3. You're drawing a lot of conclusions from one example. The Virtual Console continued across three platforms before it was canned. If Nintendo is happy with the subscription revenue they're getting from the Switch Online service, they'll probably carry it over to the Switch's successor unless it's a wildly different system.
I disagree with this. Are you talking about the $1 Wii U upgrade program? We still had to pay for that. AND it wasn't the entire library, far from it. They still trickled out the games, I was not able to replace my entire Wii library on Wii U.
Or do you mean the backwards compatibility? That pathetic BC solution where you had to load an app to load your app? That ugly ass, clunky VC "inception" style solution? I don't really consider this a true continuation of the service either.
What about the fact that the 3DS had its own VC but was also shut down? I had Pokemon Yellow from that but I couldn't play that on my Wii U, or on my Switch.
As far as I'm concerned Nintendo has burned the VC down three times now, not one - Wii, Wii U, 3DS.
It's not a stretch to think they will burn it down a fourth time. If the subscription model results in less overall profits, I could see them rebooting it again for a more traditional ala carte model.
I have not subscribed to their new service, whereas I owned a TON of VC games on their last 3 consoles. I suspect a lot of other gamers are the same - they would prefer to just buy them not pay a continuing subscription fee.
I honestly expect a fresh start a few years from now. Attempt #4.
www.eurogamer.net
