Hopefully they sell those games for a REALLY low price (yeah, right) or find a way to give us credit for our 3DS/WiiU purchases.

You have a good point, though. I've purchased a lot of games I wouldn't normally consider. If there Virtual Console were a thing, I wouldn't be enjoying them.

indie sales probably would go down with VC competition sure, but when have you ever seen a company restrict quality games on a system to give smaller games a chance?! That's insane. Does sony say "ya know we're not gonna let people buy the same damn fifa/madden/CoD game this year we're gonna ban those games so those many of millions of people can go ahead and spend their money on new experiences instead of buying the same damn thing every year"? No. More quality is always better. It's called a marketplace. If you wanna win you gotta be better than the competition, not just because the competition is restricted.

Good point, although some people will oppose you for it.

Truth is, Nintendo is creating a much more inviting ecosystem for third parties than they did with Wii or Wii U. Nintendo can always add Virtual Console later in its life cycle when it has established itself as a viable platform for indies. If it's deliberate, then it's a sound business decision, although a bit un-Nintendo-like.

Except the Wii and WiiU were both praised by indies and demonstrated that their games sold extremely well on those systems. So... I think your theory is meh.

Yeah I subscribed to that theory as well. However I want to point out that I believe Nintendo is saving VC for later. I think Nintendo is going to use it to push paid Switch online. I am not sure how will they do it but its just a prediction.

I'm not saying indie games sold bad on Wii and Wii U. But PSN and especially Xbox Live were far thriving platforms when it came to indies. With Switch, Nintendo is creating a way better ecosystem, at least that's how I perceive it.

I dont think hes saying he doesnt want VC to be on there just that VC games very likely steal sales from indie games (similar price and many indies are heavily influenced by 80s/90s classics) and if Nintendo wants to continue to have strong relations with indies than they need indies to be as successful as possible.

One other reason i can see why Nintendo has held off on VC is because they want to sell NES/SNES Classics.

I agree, i think there are 3 reasons why Nintendo hasnt introduced VC yet.

1. Like the OP has said, it gived indies a much better chance of success by not having to compete with similar priced classics with similar artstyles & gameplay.

2. Nintendo wants to continue to sell the NES/SNES Classic and having those games sold seperately on Switch could potentially hurt their sales.

3. Like you said, they are probably waiting to introduce it with the paid online service and integrate it into that somehow. Not sure what that will entail at this point but i think its likely.

Yeah they will probably make all the money they can from the Classic series of systems - NES relaunched this year, probably N64 next holiday - before they add VC to Switch. Maybe they will initially just have gamecube games in the VC and third party games in the VC so as not to hurt Classic sales.

I think that's just a problem that happens when a console's library continues to grow, it just gets more competitive, although if a game is truly good, I imagine it'll get its share of sales. Besides, Sony is often boasted for having a large library and that never really seemed like a problem.

But most of all, I want my dang old school games dang it!!