Uncharted 2?

One thing I forgot to mention is the clearly different views some (a majority?) of third party developers have of the three consoles based on their manufacutrers, which also has a big impact on their decisions:

Nintendo

There is clearly a level of fear here that Nintendo 'understands' the Wii in terms of motion controls and titles as well has having the dominant franchises for the system - Mario, Zelda, etc.  This, coupled with what has been percieved as weaker sales of certain titles has got a lot of third party developers suspicous of the platform and seems to be giving rise to a perception that your title will sell less and that you're doomed to fail competing with Nintendo themselves.

Clearly, the strong success of the core franchises plus Nintendo's success with titles like Wii Fit and Wii Sports, etc. does nothing to dispel this fear.

Also, while the Wii does sell a lot of third party SW there is no doubt that enough titles seem to perform weaker than expected, particularly in certain genres, to re-enforce this.  In the end Wii owners need to buy enough copies of certain titles to ensure they are seen as popular on the system, and this hasn't happened in certain cases.  Rightly or wrongly I feel some developers ignore or forget the sales/cost ratio and compare sales on Nintendo to sales of similar titles on 360/PS3 without taking into account the lower development costs - i.e. you could make the same return and profit on Wii selling less as your outlay is less.

I suspect many third party developers do wish Nintendo weren't as dominant with SW on their own platform as is the case.

This of course is affected by region, too.  With I think western developers much more cautious of the platform than local ones, although even there I feel a lot of local support is actually focused more on handhelds (Nintendo's own DS range plus the PSP).

MS

In many ways, it's easy to see the lure of the 360 for many third party developers.  MS has by far the weakest first party capability itself, and Halo aside needs third party titles in a huge way on its system.  MS clearly puts a lot of effort into wooing developers as a result of this, which only re-enforces this position.  The 360 sells a lot of SW particularly in the West and particularly in the English speaking territories - something that makes it very attractive to a lot of Western third party developers.  It also has a good SDK and, for Western developers turning from PC to consoles makes for a very easy transition target.  To put it simply, if you want to make a title, particularly a Western orientated FPS or action title, the 360/PC makes a very appealing combination.

The main downside of the 360 is cost of development and competition in the core genres.  Producing a good HD game takes money and if you're going to produce one in the popular genres on 360, particularly FPS/TPS with online MP, then it better be good and original or it could fail vs the plentiful competition.

The other downside I feel is that some developers are uncertain about the popularity of broader genres on 360 vs the core action/online titles.

360 is also attractive for Live, which can provide a channel for lower cost games to reach a more niche audience.

Finally, the 360 has been (perhaps still is) attractive to Japanese developers wanting a slice of the currently popular West.  Although clearly results for more Japanese centric titles on the platform may give pause to that being exclusive in nature.

Sony

Sony presently lies between Nintendo and MS I think for a lot of third party developers.

Sony has a strong first party development capability, and does own some key franchises in the same manner as Nintendo.  But historically it's a platform that's been host to massive third party success, and there is no doubt that many third parties are comfortable in principle with supporting the PS3 as a platform, particularly since the platform 'found its feet' and started selling most third party titles in comparable ratio to the 360 (WW that is, clearly it varies by region).

Where it differs from the 360 is that it has (still?) historically been tougher to develop for, and it's harder to produce a good 360/PS3 or 360/PS3/PC title than a good 360/PC title.  For developers moving from PC to console support this has been a particular hurdle, and it's no surprise to me that initially the 360 got all the love and even now still has sole console focus from developers like Valve.

However, I think for most developers that particular hump is fading, and like the 360 the PS3 is seen as a fairly safe bet for solid sales if you produce a good title.  It's weakness for developers is that in US/UK core titles sell less than 360 although this has evened out in ratio.  On the other hand there is a perception, I believe, that a broader spectrum of genres can sell well on the PS3, making it seem more appealing I believe to developers looking at titles outside the core 360 genres or to spread the risk of such titles across both platforms.

PS3 also has PSN, which is an attractive channel for the right titles.

Finally, it appeals to Western developers as a safe bet to extend sales on top of 360 while it clearly offers a better chance of penetration in Japan than 360 (although this is a lesser priority I think for a lot of Western developers).  Clearly it is now a fairly safe bet for Japanese developers as titles now sell well enough locally plus the PS3 offers access to the Western market now in a similar manner to 360.

In the end, I believe currently the PS3/360 platform just seems more appealing to a lot of third party developers from a potential sales/competition perspective, with the main downside being cost of development.

The Wii is attractive for potential sales and cost of development, but right or wrong a lot of developers see it as being far riskier from a competition (with Nintendo) and breadth of genre perspective and unless that changes it does seem likely the Wii will never see the dominance in third party support the PS2 did before it.

The Wii Remote has an IR pointer. It's perfect for On-Rails games.

Oh, and how about this.

Actually its perfect for third person shooters and first person shooters, Links Crossbow training wasn't all on rails it was also part TPS.  As for lightgun games, the IR is MUCH better than other options but still not lightgun precision, you can get pretty close when you have games like Ghost Squad that lets you calibrate it, but part of the fun of lightgun games were that you just point and shoot, you didn't need the pointer on screen and because the IR can be off depending on where you're standing/sitting in the room you can't just point and shoot naturally.

It's funny, and maybe due to how long I've played on PC (took me ages to get used to a gamepad for FPS) but I just can't use Wii controls for what I see as a normal, Half Life style FPS.  The nunchuck is great for movement, but holding the Wii mote and pointing just doesn't work for me like using a mouse, or even a gamepad.

What I'd love for FPS is a nunchuck / mouse combination.  That would be the best control option for FPS I think.  Precision movement with variable speed and rapid, precision movement both for small aiming adjustments or large scale swinging around.

There's advantages to all set up's, I've been told I'm a special case but for me FPS games on the Wii are as natural as FPS games on PC, but with the mouse it isn't about having a steady hand and wasd can be a fraction of a second faster.  On the other hand the Wii remote only requires you to move your wrist and can be much quicker as a result while the analog stick is like you said precise you can press a little to inch up you can press all the way to run. 

Personally I tell people to give it a chance, it's much more intuitive than using a gamepad for FPS games, but I chalk most of the "I hate FPS controls on Wii" to the same reason gamepad players say "I hate FPS controls on PC" it only makes sense if you either A suck or B didn't spend time to get down the controls.

Wii controls for FPS are very intuitive, just point and shoot. It's easier, faster and more accurate than using sticks. However, I recommend to sit down and rest your arm over your leg to not get tired and have more precision.

Well, I will keep trying, but the challenge for the Wii is that, as you say, people like you seem to be in the minority for using the controls for certain genres.

I find the Wii acceptable for FPS but not superior, and I get the feeling I'm probably in the majority camp with that.  I'm talking here about people actually using the console, etc. not those simply not willing to try.

The other challenge the Wii faces is its specs.  At the end of the day, a lot of FPS players either are transitioning from PC across consoles (like me) or have got used to FPS on Xbox/360/PS3, and the Wii also looks pretty long in the tooth graphically for FPS games at this point in their lifecycle.

I don't think I'm a graphics whore as such, but when, for example, you've played  Half Life 2 on PC when Source was brand new, the Wii does seem limiting for what I expect for those titles.

In the end I feel that the Wii is very good at some stuff, which is why I have one, but that it will never get any broad acceptance across a bunch of popular genres, FPS (particularly online) among them.  As a result, with the huge jump in former PC centric genres like FPS on console, it simply cannot be the one console for all that the PS2 arguably came closet to (never being too hot for FPS and some genres either I wouldn't say PS2 100% covered all the bases).

Therefore the whole idea of why don't people settle on the Wii, or the 360 or the PS3 is a redundant one now.  The customer demographics for consoles are now fragmented this gen, across different consoles and by region too, and that's not going to chance I think.  The Wii will sell the most HW due to who it appeals to and their numbers, and by consequence will sell the most SW, but only of certain genres, with plenty of other genres being favoured elsewhere.

It's a bit of a bugger though as I've never had so much tech as this gen, what with a PC, Wii, PS3, DS and PSP and I still don't even have a 360.

Previously all I felt I needed was a PC and a PS2.

"In the end Wii owners need to buy enough copies of certain titles to ensure they are seen as popular on the system"

No, because that is the developer forcing the consumer instead of a developer making a game that we want and THEN we will buy it in sufficient numbers.

Uncharted 2 what? I specifically stated great developers go the extra mile no matter the system. I don't think you actually read what I wrote.