For all the games you've mentioned, from Fight Night and Tales to Bioshock and Fallout 3, all of them could be ported to the Wii in phenomenal form despite some loss of graphical fidelity. It all depends on whether the 3rd party is willing to pony up time and money to get it done.
Would Mario Galaxy and Smash Bros. Brawl be the games they were if they had the resources given to Chop Till You Drop?
Chop Till You Drop is one of the worst examples of what could happen with those games on Wii, because it was obviously not a serious effort from Capcom.
IF Chop Till You Drop had a similar budget, team size, and development time frame to the original on XBox 360, then you'd have a point, but because it didn't, the point is moot.
When Wii "core" gamers ask for these games (even say RE5, MGS4, FFXIII, etc...) and when people propose that these games would do well on Wii, they assume an close or equal number of resources are going to go to them.
Would a Dead Rising game with a $5-$10 million budget, A-team, and 2-3 years development time on Wii turn out like Chop 'Till You Drop? Probably not. It would probably be much closer to the original on 360, have gotten rave reviews, and been much better accepted by the "core" gamers on Wii looking for those types of games.
As has been established by these sales numbers, Wii multiplatforms games even in traditional categories like FPS (COD3/World at War), survival horror (RE4), and 3rd-person-action (Force Unleashed) can do really well and even outsell the PS3 versions sometimes.
It's not a matter of whether a near-identical port of Bioshock would have done well on Wii. Based on all the relevant data we have, it would likely have done pretty good and probably outsold the PS3 version.
Like I said, imagine Nintendo's AAA blockbuster titles on a budget of Chop 'Till You Drop - no way would they have come out as well.
A better (if still flawed because there are improvements that could no doubt have been included) example is World at War:
http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/wii/callofdutyworldatwar?q=call of duty
The game sold really well on Wii (~500,000 estimated) and no doubt it was profitable for Activision, and like most Wii titles will probably continue to have legs even if out of the Top 10. Just like Activision could turn out a well-received port of a technically advanced game, so could all these other 3rd parties if they cared to.
Supposing 3rd parties had taken this approach from Day 1, and invested into the Wii similar budgets and talent that their 360/PS3 flagship games get - and had experienced the success of "core" titles like COD3, World at War, RE4, Force Unleashed, Metroid Prime 3, etc... Maybe some of these studio closings would still be going on, but it certainly wouldn't have hurt to have money coming in from games like Bioshock, Fallout 3, MGS4, Assasin's Creed, Mirror's Edge, Dead Space, GTA4, RE5, SF4, Burnout etc... on Wii.
I understand from a stand on principal why some of these executives at major companies would not want to give into a system with less horsepower, but considering the system in question is more powerful than hardware last gen (PS2/XBox/GCN) that still carried a lot of AAA flagship multiplatform titles, wouldn't these companies prefer to but principle aside for a minute for the sake of not having to shut down so many studios (and of course not suffer the losses most major 3rd parties have in recent reports)?
EDIT: Obviously the industry is growing big time and money is pouring into the industry like never before - you'd think 3rd parties would be fighting for every last dollar on the Wii table but instead it's like they have an aversion to Wii money if it takes anything beyond a chump effort (which is why we see mini-games and gimmicks but not AAA mainstream multiplatform titles).
