Man, I'm about to make myself feel like an old man, but I need to make a point.

I remember back in the day when console first person shooters were considered vastly inferior to their PC counterparts. I had talks with PC fanboys who more or less stated that Halo was nothing new on the PC and first person shooters were light years ahead on the PC. He wasn't just talking about graphics though, he was talking about controls.

Mouse controls were basically considered the definitive way to play first person shooters. This was because this point and click interface of the mouse is so much better then the sliding of a reticule with an analog pad. Turning was much faster, and most importantly the aiming from using the mouse was second to none.

In this age of Call of Duty and Halo Reach, it seems people have largely forgotten that, and not only accept the dual analog as the way to play first person shooters, but PREFER it in many cases. I can understand that, as back in the day I loved Halo, and found it difficult to play anything with a mouse and keyboard. But in the end, it has less to do with what works better, and more to do with simply what we're used to.

I think that's the case with these new fangled motion controls as well, as people have been slow to adopt them outside of stuff like Wii Sports. I don't think this has anything to do with the standard control scheme being "better" though.

Pointer controls are, honestly, the next best thing to a mouse and keyboard. They don't provide quite the same amount of precision as a mouse, by directly moving a cursor along a screen rather then sliding the cursor like analog. Using pointer controls, I've been able to shoot with precision that I struggle with on an analog. On Halo I often struggle to line up a headshot, because it requires very precise movement of the analog stick. Push it too hard and you overshoot your target, don't hard enough and I don't get the reticule over the target. It can be very frustrating, especially in the heat of the moment when I only have a split second to make the shot.

Motion control provides a more direct input. Rather then moving a reticule with a stick, I'm moving my wrist. I have a much easier time lining up shots. I'm able to shoot smaller targets with much more precision, and I'm able to line up my shot with much more finesse then I can with an analog stick. I do have problems with shaking in a few games, but I usually rectify that by simply resting my hands on my legs. I find it to be a minor problem that doesn't come up with every shooter, and is made up for in the benefits of more precise aiming.

Understand, I've been using analog control since 2002. However, I've played plenty of Wii first person shooters over the years and I have a lot of experience with motion controls in FPS. Having had plenty of experience with both methods, I find motion control to be a more precise style of control, and one I prefer when given the option.

Conduit had pretty good controls, but too bad the game was meh. That brings me to my next point. In the grand scheme of things people could give a rat's ass if one control is better or not. If that was the case, ALOT more people would play FPSs on PC. At least the CODS, but that game sells on consoles. Why does the inferior control scheme win out?? Cause maybe for most people its just easier to play on consoles period. People care about content, if they didnt the WIi versions of COD would do just as well as the PS360 PC version. Thats just my take.

I played Goldeneye for about 300 hours and with a KD over 2 and a win/lose ratio is over 4.
I will tell you no lie that the wii mote has a steep learning curve but it is better.
The time it takes to react and to move to where your target is located is natural. It is more natural to use the pointer and more faster. It also gives you more freedom for looking around. Also the hand shaking is just a sign of you not being used to the controls yet. I can hold a steady hand no problem but it does take time getting used to.

Their is no issue with the controls. It is just a different way to play. No one can pick up a motion controller and be good right away. You need to invest time to get good. Like practicing a sport. Once you master it the old controllers will feel dated and old.

Well since we are talking about PCs, here's my 2 cents (I used to be a PC gamer exclusively myself way back in the day). Its to do with both quality and cost. The reason why more people don't play on PC is because the cost of buying a gaming PC ready made is very high. Now this is a very important point I think since a lot of people do not want to go through the trouble of buyng the individual parts (like most PC gamers do), but rather just have a box ready for them to play on, which is exactly what a console is. Although its not as high in quality (still good quality though), its incredibly efficient and easy which is just what people want. Also you don't have to bother buying new parts every other year to replace your older ones. General people just don't want to go through all that trouble.

@killeryoshis You raise a very interesting point, it does seem the learning curve is quite steep indeed, from what I could tell.

@knuckles87 Defo would say PC controls take the best of both controller and motion control worlds, from what I feel.

I really loved the move gun. I played at my friend's house with Killzone 3 it's really amazing. I wish I could play it with UC3 as well though. But I don't really wiimote or Wiimote Plus. I'm planning on buying a PS move sharpshooter soon for Resistance 3 and Killzone 3. Resistance 3 looks like a really intresting game. 

For aiming, Wii remote is obviously better, unless a developer really fucks up, aiming with a Wii remote is just naturally going to be better than a control stick unless you play Wii games stood up with your arm stuck straight out and aim without bending your wrist or elbow.

Your question however is with the whole FPS experience, which unfortunately for Wii games brings in the decisions of publishers and the competence of developers, which are mostly asinine and sub-par respectively. (the former usually incurring the latter, ie pushing the after-thought Wii version of a game to second rate devs)

Personally I don't really care for the story or graphical achievements of the games that actually do well in those areas, which brings me back to the controls (I haven't read the whole OP but I believe this was your main focus) and was also why i enjoyed The Conduit. The main problem with Wii and Move controls for FPS is the lack of a second analogue stick. When sat at a PC with a mouse on a flat surface it is possible to have a fixed cursor and use your aiming device (the mouse) to also act as your 'looking' device (looking is the process of rotating your view).
The Wii remote does not have the luxury of an assumed default position, if you let go of the controller in an FPS that uses a pointing device to alter the 'looking' action in game then your view could move about wildly depending on what the IR camera sees. With the PSmove I would guess dropping the controller will also give unexpected results depending on what angle it rests at, and also whether the glowing ball can still be seen by the camera (I would think sensible developers should either stop camera movement or reset to a central point if the ball is unseen, or at least give an option about what to do as some games have if the Wii remote camera can no longer see the sensor bar).
If the Wii remote or Move controller had a control stick, or even just a slider things could be different, pointing at your target could be done independently of camera movement and in terms of the possible speed and accuracy this would trump even PC players with the mouse... however it would make things more complex, something which motion controls are supposed to try solve.
I think with a circle-pad/slider like the 3DS/PSP in the place where the A-button is on the Wii remote, pointer controlled FPS could be wonderful... generally forward/backward and strafing movement is done at top speed by a lot of gamers (Most PC gamers not even having the option of analogue character speed) so a slider control would be adequate, providing the option of slower movement if needed, but otherwise 360 degree full speed movement. Then looking and turning can be done with the nunchuck. and the Wii remote aim allows you to shoot anything you see on screen like in Wii Play.

Without that extra control option developers have had to try a number of different things to get the looking/turning problem to work, mostly using bounding boxes to allow leeway for hand movement, then adding a PC-mouse like solution for outside the bounding box so that pointing more in a direction turns you more in that direction.
Of the Wii FPS games I have played (few, because a games setting is more important to me than story, hence not buying war based FPS) I think The Conduit got the controls best for what is possible, simply by allowing the most customisation. I play games on my bed, so my wrist lays on my lap and I have no trouble keeping the remote pointed at a small space (probably wavering only a couple of pixels at the most) and could alter the bounding boxes to be close to mouse like controls.
Goldeneye tried an unusual cross between mouse-like controls, and a lock-on/z-target system similar to third person Adventure games and Metroid prime 3... except the lock on wasn't permanent... ie if you are pointing in the general direction of a character you can lock onto their position at the time you press the button, but if they move you have to follow with pointer controlled looking (ie mouse-like) as usual. This actually works very well, but personally I prefer The Conduit version.

------------

Ok, Seems when I post while drunk I ramble, hopefully what I said makes sense even if it is a good example of a teal deer.

There's a simple acid test. Imagine trying to draw a triangle with a wiimote/psmove. Now imagine trying to draw that same triangle with a single analog stick controller by your thumb. Imagine doing them both very quickly. The latter is more difficult, isn't it?

I don't think there's really much debate about which control scheme, objectively, offers the most precision. People do have their preferences though and some guys will always be more skilled with analog sticks than wiimote/psmove, simply because that's what they play and practise with.

The circle-strafing isn't actually a problem with pointer controls, since your reticule will be at a specific point on the screen according to your turning radius; you're just keeping your target off-center from the screen. This isn't any harder than circle-strafing with two sticks, once you know how. And, hell, you're more accurate when you do it.

Yes yes KB&M is better, yes, I acknowledge that

There's just no real respect in which dual analog trumps pointer controls

I think you sir have gotten very much to the root of the issue I was talking about with that statement above. Its exactly this assumed default position that I find is so important in FPS games. Normally when I point at something with the second analogue stick while aiming down sight or otherwise, I can pretty much bring the second analogue stick to the default position to the middle while shooting the guy keeping my gun on screen absolutely steady and on point where I just aimed. This is exactly what I can't seem to do with the Wiimote perfectly, as there is no assumed default position with the Wiimote, so you kind of have to hover your hand in midair (even when resting your elbows) which makes it difficult sometimes to keep your crosshairs/iron sights steady at whatever you are shooting at. I know this feels very digital, but I think its an important feature in FPS which allow both KB&M and controller users to sort of lock on and don't have to worry about anything else, while MC users still have to keep the gun in place, because as you said they can't just drop the Wiimote from their hands and hope they would still be on target. Thanks for your insight though, it helped me understand the issue a lot more clearly.

Mostly because it is more fun.

But really, it is just so much easier. The only thing that even makes analog sticks come close is the heavy auto aim that games use to compensate.