As someone who isn't a big fan of motion controls I would prefer they keep the big franchises as both control options.  It's certainly the best option for the consumer even if it disqualifies them for forum lists.

If it enhances it then it doesn't have to be the only way to play it for people to take notice.  Wii fans have been saying for years that pointer controls are bar none better than dual analog for shooters and that will certainly be tested when Killzone 3, inFamous 2, and MAG 2.0 are released.  If they are distinctly better I'm sure people will take notice and the community for those games will move towards those controls and more will become fans of the Move regardless of whether the game is solely Move controlled.

And yes I get that you would respect the Move more if Sony put more behind it, but I think that giving the consumer options instead of trying to jam something down their throats is what I'd prefer.  It's not as though MS has committed to putting any big established franchise on the Kinect either so by that theory you shouldn't have much more respect for it than Move.

I discount the idea because I have played tons of great games on Wii that I didn't feel were enhanced by motion controls in the slightest.  The games that really are enhanced by it are new franchises made with motion controls in mind. 

The advantage of Move is that it can leech of the Wii library (Dead Space Extraction, the crap Lotr game, etc). Kinect will not be able to do this. Developers will be able to produce games for Move with less development risks leading to the possibility of developing a larger library.

But in my mind when they say hybrid game that's something that will have an option to use Kinect in some way and won't require Kinect to play it similar to how LBP2 has a few extra levels that require Move and you can use it for the level editing.  I could be wrong but until I see evidence to the contrary that's what I think will happen with hybrid games. 

Yup.  That's another aspect of Move being a safe strategy from Sony.  I would imagine they see three advantages here:

1 - third party developers will be tempted to get previous Wii titles on PS3 - I think this has already happed with a couple of titles but can't remember which.  If this happens Sony knows it means Move will see it's library of titles grow pretty quickly

2 - it must now be ugely tempting to third parties to target Wii/PS3 with the caveat they'll have to stump up a bit more cash for some HD level textures, etc.  But still, with almost identifcal control schemes it would be very, very easy to put a game on Wii/PS3 now.  Advantages for Sony are again rapidly expanding library plus a softening of Wii's status as the only place to get certain titles.

3 - with Wii/Move so similar, Sony are probably hoping that developers who go for option 2) above decide Kinect is too different to support and go for the larger Wii/PS3 install base, particularly as with the Wii that install base should, in theory, be the most receptive to good family casual titles

Kinect really is quite an interesting risk when you look at it carefully.  With the 360 MS focused on being easy to develop for, easy to port to, easy to get games on.  Now, they've come out fighting with something different enough from the Wii that it is Kinect that could be seen as new and tricky, as a risk to support.  I think MS are putting a lot of effort into Kinect, and will certainly comission plenty of software, but Kinect remains a risky approach.

I applaud the risk and recognize it as a bold attempt to really jump forward.  Move I think will be a success and even if it's only moderate it won't hurt Sony at all.

Kinect is different.  It could be a huge success, it could be moderate, but it could even hurt MS (again, I'd contend there is no way Move could hurt Sony in any way as a brand or whatever) and that's where the risk comes in.  Kinect could fail, and not only that, but it could harm MS brand around 360 and the hardcore.  No one sees it as odd that Sony should support somthing like Move.  But MS?  The home of Halo?  Online hardcore gaming?  A platform whose top titles are all mature rated?  Yup.  Kinect is as big risk all around.

As if everything around the PS3/360 wasn't exciting enough I'd say with Move/Kinect things just got a lot more exciting in terms of how each brand is going to go forward for the rest of this gen.

is the wii port of dead space on the list?

This has probably be said a few times but.. not including MAG / Heavy Rain in the analysis at ALL is biased.

why not even have two charts? One with a complete set and one with games that exclusively use the specific hardware.

I've never quite understood why you are so infatuated with metacritic. But since this thread is specifically dealing with metascores, why leave the highest ranked PS3 games out?

It's like even when you make a thread about metacritic, which in itself is a wack site which means nothing, there still need to be rules that leave out certain games (which happen to be PS3 games).

are you really telling people that sony should completely discount a 2nd controller option with the DS3 for consumers who would only play their "big" franchise with a DS3?

are you serious kowenicki? Are you trying to tout microsoft is "brave" for releasing DANCE CENTRAL/KINECTIANIMALS/KINECT SPORTS as kinect only titles? Why doesn't microsoft release HALO KINECT? Why don't you point that out, instead of just taking a hit at sony as you always do?

lmao you literally stole it from me. Kowenecki what you're saying for Sony to do would be a redicolous business decision that would piss off thousands if not millions of fans. And I'm talking fans of PS3. The haters would jump on it like flies on shit as well.

Releasing Uncharted 3 as Move only would be Fail of the year on Sony's part.