Are third parties skipping Nintendo out of spite?

[Salnax]

It's not spite. 3rd parties, particularly AAA and Western ones, simply happen to view 1st party developers like Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft as potential competitors. How can EA be the #1 video game company in the world if Nintendo is at the #1 spot? The answer is simple: do everything in your power to weaken the competition. It's easier to let competitors die than work with them, so 3rd parties like aligning with platforms with pathetic 1st party support.

Hence, we see a hierarchy:

*Wii U: Huge 1st Party (The Wii U has already had multiple sequels to some of the best-selling games of all time),but Minimal 3rd Party Support (Besides indie-type games, which Nintendo generally relies on 2nd parties for)
*3DS: Big 1st Party (Not quite Wii U scale, but close), Poor 3rd Party Support (The 3DS hasn't had a non-FIFA EA game since 2011 for example)
*Xbox and PlayStation: OK 1st Party (but not enough to dominate the best-selling games on the systems), OK 3rd party support (hundreds of titles, including a bulk of AAA support)
*PC's and Mobile Devices: Poor 1st Party (Basically none), AWESOME 3rd party support (A vast majority of games released commercially)

If Nintendo wanted to get as many big 3rd party games as they got during, say, the GameCube era, they ought to make underwhelming games like they did back from 2001 to 2004. Of course, even Nintendo's subpar games (and Melee) ended up dominating the GameCube, so finding a strategy where they don't have to rely on their competitors is likely a good idea.