Uh, no. M+ aiming isn't nearly as accurate as IR aiming.
This claim is getting tossed around but it's misleading.
M+ aiming is perfectly accurate. It is as responsive to the movement of the wiimote as IR aiming.
It is not, however, inherently LOCKED to the alignment of the wiimote as IR aiming.
If you try to play the game by pointing at the screen, it will not seem like IR aiming. The game isn't designed to work that way. The wiimote is an
air mouse in the case of this game.
Preferring one method of control or the other is entirely up to the individual. But people need to stop perpetuating the myth that SS's control scheme is "less accurate" than other Wii games. It has the same technical limitations as every other Wii game, no more, no less.
I would love to know where all these "progressive" action/adventure games are that people are playing. I must be missing out on some incredible advances in design if a game can make Lanaryu Desert look old and busted.
Not all, but most, of the criticisms of Skyward Sword boil down to the fact that the team didn't copy the direction of western games precisely and try to equal them toe-to-toe. Gamers follow trends and tend to be affected by what's fashionable. Western games are fashionable. Western style RPGs are what is "standard" now. Games with full voice acting are considered "high budget", because people see budget only in terms of audio visuals, not things like design. It's like the Eurogamer review of Sin & Punishment 2 said: it was the highest budget game you'd play all year... in terms of design budget.
The level design and play mechanic concepts in SS are really sophisticated. They are advanced, polished, intricate evolutions of the kind of mechanics Nintendo is trademarked by. It's just that they're not
goddamn Skyrim. So it is old poopy and made of fail.
The reason why Mario Galaxy is worshiped without the benefit of having yet become old and re-examined, is because
there is no fashionable competition in 3D platform games. There is no
Super Bethesda Brothers that has "progressive" features like full voice acting and ten hours of cut scenes for the modern gamer to drool over and conclude such things are the mark of "real games". So people's appreciation of the style of say, a Mario game, isn't nearly as clouded as it is with a Zelda game.
Why do I suspect Zelda games get re-examined five years later and judged to be classic is because: after the initial warped expectations and false comparisons have long since faded and been forgotten, people find you can still replay a Zelda game and the strength of its design and concepts - even with legitimate flaws taken into account - makes them better than 98% of what anyone else ever turns out.