Was the Wii a fad?

[Mazty]

archbrix said:

Mazty said:

archbrix said:

Mazty said:

Find me a bowling core game...I haven't mentioned any dislike for wii games,  so stop with the strawmen.
Considering the wii offers high latency, inaccurate controls, I'd prefer to stick to a pad thanks. If motion controls are so big, where are they for the PC?  

There is no strawman:  The fact that a bowling game would have to somehow be a core game in order to constitute as a "real" game in your eyes says it all.

And I'm not contesting, nor am I interested in which control type you personally prefer.  The idea that motion controls aren't at all beneficial to some game types or some people just because you personally don't like them or because they don't come standard with PCs is highly erroneous.

1.  Your strawman retort is once again a strawman. My point is the wii is a fad as it's not made for core gamers, shown by a lack of core game sales for the console. 

2.  If you are a core gamer then you will know that to move a stick 1/4 inch is faster then waving your arm, as well as having lower latency. No core gamer will choose to have slower controls, only people who don't really care about the game would make such a choice,.

3.  If motion controls are the next big thing for gaming, why are they not available on the PC? It's not erroneous, it's a relevant market observation. 

1.  Are you aware of what "strawman" means?  Your point fails because you declare something that's not made for "core" gamers a fad, which is ridiculous.  Simple as that.  And I'm not even talking about the Wii itself as a console being a fad or not; it's your logic in general that is ludicrous.  Touch-screen gaming isn't aimed at "core" gamers either, but nobody in their right mind would call it a fad.

2.  Your second paragraph is also heavily flawed because you're associating intuitiveness with inaccuracy.  You may not find motion controls accurate enough for your tastes, and I'll be the first to admit that forcing them where they don't belong is an abysmal design choice, but in a game like Wii Sports they are highly intuitive, and frankly, can make the game enjoyable to many people who wouldn't find it appealing otherwise.  It's clear that the majority of football fans prefer a control pad for Madden, but for Tiger Woods, it's a different story.  Don't relegate motion control to something "only people who don't really care about the game" would choose. 

3.  I already addressed your "PC standard" as erroneous, because it is, but apparently I need to explain it further.  The vast majority of PCs sold to consumers are not primarily for gaming.  Obviously with game consoles, the opposite is true.  So making the PC a metric by which to gauge "the next big thing for gaming" is again, erroneous.  If it were true, all game consoles would come standard with a mouse and keyboard. 

I'm just going to jump to the biggest two points:
If you are serious about gaming, as in want to win, you will use the most precise controls available. That means ignoring motion controls.
There are up to 4.5 million concurrent Steam users (not steam users in general) and over 10 million WoW players. If motion controls were beneficial to gaming, they would have started to appear on PCs. The ones that have been released have not been a success, ergo motion controls are a fad, otherwise how else can you justify their failure on pcs?
And how do you expect to use a mouse when you are sat on a sofa? It's disturbing so many people have made that mistake.