You have to consider things dynamically...why did pulishers had nothing else to sell rather than games wich couldn't possibly be successfull? Because they have never invested a single penny to create a popular (a decent) IP on a Nintendo platform, because they have been developing horseshit on Wii for 6 years.

Clearly the problem is not with Nintendo, and it's not some kind of 3rd party conspiration either. It's just a matter of choice, 3rd parties choosed to focus all their resources on Ps3 and 360, ignoring the Wii success. Now the can't pretend to be successfull on WiiU, on day1. Sure they are free to do whatever they want, in the end these are just business decision, but if their games are flopping on WiiU they should only blame themselves.

Likely port to every available system.  We are probably going to see XBOX3/PS4/WiiU/360/PS3/PC games.  It is the only chance publishers are going to be able to see a profit.

No, if successful games on other systems fail on nintendo systems then in that case its nintendo's fault because they couldnt get the userbase and audince on that system. 

also the third party publishers last gen focused more on PS360 is completly rational. why waste their best talent and money to make games that wouldnt sell on a system? most of ubisofts games are targeted towards adluts, and those games not being on wii made sense. for example metriod, probably nintendo's most mature IP sold only 1.16 million units. seriously why even bother with games like assassins creed or GTA on them when you also have to spend shitloads of money downgrading the game and making it work on the wii? nintendo went after a different audince with the Wii, that was their whole strategy in the first place. then why should third parites make games on that system to cater for an audince that nintendo didnt even try and get on the system in the first place? 

now nintendo came out to a successor to that platform and it has almost the same name, its marketing its trying to get the casuals as well. and nintendo them selfs didnt even bother making on single mature game, a 2D mario and a minigame collection is not something that would make adults go crazy. so its no wonder third parties are having a hard time selling their mature content on that console, when nintendo doesnt even try. most of nintendo's problems are their own fault. 3rd parties are just seeing history repeating itself, nintedo makes a system that only their games sell well on. thats why they are backing off and thats why ubisoft opted to go multiplatform with rayman legends

Jeez, you guys are just insatiable!

Okami and Conduit?

I can attest to Okami as I bought it, but wasn't that Ps2 game...

PS2 original and really not the same thing at all.

Better still, where are the Mario followers? Aside from the occasional Sonic game and Rayman, no third party bothers to put 3D or 2D platformers on board, either.

The only games 3rd parties make in Nintendo's footsteps were the expanded audience games.

No, if successful games on other systems fail on nintendo systems then in that case its nintendo's fault because they couldnt get the userbase and audince on that system. 

So basically you say GTA3 hasn't gathered any audience, the audience was already there waiting for it on Playstation2, you're saying COD hasn't gathered any audience, a 20million crowd was already on Ps3 and 360, waiting to recieve it...It doesn't make sense.

also the third party publishers last gen focused more on PS360 is completly rational. why waste their best talent and money to make games that wouldnt sell on a system? most of ubisofts games are targeted towards adluts, and those games not being on wii made sense. for example metriod, probably nintendo's most mature IP sold only 1.16 million units. seriously why even bother with games like assassins creed or GTA on them when you also have to spend shitloads of money downgrading the game and making it work on the wii? nintendo went after a different audince with the Wii, that was their whole strategy in the first place. then why should third parites make games on that system to cater for an audince that nintendo didnt even try and get on the system in the first place? 

I've never said their choice was irrational, but it wasn't the only possibble rational choice. You're implying the Wii don't sell to adults, it's not true games like Wii Sports, Mario Kart, Mario Bros sell to all ages. You take Metroid as example, which wasn't a really popular game on any console, but you forget about Zelda which was avaliable on launch and sold nearly 7million copies. Publishers actually took the risk to invest some money on a different "weaker" platform, the PSP (as Rol suggested). Then again you're implying Nintendo did only cater for the casual audience then why did they publish games such as Metroid Prime 3(as you suggested), Other M, Xenoblade, Twilight Princess, Skyward Sword, Smash Bros, The Last Stroy, Sin & Punishment, Monster Hunter 3, Donkey Kong Country Returns,etc?

now nintendo came out to a successor to that platform and it has almost the same name, its marketing its trying to get the casuals as well. and nintendo them selfs didnt even bother making on single mature game, a 2D mario and a minigame collection is not something that would make adults go crazy. so its no wonder third parties are having a hard time selling their mature content on that console, when nintendo doesnt even try. most of nintendo's problems are their own fault. 3rd parties are just seeing history repeating itself, nintedo makes a system that only their games sell well on. thats why they are backing off and thats why ubisoft opted to go multiplatform with rayman legends

Of course the usual stereotype, Nintendo makes consoles on which only they can succeed. Take a look at the 3DS, you have the usual Mario, Mario Kart, Zelda, Pokemon etc. Then why other companies like Atlus, Level-5, Square, Namco are releasing  a robust sequence of successfull software on it?