That's not necessarily true. There may be valid reasons for developing the game on the Wii first. Perhaps your primary audience is on Wii, and you want to take full advantage of that console's technical capabilities so that you maximize your sales. In that case you might design and develop the game on the Wii and then port it to the others.

You might also do your work on the Wii first if you don't want to spend the money on all of the development machines for the other systems. Remember that the Wii kits cost much less.

Given that the Wii version may take significantly less time and money than the others, you may also elect to do it first so that you can begin earning money to help support the development, and also to verify that the title sells as well as you projected.

 I think under the scope that the Wii has 50%+ marketshare it makes perfect sense. You perfect the version that has the greatest chances of financial return. Then you spend a little more and remap the controls, add some visual enhancers, get it running smoothly at some resolution greater than 480p.

I still don't see why that is illogical. It may not be what you or the average developer wants, but that is what the poeple who sign paychecks will want. They will want the greatest financial gain. They won't care about pushing the limits of the PS360.

Look at last gen, that is exactly what happened. Granted, the PS2 is closer in hardware to the Xbox than the Wii is to the PS360, but, they still didn't focus on the more powerful machine to get the best looking game. They focused on the version they thought would payoff better. The lower powered PS2.

Afterall, the Xbox was capable of putting out HD graphics. It was a huge thing when some of xbox's games came out in 720p (Source). Using that as a basis the Wii technically could do that as well.

I think some of you are thinking "why focus on the least powered system when you could make amazing looking games on the others?". However, you are making a false assumption that the publishers care about making the best looking game. As I noted above, they care about the bottom line and have good results to share with thier shareholders. 

bump....ultraslick donde esta'?

They will focus on PS3 when PS3 is the market leader. At the current rate that will be 20 years.

Although it is always harder to port DOWN to PS3 because of it's lack of power then it was to port UP from PS2 to cube and Xbox back in the day.

With both Wii and 360 so far ahead it seems foolish to make it the console of choice right now. I just look forward to the day they STOP making PS2 games and porting them up to Wii. it's a pet peeve of mine. Wii is weak enough you should push it as far as possible not give it ports of the last gen's weakest powered console.

I think the 2 factor most important for the studios is the development environment support which i feel is now pretty much ok... it was in bad shape till the Q3 of last year... but now lot of engines and tools have been developed and r available so its there ..

and second is the estimate on how many people r going to buy the game... i m sure they must have studies of demographic of the owners and region and gender and all these things, so its not necessarily a good move sometime to go for Wii when they don't expect lot of demand from the existing gamers... There r hardly couple of games per year per console which r system mover.. rest r just for the existing install base..

I will be surprised if game studioes donot perform such studies before investing millions of dollars in investment.

I think within a year we're going to see 50/50 lead platform, with some leading on 360 because it will likely sell more and some leading on PS3 because its such an odd platform.

That reason bothers me tremendously, by the way. The fact that Sony could get ahold of "lead SKU" status because they made a system that is so difficult to program for is divine injustice. Divine, I say!