I know Wii owners hate tests, but part of the reason huge publishers seem so enamored with the PS3 and particularly the 360 is that they are so gosh darn predictable. That's both a compliment and an insult.
It's a market with a highly concentrated target demographic (the last time I saw figures, the system was over 80% males. 80%!) with homogenized tastes. It's a highly predictable, easily servicable market segment.
To make it even more tasty, this market segment demands games with high production values. Why is that a good thing? Because it effectively eliminates anyone who can't spend millions of dollars making a game. On the iPhone, EA has to compete against Ubisoft/Take 2/Activision -- and any shmoe who has some time to spend and a good idea. On the 360, shmoes can't spend the millions needed to put together a legitimate competitor to CoD or Fifa.
By contrast, the Wii has sold itself specifically on the philosophy that high production values aren't a necessity for game quality, and has produced a varied, unpredictable demographic with more women, more kids, and more elderly consumers.
Huge production companies have got to loathe that. That may sound unfair, but that's easy for you to say when you aren't the one putting up hundreds of millions of dollars in investment capital. These are huge companies dealing with huge sums of money, and it isn't surprising that most of them are risk averse, particularly in this economy.
Heck, some have even publicly admitted to being risk averse. If a major company is willing to admit that openly, it shows how deep the conservatism goes.
