Not gonna lie, it needs a minor hardware bump if they insist on a controller that streams the imagery. The controller whilst a decent idea was just terribly executed throughout its lifetime. I personally loved using that controller but the screenside of things I often found it lacking. For third parties who had to transfer games over having to then do additional work on the controller I can understand why third parties didn’t want to work with it.
The name was a mistake, a mistake that could have been easily resolved calling it the Wii 2. The name generated nothing but confusion that Nintendo didn’t resolve through discussing this properly with retailers or its marketing campaign. By making the controller the sole focus of the marketing, people genuinely thought the Wii U was a controller for the Wii at $299. They were very very hesitant to put the actual console on show due to the fact it would have been steamrolled but at least people would know it was a console.
Otherwise Nintendo’s throughput needs to be improved and fast. The major problem with the initial games were simply Nintendo were not ready for the HD era and were having to reallocate staff from other projects to bridge the manpower gap hence the spotty release schedule in the first 18 months.
The initial games are problematic as well. Super Mario World whilst one of my favourite games on the system was a poor choice, compare it to Mario Galaxy or Odyssey which had excellent receptions. The Wii U needed that kind of Mario title, not what was essentially a 3D New Mario Bros. The same with Zelda, after Skyward Sword the next mainline title was seven years later, granted it was one of the best Zelda titles of all time perhaps but that’s an entire generation gone without it.
The Wii U was a poor decision truth be told in many regards, name, games it’s entire premise was simply poorly executed. Although the Wii U got some excellent games it was too little too late and many of its past decisions just over shadowed everything.