That's fair.

Then they should have one of their many teams give it a shot. Maybe Monolith. They said they want to do something like a Skyrim.

so Nintendo finally did something to fix some of their shoveware problems.

Good for them.

You're using a very inappropriate comparison. You're using two games of the same genre. Of course one would be negatively effected, since both are shooters (a similar situation likely occurred with CoD4/Blops2).

Having said that, the Blops2/NSMBU comparison is significantly different, since they're in different genres. You should expect users to attach to different genres at different rates, thus why one should worry about sales for shooters on the WiiU, irregardless of what Nintendo has released (unless your game is a direct competitor to something like NSMBU).

Because for their gen they are power whores although with some major slips like too little main RAM and, in PS3 case, just one general purpose PPE core. Also, they have a proven hardcore FPS audience ready to buy, making the port worth the effort.
When Wii U user base will be larger, and if its subset of FPS fans will be large enough too, you can bet EA and others will consider porting to it worth the effort.

One last thing: mine wasn't a dig at Wii U, although I consider just 2GB total UMA RAM an oversight, but more a dig at most FPS, and Crysis in particular. Ninty, though, should have considered that devs grown on PC, like Crytek, after the last big RAM crisis ended became quite spoiled brats about RAM usage optimization: already since the last Win XP PCs they took for granted at least 1GB even on entry level gaming PCs, and currently they take for granted 8GB even on cheap gaming PCs. Considering that most gaming is still stuck to 32bit, or at least they offer a 32bit version too, as dev can't give up the enormous XP user base still existing, those 8GB are necessary only on the most bloated 64bit versions, BUT it can be taken for sure that PC devs will rely, for the best settings, on at least 2GB main RAM free for apps, while at least 512MB has become the recommended graphics RAM (The Witcher 1 and 2 devs are quite an exception, with the low recommended HW specs they require for their games, but hey, The Witcher is a RPG, not a FPS  ). Wii U, with 2GB UMA (unified, main+graphics), with quite a big chunk of it, for a console, reserved to the OS, is definitely still a viable platform, considering the high optimizations present in everything made by the console maker, like FW, OS, graphics libraries, etc, but those specs are on the low end, possibly giving some troubles porting the most RAM hungry games. These troubles are expensive to solve, and become acceptable after a given potential user base is reached.
Needless to say, on last gen power whore consoles you'll receive the port, due to the large potential user base, but it won't ever be able to run at the settings possible on a gaming PC, nor it will be able to reach a possible future Wii U optimized version. But should the FPS user base on Wii U remain small, then it could receive a version quickly derived from the XB360 one, so not fully exploiting Wii U power.

I think you're being too harsh. Their Wii games have been very high in quality, and they put far more effort into those titles than nearly every other third party game out there. For example, did you know that your Wii games could take your system's friend list and import it into its own list of online friends? Probably not, because the only games that made the effort to utilize that were by Vicarious Visions.

There were actually quite a few more. The Turok trilogy, Hexen, Doom, Duke Nukem, Rainbow Six, Quake, and some South Park game at the very least: I'm sure there are a few I'm overlooking.

You brought up Bayo2 several times in this thread....why? Nintendo is basically funding the project. 

OT: This has been a very entertaining read, thank you everyone.

im not suggesting anything, im telling you thats what happened. Its well known that IW didnt care about the Wii, Activision could have made them do it, but seeing how IW was THERE dev studio they had more leeway, ALOT more leeway than Treyarch. 

This is why I mentioned Vicarious Visions at all. They have been secondary developer in most cases, and mostly worked with DS rather than Wii, but it doesn't mean they didn't put effort into the Wii.

It could simply be that Vicarious Visions takes their work seriously, and when given a Wii game to work on, they put their best into it. But Treyarch clearly made the choice to work on Wii versions, and, over time, put in effort to bring it as close to par with PS3 and 360 versions as they could manage. As we can't confidently say this about Vicarious Visions, it's harder to tell. Thus, "maybe".

Platinum Games is an independent studio, and they felt that Bayonetta 2 for the Wii U would be worth it. Sega's concern wasn't Wii U, but Bayonetta itself.