I just don't for see this spoiling Nintendo unveiling of the Wii U console since we did get to see the system at last years E3. Remember its the games that people want to see and play, sure the system is important but the system isn't going to sell its self no matter what Nintendo, Sony or Microsoft stick in it seriously. Nintendo is taking this years show by storm you can put your money on that, They'll have tons more games and probably new IP's to show off and way more time for companies to develop games to be shown off at this years E3. So what if Sony's PS4 has faster processing they clearly haven't learnt anything from there past mistakes with the PSP or PS3, I know the 360 and PS3 are pretty close in a technical stand point, but when its all said an done games look and feel better on the 360.
I never really got why people think Nintendo are the masters of "exclusive IPs" (or why they even mattered over just having a good game) when Sony has proved that they can deliver plenty of exclusive IPs (see the Playstation 2). Also, exclusivity doesn't matter when being so "exclusive" means alienating yourself from an entire generation of phenomenal multiplats. I'd take the multiplats of this generation over Nintendo exclusives any day. It's not like they're getting a "best of both worlds" deal here, they're alienating one sector that they could easily not alienate by simply making a more powerful console with more universal controls. It's sad when it's basically a catch between all these "HD titles" and "Nintendo titles" when they can't be one and the same. And don't think the Wii U will be in on this multiplat game now, they've still missed like 5 solid years of titles that they probably won't get and god forbid if the "PS4" and "Xbox 720" are significantly more powerful than it, in which case it'll be another "Wii to everything else" situation.
This. With one objection - it's unlikely that the XBox720/PS4(tentative titles) might be significantly more powerful then the WiiU for the simple reason that there isn't much of a curve right now when it comes to resources - the PS3 *may* launch just about any game, be it console or PC without much chocking and the 360 isn't far behind. Seeing that the WiiU is supposed to be 1,5 as powerful as a PS3 then... well, even if there is a significant gap between the three, it will not affect the end products. At all.
As far as Nintendo's exclusive titles, it's one thing to have IP's that are nice and original and completely another to choose to release them for "their own consoles only". Nintendo's strategy is basically "if you want to play our games, you have to own one of our systems", which is ridiculous since their hardware and software departments are completely separate.
Sony released titles (admittedly in the past...) not only for the PlayStations but also for the PC and... of all possible choices, Windows Mobile, which showes that they at least *tried* to be multiplat with their software and reach distant audiences. A simple example of this could be the Everquest series which *completely dominated* the MMORPG genre before anybody even envisioned "World Of Warcraft" (which is by the way the scourge of the genre, the equivalent of Call of Duty in FPS'es). Another instance of extending their hand towards the end-user is for example the PlayStation suite. Sony's very much aware that not everyone may be interested in owning their home consoles, or even their hanhelds, this they're trying to create a platform-neutral envioriment in which certain certified devices from the palmtop/smartphone/tablet range will be capable of launching their software.
As far as Microsoft is concerned - we know they release for Windows aswell, even if with massive delays, so there.
Nintendo on the otherhand clings to this superstition from the 80'ties that the Cold War is a Good War and release their games for their devices and their devices only, literally hogging a whole lot of licensed franchises. "If you wanna play Nintendo, you need to be Nintendo" is the trend that alienated alot of people from their blockbuster games because lots of gamers simply *refused* to buy a DS or a Wii. I personally know a long-term fan of Zelda who thoroughly enjoyed OOT and Majora's Mask, but never played any later games simply because he found the Wii "far behind today's standards and too wiggly-waggly WiiMote'ey" and instead opted for the XBox360, never turning back.
Imagine a world in which Nintendo releases an HD Zelda for the PS3 or the XBox360. Or a world where you play Pokemon in full 3D, online, with voicechat and whatnot. You COULD have those games for the last 5 years if Nintendo wasn't hogging them - the world was ready for them. Sega bailed out of the console wars and instead chose to release games that were multiplatform, and from what we're seeing so-far, that was a good decision for them. I can't see why Nintendo wouldn't be able to make certain titles have exclusive features on their hardware, but still relatively available for other users.
If I were confronted with the possibility of playing a *good* Nintendo game on *good* hardware with *good* graphics and *good* gameplay, I'd pull out my wallet and throw it at whoever proposed this deal to me. I would literally become a better person to play HD Metroid.
If Nintendo's IP's are so "wonderful" and their games are so "top notch" like everybody states, then why are they only on Nintendo consoles? Are they afraid that they may lose the Aura of Awesome when they're objectively compared to other games on other consoles?