I thought the whole point of Kinect and the Wiimote both combined as the one concept was to reduce the barriers to entry. The fact that they are similar to games already on the Wii just means that they are they obvious first step games for any next generation control interface to tackle first. They are damned if they do and damned if they don't. If they don't they'll get complaints about how they didn't make the obvious games and if they do they'll get complaints you've raised here.
I see too many people here willing to write things off before they even get a chance to prove themselves. Obviously Kinect and Move will both have their moments in the spotlight and we have a good lead on overall sales here so we ought to be able to tell in very short order if they have flopped or if they are indeed flourishing. People forget that games like the Wii Sports tennis aren't popular because people generally like tennis games but they are popular because they represent a completely new way of playing a tennis game. None of the tennis games afterwards really matched the success of Wii Sports tennis because they lack the value of being a new and unique experience.
Sure, Kinect offers a new way to do the same thing. The idea of which is to reduce the barriers to participation (is this not a good thing?) whilst not trying to duplicate the old methods which involve a physical controller. It offers an even simpler way to jump in and out of multiplayer by placing yourself in the right position to play games. Beyond that it offers a pretty good mic for Live players, a video camera for video calling and a cool hands free media interface which compliments the fact that you can get your content on demand without even leaving the couch.
