There are several reports (all seeming to come out of the UK or reference back to a report from the UK) that the Japanese periodical "The Nikkei" is reporting that software developers are leary of the Wii.

In the article (which requires a subscription to access), developers are said to compare the Wii to a fad and that many units are collecting dust. They also note that Nintendo, because it has had more lead time, is making more money while third-party efforts have tended to underperform. [It should be noted that the report appears in most detail on tech.co.uk which has been very critical of the Wii.]

The same day, Capcom pulls Monster Hunter 3 from Sony and delivers it to Nintendo. This despite the previous versions of this franchise being on the PS2.

So which speaks louder?

While not dismissing some of the concern of the developers, my money is on the latter. Bascially, developers who sell rush jobs or poor ports are being penalized. Since most third-party developers were "late to the party" on the Wii, they don't have as much to show for their efforts and they are also concerned about the cost of switching in midstream to another console.

Also, even PC World [which has also tended to be critical of the Wii's software selection] took notice of the Screen Digest report two days before The Nikkei article which observed that the Wii had more games coming out this season than the Xbox 360 or the PS3. So there is some move on the part at least of third-party developers to produce games for the Wii that had not previously been doing so.

Anyone else have any other thoughts?

Mike from Morgantown 

A couple years from now, no one will care about "The Nikkei"'s article.

A couple years from now, people will likely still be playing Monster Hunter 3.

Which of those speaks louder?