how the newest consoles are superior to the older ones as well as how programming games for said consoles is superior to older games for older consoles.

As of right now, it's hard to tell much of a difference between the look and feel of older games vs. the new games because the newest gens are just babies right now. However, the Wii U has been out longer, and other than HD and more disc capacity, the games don't look any different.  It's the same for the 3DS vs DS. Other than the 3D aspect, there's not much of a difference. However, as with all gens, the older a system is, the better the games and the more variety there is to choose from (just look at the PS2's life and games).

 

So with all that said, I consider the Wii U a step between generations. It's not on even playing field with PS4 or XboxOne, but it's a step above the Wii....