It only took 2 pages this time to get to the "people who like this thing I don't are liars and don't really like it. They're just pretending due to an ulterior motive."
So then what, do we blame the developers? Over the years we've had two different types of motion controls, one with a wand, and one with no controller, and only the former has given a few great titles that utilize the gimmick.
Is it really the developers fault? I mean, I'm sure there are awesome things that you can think of, like when you see a tech demo of playing Skyrim with the Kinect. Did you ever think about all the problems that arise when doing that? Would that still be fun after the 5 minutes that the video runs? How do you deal with doing more complex actions? What about the problem of having no physical feedback when doing these things? You see, these are the questions that usually get lost in the shuffle, instead people see unrealistic sizzle-reels, witnessing unrealistic interpretations of what the gimmick could be, and thus garnering unrealistic expectations by many people.
To a degree, I actually believe part of the blame lay with Nintendo themselves, right from the start. Nintendo is very guilty of something with motion controls in general, and the Wii specifically. Bear with me a few.
Nintendo revealed the Wii concept using a cunning series of commercials that featured suggestions for how the Wii technology would change games. Their original pitch reels referenced all kinds of traditional video games, plus some new ideas. The people using the wiimote in those reels indicated everything the Wii interface revolutionizing everything from platformers to first person shooters, and creating original kinds of games around themes like cooking.
All well and good.
The problem came in that the hardware Nintendo shipped was not truly the hardware they promised. The wii remote is still the best motion controller in several ways, especially its ability to stay properly calibrated with the screen (thanks to using a dead simple triangulation system) via the two LEDs on the sensor bar). But it lacked the sensors to do what Nintendo strongly insinuated it would do. Stuff that would one day require the Motion+ attachment. It couldn't be used as a free form sword. As a true 3D manipulator of objects in the game world. It couldn't accurately track certain kinds of gestures without guesswork.
All this essentially crippled the Wii out of the gate save for a few key "blue ocean" games Nintendo very, very carefully designed around the wiimote's limitations.
We've heard that Motion+, or rather the missing sensors Wii should have shipped with, was 'too expensive' at the time the Wii launched. If it's really true that Nintendo had considered the full sensor suite early on, they made a bad call in saving a few bucks.
Software development was crippled based on what I could see. It only compounded the problem of 3rd parties being caught off-guard by the Wii and not knowing what to do about its success. Too many games that could have been key for Wii didn't live up to the promise of motion gameplay due to being really rather limited. Others that tried, were overly complex in order to jury rig a method of sensing what the vanilla wiimote couldn't. One of the most infamous was Sega's remake of Samba for Wii. Since the Wiimote couldn't fully track motion in 3D space, Samba had a totally baffling system of calibration before every play session that broke anyway within a few minutes. It was nearly impossible to play intuitively.
Added to this, Nintendo themselves failed to a degree to show the way for other developers. It took them six years to finally release one fully functioning 'core' action adventure game built entirely around the Wii interface. While it's true they don't have infinite resources, at the end of the day, they failed to provide enough compelling software that showed off the Wii being a Wii.
I half think that the failure of the Wii to establish baselines for how motion controls could work in the world of core games and core gamers set the stage for everybody else to fail. Sony has spent too much time reinventing the wheel with Move, and the damn thing isn't good for the one thing PS3 has plenty of, first person shooters. It's way too drifty and sluggish as a pointer, the one thing the Wii does flawlessly. Microsoft meanwhile decided that the motion control audience consisted of people who like Just Dance, and built their entire motion platform around that.
A lot of people don't like motion controls in concept alone, because for them, gaming is something to kill time with or purely for relaxation and escape from other activity. There is nothing wrong with that. Tho some with that view may want to consider that gaming is not only that. It does mean different things to different people.
I think a big part of the wasted potential of motion controls comes from a not very explored angle. That angle is the lost world of the arcade. The arcade was an active venue. Many games used buttons and sticks, sure, but it was a place you went up and traveled to, not the place you crashed because you didn't want to move any more for the day. It was a social place, full of electricity and excitement of many people enjoying games with the same mindset. Arcades were also the true originators of "motion" controls. Custom arcade games used everything from guns to fishing rods to skiing rigs to skateboards. Playing such games was partly about the experience. It wasn't about what was most "efficient", in terms of moving one's fingers as little as possible, to push a button as fast as possible.
Nintendo did actually tap into what made such venues and such games attractive with their living room party atmosphere for Wii. Wii Sports series is horribly underrated and misunderstood by many core gamers. It appealed to people because it was the arcades all over again. It invited a jovial, outgoing mood where playing the game was not just about pushing buttons to see an action on screen, but a unique experience. People should have recognized this same phenomenon with the surge of music game popularity, where those dumb plastic instruments got people interested and involved for reasons a lot of hardcore gamers couldn't understand.
Unfortunately, too many negative factors disrupted the full impact of all this. From immature technology to awkward progress in software development.
Personally, I don't think motion controls are the passing fad so many think. Things have already been changed permanently, such as with the inclusion of gyroscopic controls in increasingly very device under the sun. Yes Virginia, that is motion control.
But some day, the Wii concept may come back in the form of a far more mature technology, whether from Nintendo or not.
