Let's also talk about romantic comedies. They are such a grand failure. I mean seriously.

The Kinect was designed with the casual gamer in mind. You weren't supposed to like the Kinect, or the Move.  It would be like you watching Lifetime and then doing a film Noir about the failure of women's television.

In other words, sales figures would prove your hypothesis (motion gaming has failed) wrong. But that's okay, because you'd rather have a controller in your hand. 

http://www.wired.com/gamelife/2010/09/microsoft-tokyo-game-show/

Here ya go, kiddo. Tokyo Game Show reveals.

hi... can you tell me how is MAG with move? is it fun and accurate?

@OP well like you can read on my sig, i am also not very in love with motion controls but what i am mainly against it about its place in the gaming console scheme... i am all about the traditional control for standard and motion for optional method, for some games and experiences!

 In defence the OP didn't mention sales. Inforcommercials  sells even though often the products are crap. (not saying motion controls are crap). Anything in America that has to do with losing weight will sell big yet these products often fail or American would be the skinnest people on Earth.

 IF success is only about sales then who's in doubt motion contorls are a success?

I don't know how anyone could blame Third Party developers, when Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo have barely made an effort with improving motion controls. Nintendo innovated once with their controllers and then they've just chucked it into a bunch of games that didn't even need it. They broke through, but outside of Wii Sports, they've made no real effort to create a truely great motion controlled game.

Sony are far worse, they're just doing what Nintendo are doing. They bring on a few quirks here and there, but they haven't put their best devs on to the their device (Naughty Dog, Media Molecule, Santa Monica) and are instead relying on a bunch of no name shovel ware developers.

Microsoft haven't learnt anything from the past and are instead intent on just re-sampling old experiences and covering them in plastic and butterflies, they have a different controller with the same old games that have been released over the last 4 years.

I'd argue that Third Part developers are the ones making the most effort when it comes to motion controls. Silent Hill: Shattered Dimensions, Red Steel 2, Flower, Tumble, Dance Central, Trauma Center, De Blob and Resident Evil 4 are far more innovative when it comes to motion controls compared to anything Sony, Microsoft or Nintendo have released this gen.

They have to set a good example, instead they've all set the wrong examples and we as gamers are punished for it.

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.

There is Zelda coming...

I don't think it's a failure as another entertainment option.  The Wii alone speaks to that.  The issue I see is more around some expectations that everyone would like it (clearly not going to happen) or that all games are automatically better with motion controls (also clearly not going to happen).

I think that currently - and in fact for the foreseeable future - motion controls will (arguably should) be relegated to two clear uses:

1. only for games that actually benefit from the control scheme and approach
2. only to augment games using other control schemes in tandem where the game actually benefits from the augmentation

Good examples for me:

1. playing Table Tennis with motion controls vs a keyboard or gamepad is actually superior.  This is good.  This means the scheme really fits the game and we're getting the best control experience and the game benefits in terms of fun and involvement.  EyePet with motion controls is better for example than EyePet without motion controls
2. augmenting an FPS with lean using the Move or Kinect camera (note this hasn't been done yet).  One thing I hate about console FPS (and certain PC FPS) is the removal of lean, which is actually I'd argue an option that such titles should have.  If, while sitting playing with my gamepad, I can come up to a corner, stop, then simply lean slightly to the right and peek out I'd say the game experience would have been improved a fair bit

Of course, the challenge is developers want to make money and there is the double challenge of

1. being able to identify games that would be better with motion controls
2. refraining from using them because you think it's "hot" or the in "gimmick" when you shouldn't

Now, sadly, clearly a lot of developers who hadn't thought about motion controls where thrown by the first point, as the Wii's third party support made all too clear.  It was a case of copy Nintendo (who had worked out some titles that worked) or try lots of stuff and see what works/doesn't.

I'd also note I think that, due to what I'd argue are false notions about sales potential, I still think too often titles have motion controls shoved into them.  It might be fun for a bit, but the just released Joy Ride on Kinect is clearly such a title.  Kinect is simply not the best control option for the title, and it smacks of let's do it because we want to have this on Kinect rather than is this best for the end user.

Sadly, the above has lead to a lot of failures for third parties with motion controls, only making the situation worse.

However... I'm actually glad to see motion controls on all three consoles now.  With this kind of parity - i.e. I can go motion control on all three where it makes sense, or ignore motion control and just use normal controllers - I'm hopping that we see more common sense used and the best control scheme used for each title without the feeling that motion controls have to be shoved in somehow.

Leaning motion controls has been done on PC. It didn't take off though as PC FPS are so fast in multplayer leaning is not really needed. With a mouse you can turn in an instant. It was a cool feature at the beginning but after the novelty wears off  I found it just isn't that useful.

P.S  Even though it's simple I still think the mouse is the most useful of all motion controls as you don't have to worry about stuff like keeping your hand steady.

I know, I'm a PC gamer.  I don't think the novelty wore off though - I think console FPS and faster paced MP made it less udeful or too hard to implement.

But... for SP in particular, but also tactical MP, it is really useful and far from a novelty.  I want the ability to check round corners for guards instead of rushing around and blasting, I want the ability to keep in cover in a tactical FPS while periodically checking a side corridor.

And, just because it's so obvious (and I think has even been mentioned) I'm hoping that Kinect will bring it back for suitable titles.

It's definately not for all FPS though - but I do feel it's omission has narrowed the scope of a lot of titles and removed a useful tactic.

I also want to see Thief properly implemented (Thief 3 being not bad but running on an awful version of the Unreal engine but Thief 1 & 2 remaining the real benchmark for that kind of thing) and that title must have leaning.  Also, leaning in the new Deus Ex would mean that - judging by the videos - we wouldn't have to endure a stange jump from FPS to TPS just to peek around a corner.