Nintendo has done the following this generation that I can remember off the top of my head:

Localised and advertised DQIX in the West

Advertised MH3 in West, allowed Capcom to design CC Pro

Retro gave Ubisoft support with FPS controls in Red Steel 2

Nintendo have let their 1st and 2nd parties actually make games for 3rd parties, such as Intelligent made DQ Wars, Genius Sonority helped on DQ Swords and Monolith made some SRT games.

Nintendo let 3rd parties use Nintendo licences, such as Square-Enix with Mario Basketball and Mario Sports Mix

Nintendo is localising and publishing games like Goldeneye in Japan

Nintendo worked directly with Team Ninja on Metroid Other M

Miyamoto designed a mini game for the Wii version of Samurai Warriors 3

Nintendo have made bundles for the likes of MH3, Tales of Graces, Final Fantasy III and the like

Nintendo probably funded The Last Story

Wii motion plus actually launched entirely with 3rd party software, MS and Sony didn't do the same with Kinect and Move.

I really can't see how you believe that Nintendo 'aren't willing to make the effort'

Most of those are either to be expected or are of no benefit to Third Party studios in general. Hiring a studio to make a game for your IP isn't benefiting third parties, it's just farming out development, if I was to include your example, then Sony has helped 20 different development studios this generation. Funding The Last Story when it's your IP is not benefiting Third Parties. Bundling games should be standard practice. Also, even if everything you've listed was accurate, it still in no way stacks up to the amount of effort Sony and Microsoft has put into gaining third party support.

Paying for the marketing of multiple games such as Assassins Creed 1 2 3, the Call of Duties, Final Fantasy 13, Fallout: New Vegas, Dead Space 2, Batman: Arkham Asylum, Medal of Honour, Gears of War, Rock Band and Resident Evil 5.

Creating a free to use engine that lowers development costs and makes third party development significantly easier for the PS3. This engine has had 25 games made on it and it's received some fantastic results.

Making deals with third party publishers to gain exclusive games, content or release dates. 

Sony sending out pocket teams from Sony Santa Monica, SCE Foster City Studio and Cambridge to work with many third party developers and help them with the hardware.

Sony allowing easy access through their PSN network and Microsoft vigorously advertising and promoting third party Live Arcade games on their network.

I could go on and on, but if Third Parties were to look at which publishers are offering more money, support and ease of use, then they are definently going to ignore Nintendo.

Why should platform holders pay for the marketing of third party games???  3 of the games you mention come from Ubisoft, Activision and EA - they are huge companies who can afford to market their own games.

The general consensus is that Nintendo should give free money to 3rd parties because they run an overly successful business.

Platform holders need to make deals and co-operate with the third party publishers if they want to support each other. Third parties already have multiple systems were their games sell very well (PS3, IPhone, 360 and PC), they don't need Nintendo and Nintendo doesn't need them, but in the end, it's Nintendos audience that suffers, while everyone else trots along in pretty happy relationship. 

You also ignored the other things they've done, like exstensively supporting development, helping to advertise smaller titles on their networks, creating free to use engines and having viable platoforms that are easier to port to and have all the necessary requirements to support the developers ideas.

No, Nintendo don't have to do anything at all, I'm pretty sure they are happy with how things are going for them at the moment. Third Parties don't have to do anything either, they already have viable platforms to work on and they keep getting incentives to work on those platforms. Most of those incentives have nothing to with marketing or development funding. No one is crying over this, except for the Wiis audience, who keep complaining about the lack of support, but don't want to put the blame on Nintendo for their part in this mess.

So, we're in agreement that Nintendo is at fault for making too much money?

If Nintendo were poor, I doubt there would be much difference. This isn't about Nintendo being so rich that they don't need Third Parties, it's about Nintendo not giving a fuck because they are doing well and Third Parties not giving a fuck because they are doing well. If Nintendo had a system that sold 20 million units and had a lack of crazy profits, then Third Parties will continue to not give a fuck like they did with the Dreamcast and Gamecube.

Nintendo are stuck either way, mainly because their focus is on something different and they don't care about how their minority  'core' audience feels about quality Third Party support.

It's called raising the ceiling so you can never be wrong.

"Hey, Nintendo don't do anything to help third parties." "Really? But they do all this..." "No, they need to do more."

Do you see how the the first and final statements completely contradict each other? Classic tactics. If you make a statement that's easily proven to be false you can just raise expectations even further.... It's the kind of thing opposing politicians do all the time...

"Hey guy in power, you're not spending anything on improving public transport." "Really? We've just spent £2.5billion on it." "No, that's not enough, you should have spent £5billion on it."

So even though the challengers first statement was proven to be incorrect, they still get people thinking that the incumbent isn't doing enough with a quick bit of spin, and the contradiction is forgotten...

Er, only 3 of those examples were Nintendo hiring 3rd parties to work on their own IPs.  And Nintendo's worked directly with more 3rd parties this gen (on their own IPs) than MS and Sony combined, over 50 last I checked.  Nintendo also funds and publishes projects for IPs they don't own though, like Fatal Frame or Glory of Heracles.  MS does this pretty frequently too (Gears of War, Mass Effect, Alan Wake, To Human, etc), Sony's done it also on occasion (Heavy Rain) though more rarely.

Everything he listed was accurate, and honestly it's barely scratching the surface.  Nintendo's done a ton more, including engine/tool sharing (FFCC MMLAAK), select bundling (WE Playmaker 2010, Tales of Graces, etc) or more sweetheart publishing deals (Layton notably).  Nintendo's also notably the only developer that allows 1st party teams to work on 3rd party games (Heroes of Mana, DQ Swords, Fantasy Life, DQ Wars, SRT OG Saga Endless Frontier, etc).  Nintendo also distributes tons of 3rd party games in Europe, from Etrian Odyssey to Ghost Trick to Inazuma Eleven... again, far, far more than either Sony or MS at this point.  I think the real problem with Nintendo's 3rd party overtures isn't that they're not "doing enough" in terms of actual support, but they're not purely paying out for exclusivity or (more often in Sony/MS cases) exclusivity windows or exclusive DLC.  The other issue is that, for the most part, Nintendo's incentives and support seem to be targeted at Japanese companies almost exclusively.