Slashdot beat me to the punch this morning and has an interesting three-pronged look at the naming of Nintendo's Revolution. The article cites the story I wrote for the Rocky Mountain News in which I spoke to a branding expert about the name. It also includes Chris Kohler's defense of Wii over on Wired and Games.Net's piece on the strangeness of the name.

From the Rocky article:

"Graphically, the distinctive 'ii' spelling symbolizes both the two unique controllers and the human form. An unusual name sets us apart from the crowd, just as our distinctive machine is completely different from what our competitors are offering," (said Perrin Kaplan, Nintendo of America's vice president of marketing and corporate affairs.)

But (branding expert) Steve Manning says that Wii doesn't really convey any of those things, adding that anytime a company starts explaining their brand name, it's a bad sign.

"The biggest key to figuring out it's a bad name is when they explain it," he said. "You don't have to explain a good name, you have to explain a bad name."

He goes on to talk about why Nintendo probably didn't stick with Revolution.

Both Sides of Wii [Slashdot]