I think you're confusing IR with motion controls, no one here is arguing about the latter, but merely referring to the pointer itself.

I also think that a number of people arguing for PC controls are missing an important point.  Sure mouse + keyboard is better/faster/more accurate when that's what you've been using for years.  Speaking as someone who just started playing FPS on both systems, I was able to figure out the Wiimote setup a lot more quickly and be more accurate with it than with my first PC FPS's.  It's a lot easier to learn how to be accurate pointing at a screen and pulling a trigger while using a joystick than flicking a mouse loosely tied to a cursor around accurately while managing a bunch of keys with the other hand.

Maybe I just really liked RE4. I beat on GC, then PS2, then Wii. I must say that the Wii version was easily the best one. Def. worth a try, shows you the true beauty of IR.

He's talking about the finisher moves, where the screen prompts you to swing a certain direction. I've never had problems with it, like he claims to. Either way his argument is completely out of place here, since this thread isn't even discussing motoin control.

First sentence is too silly to dignify. No, really, you're goofy. Lol.

Second sentence, two points. One, you're changing your tune now (look back to what you wrote before, compare it to now).

Second, it is harder to say. I can name a few off the top of my head (me, my friends, some family), but who's to say about the rest? DDR has a devoted arcade fanbase, and the arcade fanbase also tends to like their arcade shooters. I can't speak for how much overlap there is there...and neither can you.

You're also making the mistake of thinking that because you don't like something, others won't. You'd prefer to be a sloth on your couch when playing your shooters. Some of us wouldn't. Some think they would, but may find out differently when they try it (Playing Is Believing!). The reverse is equally possible. I recall this same argument springing up when the Wiimote was first unveiled. How's that working out?

Long story short: you built a thesis on a structure that is both flawed and the product of stereotypes rather than data. You may still be right, but it would be more through luck than through proper analysis.

Interesting because I can name only 2 people that enjoy DDR and shooters and that's me and my friend, and she's not all that much into shooters anyways. However, how many of those children, mothers, grandmothers, that bought the Wii, WiiFit, Wii Sports, and other such movement games would ever buy a game like Halo? It seems not too many. The games are well liked but the overlap of shooters and physically demanding games is not that great. Also for the VR, are you suggesting we will have grand halls where we will be able to run and shoot? Because I don't see any other way of us getting VR unless our bodies can be physically inert.

I also already stated why the mouse is better than the IR. If I lift my hand from the mouse, my character won't go berserk, if I rest my hand with an IR pointer, it's gonna completely fuck up where I'm aiming/looking.

I don't really agree that the Wii-mote and nunchuck are better than a keyboard and mouse for immersion. The way I see it, even if the button is a trigger, it's the game itself that has to immerse you, the controls are only part of it. Unless input methods are so good that you're not going to be tripped up by commands not registering or something like that, I would personally stick to the mouse and keyboard today. That isn't to say the Wii isn't fun or isn't interesting or anything, but I'd rather wait until tecnology is precise enough and good enough to put it to task of saying it's superior. Then, that also calls the power of the console into question as well because I'd rather play something like World at War on the PS3/360/PC as opposed to the Wii for the other immersions of graphics, sounds, and bigger online components.

I understand the point you're trying to make about VR, but I'd rather think about the kinds of changes that'll be happening technologically just to get to the point of VR instead of 'what if we were using VR tomorrow'. I say this because perhaps what the Wii is doing will have a factor in changes in the future and while things will slowly change, but just you wait to see what's going to happen once new forms of input are the standard. I think the competition mindset and everything you say HD console and PC people do today will just migrate over and nothing will have change (except of course for the input method). Will it be rocky at first? Heck yes, but we can't predict the future of when and how these things will happen.

For the rest, I've already stated my case, and you've stated yours. We ain't headed anywhere, so let's agree to disagree.

For this sentence, why would you think that? One does not need a tennis court or boxing ring to play Wii Sports. A baseball stadium isn't needed to play Super Sluggers. Why, then, would this be necessary? Granted that the immersion factor wouldn't be there 100%, but it'd be closer, which is donathos' point.

As a PC enthusiast, I must admit that Wii controls for FPS are much more immersive than mouse and keyboard. And I find them much more fun.

If I could play Half Life 2, Crysis and CoD4 with my Wiimote I would be very very happy :)

I think they're similar in a way. You have to remember the buttons on the keyboard just as you have to remember the buttons and motion control commands on the wii-mote and nunchuck.

Maybe I think that way because I can do both. I've not only been playing PC games for years on keyboards and mice, but I've been playing on console games for just as long. As such, I enjoy using keyboards and mice more for a FPS game, but I'm generally comfortable playing a FPS on a controller.

I would say the wii-mote is more loosly controlled as the mouse is 1-1 with movements on screen.

Yeah but you are speaking VR here, where you move yourself and do everything yourself, thus making people that are not physically fit, the "hardcore," suck at these games. You also said that having a Matrix-like technology might happen some time later but maybe not. Now adding your two statements, an FPS would require a huge field to take place, because you know, people generally move, and if they can't ust use their mind and have to do so physically they need the space to run. If howerver it is a Matrix-like type of VR, then it really wouldn't matter since everything would be as simplified as it is now in games. Also not a single game you just listed is even close to being VR, those are Wii games where motion is completely automated.