I think it's clear from the launch conference that Microsoft had a far different vision for Xbox One originally than what they have decided on now.

But Kinect always had the problem that it couldn't be a pure control input on its own for most games. The Wiimote and nun-chuck solved the issue of navigating 3D space while using motion controls. The Kinect, in that regard, went backwards.

It doesn't need a price cut. It's not going to help it, and if it did it would be very short term. It's already at a very reasonable price and there are good bundles. The interest just isn't there for the console right now. It is slowly growing, but it's not going to break any records lol. Just like the GC it's still not going to sell well with a price cut. 

The Wii U doesn't have a lot of problems. It generally has two. 1. Lack of third party support. 2. Hasn't sold as well as Nintendo would have liked (reasons for this make no difference because it's all the same result to the same problem).  The Gamepad is not a problem for the system, everything that people come up with as reasons to the gamepad being a problem are entirely conjecture without any real evidence. 

I wouldn't be surprised to see a price drop once the console is still able to profit from a sale with a price drop. Dropping the price to a point below profit won't help Nintendo because what they are worried about is profit at this point and it's going to be a tight rope walk for them with such a low install base of the Wii U. If they were to lower the cost below the profit point, they would be taking a massive risk with the hope it sells super well and that all those that buy the system purchase good amounts of software to go with it. It might only need 1 or two, but it might need 3 or 4, only Nintendo really knows at this point. 

Nobody even knows what the NX is, and we won't know until it is brought up in 2016 and there likely won't be anything tangible till 2017. Nintendo is not a stupid company, I'm sure they have taken consideration of the different outcomes of the announcements just recently made. 

Since both actually had this camera/kinect concept at first, I'm not sure this is entirely correct. The PS4 dropped it to undercut the price of the X1. To combat that, the X1 should have really made use of the kinect to show what it could really do, but backed down like a dog with its tail between its legs. Now we really have near clone consoles with very little differentiating them in any way with the exception of a few exclusives on either side. In the end, it will make very little difference which console someone picks up now, they will likely just go for the cheaper option because they are mostly buying these consoles for the new COD or other massive third party sellers that really actually eclipse most first party... As sad as that is. 

I think this sums it up perfectly.

it was part of their whole bid to take over the living room, but they really overestimated how much people wanted to say "xbox on"

Kinect was to MS what 3D was to Nintendo during the 90's; a fantasy of the heads of the division but not something that gave the medium anything we wanted or needed and ultimately a waste of time.
One of the first things I said about the Xbox One when it was unveiled was that mandatory Kinect was a huge mistake and I wrote in the UNITY thread that Kinect and the Gamepad would work against their intended purposes of appealing to a wider audience and instead narrow it for presenting a bipolar image and having low levels of proper implementations.

i really dont think they had any real intention of using it for gaming. If they did we would have seen more than 3 games in a year and a bunch of DL stuff. Gamers so through it and rejected as they should.

Original Kinect purpose was attracting casual audience.
Kinect 2 purpose (since it was considered as obligate part of console) was advertisement market.

maybe they didnt show anything becasue there was nothing to show. All the talk of smart glass and what not wasnt ready to be shown becasue they were still probably working on it or worse case it was BS to begin with. From what ive played 2.0 didnt even work that much better than the original and thats not something you wanna bring attention too.

Everyone was in awe when Microsoft unveiled the first Kinect while demonstrating the Milo demo. Many gamers thought that this would actually be a game, or at least, be an example of what is to come. People were fooled into buying the first Kinect, so it baffles me as to why Microsoft would make Kinect 2.0 a key component of their new generation console.

You tricked your consumer the first time and are now making it mandatory? Really? They clearly didn't think this through...