I think it would be more accurate to say it was highly successful in its era - since it generated a lot of hype, press, and games seemed to be selling quite well according to reports - but it became redundant and obsolete with the Eshop - which acts as a rebranding and successor to the VC and Wii Ware, as well as an avenue to purchase retail software.

In the era of the Wii, the VC made sense. But it was locked down and limited. Nintendo also had Wiiware. What essentially happened is the two platforms were combined into the EShop and restrategized giving third parties more control over release schedules and strategies. Nintendo itself decided to do three things: 1, bundle software in classic consoles. 2, Use it to incentivize the online service by offering several dozen games to play for free. 3, with more recent releases, Nintendo has found it more lucrative to remaster/update their more recent content - but this includes some older titles like Link's Awakening - and it has been highly successful in volume and revenue.

Third parties have taken a variety of approaches on their catalogue software. Sega, Konami, and Namco, bundle catalogue software together and sell it for moderate to retail price; Square Enix, Kairosoft, and NIS, sell their games individually for cheap; and others like Capcom and SNK do a mix of both strategies. Nintendo, on the otherhand, uses their older properties as a perk to help incentivize their online service while taking their more recent ones and updating/remastering them to sell on the EShop... sometimes they do older stuff, like Link's Awakening.

In terms of software volume and quality, the Switch has now surpassed the Wii's Virtual console. We're even getting games like Final Fantasy Legend, Romancing Saga, Grandia, Langrisser, Disgaea, Tales Of, Final Fantasy 7-12, the Dragon Quest series, Witcher 3, Elder Scrolls, Diablo, Valkyria Chronicles, Dark Souls, and more - many of which either didn't release outside of Japan or didn't even come out on Nintendo consoles in the past. Instead of buying Sega games one at a time, for the price of 3 of them, during sales, you can get a bundle of 47 classic Mega Drive games.

tl;dr/ADD version - The EShop is the main successor of the Virtual Console and has surpassed it in volume and quality of catalogue software.

If you want to play old Nintendo games then buy the old systems.... I recently bought PS3 to play Gran Turismo 5/6, Red Dead, etc. I'm not complaining. Its like you guys can't even comprehend to buy old systems.  Anyone want to buy my NES or SNES mini for 3x initial cost? 

Because most of the hardware and software is expensive. And Nintendo makes no money off of these sales, obviously. Players lose and Nintendo loses too.

That's why so many people want more legacy content. It gives them an official and modern way to play older games and Nintendo makes money as well.

Well you could still buy a Wii U or 3DS and buy some VC games.  My Wii U which I transferred data from Wii is loaded with VC games.  I know it sucks they went subscription based and can't own now but that's is where the industry went to crap subscriptions in my opinion.  Nintendo should have offered VC games for sale on Switch and subscription service.  I don't see why they just abandoned VC sales after they made probably a boatload of money on the Wii, 3DS and Wii U.  Miss the Wii days but eventually even the Wii VC went to crap with barely any titles added and then the selection of consoles on the Wii U dropped even though they added GBA and Wii VC.

Great explanation, i liked that part where you detailed how the different companies manage their own releases as they see fit on the switch, but despite having a service with more volumen, maybe it's because how it is structured that people don't see the clear distinction between what they saw as "virtual console" or "older games" and releases of current games on the online shop, that people still seem to think that there are not enough releases of older games, and some also think that ther is no reason for Nintendo not to put games that were on the previous consoles like some articles titled "10 Great Games That Will Disappear When The Wii U eShop Shuts Down" you can found on the internet that listed: Super Mario RPG, Fast Racing Neo, Metroid Prime Trilogy, Wii Sports Club, Rhythm Heaven Fever , The Legend Of Zelda: Wind Waker HD & Twilight Princess HD, Pandora's Tower, The Three Game Boy Advance Entries In The Castlevania, Sin & Punishment,  EarthBound Beginnings,  and like that is obvious that the other companies will handle their games as they see fit, on wii for example some liked the convenience of having access to all the original Mega Man games from 1 to 10 except for 8, in that case people also think that it would be convenient to have all Zeldas available or all Metroids including prime trilogy etc, or having all the N64 games made or published by Nintendo, etc.

As far as shutting down ROM sites like in this case, I accept that this is Nintendo's right, although I think how they are handling it is antiquated and it makes them even more out of touch with their fanbase and makes them look like a greedy, authoritarian corporate entity crushing a little guy instead of a fun family company that everybody has fond memories of. I rarely see Sony or Sega running these kinds of lawsuits and I am sure that there are way better ways to handle this in the 21st century then what Nintendo does.  Most of Nintendo's fanbase (including myself) don't see downloading ROMs for 20-30 year old consoles as being worse than jay-walking on a secondary road at 2:00 AM in the morning and Nintendo should tread carefully with these kinds of suites as the message of fear that they are trying to spread can really blow back on them nowadays. If I were Nintendo, I probably wouldn't touch these sites unless they were pirating games for active consoles and if I did so, I would handle it as quietly as possible and settle outside of court while showing maximum leniency to the perpretator (and certainly not levy 2 million dollars in damages against some average Joe who won't see that kind of money if they worked for a 100 years).

That said, what I have much greater issue with is Nintendo's position that you cannot even make backups of games that you own. Nintendo and other corporations are part of the reason why the legitimacy of making personal backups for archival/format shifting has been basically nullified with new rules prohibiting bypassing DRM. Stupid courts in US and Canada (thanks in large parts to suites that were launched by Nintendo) have even held that the physical shape of a Nintendo cartridge constitutes DRM and you cannot extract the ROM even if there is no digital encryption of the content, whatsoever. Honestly, this is corporate fascism and is a violation of a person's basic right to private property. In other words, retro gamers have to become criminals to be able to play any game they own from gen 5 and earlier since these carts are all 20+ years old and just playing the carts can ruin them. Case in point, I had a Star Wars Shadows of the Empire cart and a Dragon Warrior cart both fail on me this year just by powering up the ROM chip. Apart from downloading the ROM, backing up a carts is the only way that a person can safely play these titles especially since a lot of these games have not been released on eShops. Thanks to Nintendo, both downloading and backing up ROMs are both viewed the same which only makes me feel even more accepting of those who download ROMs.

One of the most frustrating aspects is every new generation means a completely new frontend eShop, so the ability to acquire their older games is a chore every generation. Back in 2011, they gave you 10 free GBA games, while GBA games were also on Wii U Virtual Console. Now a decade later there are rumors of maybe the original Game Boy coming to the Switch, but you know it's mostly going to be shovelware like most of the other old games they release every few months on NES/SNES Online. One has to wonder if the Switch generation will last long enough for actual GBA games to arrive--then the next generation will start and two years later they'll release mostly forgettable NES games. and the cycle will start all over again. This is all forgetting the solid Virtual Console the original Wii had back in 2006. I really just don't understand their hesitancy in just fucking releasing most of their back library especially since they're so aggressive about piracy. "Teehee... here's a generic SNES sports game no one played or cares about!" Fuck off.

It would really be in their best interest to adapt to a similar model as Sony and Microsoft, like make your backlog available and allow seamless transition to the next generation when it comes. Eventually it will be inexcusable in the modern era to lose everything you had from the previous generation when upgrading. I honestly think one of the main reasons that Xbox was able to survive on life support for so many years was because so many people had bought into "mah ecosystem" and didn't want to lose everything they had bought on their prior Xbox systems. At this point Nintendo is shooting themselves in the foot by allowing for a clean generational break to a competitor that DOES allow for such things if users aren't able to migrate their data anyway.

A lot of misconceptions in your post. Let me break them down.

• Buying an item with copyrighted material on it does not make you the copyright holder. The copyright material remains the property of the creator/owner. You are certainly not entitled to copy and distribute someone else’s property.

• Copyright laws exist because copying and distributing stuff violates the rights of the creator/owner of the property, and undermines their ability to use/distribute it the way they want to. Nintendo is the creator of their stuff, not you; Nintendo has the right to sell their stuff and use it however they want, you don’t have the right to decide that for them.

• Nintendo didn’t invent copyright or trademark laws, these are the results of the legal systems of the country you live in.

• Assigning a random data point like “20 years old” doesn’t justify your position. The laws of your country determine how many years until a copyright expires, not your opinion.

• They also didn’t “crush” him for being a “little guy” they sued him for damages because he was profiting by pirating Nintendo’s property.

• If Nintendo sets a precedent for allowing pirates to distribute/sell Nintendo’s property, and even profit off of them like this guy you’re defending, then the precedent would allow Apple and Microsoft to do so.

• Being a company that serves families does not mean Nintendo can’t also have legal rights. You do realize both these things can and should exist?

• Nintendo’s ownership over their own property is not removed because you want stuff for free. And even if your made-up claim that “most Nintendo fans agree” was true, that is not a valid argument against Nintendo’s legal rights.

• Calling yourself a “Nintendo fan” does not give you the justification to decide how Nintendo’s copyrights are used. Besides, it’s not up to fans to decide how someone else’s creation should be used or distributed, it’s up to the creator. 

• Defending copyrights and trademarks is neither antiquated, greedy, authoritative, nor fascist. These are all unsubstantiated attacks your making, not valid arguments.

Your post falls apart with a basic application of reason and reality. I’m not seeing someone making some kind of rational argument against the tyranny of copyright law, but you’re not doing that, you’re attacking Nintendo for protecting their property from rampant piracy.

Nintendo’s not greedy for doing that, as a creator they have rights to defend the properties they created. You’re the greedy one. Your motivation doesn’t come from anything relating to justice, but from selfishness and entitlement to properties that don’t belong to you.

I couldn't disagree with you more.

• Buying an item with copyrighted material on it does not make you the copyright holder. The copyright material remains the property of the creator/owner. You are certainly not entitled to copy and distribute someone else’s property.

You are entitled to make personal backups or to format shift the copyrighted content you own (of course, this is under the condition that you do not share it).  This goes way back in copyright law for decades across many countries.  I never said anything about owning the copyright of the material that you purchase.

• Copyright laws exist because copying and distributing stuff violates the rights of the creator/owner of the property, and undermines their ability to use/distribute it the way they want to. Nintendo is the creator of their stuff, not you; Nintendo has the right to sell their stuff and use it however they want, you don’t have the right to decide that for them.

I never said that I wanted such a right.  I only want the right to backup my own physical media in the event that they fail, which is also my right enshrined in copyright law.  The DRM clause that was recently added in the last 10 years to both US and Canadian copyright law is interfering with this right.  Before 2012 in Canada there were absolutely no legal barriers against me making backups of games that I own, now the legality is ambiguous.

• Nintendo didn’t invent copyright or trademark laws, these are the results of the legal systems of the country you live in.

Media giants (which Nintendo is one of) lobby governments to pass amendments to the copyright acts that hurt the consumer.  It's their right to lobby, but it is also my right to dislike the actions of the industry because of this.  The DRM bypass prohibition was brought in specifically as a result of industry pressure in Canada and there were numerous consumer groups that opposed it, unfortunately corporations lobby and control a lot of politicians so we know who they ended up siding with. Companies like Nintendo also pursue court cases in courts that they know are sympathetic to their cause in order to get rulings that are liberally in their favor that expands the intent of said laws even beyond the intent of the politicians who created the law.  I am not sure if Nintendo had a hand in creating the DRM bypass prohibition but they have aggressively made use of it and their court-cases have created case law that has put a lot more restrictions on the consumer's ability to protect their purchases.

• Assigning a random data point like “20 years old” doesn’t justify your position. The laws of your country determine how many years until a copyright expires, not your opinion.

I don't think that you understand my position, I am not trying to argue that downloading a 20 year old game is not a violation of current copyright law, I expressed my opinion that the crime should have the seriousness of jay-walking at 2:00 in the morning. Also, laws can and sometimes should change.  That's my opinion and if you don't like it, you can have your own.

• Nintendo’s ownership over their own property is not removed because you want stuff for free. And even if your made-up claim that “most Nintendo fans agree” was true, that is not a valid argument against Nintendo’s legal rights.

I personally do not download pirated media.  I have spent tons of money buying retro games used and 100% legit over the past decade as well as my own personal collection of games from the 90's.  I want to make backups of these games because playing them can destroy the media (both cart and disc based media).  If you want to risk killing a $300 Dragon Warrior IV NES cart by playing it in 2021, that's your choice but I shouldn't have to be forced to destroy my media just to have access to it.  This is why backup and format-shifting provisions exist in copyright law.  It's unjust for these rights to be curtailed just so that Nintendo can have a heavier hand in going after people who actually pirate things.

I also feel that people who download older games, while breaking the law, are about as bad as jaywalkers (who are also breaking the law).  This is my opinion and I would love to see a poll of the gaming community to see how many people agree with me.  I am not arguing against Nintendo's legal rights, I am saying that they should pay attention to their fans because they are lots of upset fans like myself who can be very easily convinced to boycott them if they keep enforcing their rights in a heavy-handed manner.

• Defending copyrights and trademarks is neither antiquated, greedy, authoritative, nor fascist. These are all unsubstantiated attacks your making, not valid arguments.

The "fascist" comment was specifically in relation to my comments on recent copyright law changes prohibiting personal backups.  Nintendo going after ROM websites I feel have bad optics for Nintendo but I acknowledged that it is their right.

Your post falls apart with a basic application of reason and reality. I’m not seeing someone making some kind of rational argument against the tyranny of copyright law, but you’re not doing that, you’re attacking Nintendo for protecting their property from rampant piracy.

Honestly, I am not sure if you even read my post, but yeah part of it is that I am attacking Nintendo for the over enforcement of their copyright laws.  I am pretty sure that this is the topic of the thread.  A lot of people (including many on this thread) think that Nintendo is being too heavy-handed, even if they are in the right.  The other part of my post was that I am upset at Nintendo for contributing to the obstruction of user's rights to make personal backups of their media.  I don't see how any of this argument is faulty, although you are free to disagree with it.

Nintendo just added Bluetooth to the Switch, you just got wrecked, Captain. Time to update the thread and accept your mistake.