Surprisingly, this is neither Wii U bashing or trolling. Just somebody making some fair comparisons between two of Nintendo's less successful platforms.

I'm going to have to watch next week's video to see what he meant by "gamers" being a part of the problem.

Oh there is so much i disagree with in this video.

-Battery Life - Yes it is bad, but also isnt similar to Virtual Boy and disposable batteries.

- Launch Games -  Clearly WAY better than Virtal Boy's and also way better games overall.  Funny how he mentions that a lot of the games WiiU had was on previous platforms while also mentioning PS4 sold 5.3m in 4 months......uhm yeah, it seems a lot of ps4's library was out before PS4 and on top of that you can get the majority of PS4 games on another platform.

- Cost -  he talks about low cost and hidden costs......like PS4/XBO doesnt have hidden costs.....XBL/PS+, games, etc.  But that is ok we're just going to ignore that.

About the only things i agree with is Nintendo's lack of third party support and them sacrificing graphics for a tablet that has yet to show much relevance.  Thereis reasons that Nintendo's competitors are in a better situation, and there is reasons Nintendo is in the situation theyre in, but this video did not explain them.  In fact most people already know the reasons by this point.

This video deserves 

Virtual Boy was just supposed to be like 'toy platform' similar to Nintendo's products in the 1960s/70s like the Love Tester.

People just expected it to be a full blown game platform. Yamuachi sometimes played weird hunches, this was one that didn't pay off. Still I think it's kinda cool they did release it, it's a cool collectable.

Also some of the points in this video are stupid ... like you didn't have to use batteries with the Virtual Boy if you didn't want to, you could just plug it in and play. Also the Game Boy Color and Game Boy Advance (1st rev) both used batteries and so does the Wiimote, all three were insanely successful. 

The Wii U has a much more direct parallel with the GameCube. It's virtually just picking up where the GameCube left off.

Honestly if they had sat on this idea and let the technology for it mature and released a color version of the Virtual Boy with N64 or Dreamcast-level graphics say 6-7 years later, it probably could've been a hit. 

While I do agree with a lot of the points made in the video, its biggest flaw is the entire premise itself - comparing the WiiU to the Virtual Boy.

One could certainly make a correlation with both being too expensive/overpriced and perhaps there's an argument to be made regarding rushing out the consoles, but those comparisons could be made to many systems.  And comparing the two with both being "failed" concepts would place them so far apart on the spectrum that the comparison is largely moot.

The VB had absolutely nothing redeeming about it including its software.  To compare the WiiU's games in that way is complete folly.  Battery life being a relevant point?  Seriously?  And the lack of 3rd party support is pretty much par for the course for Ninty now, so that's also not making a case for the VB's pertinent similarities.

In short, it's a terribly inaccurate comparison.

While he makes good points (I actually already watched this video before I saw this thread), I disagree with the comparison and a lot of the things he says. I even actually made a comment on the video itself explaining it. There's also the fact that he talks about there not being a bundle, but there in fact is (and the more expensive model is now the same price as the regular one so the price argument kind of goes out of the window there).

I think that one of the biggest problems in his argument is thinking that the Wii U would have done better if it were cheaper and came without the gamepad. There's really no evidence to suggest it would have. Especially since 3rd parties in general have historically not done as well on Nintendo systems (quite likely due to Nintendo's not so nice history with 3rd parties). I kind of doubt any simple change to the system would have changed much. At best, Nintendo would have had to spend much more money with no assured success in the market, meaning possibly even larger losses than they had with the Wii U.

Also, the problems he talks about with the Wii U were there with the Wii as well. The market really isn't that predictable.

its kind of obvious isnt it, us consumers are the ones that buy up the crap money grabbing rehashes year after year rather than investing in new and innovative games. Thats why innovative platforms will continue to fail

edit: except Wii =P

As someone just mentioned to me, WiiU is more of a gamecube 2.0 than a Virtual Boy 2.0. Much better comparison

Its right in some points, but still not fair. A comparison with Gamecube would make more sense.

I like Game Theory, but this was complete nonsense and just a clickbait title.

I only need one argument for this: 

According to his criteria the XBONE is also the new Virtual Boy. The only difference is that it has third party support. 

As for the short battery life: never had any problems with this. I just plug in my Gamepad while playing. Problem solved. It doesn't use batteries like the annoying Wii mote. Plus the Wii U pro controller lasts longer than any wireless controller I've seen. And why on earth is he counting extra controllers in the console price? Most people buying a Wii U already owned a Wii and thus already had controllers. PS4/XBONE owners do actually need to buy additional controllers if they want to play with friends. Talk about rip off. 

Strange comparison. The Wii would be a new Virtual Boy by his criteria, too (besides the battery life). And the GameCube should have been super successful.

The Wii didn't have more quality games 15 month after launch than the Wii U. Only the GameCube had a better early lineup.

The Virtual Boy just wasn't fun to use at all. The Wii u doesn't have that problem, but it has very strong competition.