It's been said all the time...but it's not Nintendo's fault for making great games...

Say what you want about rehashing Mario and Zelda, but I find them to be AMAZING games, and Nintendo simply as a game publisher is my favorite.

I would like to know more about this Nintendo relationship with third parties. Is Nintendo at fault for ignoring 3rd parties or is it just that they do not want to bribe (or do not have that kind of money) the developers with money, booze and hookers?
I would like to request a link with historical data on this issue (if possible).
I have heard that Big N screwed up on N64 days and that developers just left. Looking at Gamecube I do not things this way. It was like the 3rd parties were showing Nintendo the middle finger. "Things do not sell on Nintendo consoles" "It is kiddy" "They only care about Mario or Pokemon" "Should we release a real game on GC? NO! Just make some crappy spin-off".

it's corporations' way. Point finger elsewhere.

Exactly. Developers found out its alot easier to make money selling a mediocre game on the PS1 (with a huge install base) than develop a quality title for the N64 (although it was alot harder to develop for). And then when gamecube came out, it was too late, because Sony had made alot of the good games exclusive and Nintendo didn't have alot to offer.

So here's to you, 3rd parties that left Nintendo high and dry: Nintendo doesn't care. They are literally using tractors and forklifts to sort all of their $1000 yen bills in a warehouse somewhere, the money from all their first party games.

No, you are wrong.  Nintendo was quite arrogant during the N64 days.  They reacted verry harshly towards 3rd parties, insulted their opponents, and never co-opperated with 3rd parties in game development for their difficult system.  I do NOT think that Nintendo acted like this during the Gamecube era, but the damage had been done, and it takes time to rebuild relationships with 3rd parties.  I think that after their bad attitude during the Nintendo 64 era and their bad sales during the Gamecube era 3rd parties saw the Wii as a worthless venture.  A lot have realized things have changed, but certainly not all of them, and it will take time for the Wii to develop a dominant share of good 3rd party software.  

Wouldn't you hold your cards close to your chest if your biggest competitor was notorious for "borrowing" innovative ideas?

The signs were there to be read that the Wii was going to be massive, I remember reading somewhere that Ubisoft were all on board for the Wii the very first time Nintendo demo'd it to them, that indicates they were approaching third parties and if they chose not to visit LucaArts i'm sure there's a good reason for it.

The fact is 9 out of 10 of every third parties would have not backed Nintendo because of the Palystation brand name, EA admitted they were short sighted, hit the problem face on and their next wave of games reflects their new attitude to this with vast online options, fmaily play options, peripheral party games etc.

we all knew that the wii was going to be big and that's why I preordered mine as soon as the option was there and I got mine at launch, if Lucas Arts were following the masses with the PS3 then so be it but at least admit your own errors and learn from them.