I agree with you on touch controlls if we are talking about merely having virtual buttons or some shit. It doesn't work, and companies (Sega included with their early iOS ports) were wrong to go down that road.
But as I said, games can be VERY enjoyable if they are designed with touch in mind. Again, my fav example, Crazy Taxi CR has excellent gameplay with simple touch controlls and mechanics that fully incorporate them.
As with everything platform there are good and bad games. Good mobile games fully incorporate touch mechanics and balance gameplay time/microtransactions. Bad ones don't. Let's not throw every mobile game in the same bag.
Take Sonic Runners for example. You can play endlessly if you're good enough. This is a good mechanic.
Your Total War example, very bad mechanics. There is good and bad, we should not ignore the good because there is bad.
"But 99% of games are bad"
Tell me something new 
You're right, it is expected that 40 years later games are better. Point is, if I can enjoy Star Wars Empire Strikes Back on the Atari, why wouldn't I enjoy Temple Run or whatever mobile game people enjoy these days.
I'm talking about touch screen controls in general, you cannot escape the fact that you need to physically cover the display to play the game. Considering we are talking about 'Mobile' devices, this means the screen is already generally small, or you limit the 'mobility' of the device. You can make games around it, but in the end you're ultimately just trying to work around a liability.
There are some games that benefit from it, but I can't think of many, if any, examples where another input system wouldn't be superior.
It's basically just the lowest possible entry point for consumers, everyone has hands (well, most people) and it doesn't require any peripherals.
I'm also not saying all mobile games are skinner boxes, but I'm just pointing out the difference between inserting more quarters and micro-transactions in the popular model that is being used.
I don't know how Sonic Runners works because the game looks incredibly dull to me.
But we have far more options than just the games from 4 decades ago. If you feel that Temple run and the like are equal to other modern games then that's fine, but I disagree.
Again, not all mobile phone games are skinner boxes or terrible, but I've outlined reasons above why none of them have held my interest for very long. I will say that I played Hitman Go a bit this morning on the train and it's still quite fun. I bought it for $1 in the Eidos humble bundle though. I'll probably stop playing it by the time I buy a new book to read instead.
Well yes if you have an iPhone but I have a Note 3. My finger probably only covers 5% of the screen at most. Although I can agree on the physical feedback, I've found Sonic the Hedgehog 2 to be excellent on mobile and have had no issues with the controls after getting used to the lack of buttons.
I have a One plus One which is also a sizeable phone, but I still don't like to play anything real-time because of the issue of covering the screen with my hand and fingers. You can mitigate the downsides by making the display larger but you still have to cover the screen.
I used to play emulated games on my phone but found them borderline unplayable with touch screen. If you can play Sonic 2 then I'm genuinely impressed. I just find it too frustrating to be fun.
I just find Chain Chronicle enjoyable in short bursts, the strategic elements are unfortunately undermined if you level up to greatly, but the cast of characters, art and story was enjoyable enough to me to keep playing. There's going to be balancing issues addressed in version 2 with a lot more content that I'm looking forward too. The social aspect is pretty fun too, who'd have thought it'd be what I post most on NeoGAF about : P
Also I don't know why you wouldn't hold any hopes of an action game from SEGA ever again. I think you might be a bit too harsh on their production capability, wither the project gets localised or if it's something that interests you is something else entirely.
You find Chain Chronicles more fun and involving than Bayonetta? What about other Sega RPGs?
I would like to try Chain Chronicles, but it required me to be always online to play it (presumably so Sega can sell my personal details to the Yakuza) and it kept nagging me to buy shit even when the game wasn't running, so I uninstalled it.
As for Sega making another action game, do you really, truly believe there's more than a 1 in 1000 chance of that? Sega didn't even want to publish Bayonetta 2 which is an established IP that they own with a decent first game launch. Why would they try something again? They think translating PSO or Yakuza is 'too risky', why would they make a niche genre game?
When you say it wouldn't appeal to me, what do you mean, I feel I'm pretty open to most genres and styles if the game looks fun. I don't even see them making one for Japan only at this rate.
