Yeah, the PS4 completely crashed out of the gate with no backwards compatibility whatsoever, didn't it?
Oh, wait.
You realize how disingenuous it is to compare no backwards compatibility to offering it on a "unified" platform and then breaking up a part of that platform into hardware-specific pieces, right?
I mean, especially considering everyone's favourite talking points about the Wii U and 3DS failures were how unclear their marketing message was to the reality of the product, right?
I just want to be sure you're aware that you've compared apples to a slice of moldy bread.
I haven't ever come across any evidence whatsoever that backwards compatibility sells consoles. Even if backwards compatibility did sell consoles, it could only do so in proportion to the sales of the preceding console, which in the case of the Wii U is an incredibly low base. As Sony learnt after launching the PS3 and applied to the PS4, it's not something to throw money after, and in the case of a touchscreen in the controller (no matter how small the screen), it's a nontrivial expense, which could go to either improving performance or reducing the price (two things which do sell consoles).
I think you need a refresher on just how much money Virtual Console has made Nintendo with its first-party titles alone. Sony might not want to throw money after it, but Nintendo sure as hell would, because they've made more money out of it than Sony could hope to achieve, they know the value of it, so long as it's done right.
And this is without discussing the negative aspects of their likely-intended marketing message, something Nintendo seriously can't afford to screw up again, or at least not as blatantly or intentionally as what you're proposing would.
Besides, Nintendo has attempted and failed to sell people on the idea of a controller with a screen in it.
No, they attempted and failed to sell people on a controller with a screen in it being a marquee feature of a console with last-gen graphics for $350. There's a bit of a difference, that burden doesn't fall to the Gamepad alone.
They even largely abandoned heavy use of it in their own games after about a year on the market.
They don't use it for all that much more on the DS and 3DS either, but that didn't stop them. So.............
If you're starting a video game platform from scratch (which it seems they're doing with the NX), then it doesn't make any sense to permanently lumber it with an input technique which has proven commercially successful and largely ignored even by their own internal studios.
See the above example.
Even the one function of it which has had by far the most use in games (off-screen play) is entirely negated by releasing a handheld that plays exactly the same library.
Except, y'know, I don't want to ALWAYS play on a screen that isn't my TV. Nor do I wish to buy a $200+ device just for that function alone. And neither will anyone else.
So yes, I think it's safe enough just giving the small subset of owners who want to play Wii U games (who, incidentally, would likely heavily overlap with owners who also own the handheld anyway) the option to play Wii U games through the handheld.
Actually, that overlap is minimal to non-existent. GAF is not an indicator of the larger market. Most 3DS owners don't own a home Nintendo console. Just need that clarified.
Furthermore, I don't think the handheld should stick with dual-screens either. Again, for the sake of starting the NX off on the blankest slate possible, I think the most straightforward approach of a single screen is the way to go. It gives them by far the broadest variety of options in terms of form-factors down the line, and as you say it simplifies cross-development if both pieces of hardware have the same number of screens
Besides, as I pointed out in my earlier post, Nintendo have shown that they're more than capable of
making dual-screen games playable on a single screen.
Where's the touch screen you'd need to play those DS games if both screens are on the TV? So now you're going to have them say "yes, we have backwards compatibility for our most successful game hardware ever!.... except you can't play on your home console, and I hope you like to squint on your handheld!"
Yeah, sorry, I've seen people advocate this before, but I think it's a steaming load and adds more limitations than it solves.
And on a last point, I'm far from a gamepad hater. I think Nintendoland is genuinely one of the best multiplayer games I've ever played, and I think it's a shame that the potential of the controller hasn't been more thoroughly explored. But whether I like the gamepad or not has no bearing on the commercial viability of Nintendo continuing with controller screens with the NX.
Whether or not something is commercially viable depends greatly on its messaging, which is completely thrown into jeopardy by your proposal advocating against it.
Not true. Iwata confirmed they were still manufacturing new units in May of 2014.
https://www.nintendo.co.jp/ir/en/library/events/140508qa/index.html
At some point, I clearly remember that they stopped, not too far outside of its first year, because they had a surplus of inventory that wasn't moving fast enough. And those units being made in May of 2014 were likely still part of their initial production planning, seeing as how that was a year and some change from the original launch date.
But the primary point I was trying to make was that they haven't continued making new units into 2016 in the volume they'd need to get price breaks on the hardware components, since depreciation of value only makes up a portion of component cost reductions, except in the case of the GameCube, because WOW, component costs on that sank like a stone somehow.
