I do believe they should publish it anyways, since they are already committed to it, but I don`t believe that more is always good. I`m more of a quality over quantity person.

1. Yes it does, since they were the ones who made the game and if they had made it good, it would have been worth the investment.

2. I'll agree that a GTA port would have been awesome. Destiny? Meh, would've done as much as Call of Duty does on Nintendo systems, which is nothing. Problems here are that Take Two Interactive and Activision would rather make profits on systems where those audiences already exist, thus everything with the exception of Skylanders have ditched the Wii U.
Fallout 4 on Wii U would have had the same issues as this, since that's a game being developed primarily for PS4 and Xbox One, so it would've been like Sonic Heroes on PS2, glitchy, slippery, and an all around inferior port of what was primarily a Xbox/GameCube game. Also, the development catastrophe was due to not having a publisher after THQ's downfall, which Nintendo came in to do. That gave Valhalla a home platform they needed to make the game good with plenty of development time. Look at Bayonetta 2, another 3rd party games that wouldn't have seen the light of day without Nintendo, and that game managed to be fantastic and well worth the investment, while taking a much shorter development cycle than Devil's Third. So again, no excuse whatsoever.

3. I'll agree that Nintendo should have stepped in as publishers in that regard and that they should have opted to delay the game. Although, then people would be saying "Oh great, ANOTHER delay of a Wii U game."

4. They are releasing the game, although North America is questionable, the reason I say is because it seems as though now Nintendo of America has changed their minds about that. But even if they didn't release it, I wouldn't blame them one bit, because, simply put, the game is crap. And yes, both parties share blame in that regard, but it's still mostly Valhalla's fault, because, three years, how much more time do you need to make a generic FPS.
And they'll make that money back another way, they're a multi-billion dollar company, who have been the #1 video game company in Japan for the better part of 3 decades now. And hopefully they'll spend that money they get back on meaningful ports like you say, like Bayonetta 3, etc.

All of the supposed controversy stems from the debate about whether or not NOA neglecting to publish a Nintendo-funded game due to its perceived low quality could be justified. But that very question is merely the result of a bunch of he-said-she-said, nothing more than hearsay at this point, and ignores the 'third option' of Nintendo handing it over to a third party to publish. What exactly would be wrong with letting XSeed handle it? Why would that be a bad thing at all?

The game is coming West. Doesn't matter how. There's no controversy here.

What Nintendo shouldn't do, is publish it if it's broken. No one should publish a broken, poorly optimized, buggy mess of a game, least of all Nintendo who still have a reputation to loose in that department. If it runs properly in the end but is still just a bad or mediocre game, well, at least I don't see them tarnishing their reputation by publishing it.

Them they ahve even more right to can the thing, they have personal involvement in the games sucknness

there is no controversy, its a shitty game, end of story.

Loved Other M and Crystal Bearers. Two of the most hated games for Wii last gen.

Yeah, Crystal Bearers is a bit of shame, that game had a lot of potential, which admittedly it didn't live up to, but it was decent and a sightly better then I think its spiritual predecessor Dawn of Mana.

Other M is another one that was ok, but the weight ot its flaws crushed it, I mean the flaws of the story are over blown but it was really a bad story. Wasn't a fan of the first person shooting segments in that game, but I think it did the hybrid side scrolling action really well.

I didn't get in on those games until a while after release, so  maybe knowing what to expect helped. I thought they were strong entrees though.

I am convinced this is an issue of "oh lol we got new gen games to compare to this. Look how crap it is in comparison? Hahahah! We are such pro critics. This is from 2 gens ago we dont give a f*** about some Wii U game.".
I'm not buying a single second of their act. I have eyes and i see the game and i dont see this awful game they are talking about (doesnt mean i see a masterpiece ofc, but it looks fun to me). Surely, they dont know what an awful game is. Perhaps been too pandered to to even know.

To be honest, not long ago these "critics" told us how Bound by flame is a terrible game and i think its an awesome game. So... yeah, its been a long time since i trusted their biased views.