The Wii U is withered tech much closer to the 7th gen than the 8th gen. It is again a generation behind...like the Wii. That's the only point I tried to make. I don't see why you are going into such specifics.
No, the Wii was a generation (of consoles) behind in terms of both power and architecture. The WiiU may be a generation behind in terms of raw power, but it has a much newer hardware architecture.
Furthermore, the chips are big enough to even surpass the ones found on the GC in terms of die size, and that's all that matters when it comes to this comparison.
The fact that the other vendors have opted for bigger consoles and more expensive technology doesn't negate the fact that Nintendo has a technologically comparable console to what the GC was on 2002, maybe not in comparison with its competitors (it has launched 1 year before this time) but in relative terms of time/tech/power.
Kazuma Kiryu said:
What's the surprise here? We've seen this time and time again. "Who cares about graphics, etc etc". Yet when we saw that zelda tech demo, people went fucking nuts about how good it looked.
Everytime we get a technical thread, people start dumping gifs of a few games saying "look how good it looks".
No, this is not how it is. What a lot of people say is that "as long the game is good enough, technology doesn't care" which doesn't contradict the fact that one can be "wowed" by a game with great graphics and technology.
The problem here is more you. Since for you tech is first, second and third, you can't comprehend how someone can appreciate a game or even a system that's not at the edge technologically speaking, and at the same time appreciate a good graphical showcase.
There exist people that played games back when they were a "nerd thing" and that appreciate things like the playability and such, you know?