I'd have to say it did. You look stupid playing some Wii games and you look dumb as a rock playing VR.

Well, your example hits the nail on the head. The Tesla has a lot of innovations that make it possible, including tires. To give the tire-inventors credit for the Tesla would be foolish. But you instead argue that the Tesla doesn't use a tire at all as the tire hype ebbed up years before the Tesla came out.

No I argue that tesla use the Tyres, but people have gotten over the innovation of high tech tyres and so much more is needed to make a Tesla possible (Like VR) that just pointing out the tyres is silly. 

Perhaps with some stretch of the imagination, the Wii added to more sales of Move controllers and perhaps gave Sony that little push to go ahead with Move instead of just sticking with the ps eye. The wii certainly inspired Kinect, and Kinect becoming a success also added to Sony adding a camera at launch which wasn't even used for anything other than broadcasting yourself.

However with camera's and move controllers already around, it was a lot easier / cheaper to add a vr headset. Sony had already done headtracking experiments since the Eye toy (it was even in GT5) so all the pieces were in place.

The Wii popularized motion controls. The success Move had from that kept the costs down. So while the Wii did not influence modern VR is how it works, it did pave the way in having a lot of hardware already out there for PSVR. For how it works, the influence was actually negative as a starting from scratch solution would have led to better tracking instead of re-using move. But for sales, definitely positive. A headset that required $600 to start would not have sold as many as PSVR has.

Wii showed, cheap tech can have great success.

Yeah, it was clever business decision, but after trying Arizona Sunshine on PSVR and then on Vive...oh boy, I'm not sure I would ever want to play PSVR again.

AZ Sunshine wasn't made for move though, ported. It works better with the aim controller, yet also not made for it.

The camera placement, ambient light and reflective surfaces affect move way too much. The camera has to be high for games like AZ Sunshine so you don't get the move or aim controller in the line of sight of the headset when aiming down the sights. Placing the camera (and playing) at an angle so our black leather (reflective) couches weren't in the background turned Beat Saber from frustration into getting full combos on expert. Of course only when the light level is stable (sun cloud mix is bad)
PSVR 2.0 needs a much better solution that doesn't fall apart when the sun peaks out from behind the clouds.

Are you implying that VR developers wouldn't have thought of using motion controls over gamepads if it wasn't for the Wii?

To be honest, I haven't spent much time on PSVR, tried few games and that was about it. But what I've noticed (or at least that's what it felt to me) is that Vive is much more precise and responsive. And being able to fully turn 360 without loosing tracking was major difference.

“mainstream hardcore gamer” is about the most pretentious term I have ever heard gamers come up for themselves to try and make themselves sound superior. Particularly considering mainstream and hardcore are effectively antonyms.

And of course the Wii came to mind when coming up with control methods for modern VR. Nintendo did the interface successfully, and VR is home to a lot of motion based games that are often even simpler than Wii Sports, but people have fun with them in the same way as with the Wii. While some are saying “VR is more than just motion controls” not wanting to score Nintendo the credit, the motion controls they use still originated with the Wii, and Wii itself was a lot more than motion controls as well - while Nintendo had been experimenting with multi-purpose controllers since the N64 (d-pad and analog modes), none of the home consoles balanced it out between the multiple interface methods as the Wii did; you can bet VR devs have looked at that.