Support NeoGAF

[-Pyromaniac-]

You're probably gonna be disappointed in all the systems, then.

Why? Well let me clear, I'm just speaking with no knowledge whatsoever on what the PS4 will be like. I don't mention the xbox3 because I won't be getting it regardless. But yeah if the PS4 ends up being the same leap as the Wii-U then I'll actually be happy because that might mean I'll be able to single console it up for the most part. But if it's a very noticeable difference, that's where it starts sucking for me.

 

[dacuk]

Why? Well let me clear, I'm just speaking with no knowledge whatsoever on what the PS4 will be like. I don't mention the xbox3 because I won't be getting it regardless. But yeah if the PS4 ends up being the same leap as the Wii-U then I'll actually be happy because that might mean I'll be able to single console it up for the most part. But if it's a very noticeable difference, that's where it starts sucking for me.

Get a gaming PC, and update its parts accordingly

 

[-Pyromaniac-]

Get a gaming PC, and update its parts accordingly

I do PC game, not hardcore super specs but I do, which is why I prefer to single console it.

 

[Door2Dawn]

bah. Not bad but definitely not enough to replace any other console. I'm just hoping this comes out a long time before the PS4, that way I can justify buying both, lol.

errm 5 times what the HD twins are doing now is a pretty big jump I think.

 

[-Pyromaniac-]

errm 5 times what the HD twins are doing now is a pretty big jump I think.

like I said, my dilemma is not with the leap itself, but the leap in comparison with the PS4.

 

[60_gig_PS3]

Nintendo needs to launch with some real Mature titles like Skyrim or something like it because the killer apps at launch always seem to set the stage for the kind of 3rd party support they'll get.

If they go down the kiddy path from the start you will almost definitely need a PS4 next gen.

I'm getting WiiU anyway since it's the only way to play next gen Nintendo games.

 

[Fourth Storm]

All the pessimism...:/

Here's a believable rumor: Tri-core CPU. And I'll be damn surprised if it isn't OoOE (needs Wii BC), which makes it better the Xenon by a good deal already. Take the reasonable rumor of 3 MB L2 cache (IBM eDRAM). That's 3 times as much as Xenon. Then, remember the rumor that the GPU (not CPU) was responsible for the overheating...

We also heard, via rumor, that the CPU in the dev kits was clocked at 3.5Ghz. The similar clock speed makes quick and dirty ports from the 360 a piece of cake even if we're talking in order versus out of order execution. Basically, I don't see them going much lower than this on the CPU clock speed. There's little reason to downgrade the CPU when it's not causing any problems.

But don't think of it as anything remotely near a true Power7 design (nobody said Power7 but some employee from IBM on Twitter, and it was hardly official). Without the need for 4-way SMT, double floating point calculations, and large amounts of L3 cache, it will resemble an almost unrecognizably slimmed down version of IBM's chip. In other words, a Power7-inspired design perfectly crafted for a game console.

On the GPU side, we've heard all over the place. I'll have to ramble about that later.

 

[Shanadeus]

Nintendo needs to launch with some real Mature titles like Skyrim or something like it because the killer apps at launch always seem to set the stage for the kind of 3rd party support they'll get.

If they go down the kiddy path from the start you will almost definitely need a PS4 next gen.

I'm getting WiiU anyway since it's the only way to play next gen Nintendo games.

Game of the year editions for Skyrim, Assassin's Creed, Batman, would be enough to send a message to the core gamers initially.

 

[BurntPork]

Nintendo needs to launch with some r34l m4t00r titles like Skyrim or something like it because the killer apps at launch always seem to set the stage for the kind of 3rd party support they'll get.

If they go down the kiddy path from the start you will almost definitely need a PS4 next gen.

I'm getting WiiU anyway since it's the only way to play next gen Nintendo games.

Fixed.

 

[Fourth Storm]

Game of the year editions for Skyrim, Assassin's Creed, Batman, would be enough to send a message to the core gamers initially.

I think those titles have a real chance at resonating with upgrading Wii gamers. Time will tell. I think the whole point of getting Wii U out sooner rather than later is to get a year or so of quick and dirty ports so that the 3rd party titles like those build a fanbase on the console.

 

[AzaK]

Game of the year editions for Skyrim, Assassin's Creed, Batman, would be enough to send a message to the core gamers initially.

Considering my PS3 died the instant I turned it on to play Skyrim for the first time - I'd buy them.

 

[AceBandage]

Considering my PS3 died the instant I turned it on to play Skyrim for the first time - I'd buy them.

Ouch.
Though, from what I hear about the PS3 version, that may have been the better option.

 

[Anth0ny]

Game of the year editions for Skyrim, Assassin's Creed, Batman, would be enough to send a message to the core gamers initially.

If they don't release $40 versions of those games, Nintendo already fucked up.

Seriously, $30 Ass Creed trilogy, Batman double pack, Skyrim, Battlefield 3 and Modern Warfare 3 should be on there ASAP.

 

[HylianTom]

This is probably overly pessimistic, but I'd bet that no matter how powerful Nintendo makes this console, third parties (especially western) will still deliberately skip putting any big titles onto it.

Then, many who whine about Nintendo platforms not getting big third-party titles will promptly turn around and reward third parties by buyng those titles on the other consoles.

Just a hunch.

 

[ivysaur12]

This is probably overly pessimistic, but I'd bet that no matter how powerful Nintendo makes this console, third parties (especially western) will still deliberately skip putting any big titles onto it.

Then, many who whine about Nintendo platforms not getting big third-party titles will promptly turn around and reward third parties by buyng those titles on the other consoles.

Just a hunch.

This is absolutely what's going to happen. Any other expectations are pipe dreams at this point.

 

[AceBandage]

This is probably overly pessimistic, but I'd bet that no matter how powerful Nintendo makes this console, third parties (especially western) will still deliberately skip putting any big titles onto it.

Then, many who whine about Nintendo platforms not getting big third-party titles will promptly turn around and reward third parties by buyng those titles on the other consoles.

Just a hunch.

If they can easily port over all the assets, they won't skip out on the Wii U for anything.
It'll be easy sales either way, and they'll need that.

 

[Anth0ny]

This is probably overly pessimistic, but I'd bet that no matter how powerful Nintendo makes this console, third parties (especially western) will still deliberately skip putting any big titles onto it.

Wait, why would they do that?

Nintendo is moves a fuck ton of boxes. The Wii sure as hell would have had all the CODs, Ass Creeds and Skyrims if it were powerful enough to run them.

But it's not. And Wii U probably won't as soon as 720 and PS4 drop.

 

[dacuk]

If they can easily port over all the assets, they won't skip out on the Wii U for anything.
It'll be easy sales either way, and they'll need that.

I still think that Nintendo has to do something 3DS-crisis-like for WiiU to succeed with third-parties, like charging half the licensing money Sony and MS charge to 3rd parties, absorbing the costs of online services, or aggressively lending its IP to "enhance" third party games.
Knowing Nintendo, those won't ever happen.

 

[bgassassin]

But it's not. And Wii U probably won't as soon as 720 and PS4 drop.

Halfway into their lifespan at best.

 

[BurntPork]

If they don't release $40 versions of those games, Nintendo already fucked up.

Seriously, $30 Ass Creed trilogy, Batman double pack, Skyrim, Battlefield 3 and Modern Warfare 3 should be on there ASAP.

It's nice to want things.

 

[HylianTom]

Wait, why would they do that?

For whatever reasons we plenty of instances of "for PlayStation 2 & xbox" - with the adequately powerful GameCube conspicuously omitted.

Deja vu..

 

[AceBandage]

I still think that Nintendo has to do something 3DS-crisis-like for WiiU to succeed with third-parties, like charging half the licensing money Sony and MS charge to 3rd parties, absorbing the costs of online services, or aggressively lending its IP to "enhance" third party games.
Knowing Nintendo, those won't ever happen.

I think that's already happening.
Especially with EA and Activision.

For whatever reasons we plenty of instances of "for PlayStation 2 & xbox" - with the adequately powerful GameCube conspicuously omitted.

Deja vu..

The market has changed drastically. Huge budgets need huge returns and games need to be on as many platforms as possible.

 

[TheExplodingHead]

I don't think we have to worry about ports if the other systems don't dramatically outclass it in every technical sense, and dev's don't focus on those. Which is doubtful looking simply at production budgets right now.

For me the biggest reason we'd see no big ports (on the "off seasons" for 1st party games) would be the online component and ability to patch and offer DLC. And even then we'd see them, there just wouldn't be as much dedication to the Wii U ver. But it also depends on what the demographics look like after a year too.

 

[kodt]

It's nice to want things.

This reminds me of a Dreamcast article I read back in 97-98, it listed the 10 most wanted games on the system. I remember it listed a bunch of popular PC games like:

Half-Life
Dark Forces II: Jedi Knight
Heavy Gear II
... and several more shooters etc..

I got super excited only to realize this was a "want" list and not games that were actually coming out for it.

 

[The Xtortionist]

I would probably rebuy some games if they ran at 720p/60FPS. Anything less than that and I'll pass.

 

[TheExplodingHead]

I would probably rebuy some games if they ran at 720p/60FPS. Anything less than that and I'll pass.

I'd buy Dark Souls day 1 on the Wii U if it was 720p/60fps. If only because a gody PC ver will never happen. They might even be able to improve inventory management on the Upad as well.

 

[dacuk]

I think that's already happening.
Especially with EA and Activision.



The market has changed drastically. Huge budgets need huge returns and games need to be on as many platforms as possible.

I thing Nintendo could have a winning hand there with EA and Activision, if they are permitted to monetize somehow the online part of their games.
We know how much Kotick has complained about MS getting the money with all the CoD/MW* online playing

 

[bgassassin]

I thing Nintendo could have a winning hand there with EA and Activision, if they are permitted to monetize somehow the online part of their games.
We know how much Kotick has complained about MS getting the money with all the CoD/MW* online playing

Probably why EA at least seems excited about it.

 

[TheExplodingHead]

I thing Nintendo could have a winning hand there with EA and Activision, if they are permitted to monetize somehow the online part of their games.
We know how much Kotick has complained about MS getting the money with all the CoD/MW* online playing

That's really the last thing I want to see. Giving publishers free reign to nickel and dime gamers (and you know it would happen) at every turn would be lame and terrible for Nintendo's first real online strategy. Everybody would hate it eventually. If that's what it would take to make publishers "excited" than I can live without it. It's bad enough I pay for XBL and still see ads.

The fact that there have been some boundaries not crossed in terms of "monetizing" online interactions is the reason it's still a good investment. I really don't see much of a future for 90% of games to be pay-to-play, and the few that could get away with it will only make whatever platform it's on a bad purchase decision vs. a "free" platform. Nothing wrong with being aggressive in the free market if people are willing to pay, but I just don't see it as a wise decision for Nintendo to allow. Just me though.

 

[AzaK]

Halfway into their lifespan at best.

Agreed, if at all. By the time the other systems are 1/2 way through the cycle the Wii U will have probably 20-30 million units out there. Any developer that can port their game to it WILL do it. There is nothing to indicate that there will be a vast technological difference between the Wii U and others.

 

[AceBandage]

There is no way in all the seven hells that Nintendo will let third parties have free rain over the digital portion of the Wii U. They'll want their cut and their say.

 

[Jaded Alyx]

For whatever reasons we plenty of instances of "for PlayStation 2 & xbox" - with the adequately powerful GameCube conspicuously omitted.

Deja vu..

Tiny GameCube discs didn't help, neither did the weird button layout.

 

[TheExplodingHead]

I actually think Nintendo could make headway capitalizing where Sony somehow didn't. By heavily marketing a FREE online experience in every commercial, and building a framework in the public's mind that they are offering a very capable FREE service that stands up to other MP services. It still boggles my mind Sony didn't pound that into the ground in every marketing pitch, obviously they wanted to not dissuade PlaystationPlus, but what would have garnered more sales?

 

[Shanadeus]

I think those titles have a real chance at resonating with upgrading Wii gamers. Time will tell. I think the whole point of getting Wii U out sooner rather than later is to get a year or so of quick and dirty ports so that the 3rd party titles like those build a fanbase on the console.

All those titles would do very well on the Wii U with just an incremental visual upgrade and a hack job use of the tablet features.

Asscreed could use it for eagle vision, Skyrim utilize the touchscreen for spell/ability management, and Batman could use it for detective mode or whatever by just holding the WiiPad up.

Just enough to show off the potential of the Wii U without resorting to re-inventing the wheel like developers had to do with the Wiimote.

 

[sfried]

This is probably overly pessimistic, but I'd bet that no matter how powerful Nintendo makes this console, third parties (especially western) will still deliberately skip putting any big titles onto it.

Then, many who whine about Nintendo platforms not getting big third-party titles will promptly turn around and reward third parties by buyng those titles on the other consoles.

Just a hunch.

Just how do you stomp anti-Nintendo bias from publishers? Not even lead sales success helped the Wii.

It's like they look for every single excuse "because it's a Nintendo console".

 

[Forever]

Just how do you stomp anti-Nintendo bias from publishers? Not even lead sales success helped the Wii.

It's like they look for every single excuse "because it's a Nintendo console".

I do think that there is some element of bias in, for example, how Capcom treated the Wii. RE4Wii proved there was a market for traditional Resident Evil, and people even bought up Umbrella Chronicles in the hopes of getting one. Then...nothing, basically.

At least the Wii will be spared from Operation Raccoon City.

But graphical parity would surely have ensured a lot more multiplatform titles at the least.

 

[sarusama]

To all the folks replying to the pessimistic posts: if anything no one here has really been pessimistic enough yet. Regarding hardware specs, we'll probably never be able to confirm any of the numbers that we are throwing around, and just looking at the end result (game graphics) is not going to be constraining enough to validate these numbers either.

Instead of looking at how much PC parts cost nowadays, and putting together what you'd like to see happen, I'd challenge the more business & manufacturing savvy among us to consider the following approach: what is the bare minimum that you'd need to sell a console with the level of success that Xbox 360 had? And I'm not talking about street-cred here, I'm talking about bottom line... which in the end is what corporations care about.

I think if you consider that the thing will pretty much have a blu-ray drive but not play any blu-ray movies is quite telling. Heck, it won't play back DVDs. From what most of your are speculating about in terms of hardware, I still get a feeling that it's driven by what, for one reason or another (even if that's just because it sounds good on paper), *you* would like to see, and not what would be needed for a healthy bottom line.

Anyone up for speculating along those lines? What would be your best guesses at the success of a WiiU that is pretty much equivalent to a 360?

 

[sfried]

But graphical parity would surely have ensured a lot more multiplatform titles at the least.

I'm starting to think it would have just as much more multiplatform licensed trash as well, because of the ease to port stuff.

I don't see them gaining any respect unless they moneyhatted every big developer out there.

Anyone up for speculating along those lines? What would be your best guesses at the success of a WiiU that is pretty much equivalent to a 360?

I thought "bottom line they want quick ports"? Being slightly more powerful than 360 is enough for them to move code without having to optimize performance for the system that much.
That said, I doubt they will use the same architecture as their competitors especially when it's obvious there are flaws in it.

Besides, why the pessimissm towards a system that nothing has been set in stone yet? Because of their "failed" E3 outing?

 

[AzaK]

Instead of looking at how much PC parts cost nowadays, and putting together what you'd like to see happen, I'd challenge the more business & manufacturing savvy among us to consider the following approach: what is the bare minimum that you'd need to sell a console with the level of success that Xbox 360 had? And I'm not talking about street-cred here, I'm talking about bottom line... which in the end is what corporations care about.

The 360 has not been successful wrt the bottom line. MS have haemorraghed money.

I think if you consider that the thing will pretty much have a blu-ray drive but not play any blu-ray movies is quite telling. Heck, it won't play back DVDs. From what most of your are speculating about in terms of hardware, I still get a feeling that it's driven by what, for one reason or another (even if that's just because it sounds good on paper), *you* would like to see, and not what would be needed for a healthy bottom line.

Anyone up for speculating along those lines? What would be your best guesses at the success of a WiiU that is pretty much equivalent to a 360?

No offence but have you read the thread? The main posters who have either real info, or knowledge about hardware are definitely keeping it real wrt the specs of the system.

 

[sarusama]

Besides, why the pessimissm towards a system that nothing has been set in stone yet? Because of their "failed" E3 outing?

No, no. Pessimism was the wrong word. I guess it more about putting what Nintendo will provide before what you wish they would. For example, I would totally appreciate a mode where you could play Wii games at 720p, even if that means that some games just plain won't work. I'm not even saying that they should put any effort into patching up stuff to make it work, but just enable the option, and games that happen to work, work, and those that don't, don't. Apart from PR implication and what I imagine is low engineering overhead (but I could be wrong with that), that doesn't seem like it would be much to ask for. But it will never happen. Period. It's not even worth the little engineering it would take to enable, because maybe 1%-5% of the install base would even potentially care/use it. I mean, their friggin' SNES emulator on Wii didn't allow you to remap the buttons of your cube controller. Now that would not have been a big deal to implement, still we didn't get, because it was not worth it to them. So, it's less pessimism and more considering the most bare-bones option, the minimal one that will allow them to sell their games to their expectations and nothing more.

The 360 has not been successful wrt the bottom line. MS have haemorraghed money.

Yeah, you're right. I guess I should have just said "an average-successful" console instead of putting the 360 up there. It seems to be doing well now, but it did bleed at lot initially, didn't it. I'm still thinking some configuration that focuses on bottom-line first, and screw the vocal minority is more likely what we'll be getting.

No offence but have you read the thread? The main posters who have either real info, or knowledge about hardware are definitely keeping it real wrt the specs of the system.

They are probably reading this thread with some amusement I would wager. I have to admit, that the speculation certainly has been kept in check. But a good chunk of the speculation is still driven by what PC tech is, and what numbers people estimate to be good ones (for some posts, I really feel like it's only about the number and not even really about what it represents).

In all fairness there really isn't much concrete info to go by, so it's all good. But I ask again: assuming a WiiU would be as powerful as a 360, alright, alright, I give, a 360 @720p, and had minimal to no "set-top box" features. How well do you see it selling? It wouldn't have exclusivity on user interface like the Wii did.

 

[Shanadeus]

No, no. Pessimism was the wrong word. I guess it more about putting what Nintendo will provide before what you wish they would. For example, I would totally appreciate a mode where you could play Wii games at 720p, even if that means that some games just plain won't work. I'm not even saying that they should put any effort into patching up stuff to make it work, but just enable the option, and games that happen to work, work, and those that don't, don't. Apart from PR implication and what I imagine is low engineering overhead (but I could be wrong with that), that doesn't seem like it would be much to ask for. But it will never happen. Period. It's not even worth the little engineering it would take to enable, because maybe 1%-5% of the install base would even potentially care/use it. I mean, their friggin' SNES emulator on Wii didn't allow you to remap the buttons of your cube controller. Now that would not have been a big deal to implement, still we didn't get, because it was not worth it to them. So, it's less pessimism and more considering the most bare-bones option, the minimal one that will allow them to sell their games to their expectations and nothing more.



Yeah, you're right. I guess I should have just said "an average-successful" console instead of putting the 360 up there. It seems to be doing well now, but it did bleed at lot initially, didn't it. I'm still thinking some configuration that focuses on bottom-line first, and screw the vocal minority is more likely what we'll be getting.



They are probably reading this thread with some amusement I would wager. I have to admit, that the speculation certainly has been kept in check. But a good chunk of the speculation is still driven by what PC tech is, and what numbers people estimate to be good ones (for some posts, I really feel like it's only about the number and not even really about what it represents).

In all fairness there really isn't much concrete info to go by, so it's all good. But I ask again: assuming a WiiU would be as powerful as a 360, alright, alright, I give, a 360 @720p, and had minimal to no "set-top box" features. How well do you see it selling? It wouldn't have exclusivity on user interface like the Wii did.

Honestly?
It would do better than the GC, by capitalizing on whatever number of Wii casuals they might be able to drag away from the Wii to the Wii U and by offering Nintendo fans Nintendo games in HD:

 

[bgassassin]

They are probably reading this thread with some amusement I would wager.

Or they've been posting the whole time and have already answered those questions.

 

[AzaK]

In all fairness there really isn't much concrete info to go by, so it's all good. But I ask again: assuming a WiiU would be as powerful as a 360, alright, alright, I give, a 360 @720p, and had minimal to no "set-top box" features. How well do you see it selling? It wouldn't have exclusivity on user interface like the Wii did.

pullsomethingoutofmyarsemode on

I would say you'd get all the Nintendo faithful who love their franchises, you won't get any of the other platform gamers to switch, and you'd maintain an acceptable level of the casual audience. So, I would take a swing at something like 60-70% of the sales of the Wii.

Don't underestimate:

1) Nintendo franchises
2) The tablet controller
3) Nintendo franchises
4) The right price
5) Nintendo franchises

 

[sarusama]

Or they've been posting the whole time and have already answered those questions.

Yeah, there's clearly some aspects that have been touched upon. But they also remained understandably vague.

But now I'm curious, bgassassin, since you've been posting some specific specs, if you were to configure what you'd estimate being the lowest spec WiiU, what would that be? Then if you were to imagine the lowest specs Nintendo could get away with, what would those be? Do they match up?

 

[HylianTom]

Just how do you stomp anti-Nintendo bias from publishers? Not even lead sales success helped the Wii.

It's like they look for every single excuse "because it's a Nintendo console".

Agreed, particularly with western developers and media outlets. There seems to be this.. "oh, you! You still haven't died yet? What nerve!" attitude that's pretty pervasive, if not fully verbalized. I have no clue if or how this can be countered.

I do know one thing: if you're a Nintendo fan who financially rewards third parties for flagrantly shunning the console, you're a part of the problem.

(I'm going to get roasted for these "truth serum" comments, aren't I? Oh well.)

But I ask again: assuming a WiiU would be as powerful as a 360, alright, alright, I give, a 360 @720p, and had minimal to no "set-top box" features. How well do you see it selling? It wouldn't have exclusivity on user interface like the Wii did.

I don't know. If forced to predict, I'd bet that it sells somewhere between what the GameCube sold and what the Wii sold.
(going further into "grumpy old man" mode here) Somewhere along the way, we got this collective bug up our butts that we need another DVD player/Netflix player/internet program in the living room, and a bare-bones box that just plays games when you out a disc in it -(wow!) - would be viewed pretty negatively. Makes me wonder how our spoiled asses got along without these added features in the olden days..

 

[sarusama]

pullsomethingoutofmyarsemode on

... So, I would take a swing at something like 60-70% of the sales of the Wii.

And to that I would say, that would be a really good success. By aiming for that, they would make a good profit.

This answer is an example of why I was saying earlier that some of the posts weren't "pessimistic" enough. If pretty much a 360 gets them 70% Wii, then why would they add anything to it, hardware wise?

Also good point about Nintendo games in HD, although I could go further and just say Nintendo games When I read articles online and some of the posts on GAF, it actually now surprises me when Nintendo games sell well. I find myself thinking "people like this?", "didn't everyone clamor for voice acting? It doesn't have it!" I'm glad their games still sell well (I wish Galaxy had sold more than New Super Mario Bros. Wii), because Nintendo is one of the few companies that consistently makes these type of games. So pessimistic or not, bad online infrastructure / weak hardware / bare bones features or not, I'll have a WiiU

 

[ClovingWestbrook]

If they don't release $40 versions of those games, Nintendo already fucked up.

Seriously, $30 Ass Creed trilogy, Batman double pack, Skyrim, Battlefield 3 and Modern Warfare 3 should be on there ASAP.

Lol.

 

[sarusama]

a bare-bones box that just plays games when you out a disc in it -(wow!)

I'm actually pretty bummed about all those HUBs on consoles now. I wish they'd implement a mode where turning it on automatically starts up the game you've got inserted, and going to the menu would be an extra step you have to take if you do want to go there. I'm certainly in the camp of I want it to play games, everything else... whatever. My TV has netflix integrated now, I won't even be using that feature anymore on any devices I have attached to it.

One thing I do have to admit though, I wish I could "install" games on my 3DS. If I ever do take that thing out with me, I can't be bothered to lug a bunch of carts along. I guess I've been spoiled by the smartphone way of having everything with you always.

 

[blu]

Anyone up for speculating along those lines? What would be your best guesses at the success of a WiiU that is pretty much equivalent to a 360?

You mean a verbatim copy of the 360 architecture, just with more edram (the rumored 32MB), a more-recent R700-based GPU and upped (doubled/tripled) ram amount? It would do just fine as the next nintendo console.

From what little leaked bits and pieces we have, though, we don't need to stick with that scenario. It seems that WiiU's architecture will be a genuine evolution of the cube's (soft of how the 360 was, loosely), but also an evolution over the 360, and not just a 360 xN.

I, for one, don't expect WiiU to feature 360's CPU architecture (i.e. a power5/6-hybrid/derivative). We'll surely see, though.

 

[Anth0ny]

All those titles would do very well on the Wii U with just an incremental visual upgrade and a hack job use of the tablet features.

Asscreed could use it for eagle vision, Skyrim utilize the touchscreen for spell/ability management, and Batman could use it for detective mode or whatever by just holding the WiiPad up.

Just enough to show off the potential of the Wii U without resorting to re-inventing the wheel like developers had to do with the Wiimote.

Basically this. Take the biggest games from this year, and slap a "definitive version!" tag on them. Quick, cheap, and will probably drive sales. It also lets consumer know that Nintendo is on board with the big boys, and the Wii days are over.

Spoiler

too bad they're fucking calling it Wii U