Here is the thing. Why does a game have to have a ton of motion control? Do you complain if your game doesn't have enough A button? I can see it now... "This game fails because it doesn't have enough A button!!!"
Good motion controls are those that are inserted into the game while feeling natural to the user. Here are some of the games I feel that use motion/pointer controls exceptionally. note, that this does not mean that they use them exclusively or excessively.
- Mario Strikers Charged - quick flick to hit people, and you use the pointer to block mega strikes
- The Godfather - choke people, throw them off buildings, hit them with a bat. It all feels natural
- Metroid Prime 3 - aim your gun with the pointer, quick flicks of the wrist for the whip, and you sometimes pull on levers
- New Super Mario Bros Wii - I now flick my DS when playing NSMB
Not a lot of motion, but it works perfectly while making those long skilled jumps. The funny thing about this, is it brings me back to those days when I would flick my controller to make that extra long jump, or turn the controller as I turned a car, but there were no motion controls back then 
- Tiger Woods PGA Tour- or any sports game for that matter have all worked really well
- Mario Kart Wii - excellent use of motion control to simulate a steering wheel
Just enough motion is inserted in these games that everything feels right. No flailing required, no excessive motion required (except for Tiger Woods which is understandable and desired), just enough movement to immerse the user. None of this has anything to do with 1:1 (except Tiger Woods). Godfather, Metroid, and other similar games could have been improved with WM (or PS Move) 1:1 tracking by reducing errors in reading the users input, however they don't need true 1:1 tracking to make those games better.
