If QOL ties in the WiiU and sells really well, then i might - 'MIGHT' - see a 10 year lifespan.

10 Years?

Only if you expect Nintendo to shrink massively as a company, they install base is way to small for them to even consider going passed 4 years.

Its so nice to see posts from people who didn't even read the OP.

just like ps3 and x360 have 10 more years. yeah sure. and i read the op.

That's right. The point is, Wii U isn't a "good enough" console for Nintendo.

Basically, you're saying that since you're enjoing MK8, then the WiiU can stay on the market for 10 years because that's what Nintendo fans want. While I agree with you on that, I'm sure you realise that it's impossible for Nintendo to support a console which is selling even worse than the GC and will probably be unable to sell 20mln consoles WW in 5 years. That's just not acceptable, unless they're planning to start a completely new business like they did with the Wii and become (stay) irrelevant in the home console "traditional" market.

A 10-year life doesn't fit Nintendo's business model. It makes more sense for them to release a new piece of hardware and the associated 2D Mario, 3D Mario, MK, Smash and Zelda updates to make money.

Further, Nintendo wants Wii-level profits. They aren't getting that with Wii U. Unless there is a dramatic turnaround, Nintendo will surely want to launch a new hardware concept after Wii U has been on the market for 5 years if only to get people to buy their standard franchises again, but hopefully also hook them in with a new and more profitable hardware concept.

If they could keep the same console for 10 years while making tons of money, then that's fine. The issue is that they're not. No chance.

I agree in the sense that Nintendo feels this level of visual fidelity will be adequate for their needs for a long time.

Just like the GameCube generation was effectively like 11 years ... because they recycled the chip/tech for the Wii.

So if they are planning a hybrid platform, yes, I could see it being slightly better than the Wii U/similar to the GameCube-Wii situation, they probably won't directly re-use the chip but select a new mobile (ARM/mobile GPU) chip that approximates Wii U performance and has dev libraries that allow for more streamlined porting of Wii U engines/games if need be.

But if you're saying one continuos generation of just the Wii U ... no way. They will be largely done with the Wii U as it exists now after 2016.

I wouldn't be that surprised if the next Nintendo platform is a hybrid machine that can run the same level Wii U graphics at 1080p instead of 720p and has a much faster OS/loading times (due to better RAM). That I can see happening.

They ALREADY get so little 3rd party support.

You want it to be next to nothing ?

In a hypothetical hybrid console/handheld scenario though, having lower third party may actually be what makes the business model work ... because Nintendo will likely sell less hardware overall, but the need for third parties lessens as they'll be able to supply more consistent software now that their dev teams aren't split between two. 

And if that's the case, then having Nintendo control 70+% of the software sales on such a platform (assuming a usberbase of lets say 80-85 million LTD) would be more ideal for them. 

Besides no one really is going to buy a PS4-level Nintendo console in 2017 (except the shrinking group of Nintendo die hards) ... by then the PS4 and XB1 will have sold through likely 90-100 million units. Nintendo would have to come up with a machine comparable to whatever the PS5 is supposed to be and I think they have no interest in making a game machine that would require such massive budgets.