For example, Street Fighter on a smartphone has the joystick and buttons are mapped onto the screen, forcing you to keep your big, dumb fingers in the way so it's hard to see what you're doing or at least distracting. Controller add-on can be purchased for smartphones if you don't mind making your phone bulky or carting around the accessory and attaching it to play games.
Whereas with the touch screen, you can have as many buttons as you may need. Even have the controls change with different button arrangements in the same game. The touch screen is none of these controls, so it can be any of them.
And, as you explicitly pointed out, when it tries to be a controller that it isn't - such as a joystick and buttons - it sucks horribly at it.
Sorry to necro a month-old thread, but I just watched this episode and was really intrigued by this whole "kinesthetic projection" thing. I didn't get it after watching it over a few times, so I came here to the forums expecting a discussion about it, and there's only a few posts to the effect of, "yeah, I've noticed that."
... one observation I have is that most / all of the remarks here are from the perspective of the enthusiast gamer. One issue that motion controls have had to deal with, is simply resistance from existing gamers who may intrinsically avoid accepting that there's a wholly new kind of interface they're being asked to learn.
For my part, the only challenging parts of Skyward Sword were a few of the overworld puzzles - the dungeon puzzles were always designed very tightly, but in between them there didn't seem to be nearly as much diligence about keeping the next goal from being too obtuse, or making sure that you could get a solid, relevant hint if you got stuck.