I thought this IGN article had an interesting part regarding TCon: http://wii.ign.com/articles/108/1082647p2.html
"None of the panel members were enthusiastic about the potential of either system, at least in the short term. Sebring thinks the successful adoption of those interface schemes won't happen soon. He points to Red Steel on the Wii as a painful first step towards motion control but he's also encouraged by the progress shown in The Conduit. Sebring thinks that until a title sets the standard for the interface, as Halo did for console shooters, developers can't begin the process of refining the system.
Benito further adds that shooter players strive for an efficiency that's not yet achievable with motion control."
I'm curious to see what, if any tweaks or changes HVS will make, but I thought TCon set a standard by the fact that it allowed great customizable control. Halo set a singular standard that allowed others to copy and proliferate, but it wasn't flexible. So, I don't think the Halo example is applicable here. With motion controls, I think it's critical for users to use them where they want. Plus, whereas Halo had an effect on PS2 FPS to an extent, motion controls will still be different for the Wii, Move, and Natal that there can never be a "standard."
And efficiency? The fact is that that is often a learned habit. How are motion controls innately less efficient unless you are talking about the simple idea of less movement is required for gamepad controls? If so, I think that's a trivial notion of efficiency.
I couldn't agree with you more. Hell, since TCon introduced a 100% customizable interface, I feel that it should be standard in every FPS on the market (or at least 100% customizable controls if devs don't want you to tweak the HUD).
Currently playing: Modern Warfare 2 (360), Borderlands, Metroid Prime Trilogy, Guild Wars