1. The PS Eye is just as much of an invisible mouse pad.

2. Fighting games, Platformers, and a number of other genre's do not work well on PCs as they were designed around traditional controllers.

Except with the PS eye/wand you don't have to actually aim at the invisible mouse pad just like you don't have to aim your mouse at the pad.  With the wii-mote you are aiming with the camera while PS eye is stationary.

 Even the wii-mote isn't ideal for fighting games yet it's does ok.

 P.S I think some is too quick to dismiss motion controls not realize as in my example of Sony's wand that they could benefit even PC gamers.

1 word - Upgrades.

It's easy to swap parts on a PC and make it top of the line and way beyond the consoles' power. Ram upgrade here, vid card upgrade there...

The PS Eye is reading the infared ball that is moving, which is the same difference. Further, mouse pads being visible or invisible is irrelevant. I am not looking at where I am pointing. I am looking at the cursor. Finally, this does absolutely nothing to address the actual point which is that the PS Wand does absolutely nothing to better allow you to play core games, and is, in fact, a step backwards for many of them as seen with the recent RE5 AE demo.

Again the difference has been shown before as in Johnny wii's head tracking video. Having a stationary camera simply gives you better precision.

 Finally, this does absolutely nothing to address the actual point which is that the PS Wand does absolutely nothing to better allow you to play core games, and is, in fact, a step backwards for many of them as seen with the recent RE5 AE demo.

PS. Head tracking is not the sum total of accuracy measures. Mouse does terrible head tracking, and that is the interface you are attempting to compare the wand to.

Head tracking devices can be use to track the hand  as a mouse is a hand tracking device. Thus take Johnny video but instead of using glasses with IR lights just put the IR bar in your hand and Bingo it now tracks your hand without having to aim at the camera. (Unlike the wand you still have to make sure the IR lights is facing the camera)

And thats why we have all these awesome head tracking videos with mice, right?

Also, are you ever going to actually address the point, or continue to avoid it an hope I forget? Accuracy is entirely irrelevant to which will be the superior motion controller. Eliminating old genres for new ones is a terrible idea. Creating a hybrid control system to have the best of both worlds is ideal. The PS Wand does nothing to bring us to the ideal.

*shakes head*

You realize that has nothing to do with being accurate right? It's just as accurate in your hand or on your TV... Head tracking helps make the illusion of images popping out of the screen and not a whole lot else.

As far as real accuracy the more points of reference the IR camera has the easier it is to track position.  The sensor bar has 2 points of reference so the IR camera can tell when you're turning upside down, it can also tell how far away the camera is by tracking those two points in reference to the camera. 

On the other hand the PS wand has one IR ball on the top of the wand, the PS eye can track where that is, but its using software to "fake" tracking in a 3D space, basically it tracks it by seeing the item in reference getting bigger (getting closer) and smaller (going away).  It doesn't truly know, if a baloon was deflating in front of it it would think it was moving away.  On top of that there was a head tracking tech demo made for the PS eye, it worked well but not as precise as the head tracking demo Johnny made.

No id stick with consoles.