Personally, I would like a upgrade Wii remote plus as a optional accessory at one point. Despite what most people would like to see more 'well made' motion control games in the future.

Wii had good Nintendo games, but every Nintendo system has good Nintendo games, because well Nintendo makes good games. 

Super Mario Galaxy 1/2 really don't need the Wiimote, it's kinda shoe horned in, but basically the same game could've been made on a traditional pad for all intents and purposes. That game would've been as good/better if Nintendo had made it for a traditional HD system, because you would have gotten to play them in 720p HD at least. The Galaxy games were great despite the system they were on, not because of the system they were on. 

I did really like the pointer aiming of the Wiimote, but Splatoon has made me a believer that you can have the same pointer controls with a standard type pad, so you don't need a Wiimote for that. 

Zelda: SS ... no one is really begging to have motion controls back, it was more of "yeah that's kinda neat ... I guess" type thing, but everyone seems OK with the next Zelda ditching those controls, so how vital were they to the Zelda franchise really? Considering it took them like 4-5 years to make this game, it was somewhat underwhelming to be honest. 

There's just no benefit to this control scheme I can see going forward. Casuals are happy playing their smartphone games, even Nintendo has effectively conceded this by going third party on smart devices because they can't get this crowd back. 

If you're not going to win that soccer mom/casual/I play games once a month when grandpa comes over crowd ... there's no sense in going back to the Wiimote. A regular pad can do the pointer stuff just fine. A motion control simply doesn't have the accuray of a button press. I think maybe it's just time to accept that joysticks + d-pads + buttons are the optimal way to play serious/deep video games. Nintendo invented the layout in many ways themselves, maybe it's just time to stop trying to reinvent the wheel and rather focus on creating a platform that appeals to a wide range of consumers and developers. 

The satisfaction of smashing enemies or propelling Mario into the air with a shake of the Wiimote in Galaxy 1/2, or using the pointer to sweep up star bits, or balancing Mario on a rolling ball or a surfing stingray using tilt is worth way, way more to me than just a HD coat of paint. And Splatoon's controls, while good, lack the directness of literally pointing at the screen.

I'm not talking about commercial viability here, I'm talking about, as the topic says, whether I personally "would like to see Nintendo oneday go back to the Wiimote". I would, because in my opinion is blows dual analogue out of the water with superior aiming and the potential for a whole range of immersive actions that buttons cannot replicate.

I think Splatoon's controls are superior to Prime 3 honestly. They are the best controls I've ever used in a shooter, ever and you have constant access to dual analog sticks on top of that. 

More horsepower can offer more expansive environments and so that just an "HD coat of paint" as well. 

The "immersive action" stuff ... really, I think it got tired when you really realize how inaccurate the Wiimote (and Kinect as well) really are. They missed a lot of commands and the Wiimote can't even get basic things right even with WM+ ... it can't recognize depth for example. 

That means if you move thrust the controller towards the screen, like a stabbing motion with a sword, the Wiimote doesn't recoginize it. So 1:1 control is just not there ... all it does is approximate certain angles.

After a while I think basically what happened is you started to see that motion based gaming is extremely limited in "real" full scale games. It's best left to mini-game collections and how many games can you make like that before it gets boring. 

Motion gaming's future lies with VR applications. That's where it makes sense. But a traditional game console, IMO it just not needed. 

In six years, Nintendo made maybe two truly *really good* games that really utilized the Wiimote and somehow I don't think Metroid Prime 3 or Skyward Sword go down as even one of the top 20 Nintendo games of all time. That says a lot. 

The "more horsepower makes better games" argument doesn't hold true in my opinion, as when Nintendo went HD with Wii U, their games did not improve other than the aforementioned "coat of paint".

The Wiimote senses depth-based actions like stabbing just fine in games like Red Steel 2, Skyward Sword, and Metroid Prime 3. Slashing an enemy with the swing of my own arm, or ripping off an enemy shield with the grapple beam in Prime 3 felt fantastic. Was it perfect 1:1? No. But there was a connection, and carrying out actions in a video game setting using my own physical movements was freaking awesome.

I still play a number of Wii U games that support it with the Wiimote, like COD and Tropical Freeze, because it simply feels better than traditional controls.

on this planet where only a few people actually care, if it was truly innovative why didnt the 3ds fly off the shelves? sure the new one is better, but too little to late. Why wasnt it like that from the start? Why has 3ds still seen a drop in sales.

if it still thrived, where were the Tekkens, DOAs, VFs, new MKs, new GGs, new KOFs, Mvs.C etc. one game is an exception not a rule and my point is you still HAD to buy a whole other controller to even play the none Smash one,s and using wiimote with smash sucked anyway. Tvs.C? how well did that sell? exactly. the Wii missed way more important series than it had.

i dont disagree with that they put their own spin on it, I know that, i said that. My argument was that their own spin usually sucks. Now thats just how i feel, if you dont feel the same thats all good. We might have to agree to disagree on the VR point, i think these things SHOULD be treated as a side project, i truly believe motion should ahve been treated as such as well. These kinds of things have limitations and to base a whole product around it is kinda of foolhardy, i mean it worked with Wiii for a while, but the games barely even use the motion tech now, so i have to wonder what was the point

Wii U should have been their opportunity to introduce a new wiimote. Wii U's Wiimote should have been a evolution much like how the SNES's controller was a evolution on the NES. Nintendo refused to do it, and it languished. Which is a shame. I think Nintendo would have been better off gambling on a evolved Wiimote instead of the gamepad.

thats not what he said, he is saying more power can allow a game to do more things, IE bigger worlds, now whether that is better to you or not is on you. But keep in mind stuff like Xenoblade Chronicles X wouldnt be possible on the WIi so i dont know how people can say more "horsepower" isnt important.

As for your examples, i notice 2 of 3 of those games used motion PLUS, the original Red Steel was an inaccurate mess and TP wasnt that much better, its interesting how people straight ignore the shitty inaccurate games, ( which is a lot) and Prime 3 is FP which is just pointer which has existed for years. Now had the Wiimote had Plus capabilities form the onset it would have fared a bit better a least among most gamers and it might still be more important.

Xenoblade Chronicles X would indeed have been impossible on Wii, (or any last gen system) but here's the thing; the Wii original is a better game in spite of its more limited horsepower. Similarly, Mario Galaxy is better than 3D World despite running on far weaker hardware. More horsepower means more options, but it doesn't guarantee that these options will result in a better experience. A lot of great art uses a limited array of colours or techniques, while anyone can throw a hundred colours on a piece of canvas and produce nothing but a mess.

Every system has tons of shitty games; I tend to buy and play the good ones. Prime 3 used more than just the pointer; both tilt and motion were used for various actions. And if it's examples of motion-controlled games without Motion Plus you want, I'd point to Zack & Wiki, Silent Hill Shattered Memories, Medal of Honor Heroes 2, LostWinds 1 and 2, and Shaun White Snowboarding...

Well..  I think by all accounts the 3ds is a major success.  Due to smartphones there is no longer a casual market for dedicated hanhelds but the system effectively survived when the Vita fell off. And the 3ds is actually growing year over year in america this year largely due to the enhanced 3d and the New 3ds. The dedicated hanheld market is basically returning to what is used to be before the ds expanded the market beyond core gamers.  That expanded market is now gone.

Well the thing about the wii was that it didn't get too many ports of 3rd party games. You really needed to create a game from the ground up to do well on the system. It would have been a lot of work to port down some of those fighting games to it and due to the fact that core gamers who owned a wii also owned one or both (in my base both) of the other systems there would be no incentive to buy those games on wii due to the lack of online features and poor graphics. But there were some gems in the fighting genre which were exclusive to the system and it was essential to gamers who wanted to play the best 3 or 4 fighting games available. Two of which were exclusive to wii.

It would be foolhearty right now to base a whole system around VR. But eventually I think we will want the best of the best dev's making their best work for it.  It has a chance to be something pretty big.  And i don't think you can criticize Nintendo's decisions on the wii as being foolhearty. They made more profit in their peak year on Wii than sony and microsoft made off the entire generation combined. (yeah i know that's hard to back up but it's likely true)