Yes and no. I think the content comes first. My non-gaming friends were receptive to Flower, Everyday Shooter, PixelJunk Monster, Heavy Rain, SingStar, Buzz, etc. All with controllers. They also play light gun games in the arcade.
As long as the content is relevant (and appeals) to them, plus the control scheme is simple, the controller should not be an issue. The Wii controller works because it offers a completely new experience on top of compelling content and simplicity. All 3 factors work together.
There are people at the extreme end of the spectrum (e.g., senior citizens who don't appreciate technologies, like Hayao Miyazaki). That's where Wii-type and Kinect-type intuitive controls become a bigger deal. But it may or may not work.
The controller is a big barrier to casual acceptance though. Even for me, the controller itself is a big hurdle for console FPS games. Having to remember which button does what. I STILL don't get all the buttons right in Halo: Reach. And thus end up rarely using grenades/special abilities/jump/etc...
Button mapping can be a problem. I am confused too when playing MAG using Move. But that's a core gamer's FPS.
Then again, I also forgot about swiping the controller to jab my opponents even if it's supposed to be intuitive. For a light gun game, if all they have is point, shoot and dodge, then there is no confusion. If we add more functions, then more people will get confused -- with or without controller. e.g., if we add walking, then the player has to figure out where the next objective is, and what's the best way to get there.
I think if they add better simulation, then may be a title can cross casual and expert gamer boundary. e.g., For Table Tennis, the Bronze level TT and Championship Cup TT plays differently although the control scheme hasn't changed.
I am interested to find other approaches.
