So I have a theory

It's safe to say, at this point anyway, that the Wii is the current winner of the "current-gen" group of consoles. I realize it's the least powerful and doesn't have many of the same features as say the Xbox360 or the PS3, but in terms of sheer market penetration, it's the clear winner.

That being said it's always interesting to follow the trends of video games in terms of which console, specifically, developers produce for. If you follow any of the video game blog/websites (Kotaku, 1Up, IGN, etc) then you know that while the Wii has a very high console sale rate, it doesn't have the same attach rate as the Xbox 360. Moreover, if you look at the #1 sales for each console, the #1 sellers on the Wii are predominately Nintendo made products as made very evident by the fact that Wii Sports has sold approximately 80 bazillion copies world wide. What this all indicates is that 3rd party software developers aren't taking full advantage of the large population base available with the Wii.

I wonder why that is?

I have a few theories.

First, it's not a very powerful system. You could easily joke that the Wii is just 2 Gamecubes taped together. Nintendo never set out with creating the most powerful system when they made the Wii. They wanted a console that made money and was inexpensive so they could reach the largest population possible. When the 3 systems initially came out, the 360 was either $299.99 or $399.99. But the 299 version was crap, it basically came with nothing except a plug in controller, which pretty much meant nobody would buy it. Meanwhile, the Ps3 was so expensive I expect only people who sold their souls were able to afford one. At $499.99 or $599.99, the PS3 was out of a lot of people's budgets. The Wii rather had an unfair advantage over the competition.

All this, I must add, despite the fact that it's barely an upgrade of Nintendo's last gen outing in terms of sheer power.

Apparently, the Wiimote really is that fun to waggle

Ok, so you have a pretty wimpy system, developers seem to think people like pretty graphics, I don't have any demographics to prove that, but I'm sure somebody somewhere has analyzed this more in depth than I'm willing to do.

Secondly, the Wiimote is silly. Sure, it's fun to waggle around, but from my own experience, very few titles seem able to get it right. It's as if they add it on more as a gimmick. Nintendo on the other hand develops entire experiences around the Wiimote. Just look at Wii Sports, Wii Music, or Wii Play. Like or hate them, the entire experience is based upon and around the Wiimote, not the other way around.

Now I wonder whether Nintendo forces the use of motion control or if the developer feels they have to include it in order for the product to sell, regardless many games end up failing, I feel, because the control scheme is just crap, and perhaps this hurdle is just so high that developers don't bother and just stick with what they know.

It could be argued that the inclusion of a more standard controller could improve sales, or the removal of requirements (should any exist) regarding motion control could help, but I really don't think so. If anything they could do the same with just a few extra buttons (remember the PS3 and 360 have 8 buttons, the Wii on it’s best day has 6, and try using 2 of them mid-frantic combat). I think much of Nintendo's success is its own downfall (in that it caters more to a casual gamer than a hardcore gamer) because it has produced an image it has to live up to. I sometimes get the feeling that should something like Gears of War come out on the Wii the parents would be up in arms about how their child is going to be playing all these violent video games.

There is also the whole lack of network infrastructure with the Wii. You have to trade these ungodly large friend codes with people, AND there's no "network" that connects everybody for ease of interaction. I believe that much of Xbox's success in the realms of multi-player comes from its strong Xbox live infrastructure. Nintendo has NOTHING at all like that. Even Super Smash Brothers required you to trade large codes with friends so you could play with them, and then even with their match making service, and there was no voice chat. Granted I don't relish the idea of being called various racial slurs on any more networks than I already am, but seriously, it's only NOW with Animal Crossing that we're getting a voice chat capable Nintendo channel, but even then it's just a big mic, no headset, because, god forbid, children hear naughty words via a headset [as opposed to say, TV, movies, and who knows how many OTHER video games].

What am I getting at? Probably a couple of things.

First, Nintendo needs to implement some sort of "incentive" for the 3rd party developers out there. This means enticing them. Give them a few more buttons on the Wiimote, give them some kind of network infrastructure, anything, make your platform seem acceptable. Secondly, 3rd party developers need to just develop games for the Wii and say screw all to the others. Put out an RPG that isn't an "after thought" on the Wii. What would happen if you put out an exclusive RPG on the Wii that everybody wanted?
Look at SquareEnix with Dragon Quest 9 coming exclusively to the DS. They did it because the market penetration is HUGE. Who cares if the screen is a bit smaller or the graphics aren't as good as you can get on the 360/PS3. SquareEnix went after the device that most people own. And with the announcement of DQ10 coming EXCLUSIVELY to Wii, they're doing it again! They're saying FUCK ALL to the other consoles because simply put, THERE ARE MORE PEOPLE WITH A WII THAN THE OTHER CONSOLES.

Other developers need to do the same.

Screw graphics, screw whatever else, the audience is so fucking huge on the Wii you're being idiotic to ignore it and then turn around and say you're "catering to the hardcore" player. THE HARD CORE PLAYER HAS A WII TOO.