I would say yes because Vita TV is great. However...DS is dual screened. Wouldn't be cool at all. Unless Wii U were to be involved. Then I'd be all for it.

Yes because I would be able to get one for probably 70 bucks. (I never buy things without discount)

I want a new Super Game Boy/Game Boy Player since the Wii. Because I prefer playing games on TVs no matter the resolution.

Give it some customizable borders like the Super Game Boy had etc and then the resolution will not be that much of a problem.

You know let it be rendered in 400x240 then let me chose to upscale it to either 800x480 or 1600x960 so you still have sharp pixels without blurring the image and let the rest be a customizable or simple black border.

And solve the second screen problem with making it compatible to the WiiU gamepad, regular 3DS or some seperate controller with touch screen (like a theoretical nintendo1ds)

I think you're letting your personal preferences (obviously you value backwards compatibility) cloud the discussion. 

And of course Nintendo makes money from reselling old games again, the $20 they charge for Mario Galaxy 2 on the Wii U for example doesn't magically go to charity. 

I'm not. You are. I'm using Nintendo's own words. You are not.

Most of it goes to R&D. They're future proofing. That's all. They're doing it because they have to, not because they want to.

Show me the quote where Iwata says their next console will have backwards compatibility. 

The R&D cost for putting something like Mario Galaxy 2 on the eShop is virtually nill. 

There was some logic in the Wii U having backwards compatibility because the Wii sold 100 million units, but the Wii U (going to be Nintendo's worst selling console)? I wouldn't bet the farm on that one. 

They did it with the Gamecube on the Wii. Worst selling Nintendo console at the time. Retained backwards compatability. Galaxy's situation is different. Nintendo is making Wii games digital for the first time. They aren't wasting R&D because they'd never done that before with that system. Same with when they release the GCN VC. Needing to waste recources remaking the same NES games for different systems is a waste of resources. And you can tell because $1 to upgrade a title from Wii to Wii U isn't enough to make anything. It's just to cover the cost of redoing the work 3 or 4 times when they could have been using those recourses to make the Wii VC library even bigger, meaning there's more for people to choose and they make more money.

-----

There are no quote word for confirming BC the same way there are none confirming no BC, but there are quotes that flat out say:

"...we tried to encourage consumers to upgrade from an existing handheld device to a new handheld device, or from an existing console to a new console, by providing backward compatibility that enabled them to take their software assets from their existing system."

They clearly state here the importance, to the company, of BC to encourage consumers to upgrade.

"However, we became disconnected with our consumers with the launch of each new device as we could only form device-based relationships."

Key word. Only. They value backwards compatability as an integeral was to get consumers to upgrade from console to console, but they need a unified platform, on top of backwards compatability, to be able to truly encourage consumers to upgrade.

Just like Apple does with iOS. They have a unified platform, iOS, that is backwards and cross compatible with any other iDevice. Nintendo already said that they Nintendo Network is their "unified platform." With the Nintendo Network, they want you to have a relationship with the platform, not with the Wii U. How do they do that? By tying your software to you NNID, not to the Wii U. Just like itunes is tied to your Apple ID, not your iPod.

You form a relationship with the platform through the software you already own. If software is tied to Nintendo Network, the next console literally must be backwards compatible, or it goes against the entire point of a unified platform. And they said:

"On Wii U, we launched Nintendo Network IDs, which are abbreviated as NNIDs. This is the first step of our efforts to transform customer relationship management from device-based to account-based, namely, consumer-based, through which we aim to establish long-term relationships with individual consumers, unaffected by the lifespans of our systems."

NNID's on Wii U is the first step towards becoming account-based. The Wii U NNIDs, and everything tied to them, will be the first step in establishing long term relationships, UNAFFECTED BY CONSOLE LIFESPANS.

That's plain english. If all your Wii U software is tied to your NNID, and Nintendo wants to have a long term relationship with you regardless of what system you own through that very same NNID, the best way to NOT do that is by telling you that the $1,000 library of games you build can't be used on the next console. That goes entirely against the entire point of an account-based platform.

If the entire purpose of a unified platform like Nintendo Network is to have a shared library of software across various hardware, and Nintendo explicitly stated that the Wii U will be the first piece of hardware that will be apart of that unified platform, then that means that the Wii U's library of games will be a part of that shared library, since that is the whole point of a unified platform. Which means that when the next Nintendo hardware comes out that is also part of that unified platform, it will also share that same library, because that's what unified platforms do, which means that it will be backwards compatible, because that's what backwards compatability means.

http://www.nintendo.co.jp/ir/en/library/events/140130/03.html

There's literally no quote in Nintendo's modern history that even slightly alludes to them abandoning BC. Now it's your turn. Don't come back without quotes from Nintendo confirming or hinting at the next console not being backwards compatible. No convincing quotes? No response.

They will have a unified platform going forward, but I think you're really misreading that, your quote has absolutely nothing to do with literal backwards compatibility.

DS sized cartridges would work on both their handheld and home device so there's that too, obviously you can't shove a disc into a handheld.

But I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this, we'll see who's right potentially as soon as E3 this year, because I actually don't think Nintendo's unveiling of their future platform (which IMO will be a Fusion platform) is that far off.

In a lot of ways too I think Wii U is their last traditional home console ... as in something distinctly different from their handheld. The next product cycle will be a unified hardware approach that orbits around a digital eShop (same games for the handheld and home console, just like iPhone, iPad, iPod Touch all share the same apps).

But they will allow people to buy physical games too, not everyone wants to go digital, and in a unified platform approach, having both the console and handheld share pocket friendly cartridges makes 10000x more sense. So I can buy Mario Galaxy 3 at the store, it's a little DS sized cartridge, now if I have the home version, I can plug that into the console and play on my TV. Now if I want to play on the go, I can take the cartridge out and plug it into the handheld. This doesn't work with a antiquated disc. 

Backwards compatibility really in general only has a high value if the previous system was extremely popular too ... which the Wii U clearly isn't. They're not going to bend over backwards to appease such a small fanbase that will end up buying their new system for Mario Galaxy 3 or whatever anyway.