Highest selling 3rd party titles vs Nintendo titles on the last few Nintendo Consoles.

Wii: Just Dance 3 = 9.3 million vs. Mario Kart Wii = 32 million (didn't count Wii Sports because of it's autobundling). Ratio 1: 3.7

DS: Cooking Mama (O_o) = 5.35 million vs NSMB = 28 million. Ratio 1:5.35

Gamecube: Sonic Adventure Battle 2 = 2.56 million vs SSB Melee = 7.07 million. Ratio 1:2.76

N64: WCW Revenge = 2.38 Million vs Super Mario 64 = 11.89 million. Ratio 1:4.99

GBA: Namco Museum = 4.24 million vs Pokemon Ruby/Sapphire = 15.85 million. Ratio 1:3.73

Average ratio 1:4.06

The other company's consoles?
Sega being a strong 1st party producer has similar ratios between highest selling Sega game and highest selling 3rd party.

Microsoft, probably expectedly, has it's Halo franchise be the highest selling games by a long way on XB about 1:2.5. But the situation is reversed on 360 (I don't count Kinect Adventures due to autobundling). But Halo aside MS really doesn't have a strong 1st party stable like Sega and Nintendo.

Sony, again with PS, like XB it's first entry into consoles lead with 1st parties, albeit the difference between Gran Turismo and FFVIII was ~1:1.5 so a very low ratio. And while technically FFVII was first party (published by SCE) it wasn't really so arguably the ratio is even lower than 1:1.5, and FFVII was the #2 all time PS game. PS2 and PS3 though have 3rd party games as unarguably the best seller despite having substantial 1st party titles, and good quality titles too. PSP alsp followed the PS2 and PS3 pattern, even though it was Sony's first entry into hand helds. I get the feeling that PSV will heavily favour 1st parties, but not for positive reasons.

So in some respects really strong 3rd party sales compared to 1st party is a recent phenomenon, even an exception to the rule. Still I expect for Sony and Microsoft leading 3rd parties will be the norm for however long they stay int he game. But Nintendo will always lead with its games,

What makes it bad from the Nintendo perspective is that Sony and Microsoft will always be able to attract significant 3rd party support, and so, at least in home consoles Nintendo is unlikely to ever achieve the massive dominance (>50% market share) that Nintendo fans seem to want so much. But other than for bragging rights purposes leading with 1st party titles seems fine.

Because they're jealous Microsoft or Sony fanboys who have become resentful of Nintendo's monumental success; and need to find something about Nintendo's success that they can attempt to spin into something negative.

That's all there is to it.

The problem was that the Wii wasn't capable to offer what it need for a multiplat title that could be released simultaniously on PS360Wii. So they had to make a crappy inferior version for the Wii or don't release it at all. Obviously I didn't sell on Wii like on the other systems, because it was inferior.

A true statement and one that I haven't considered.  Nintendo can just pump out a Mario, Mario Kart, Animal Crossing, or Advance Wars and KNOW that the audience will come.  Meanwhile Sony is hoping that Activision will save them with a Vita version of one of their big franchises.  When the first party is the "Hitmaker", life is a lot easier.

Best check your facts before you make such bold claims.

Wii games >500K = 276 out of 2695 total games = 10.25%

Xbox 360 games >500K = 306 out of 3183 total games = 9.61%

PS3 games >500K = 305 games out of 2578 total games = 11.83%

Clearly PS3, the lowest selling console with almost 30 million fewer consoles sold than Wii, wins that battle on % and beats Wii quite handily in absolute numbers. And 360 wins the battle on absolute numbers (although nothing in it between PS3 and 360). Ergo Wii actually loses that line of argument quite embarassingly given its substantial hardware dominance. Indeed losing the 500K race is rather unprecedented for the generation's winning console.

PS2 won the 500K race massively with an enormous 628 games getting there (XB 156, GC 96). PS1 won the 500K race with a big 383 games crossing that line (N64 96, Saturn 11). SNES won with a meagre 77 (Genesis 11).

So, in the 500K race Wii actually comes out looking historically bad. Wii HW has sold roughly on par with PS1 but has 100 fewer 500K games than PS1, and it's lost the 500K race to consoles that sold substantially fewer units. Indeed Wii moved less total software than PS1 in total and in SW per console.

Fully half of Wii's SW lead over the 360 can be attributed to a single game: The auto bundled (in most countries) Wii Sports.

With all that context Wii's software performance isn't as impressive as a first glance might suggest.

Not really a great way to argue and a way of debating that isn't wanted on here

Jumpin learn off of this.

Good statement DaRev which makes a lot of sense.

theres is no problem games from 3rd parties sell in the long run but not as good as the other two

While the intelligent thing to do in business would be to gather information to make and support a decision before it is made, a lot of executives (even in very large and successful businesses) make a decision and then look for information in the aftermath of that decision to support it.

Many publishers decided that they were going to heavily support the HD consoles in the last generation and allocated all of their best developers to these platforms, gave them massive budgets, had them work on established IPs in popular genres, and then supported these games with huge marketing budgets. At the same time they allocated their weaker teams to the Wii, restricted them to tiny budgets, had them work on new IPs in unconventional genres, and gave them very limited marketing budgets. After the games were released executives would add up the sales of these big budget games across the XBox 360, PS3 and PC games and demonstrate that they outsold the far lower budget Wii game and use that as reason why they were right not to invest heavily in the Wii.

If you could get access to the internal financial statements of many large publishers you would find that their numbers do not match the strategy they took in the previous generation. The ROI of games on the Nintendo DS and Wii in many cases indicated far greater support than the HD consoles when you factored in everything.

Nintendo will put their best development teams, using their biggest IPs, with healthy budgets, and strong marketing support on their platforms. So the net result of this misallocation of resources is similar to what would happen if you took 8 professional sporting teams and had them play in a league with 22 minor league teams. The minor league teams will do alright against eachother, and may win the occasional game against one of the professional teams, but the professional teams will dominate the league.

It's a subtle way to call Nintendo first party offers superior to other first party offers.