Has it really?

Sure, they aren't the same as they were back in the day, but are they really catering (Catering being the key-word) to third-parties?
With a system selling as fast as the Wii there should be tons of third-party content. Why haven't we seen this? 'Cause Nintendo doesn't care. They know they're going to the bank with their first-party offerings, and they hardly want to go out of their way to secure third-parties.  That has always been their philosophy, which is why third-party titles generally (With the obvious exceptions) don't do well on Ninty platforms.

 But nevermind, I do just defend Sony. Can't help it.

Quickdraw McGraw, they seemed to support Capcom enough for them to shift MH3 exclusively to the Wii... Nintendo even said that it was part of the strategy to attract more hardcore gamers.

 But the thing is Sony is now the one offering poor developer support. The PS3 is apparently hard to programme for, as was the PS2. Thats the reason why Sony has lost most of their exclusives so far this generation.

@ NJ5

I think Capcom's decision was more based on the sales of the Wii. All Nintendo really has to do is show them the current sales figures and most Japanese publishers will hop on.

Note I didn't say the big N treats third parties particularly bad. They just don't want to go out of their way, nor does it look like they have to.

@ Rath

I actually believe Sony is offering plenty of support with their PS Edge tools, as well as the money that most likely passes hands.
The problem with difficulty is more centered around the actual architecture of the PS3 (Which is Sony's mistake, but not a lack of support) rather than Sony's support on getting past that.

Sony doesn't buy exclusivity, they earn it.

 
Ahh, my mistake.

I think the number of Wii teams is an exaggeration.  You can certainly get away with less when you don't have to work with HD material, but if you want to crank out a top quality game it's still going to be expensive.

Would this really be such as surprise?  3rd parties who had big games committed to the PS3 have either been:

(1) Jumping ship -- moving dev to Wii or more often 360

(2) Announcing no more exclusivity   - OR -

(3) complaining publically about the sales performance of the PS3.

And it's not like companies like Konami and Squeenix make a habit of complaining.  They're pissed, and they want the world to know about it so they're making public statements about the PS3's performance and what needs to be done.  The obvious implication is that Sony isn't keeping them happy.

It makes business sense to develop for the strong platforms right now.  Not the weak one.  For home consoles, the 360 is the strongest HD platform with the best attach rate and the Wii is the strongest platform in terms of sales performance.  These two statements are undeniable, and it's very clear that the money is on those two platforms right now.

Hiroshi Yamauchi was Nintendo's president for nearly 53 years and can be credited for up until 2002 when Satoru Iwata replaced him as president of Nintendo. Iwata was far more focused on third party relationships than Yamauchi ever was, and unfortunately came to power far too late in the Gamecube's life to make much of a difference in its third party support.

Because of Iwata we can say that there is practically no third party publisher who is not supporting the Wii, and I suspect that soon we will be able to claim that no third party publisher is poorly supporting the Wii.

 With all of Sony's first party offerings bombing so badly lately why would third parties have any faith that they could do better on the PS3? See what I did there.

Actions speak louder than words.

Right now, we're seeing a lot of multiplatform games with only a few exclusives to each system.

As it stands, there are some developers who don't respect the Wii and so 3rd party support in the near future may not be readily seen however sales talk, money talks, and those are what pay the bills.  Developers will go where the money is and right now that seems to be on the WIi.