There are a few instances in which Motion Controls worked better than a standard button format (Metroid Prime 3 springs to mind as the first example), but the problem is that a fair bit of work needs to be done in order to get motion controls to work effectively. While it sounds simple enough (point at the screen and the thing moves), due to all motion control formats lacking buttons, certain functions that would have to have been programmed to buttons now have to be assigned to motion control functions, and doing that intuitively and in a non-gimmicky way is difficult.

There's also the fact that motion controls, despite how far they've come, just are flat out not as reliable as a standard controller scheme (unless the motion controls involve pointing at the sensor bar and nothing else). People reference Skyward Sword, which is arguably one of the best example of motion control working. But that's the thing, even in one of the best examples of motion control working, I would argue that Skyward Sword's sword swinging mechanic will still give you an incorrect input about once every 20 or so tries; a 95% success rate. And this is one of the best instances of motion controlling in a game.

Buttons (unless they break) work 100% of the time. There's a drop in reliability, it's difficult to build a control scheme around it, and if you're developing a game for the other two consoles, which don't have Wii remote style controls (or, at least, didn't until the PS Move), it's hard to port a well done version of that over to a completely new control scheme. With the Wii's generally poor sales for third party titles, the sales factor could be enough by itself to convince people to not try anything new in terms of motion control.

Well on MS and PS side both weren't included with every consoles so developping for Move and Kinect was some sort of extra work and more cost for a chance that those who bought these peripherals would buy the games. It's important to think about development cost is it worth or not.

Because of that I believe devs came up with a control scheme that was first geared at the controller. Most games that used both Move and Kinect felt like they just tacked motion control where there wasn't needed and it always felt gimmicky.

I also think the reason they didn't really developped something compelling on Wii was because of the userbase. Since hardcore gamers were elsewhere devs didn't bother developping hardcore games for Wii.

I hope things change now though. There is a place for motion gaming but the games have to be developped around motion control and not around the controller. A bit like they did with Dance Central and Kinect Sports. I think indies, more than others, will try K2 to be different and because they are sure every X1 owner has a Kinect and now that it's far more accurate and tracks fingers more concepts can be tested. I'm still confident.

For the same reason many didn't give 3D a real chance. Because motion controls are an immersion/"spectacle" aid that doesn't contribute much to the traditional gaming model.

Finger/hand movements are generally a lot more precise than arm movement, especially given the weight of the latter. Because of this, motion controls are generally a matter of physical execution, rather than reflexes and judgement. It removes much of the abstraction that makes traditional gaming practical.

Skyward Sword is often held up as a strong example of motion controls, but the motion-based commands are so simplistic that, if adapted to a control-pad instead, they would be trivial to execute.

post your delicious pic :P

What I don't get is why people are telling me that I have to like Wii Bowling with motion controls or I'm afraid of change.

How about this--maybe I don't like bowling with motion controls all that much? Is that okay with everyone? Is there a reason why I have to like it?

Not everyone likes motion controls. Deal with it. No, it doesn't mean they have to be fat or lazy, that's just people attacking anyone who likes something different than they like, which is sad.

I've played motion controlled games and, for the most part, I didn't like them very much. The two big exceptions for me were Killzone 3, which did an awesome job, and Portal 2. Just as often, though, there were games like Resistance 3, which wasn't nearly as good as KZ3.

Regardless, these are the kinds of games I like, and they happen to work really well with a standard controller or a mouse/keyboard. Why that would bother anyone, I have no idea.

Why don't PC software and game developers create something that doesn't require a mouse and keyboard setup? Touch / motion controls are SOOOO much better...

Motion controls = control options for gamers not coordinated enough to use standard dual-analog game pads.

The reason no one likes motion controls is because there's very little extra you can do with them that you can't do with a regular controller. I'm not completely against motion controls as long as the game is good and there are some, but very few, that are.

Nobodu likes motion controls.. ?

The wii was the fastest console ever.. and nintendo's best selling.. and won last gen.. (i know that "pointer control" also was loved, but a insane big part of casuals gamers like this control)

By the way.. The liltle "tilt" in hand, that get moter bikes in mariokart wii to (don't know the english word) run on the back whel.. I looooved it.. :)

maybe it because they suck balls, I'm sure it's that.

Lets face it, motion controls would have only every worked if it was true 1:1 motion and not the retarded waggle fest that it became, tech limitation stopped it from becoming anything more than a passing FAD, hell just look at 3D technology and films, two fucking tries, and to fucking failures, again it all came down to limitation of tech, people don't wanna wear retarded glasses, and thats proven by the fact that 3D content has died as the market simply doesn't give a shit, it could have gone from FAD to something as mainstream as 1080p TVs, but that required that the 3D could be achieved at 1080p with out glasses for a relatively low entry price....again tech limitation stopped that happening, same for motion controls.
(For those saying that motion controls, and by proxy the Wii, wasn't a FAD, then ask your self why Nintendo themselves ditched the motion control and implemented a standard controller configuration with the sole addition of a touchscreen, clearly Nintendo saw motion controls as a dead end, and so chose to move on. also the Wii sales have the same exact properties of a FAD, front loaded which tops out fast and then flat lines, this doesn't mean that sales are bad, just that it was a FAD.)

But you never know, motion controls like 3D movies may get a second chance, and if it does it better make something for it's self, otherwise the same thing will happen again...frankly I don't give a shit about motion controls, if they exist, cool, more people get to enjoy gaming in different ways, but hell no if they fuck up meh games.

I don't remember Nintendo doing much with the motion controller. Hell, their best game(Smash Bros Brawl) didn't even use the motion controls. With most of their games it either hurt the experience(Skyward Sword) or was completely unnecessary(Mario Kart Wii). Honestly, all I ever wanted out of the Wii was an awesome lightsaber game. I never got it.