I 100% agree that the Wii motion controls were a gimmick and that the Kinect and PS-Move also feel like a gimmick and give under developed gameplay experiences compared to what we call traditional dual-analog controls.
However, that is more a function of how long dual-analog has been around and how much more refined it is and since controls are not the attraction, the game itself has to have the competitive differentiating qualities to set it apart from other games.
Basically when Halo, CoD, Battlefield, and countless other shooters have the same controller layout and configuration, they compete with each other on rest of what the game has to offer. That is why those games are overall better quality than more shallow experiences centered around new play control type offers.
To Nintendo's credit, if they don't try to re-invent the game or create potential with new game types, you will be stuck with just a few solidly established game genre with a few franchises competing for audiences and not much truely differentiating gameplay. Nintendo doesn't want to compete on budget and risk.
Nintendo wants to offer something unique that will still manage to make you smile and enjoy. They also want more people to enter and enjoy the video game market. You who are happy to play CoD each year are already satisfied, so they see no reason to make efforts to pull you away, they would rather address the market that is not served by CoD and are open to new experiences. They did that very successfully with the Wii after first having done something like that way back with the NES. Now with the Wii U, they want to continue that while offering deeper experiences to those that entered the market with the Wii. Think of it like Wii people finally getting the SNES.
