2 of your cons seem to be knocks on the games rather than on the controller. Whether the use of the controller increases immersion levels is something developers need to work on.

As for the rumble, I never use rumble and am actually glad it's disappearing from the Dual Shake.

So, is the rumble weak to help handle the interference from it against the 3d sensors, or is it because there isn't enough power to handle rumble + sensors + attachments, or is there just insufficient space to put in a strong rumble? One wonders..

I agree exick developers need time with the controller the questions are how much time do they need and do gamers have the patients to wait.

Things like the throw motion are up to the developers. The mathematics for the arc of a throw is not built into the system, but more of a programmatic task.

So THAT point is more about the particular software you played, rather than the nature of wii controller itself.

What... Do ya want it to shake you'r friggin arm off????? Yeah... we all know why you want that extra power. But wow hows the jaded viewpoint. Maybe you'r not sold and thats ok but if its because you just suck and others are good then you'r opinions are invalid. They sound sound pretty one sided to me. I'd say let the public get these in their hands and then we'll decide. I can't just go on what a handfull of people write.

"If no real-life motions are associate with a game, does motion control add value to the gaming experience?"

I think, if done right, it CAN still be more intuitive than memorizing a button, even if the motion isn't EXACTLY the same. Much the same that gestures in web browsers can make browsing move more smoothly and intuitively (once you get used to them, of course!), gesturing with your hand could eventually be an easier and quicker way of manipulating an onscreen object than pressing a button.

In reference to your last question (If no real-life motions are associate with a game, does motion control add value to the gaming experience?) the answer that Nintendo itself seems to have is "No." We see signs of this in thier announced tactic with Super Smash Brothers Brawl, which relies on the standard Gamecube controller rather than the Wii controller. So, if a game doesn't need the motion-sensing benefits, Nintendo seems to be willing to avoid them, even on first-party titles. Let's just hope they commit to this stance and maybe third-party developers will, too, avoiding embarrasing motion-sensing overkill (Madden).

"Doesn't work well with certain games, i.e. Madden where stroke motions differ than real life ones (you don't pass a football by flicking your wrist)."

seems more like *you* don't like the control scheme for Madden, every other preview of the control scheme I've read has been positive, and after reading your "Wii is gay" article its clear why you are the only dissenters.

It sounds like first generation analog stick games to me.

I was pretty certain rumble would have to be fairly weak. Nothing to do with it interfering with anything though.

If the remote is to use a plugin station the kind of batteries necessary to work with that are only good for things that use little power over long periods of time. To power a rumble feature require batteries that are good at offering a lot of power at once, things like the average over the counter batteries you buy are better at. The result would be that the rumble feature would have to be significantly weaker to ensure any decent amount of battery life.

If however the remote is in fact using over the counter batteries then it is probably a totally different story.

There is always the possibility of course as well that since the controllers are being used so much more than they normally would that Nintendo may have made the decision to weaken the rumble features for the show to maximise the amount of time they can be used for.

Do both the remote and the nunchuck rumble?

"Much the same that gestures in web browsers can make browsing move more smoothly and intuitively (once you get used to them, of course!)"

intuitive

adj 1: spontaneously derived from or prompted by a natural tendency; "an intuitive revulsion" 2: obtained through intuition rather than from reasoning or observation

I suppose it's possible you were being sarcastic. But the definition of something that's "intuitive" is that you don't *have* to "get used to it". That's pretty much the *opposite* of intuitive.

This controller worries me.
If nintendo said it wants a controller for everyone, hence making it looking like a TV remote, shouldnt it feel natural and shouldnt you need just a couple of minutes to get the complete feel of it and how it works?

Nintendo said themselves!! "If you as serious gamers don't have patience for load screens, imagine first-timers?

Then woudnt the SAME thing apply to the controller?

Good god the fanboys....Joystiq is seriously making honest, subjective, unbiased, constructive criticisms about the controller, and people are already turning it around to say "its the games not the controller" or things along the lines of joystiq and the gaming industry as a whole just does not "get it".

Let me let you in a little secret...It is not a PERFECT controller, it will not work well with everything.

About the rumble feature:
Imagine this, you're playing a FPS and grenades are exploding, allies and enemies are firing, and the ground is shaking from the tank that passed you by. A stronger rumble would make your hand move, slightly worsening (word?) your aim - AWESOME. Instead of a shaky cursor or screen (artificial) you would have a natural hindrance to deal with.

Cons:

Doesn't work well with certain games, i.e. Madden where stroke motions differ than real life ones (you don't pass a football by flicking your wrist).

its a VIDEO GAME! you dont press a button to pass a "real" football, do you? i cant find my R1 button to juke when i'm outside playing football... oh what to do?

"I was skeptical that Wii's controls would work well with Madden. I must admit I was really impressed because its controls are very natural and easy to pick up and run with."

-Planet Gamecube

"Madden was a surprise. As let down as I was by '07 on the PS3 and 360, EA came back with a strong showing on the Wii. How hard you kick and pass is determined by how quickly and accurately you move your hand. It doesn't sound like it would work, but trust me, it does."

- Arstechnica

"All in all, we would say that is one of our favorite games that we have played so far on the Nintendo floor. The gameplay is slick and makes you feel as if you are really playing the game. We know we can't wait to play this game around our office, and we are sure that once you put your hands on the game, you will feel the same way. Simply put, Madden '07 embodies Nintendo's Wii's catchphrase: playing = believing."

- IGN

...Ya its all in the heads of the fanboys....nothing to do with Joystiq at all....

"Nintendo said themselves!! "If you as serious gamers don't have patience for load screens, imagine first-timers?

Then woudnt the SAME thing apply to the controller?"

Well most of teh times you dont start teh game from teh middle, they start off with tutorials.

also the other games are meant to attract non gamers. I dont think theyd pick up madden or zelda as their first game

# Doesn't work well with certain games, i.e. Madden where stroke motions differ than real life ones (you don't pass a football by flicking your wrist).

O, RLY?? What games exactly would those be? The games that aren't even finished yet, or the games that havent come out yet? And, yeah, divert the b****** to the guys at EA Sports.

# Rumble feature feels weak. Nuff said.

I can assume you were using a corded controller? If not, well you can guess, but as for the weakness, hmm, you say you were using the wireless...no.. that wasn't it, oh well I just don't understand what your opinion of a weak rumble is, are you talking cell phone rumbling, wacky-ball rumbling, or washing-machine?Check this out, you know the cone of vision thing? Same thing here. Point the plays of course, but to pass, hike with A, and a movable arc shows up and when you hover near a reciever, hit A again. Then, your control the movement with the Nunchuk, and stiffarm with the Wiimote! I love it already. Passing plays, after the hike would be so exciting and tense. I play alot of consoles [DS, XBOX], and in times of quick actions, I can't remember which side the X is on, while a selection made with a strictly visual clue would cut down on the ABXYO[]'s of videogames and make them closer to not just the real thing, but real play.

# If no real-life motions are associate with a game, does motion control add value to the gaming experience?

Did you mean associated? Hm.

I'm afraid you are going to have to give an example of this "mystery" game your talking about.

But soft, let me give you an example in it's heretofore.

Imagine a DS game. Okay now imagine, it's Fall 2004 and you expect this to be the greatest innovation to hit portable gaming.* You purchase Rayman DS and The Urbz. Your expectations have been obscured by your own vomit.
These games have virtually no worthy touch screen functions whatsoever. It's like I found an old N64 at a yard sale with an unlabeled cart still in it. When you bring it home.........
......................
......................
Superman 64.

Okay so it's not THAT bad, but I think the developers will use common sense in deteremining when where and how motion-sensitive controls are implemented. And remember the Virtual Console, will those games be motion-sensitive???? HMMM?????!!!!!!


*I didn't really mean all that. Touchscreens are old hat, and so are two screens.

Duh, Game and Watch. Look it up. GOSH!

I'm not sure I mind flicking wrist to throw behaviour. Does it at least feel as though you have control over how far you are throwing?

The biggest question.
Can I switch to normal controller mode? Because what if my arm is really tried but want to keep playing it.

How many times can one go fishing or sword fighting before this gets old. Sony's controller is going to seem old real quick as the novelty wears off and all we are left with is tired arms.

This has all been done before...remember the power glove...yep it was cool for 15 minutes back then too. I predict that about a year from now...hardly anyone will be using the Wiimote. Their games will switch back to the normal controller with Nintendo having it's tail between it's legs.

I play allot of FPS, RPG and Racing titles...and an occasional Sport title. I just don't see how it would be better to play any of these generes using a wand and flicking my rist for hours on end.

My crap how Kameo would have sucked if I had to flail my arms like a fool for 12 hours. What about online play...the controller certainly doesn't lend to long hours playing online.

God forbid someone doesn't like the Wii controller.

"intuitive

adj 1: spontaneously derived from or prompted by a natural tendency; "an intuitive revulsion" 2: obtained through intuition rather than from reasoning or observation

I suppose it's possible you were being sarcastic. But the definition of something that's "intuitive" is that you don't *have* to "get used to it". That's pretty much the *opposite* of intuitive."

That would be true, unless of course you had spent the better portion of your life doing something counter-intuitively and had gotten used to it. For instance, gesture-based web browsing. Most people have spent the length of their experience with the internet clicking the buttons "Back" or "Forward". As such, they have gotten used to the button-based interface. This doesn't mean that the interface is "intuitive", it just means that the person has adapted to it. Enter an interface such as gesture-based browsing or rocker button browsing, where by a stroke forward with the mouse means forward or a right click and a left click in rapid succession means back. These methods of browsing may be more "intuitive" to most users, but will undoubtedly take some getting used to regardless.

So, the fact that intuitive controls are "derived from natural tendencies" doesn't mean they don't take getting used to, espeically in situations where people have been trained to use counterintuitive and unnatural control styles.

Can someone tell me, who still play EA sports games anyway?

I think 99% of you are somewhat missing the point here.

Wii controller only captures the movement. The processing of that is up to the game code. In other words, all this "intuition" or "realism" issues are up to the game programmers who write a code to implement and process a certain movement.

That in itself isn't about Wii controllers, but the games and their developers individually.

Taken from a comment I made yesterday:

Is anyone else sick of all this "motion" stuff yet?

I mean damn, when I play games it's to chill, have a beer, kick back, and relax.

I play basketball 6 times a week, and occasionally go golfing and/or play football weekly. The last thing I wanna do when I get home is turn on my console and start swinging the controller around the room and getting all crazy.

I wouldn't be surprised if a "virtual tanning booth" was in store, so everyone can get a sweet tan to go with the toned physique they should have from playing these games.

I guess this is all a ploy by the gaming industry to turn gaming "geeks" into "studs"? Who knows? Count me out on this "motion" stuff for the time being.

# Doesn't work well with certain games, i.e. Madden where stroke motions differ than real life ones (you don't pass a football by flicking your wrist).

# If no real-life motions are associate with a game, does motion control add value to the gaming experience? (undetermined)

Exactly. You may aswell just push a button. What is exactly more realistic or immersive about flicking a remote to throw a ball instead of pressing a button?

If the action you perform with the Wii-mote does'nt represnet or have anything to do with what happens on the screen then it's a waste of time.

So i can flick a remote to through a ball instead of pressing a button? WOW, big f******* deal.

All Nintendo have done with this is isolate developers. This contoller will only work at it's best with simple party games etc.

It would'nt be so bad it the machine itslef was'nt so underpowered compared to the ps3 and 360. At least then games like Zelda, Mario and Metroid would look a whole lot better and more immersive. God i wish the actual machine was more powerfull. I look at Sonic on the 360 and i can only dream of how good Mario Galaxy would of looked on a nintendo machine with the same power.

The greatest console ever made was the SNES because it had the best graphics, great controller and great 3rd party support and games. This is what i wanted with the Wii but it's not going to happen. Damn you Nintendo. :(

Hmm, very interesting how the last point is mentioned as a con. I really wouldn't put it as a con. Where the Wii controller is associated with real-life motions, it adds immense value. But where it may not mimic real-life motion, it does not detract from the game experience does it. It's not like a standard controller adds to the gaming experience in that situation.
So instead of a button press, you have a small gesture. I am willing to make that change if in the rest of the cases (where controller mimics real-life motion) the game experience changes hugely.

Quoted from the post:

"Having spent two days now with Nintendo's Wii controller, here's what we THINK up to this point."

Notice the word, think? See, yeah, I feel maybe they've been too hard on the controller, but who can blame them? Its the first time they've played it, with a bunch of early demos. They aren't being optimistic, sure, but do you have to be? Look at the hype it got. Frankly, despite being a Nintendo fanboy, I'm sorta glad they're being HONEST about their experience. Besides, just because a lot of people seem to be enjoying the Wii doesn't mean everyone will. Did everyone like Halo? No. Does everyone like DS? No. Does everyone like the PS2 controller? No. Does everyone like keyboard and mouse? No. Does everyone pick up on things as fast or the same way as everyone else? Hell no.

No holds barred opinions; maybe Joystiq was overall disappointed with the controller because I think a lot of people expected something a bit greater with the thing. Actually, I am disappointed with it. I expected more, but I am still excited to try it. Everyone who has said that Joystiq is being too hard is just being a stupid fanboy. You all didn't want this new thing to be a shred of disappointment, and someone felt it was. Sorry they don't bend their opinions to satisfy you. And why should they? Do you give them money to do so? Not likely, so back off.

Still, I want the damn Wii, I just hope these minor issues will be fixed, but I'm sure they will, if the developers are smart.

hahaaa I agree with many of the posts here. If many gamers have spent the last few years if not the last decade playing games with dual analog or single analog setups of some kind, how can you not expect them to need time to get used to a new control scheme. People can be such idiots. Ask dual analog Halo players that are experts to play on mouse and keyboard and see how quickly they get owned because of the new controls. Obviously it's going to take time.

How was it when you first played with an analog stick? how about a six button layout? how about dual analog in a FPS for the first time? Who the hell was "used" to it as soon as they picked up the controller?
Give me a break.

I like how a lot of the comments are along the lines of "I'll be tired of moving my arms and I won't be able to play for 300 hours at a time!"

Good! Go outside!

I'm so surprised that big commercial gaming sites with Nintendo sponsored ads are complimenting the Wii while blog sites like Joystiq are "up in the air" about it.

Wait... no I'm not

Man. Joystiq says something good about Nintendo and people are complaining about how biased they are and how they are all Nintendo fanboys. Then they go and give some sour opinions on the Wii, and there is an immediate backlash. It seems that people are either adamantly praising Nintendo, or they have a mission to convince everyone that Nintendo is teh suck.

Take Joystiq's comments for what they are. Use them to stimulate discussion. It doesn't mean that you have to believe what they say. They are merely commenting on their own experience. They aren't trying to make it your own, well, unless you let them.

What I gather from the Wii controller is that, love it or hate it, everyone wants to try it at least once. And what some people were saying above is true: it is up to developers to capitalize on the uniqueness of the controller.

I don't think the commentors here are being very reasonable.

If valid criticism isn't leveled at the games and at Nintendo, then problems or mediocrities that do exist will never be resolved.

Much better, Joystiq. Your own opinions are more interesting than "I heard some guy say to some other guy."

jon said: "This has all been done before...remember the power glove...yep it was cool for 15 minutes back then too."

Cool for 15 minutes? Sorry, no. It was expensive, worked poorly and had support in all of 2 games, one of which wasn't released in Japan. It sold SO poorly that PAX, the company that released it in Japan (not Nintendo, by the way) went out of business.

If you're going to target a Nintendo failure, at least target one BY Nintendo, like the Virtual Boy.

I am really looking forward to trying the controller, the online reports have been mixed to say the least.

Kokatu has a video where they interview people after using the wiimote, most people say it's easy to use quite quickly.

I do find it strange that IGN, 1up and others seem so positive and Joystiq is more cautious. Could it be that Joystiq doesn't review games and need advance copies so can be more critical of Nintendo?

It seems that Nintendo will get a lot of feedback from E3 and could turn control problems around before launch date. I especialy hope that Metroid gets work as the turning mechanism looks terrible.

its a game for crying out loud. nintendo is just trying to make a different way for us to have fun. we have been using analog sticks since for 10 years, lets give this a try and then start criticizing it once we have something to actually say about how it feels.

Well, at least Nintendo has people talking. Sheesh.

Just to clarify my points. I'm all in favor of skepticism. I'm skeptical myself and won't pass judgment until I get my hands on it and play myself.

My comments about the pros and cons are simply my opinions. I don't care about rumble and never have. I turn it off anyway, so if there's no rumble or I can't feel it, I won't be sad.

As for the control schemes, there's no reason why you can't be disappointed with a game that uses the Wiimote poorly or just dislike the Wiimote. It's your opinion. But if you dislike the control scheme because the gestures don't make sense in the context of the game (i.e. non-intuitive) or because the game doesn't make good use of the technology, that falls on the developers. If they're going to utilize it, they need to do it in a way that makes sense or not do it at all. It's just like a regular controller. If the control scheme sucks, you don't blame the controller, you blame the person that came up with the scheme.

In the long run, it might turn out that the Wiimote was a bad idea and just isn't feasible as a video game controller. In that case, we'll all have a good laugh at Nintendo's expense just like we do about R.O.B., the Power Glove, and Virtual Boy. In the meantime, though, the onus is on developers to make good use of it. Especially since they have a choice to not use it at all. If EA's choices for controls in Madden are shit, that's EA's fault.

Hm, I think there's a lot of miscommunication in this blog. While I do appreciate that Joystiq is giving their honest opinion about the OVERALL EXPERIENCE, their wording seems to send "honest, constructive criticism" to NINTENDO. And while yes, there are a few bumps with the controller-to-TV connection, the vast majority of videos I personally have seen of first-timers playing, for example, Mario Galaxy - have had no problems at all... with a giant smile on their face, the entire time.

Regardless, this is what I'm trying to say - Regardless of Joystiq's intentions, they have caused some people, fanboy or not (God, how I hate that word, it's truly ridiculous), to be a bit angry. It is interesting, in my opinion, that Joystiq is one of the minority companies/reporters that seem to see such numerous flaws with the gameplay. I personally find it strange that some people are absolutely raving about the new Metroid while others are quick to bash this "turning" control.

I think ALL of us need to keep something in mind:

While those who have played Wii at E3 DO have more experience with the thing than us who aren't that lucky, you MUST remember that this the first time they got to play the damn thing. Don't even try to deny your first time playing a N64 - I for one, who had undeniably mastered the SNES, absolutely SUCKED with the new joystick controls of the N64 controller. Sure, I WANTED to blame my suckiness on the controller, but really it was my lack of experience that deterred from my skill.

And while this is only one part of the equation, I feel like Joystiq (and some other reporters!) have forgotten to keep that in mind. Remember, the majority of these people have only played the thing for a combined time of one hour at most; it took me (and most of my friends/family) weeks/months to master the N64 controls. So before ANYONE can make TRUE JUDGEMENTS (opinions however, are welcome!) one must own a Wii and several different games.

Which brings me to my main point: 99% of the 'problems' Joystiq and other reporters are experiencing are not 'PROBLEMS' at all! Was there ever a point when the Wii remote itself went completely wacked? Did the connection between the remote and the TV ever actually fail?

Even if it had, this is something to be expected; this is Nintendo's first time introducing Wii to such a vast public audience... we are not professional gamers OR developers with this thing just yet. We are mere amateurs, just as most of us were when we first played the N64!

I understand that Joystiq is just stating its personal opinions about the controller, but I personally wish they would send its criticism and opinions more to the developers of the games that they struggled most with. You must remember that, aside from 1st party titles (which, mind you, have recieved the most praise!), Nintendo creates the Wii controller (which is nearly perfect) and then sends it out to developers across the WORLD to deal with.

Many peopl here, myself included, find it a bit unfair to say "Hmm we're unsure about this whole 'Wii' thing". Rather they should be saying "Hmm we're unsure about the controls that EA decided to use in the game".

Another thing we all must remember is that we all are expecting different things from this system! Those expectations lie in the hands of - not only Nintendo - but the game developers, also!

In my personal opinion (based on the majority of what I have read and heard) is that Nintendo has done 99% of its part in providing:

A) An ergonomic, stylish, well-constructed, well-performing, and INNOVATIVE controller.
B) A solid diverse spectrum of different genres of games... of course, we should all remember that not every time of game will work on the Wii - Nintendo itself has realized that, hense it's ability to depend on the GC controller for such a minority of games.
C) A great atmosphere for new gaming.

You also must remember that - for those who have experienced connection problems - these Wii's are all lined up RIGHT next to another. Each individual is surrounded by what appears to be at least 49 OTHER consoles... by a mere 5 feet! I personally think it's a miracle Nintendo has been able to offer such a welcoming, new experience to so many players at once!

Of COURSE people are going to have problems with the thing, but I think it is our job - as consumers, spectators, and critics alike - to give another look at TO WHOM we are sending our own personal opinions/suggestions/criticisms.

Kudos to Nintendo for doing their job in bringing its innovative product 99% of the way to the ultimate goal!

You know you like it.

"you don't pass a football by flicking your wrist"

Vince Young does.

The question isnt whether or not the controller mimics real life movements, but whether or not the controller is immersive, intuitive, fun, and easy. Take Super Mario Galaxy, where you shake the controller to twirl. You aren't actually spinning it around, but from the impressions I've read, it definitely fits the bill above. Don't be stupid- since when has anyone ever cared about whether or not control in a game copies real life movement? Games are supposed to be, first and foremost, entertainment. Realism is secondary, especially when it's not as fun.

I would expect there to be some issues with the Wiimote; it is after all, being played on Demos. That would seem obvious to me. It should also seem obvious that ign, et al., should be biased as their sites depend on customer loyalty, regardless of the system.

I would have to agree with Nate on a point or two, however. When I want to exercise, I'll activily look for it, but pass on turning the Wii on for it. I prefer a more "chill" approach to gaming, i.e., laying on the floor, pillow under head, and a drink nearby. I do look forward to playing the Wii, but not as my primary source for gaming or exercise. I feel the system specs will handicap this "innovative" machine sooner, rather than later.

I've always wondered how online games will work with the controller, specifically the anti-cheating stuff. Because with a freehand controller like that, people will inevitably find ways to make actions easier, like playing really close up to the TV or something. For instance, most good donkey konga players will just slap the sides of the drum for a clap rather than actually clapping. So, if its online and you can't actually tell if the other person is cheating, how can you be sure of the fairness?

"As for the rumble, I never use rumble and am actually glad it's disappearing from the Dual Shake."

Actually, I found it amazing of how weird it felt NOT to have rumble. I bought a wireless PS2 controller about a month ago and couldn't stand it because it didn't have rumble. It felt empty. The surround sound didn't save it, either. I returned it and bought one with rumble. Much better.

To me, the rumble feature is more like an alert of when you are getting attacked. It also accentuates sound. For example, in Shadow of the Colossus...when one of the Colossi pounds it's foot next to you, the violent vibration in addition to the sound makes all the difference.

As far as the Wii is concerned, some rumble is better than none. I'm really disappointed that the PS3 won't have rumble at all. I've grown much accustomed to it over the last several years.

This should never have been the central feature of a new console. Like a lightgun it will get very heavy, very quickly. And i agree whats the point of motion moves not matching real life moves. For FPS im willing to give it a go, but beyond pointing at things i really cant see it achieving anything. Zelda with odd button and movement seems complicated already, How will non gamers be any better off. A Dual Stick controller is standard nowadays and it took countless revisions to get here. Ask a fighter pilot to fly with a remote compared to a real stick, or a crane operator to flick his wrist to lower a load. You need tactile feedback for precise movements, not by flicking about, and videogames need similar precision.

Surely no one will read this, so far down the page. I don't think the current rumble feature is final. During Nintendo's media briefing, during the unvieling of the speaker in the controller, they were very carefull to note that there is more that they are not saying. You could read into that any way you like, but I remain adament that even mild gyroscopic feedback will be a feature in the final controller.

Thank you if read this.

I have enjoyed reading all the comments here as there is a lot of good back and forth. I think, ultimately, as others have said, we are going to have to make the determination of whether we like the control on our own. I expect that demos won't be perfect and I also expect that in the next 4-6 months many of the kinks that joystiq, arstechnica, and ign found will be worked out of the good games. Let's face it, there are good and bad games with any system. Some of the ones that were demo'd may ultimately fall into the bad or so-so camp. Personally, I am very excited by the Wii and the direction Nintendo is going. Even if the Wii doesn't work, which I think is highly unlikely, then at least the industry can say, "We tried it."

I don't think the wiimote will be a dismal failure but I still think it's limiting the type of games that can be adapted to be played with it.

No way could you properly play a fps with the nunchuck and the wiimote combination using the motion sensors for movement and such. FPS is purely a twitch/instinct type of game. Sure, you can probably slow it down enough for it to be playable with the wiimote, but for a face paced game, it's not going to work.

How about a flight sim? Pitch, yaw, roll? Not going to work. Even with the PS3 Dual Shake, it's doesn't work like a Joystick and throttle/rudder control setup.

How about a driving game? What would be the motion sensors used for?

I can see sports games like football, tennis, golf, table tennis, ice hockey to be playbale, but games like basketball, soccer, baseball it's harder to see how developers can get it to work. It's probably easier to do arcadish sports games than simulation sports games. For example, the Tennis game using the wiimote, it was using the wiimote to swing but the player movement was computer assisted (if not totally controlled).

A lot of the games will probably use the wiimote like Super Smash Brothers Brawl and not for the motion sensor capabilities. I doubt the Dual Shake gimmick of the PS3 will be utilize much at all.