Worst? it had more games than probably GC and N64 combined? how was it the worst?

I think the real question is am I going to give up Activision.

I gave up on them when they ruined Crash. 

Only a handful of ok games, tons of shovelware. Can't name a single AAA release, only some crap versions of CoD that looked worse than GC games.

I know, it was due to hardware capabilities, but I only wanted to say that they weren't there.

N64 had some good third party exclusives.

GC had many multiplats on par with PS2 and XBOX versions.

See thats the rub, they did have TONS of shovelware, hence they did have support. Now im not going to argue what game is ok or not because that is completly subjective and their is no right or wrong answer. All im saying is the Wii has a lot of 3rd party support, whether those games were AAA or if you hated them or not is irrelevant.

FYI i agree the library overall sucked, but support is support.

SEGA, TECMO/KOEI, Platinum (not exactly third party, but not nintendo first partty), ATLUS, Square-enix with Dragon Quest X. There are a few of these exclusives coming from Japan. From the west there was Zombie U and that was it.

As i said, multiplats are not what people buy Nintendo systems for. If anyone wants those third party games, you have to get a PS or XB. The third parties offer alot more support on those systems. Half assed ports will not move an audience that didnt buy the system for those games inthe first place.

Shovelware is not support.

Stop debating semantics. Nintendo hasnt had proper third party support since the SNES days. If anything, you can debate that the Gamecube had some, but Wii and N64 were left to dry.

They are games arent they? made by 3rd party right? Thats support. Otherwise you're going to have to define what "proper" is, just cause you didnt like it you cant act like they dont exist.

Already explained that in a prior post, we're kinda going in circles on that one, haha.

PS4 and Xbone had better launch sales than Wii U, would include more of the active COD base because they would be mostly moving on from the series' stronghold on PS360, and again, Wii U owners at this point are mostly the hardcore Nintendo fans, who are more likely to turn their nose up at yet another subpar port.

You stated that western developers stopped supporting the Wii U and only Japanese developers support them.  Ports or not, the western developers have put far more software on the Wii U than the Japanese have.  All without requiring a pay off to develop the titles.  The companies you listed aren't supporting the Wii U just because, these publishers are being paid to develop these exclusives.  If they didn't get the funding from Nintendo, do you think they'd develop for the Wii U or another console/handheld?

But people didn't buy the console to play all the shovelware.

They bought it for Nintendo games and maybe Just Dance or Mario & Sonic.

Casuals bought the shovelware because they weren't well-informed.

If 90% of Wii's third party games would have never been released, sales numbers wouldn't be that different.

Wii U's failure and Wii's success haven't much to do with good or bad third party support.

XBOX and PS depend largely on third parties. But that's also a risky business. People who bought a 360 to play multiplats can go to the PS4 now.

More multiplats wouldn't help the Wii U.

Financing third party exclusives could be Nintendo's main strategy this gen. They started it before it's launch (TW 101, Bayonetta 2 and Lego City Undercover, not sure when they did it with Sonic Lost World and Mario & Sonic) and I think they enforced this strategy when they realized that the sales are way under the expectations. We'll see at E3 I guess...

Hyrule Warriors was also a result of that, I hope we'll see more and better games in the future.