I bought it because for the first time a console controller didn't make me pull my teeth out for most genres. But I had already agreed with you as far as the controller goes. Not peripherals though.

BTW I edited my post after you quoted it, you might wanna check it out.

Controllers are peripherals in that they are a piece of hardware connected to the main unit, so lets take it as a peripheral in this sense.

Then we go back to the essential question - other than the Wii Remote, what Wii peripherals were essential to drive Wii sales?

The interface is a critical part of the game. Nobody plays DDR with a hand controller. Guitar Hero wouldn't be the phenomenon it is without that plastic guitar. Just as you cannot play badminton without rackets, shuttles, and a net, you cannot play Wii Fit without a board. The so-called "peripheral" is an integral part of the game itself. Trying to seperate the game from the interface is like trying to take a train off its tracks: Everything just stops working.

In previous generations, very few games successfully broke out of the default gamepad interface. Maybe it was the price, or more limited technology (wires in the living room are annoying) or lukewarm software support. Maybe the market simply found video games themselves to be enough of a novelty that they didn't need to push things with new interfaces.

Now, after a couple decades of limiting interface to the gamepad, game designers are breaking away from merely evolving the gamepad and the gameplay mechanics that rely on it. They're introducing new interfaces to develop new game mechanics. And people are excited by new experiences. Maybe these new interfaces are getting the serious support they need to succeed. Or maybe the market was just tired of the gamepad and longing for something fresh.

Yeah, more peripherals at E3. Zelda functinal peripheral would be cool.

The complexity behind buying a seperate remote along with public perception will keep PS3 and 360 from ever achieving anything other than mild success compared to the Wii.

This is just the nature of the consoles.

Casuals see the Wii as an experience tailored to them. Therefore they see the Wii as a better value to them as a consumer, even without price considered.

It would be like asking, "Will the PS2 get in trouble when the Gamecube gets RE4, Windwaker, and ToS?"

Despite having the goods to attract the masses of hardcore gamers, the console was unable to steal any of the PS2's thunder. Now, I realize that comparison isn't air tight, but I feel that the underlying princible is the same.

Future console purchases are determined months or years in advance, and it is impossibly hard to shake stigma. It takes a long time for public perception to catch up to reality, and to top it all off, the complexity and barriers to entry for the HD consoles, be they real or imagined, will prevent longterm casual success as we've seen with the PS2 and the Wii.

For these controllers to have success then need to be:

A. Required for a large amount of games.

B. Packaged with the hardware.

C. Heavily advertised.

D. Supported by Microsoft/Sony's first party development team.

E. Launch with a killer app.

F. Be better than the Wii-mote

G. Have an equal or better hardware price point than the Wii

H. Drop multiple skus that don't include this remote, or preferrably have a standard unit.

I. Full backwards compatibility on all PS3's sold.

J. Marketing campaign downplay HDTV's.

That is pefectly reasonable. (and more than likely accurate) However, you probably should have worded your OP differently. It sounded like you were saying that people were buying the Wii for the peripherals themselves, not the games that use the peripherals.

Or is that what you meant anyway? I'm confused. But if you did mean that, you're wrong.

He's more wrong than that, unless he can answer my last question appropriately... other than the Wii Remote, I see no peripheral which was essential for Wii's success.

I agreee with the OP

But I can't prove it

It remembers me the 3 girls at my work who decided to get a DS because it was a DS whatever the game it was able to play.

I also believe people buy Wii because it is a Wii without asking themselve "what ninty is going to show us during E3' (since they are not hardcore, they dont know E3)

BUT

I also agree that PS2 was mainly sold because it was a Playstation(2) and because of "hype".
Neverthless, for the PS2, there were also the promised games ...MGS2/GT3/FFX

The Balance board was successful in further expanding the market to people who aren't interested in games at all. The wheel included with Mario Kart was successful in allowing non-gamers to identify with a controller they are familiar with - the steering wheel.

The only peripheral that admittedly has not been a success is the zapper.

All those thing are true, but they don't mean that Wii sales are driven by those things more than games... At most, we can say those things "help" Wii sales, but we can't so easily say that they're more important than games in driving sales.

From what I read in the thread, that's the problem most people have with your reasoning.