The Wii is not a gimmick, if you think it is, than you don't know the meaning of the word.
The definition of 'gimmick':
gim·mick (gmk)
n.
1.
a. A device employed to cheat, deceive, or trick, especially a mechanism for the secret and dishonest control of gambling apparatus.
b. An innovative or unusual mechanical contrivance; a gadget.
2.
a. An innovative stratagem or scheme employed especially to promote a project: an advertising gimmick.
b. A significant feature that is obscured, misrepresented, or not readily evident; a catch.
3. A small object whose name does not come readily to mind.
tr.v. gim·micked, gim·mick·ing, gim·micks
1. To add gimmicks to; clutter with gadgets or attention-getting details. Often used with up.
2. To change or affect by means of a gimmick.
Why is the Wii not a gimmick? Because of 1b and 2b. The motion controls of the Wii are not an unnecessary feature, they are not 'tacked-on'. They are integral to the experience of the device. Which is why motion controls in Wii games that are completely built around it, like Wii Sports and Skyward Sword, are not gimmicks.
If you say the Wii is a gimmick, than the so-called 'multimedia hub' on the PS3 and also the X360 is certainly also, a gimmick.
----
Anyway, to go back on-topic.
I don't think Skyward Sword is the 'worst' Zelda I've played, not by a long shot. But I do agree with some of the others that it falls short compared to most of the other 3D Zelda offerings. Ocarina of Time will likely always be my #1, and of the 3D Zeldas I at least like Twilight Princess better than Skyward Sword. I'm not yet sure about wether or not I like it better than Majora's Mask, but I do like it better than Wind Waker. Which I feel is the weakest of the 3D Zeldas (which doesn't mean it's my least favorite Zelda or a bad game, there's still most of the 2D and 2.5D Zelda games below Wind Waker).
What I feel Skyward Sword lacks is, like others pointed out, the overworld. I don't like the 'stage'-setup of it, it takes away from the exploration and makes the world feel small instead of big which was the developer's intention. This is my biggest gripe against the game and it costs the game major points in my book. Another thing is that I find the dungeons severely lacking in length compared to other games, there were way too few interesting enemies and the music is mostly unmemorable.
People were also complaining about Ganondorf being in Twilight Princess, that his role was too little, but then with Skyward Sword we get this final boss which doesn't have anything else to do with the story than the five minutes it's alive. I'd take Ganondorf any day. I do like how this boss' legacy appears to 'create' Ganondorf in the other games.
With that said, I thought the story was interesting enough. We saw how the Master Sword came to be, what it's true function is and why only Link is always able to find it. We also saw, well it's implied anyway, how the Kingdom of Hyrule was founded and why they worship the Triforce. The only thing really, is like I said, the addition of Ghirahim's master. They could have done a lot more there and simultaneously lengthen the game a little. And yes, there was indeed the plothole where the point of Link continuing to follow Zelda around seemed moot, but oh well.
I will never speak bad of the control scheme however, that's probably the best thing to ever happen to the franchise. Personally I'm always open to new control schemes, I liked the Stylus control of Phantom Hourglass and Spirit Tracks too, so the motion plus scheme is absolutely perfect. This is why I was constantly reminded about the lack of enemy variety, this game would have been perfect for some fight against Darknuts or Iron Knuckles.
At least the Stalfos were in there.
All in all I wouldn't be so harsh on it as the OP. It still was the best game of last year for me, but then again I thought it was slim pickings if you ask me. I was still greatly entertained, but I'm also entertained with the 'bad' Zelda games, except Four Swords perhaps...
