First of all if you mean that I write with bad english, I do take it personally because of two things:

1, I am a non native english speaker.

2, I am a dyslexic.

Now back to the other things: Why isn't Nintendos best devlopers leaving as fast as they can? I mean they doesn't even have a choice. As a dev wouldn't you think it was fun to play around with motion sensor technollogy, nerds on the internet seems to think it is so fun that they hook up industrial robots and other things to the Wiimote. I personally think it would be really fun, but of course I only do some hobby work with Java sometimes.

 EDIT:

Just wanted to point out something about what good source can do: Once upon a time there was a computer called C64, it become the best selling computer of all time. It had a 1 (yes one, 1) Mhz CPU and 64 kb (yes kilo not mega) of ram and no harddrive. To this a group of geeks succeded to make a GU called GEOS. More about this OS that was actually more wide spread than both W3.11 and apple can be found on this link.

http://www.osnews.com/story.php/15223/GEOS-The-Graphical-Environment-Operating-System/

Today devs are lazy nothing else

I think there are a lot of unresolved questions on how much Nintendo improved the hardware but that really doesn't change the fact that it isn't bleeding edge technology. The important question is whether it actually matters?

Beyond the obvious "Gameplay over Graphics" discussion, we really haven't seen anywhere near the limits on what is possible on the PS2 yet; it sounds silly, but the Gameboy and Gameboy advance both found tricks to produce "seemingly impossible" games long after they were dramatically below bleding edge hardware. Necessity truely is the mother of invention and if developers start feeling presure to produce Wii games that look like PS3 and XBox 360 games they will find ways to cheat.

QFT.

Ditto to what Dolla Dolla said and add in the element of decreased break even points on the Wii as opposed to the Xbox360 and PS3 and you should be able to see how moronic it would be to ignore the system. Throw in the everyday increasing user base that by December could pass the Xbox360 world wide and if things really went well how more combined sales than the Xbox360 and the PS3 put together and you can see again why the Wii is unlikely to be ignored.

I agree with you but, depending on the level of popularity, if the Wii is popular enough you could potentially see a lot of multiplatform games being designed for the Wii with graphical enhancements for the PS3/XBox 360 version. To a certain extent this is very similar to PC development in that PC developers will often have low, medium and high detailed game assets and textures (and previously had shaders being optional) to enable people to play the game on their "Minimum Requirments" system while still providing benefit to people with new gaming systems.

That is something I actually don't want to happen. I am hopping for more exclusive games for Wii that really uses the Wiimote, games like that would be really bad on non-wiimote hardware  

I agree with you, I was thinking primarily of Multiplatform FPS because I anticipate the standard Wiimote-Nunchuck set-up will be possible to translate to control pads in a similar fashion to how Keyboard-Mouse is mapped to gamepads.

True, but Red Steel on xbox360 wouldn't have worked that well I think.

It doesn't matter what developers want to develop for. They'll develop for what their publishers tell them to. Publishers don't care how powerful a system is, they want their biggest properties on the biggest console. Many of these major franchises we see going PS3/360 are going to become irrelevant this gen. Just watch. One major franchise after another is going to have dissappointing sales on those systems. They simply cannot sell as much as they did last gen on more expensive systems while Wii and DS are the talk of the gaming world. Meanwhile a whole stack of Nintendo-published games will rewrite the top 10 all-time worldwide software shipments list on this site. Third parties can either develop for Wii and DS, or be marginalized on marginalized systems. They can try to be a biggest fish in a little pond, or they can try to be the second biggest fish in a much bigger pond. Does it surprise anyone that the developers who came to Nintendo's party are the ones not mentioned as threatened by Wii? Ubisoft performed well on Wii, Sega has too, Majesco may be turning the whole company around on the back of Cooking Mama, SquareEnix is turning every random FF and DQ spin-off or remake they spit onto DS into a million seller. Even Microsoft can only get a hit out of Rare by releasing it on DS. Developers WILL fold this generation if they don't focus on Nintendo's platforms. There will be third party publishers selling off their properties, declaring bankruptcy and closing their doors if they don't get on board Wii and DS. Nintendo has the power to fuel those systems to a high level of success themselves, and the competing systems are built for failure regardless of software support due to price.

Are you being serious here?  Why would any developer feel like they was being punished to work on any specific hardware.  Lets be realistic here, in general code is code, it doesn't matter what hardware you are programming for or what language.  

Personally, I would say that a really talented developer is one who can make amazing things happen KNOWING that they have less powerful hardware to work with.  That means you have to have cleaner, more efficient code.  You need to have better optimization.  You need to be a BETTER programmer than one who is developing for a more powerful machine because you don't have extra resources to throw around.

You also have to take into account the ease of development between two platforms.  Why, as a pro software developer myself, would I be happy to work with complicated hardware with a bad SDK and poor support (such as the PS3 seems to have) and feel punished to work with a much simpler, easier to use and well supported one (such as the Wii).  If developers wanted powerful and complicated development, we'd have stuck with assembly.

In my opinion, the reverse of what you say is true.  If I wanted to show how good a developer I was, I'd want to be working with easy to use hardware, on an exciting project with much more stringent resources so I could prove I had the skillz to make a great game that looked good and ran well.  The only people that would feel punished by working on less powerful hardware are the ones who have something to hide because they aren't good enough programmers to handle it.