I would bet that PC gamers are actually less likely to have HD TVs than other kinds of gamers, making the PS3 and Xbox 360 more limited in their usefulness.
I don't agree. For gaming alone, that would be true, but I think it's gonna be hard to find a PC Gamer that doesn't appreciate high-def video. And I'm not talking about HD-DVD/Blu-Ray. (When you download game/movie trailers, are they standard-def? I'll actually wait on some trailers until the high-def version comes out.) We are generally movers of technology, not adopters out of neccesity. We aren't PC gamers because we prefer the controls; that's just a bonus. We are PC gamers because we like hardware, options and power.
Of course we appreciate high-def video. But with the exception of over-priced HD-DVD and Blu-ray players, there's just no reason to have it anywhere other than the PC. As you said,
when I download my trailers and such, I do get the high-def versions. That's where the content is. I know that, with my PC, I can get high-def trailers and games and photos and eventually videos (TV and movies) too. For a TV, you have to pay extra. Hell, for a TV, you have to pay period. I'll be the first to admit that I don't pay for TV. I download what I want. Maybe I have to wait a day or so, but I have total control over the content, can archive it for years, and skip commercials. Increasingly there's no usefulness for a TV, especially if your PC display is large enough to act as one. I still think my point stands however. You'll find media buffs all over the technology spectrum, from some guy who's never used a PC but wants a big-screen TV and $2000 sound system to people who have put their PCs right in the middle of that setup. But I think, in general, PC gamers tend to have both the PC hardware, PC knowhow, and display resolution and size such that they have very few reasons to get a TV, period. Someone who has a low-end PC or very little knowledge would have many uses that I wouldn't (watching DVDs and TV shows, playing consoles, listening to the news, etc).
Another thing, as I think you said, is that PC gamers tend to enjoy their FPS titles. We love the precision control of a mouse for aiming, and laugh at the awkward thumb-fumbling controls of consoles. This is exactly why we should embrace the Wii, however. Its control style, with point-and-shoot simplicity and accuracy, bests anything the PC has.
So, was that just personal observation on the Wii-mote potential, or was that based on experience? I'd love to hear more about how it plays if you're already using it.
Observation only, sadly. Our local stores don't have any Wiimotes for the demo units so I can't speak from personal experience. However, I did view a video of two people playing a target practice game. The speed and accuracy with which they lined up shots was quite impressive, and I don't think I could have competed with them if I was using a mouse and keyboard. You can do a sort of test yourself though. Find a couple objects in the room you're in--say, a doorknob, the bottom left corner of a window, the rim of a trash can, a light switch, and a pillow--and see how long it takes for you to point at each of them and say "bang". Do you think you could do that with a PC? Open up Paint, put a few (6-8 maybe) red dots on the screen spread out on the canvas. Sit back a few feet and try the same thing. Point at the dots as fast as you can. Then try to click on each with the mouse (using a different color for the paint brush). See how long it takes you. Now try for accuracy. Using your mouse, try to write "Sweet!" on a blank canvas. Now try doing that with a fingertip.
Its raw potential, if sufficiently accurate, is about as high as you'll be able to get unless you use a touch screen for more fast/accurate input. Whether the Wiimote is this accurate or not is up to debate and testing, however I heard from a friend that it was "dead accurate". I'll update this if/when I get to try out a Wiimote
😉