I can give you one that was released in 2010.

Metascore (Wii) - 77/100

Metascore (PS3) - 75/100

Metascore (PC) - 75/100

Metascore (360) - 74/100

The reason why the Wii version scored higher is simple: it was different. The Forgotten Sands was built from the ground up to make use of the Wii's features, and it really succeeded. The other versions were stuck with a rather PoP game with better combat (which still wasn't great) and less interesting level design.

"Wii gamers have often been forced to make do with a substandard product for their less powerful system. This time, they get a great game built from the ground up to succeed." - GameInformer

I like the graph, but as people said, I could have already guesses this. I would also add that outside of a bigger market, they also represent different markets.

its not even that, fact is Ninty didnt push those games anywhere near as much as they pushed the Wiiseries of games, that was their primary focus, their core games were secondary in terms of exposure.

The "HD" part is not the concern though. That's the part that would be removed and down-ported. The question is surrounding the rest of the gameplay and the only one out of the bunch (ignoring multiplayer) that I would be sceptical of is AC due to its vast overworld with tons of computer driven people. Sure the AI is simple for the most part, but it is still very large and a big reduction in that would have changed the game itself.

However, other FPS, TPS, batmans, and so on had worlds that were more limited and a downgrade of visuals would have been more sufficiant. Could of left out multiplayer in most as they are primarily solo experiences anyways.

Again, its a futile argument as it was never done. 3rd parties proved their own truth by never catering to core on Wii and it vanished early.

That's what I meant by the marketing part brah. But did you mean in terms of volume and # of titles released in the respective categories?

You can't expect Ninty to solely focus on the non-casual market either.

Courtesy of FOX, boys. A core game that was of higher quality (budget?) on the Wii, here are the sales. It was in 2010:
http://www.vgchartz.com/gamedb/?name=forgotten+sands&publisher=&platform=&genre=&minSales=0&results=200

ok so it sold ~600k on PS360 each and ~200k on Wii. 1/3 the sales... in 2010 well after any core audience on Wii had vanished.

COD is a better example and shows the migration of core people away from Wii. Each game got better each with and even included Multiplayer. Yet it continued sell less for one simple reason. Core realized NO OTHER 3rd PARTY games were coming after 2008/9 and started buying PS360s, they then of course bought the PS360 version of the games.

There wasnt any...and thats my point. Dead Rising was an early 360 game and the Wii couldnt even run THAT! And there are people who still believe that it could run AC with just a hit on visuals, LOL. Its ignorance. Play AC on PSP and tell me how well that went over. COD, that engine is old as hell and you know what, MW3 STILL ran like crap on Wii, pop-ins slow downs, its not just visuals.

Probably not budget, but the game does illustrate a point I'm trying to make (and I'm sure you're making to some extent). It doesn't matter if a third-party developer makes a really good core Wii game. At that point, people had far too many preconcieved notions to care.

By the way it was a rather nice looking game, I recall. Decent physics and effects, all running at 60 FPS.

jesus christ, why does anyone use DR. It was  game put on a Gamecube engine that came out well after the original. It was a rush job and not the same thing.