The joke was so funny, I forgot to laugh.

And so did Ubisoft which did two camera-based game -- an exercise effort with a faded semi-star (on sale for $29 at some stores) and a sports mini-game compilation that was borderline unplayable.

Mike from Morgantown

I think it will be called "Wii Can" like "Wii can do video chat" got it ?

by the way this thread...kind of lame ... i bet u are having too much free time hahaha

"We Cam"

It watches you play with your Wii.

The company behind Kinect went first to Nintendo presenting their camera, Nintendo literally said: "Too expensive. Not practical. It doesn't deliver what you guys say. Wiimote gives better results. We don't want it. The door out is right there buddy. Kthxbai."

Then they went to Microsoft and were given a "Yes"

http://gamrfeed.vgchartz.com/story/6756/iwata-refused-natal-technology-in-the-past/

I really doubt Nintendo would want to pull of a camera knowing they refused Kinect before Microsoft.

Maybe next gen, they may do something that can track your entire body flawlessly with 1:1 accuracy on every movement at any part of the body. Kinect is an impressive piece of technology but it isn't on par with what was promised on those fake promotional videos, and I think Nintendo would be interested on such a tech if it was actually capable of that.

Not to troll Kinect. Wiimote without the wm isn't capable of doing of what they supposed it would at the first presentation of the thing.

LOL, first sorry, I meant to post this in "Gaming" forum, not "Nintendo" one, to avoid possible excessive trolling (yes, a moderate dose of it was intentional, but not too much!  ) and made the discussion more neutral, but anyway, besides the joke, I was also half serious and agree with you, my reasoning was that camera plus controller is very good for a lot of things, but hands-free camera with depth detection is very good for some other things, and each one can do well a subset of things that the other cannot do well, so next gen consoles will need classic controller, motion detection controller and some kind of 3D camera, to offer a complete set of control options for any possible game, without having any kind of game impossible or heavily crippled. Obviously, as you correctly say, Kinect tech is still expensive now, and it would have been impossible to be included at the beginning of this gen at a reasonable price, even now it would cost almost as much as a Wii, so MS is perfectly right to try to be a pioneer at least in something, this will pay, but next gen will be the real take-off of 3D cameras. BTW, having removed the CPU from the peripheral to keep costs under control, and having to rely on console's processing power, Kinect will reach its full potential next gen too.

LMAO

Maybe the Ewe (eye plus wii) make the Wii life cycle much longer, 4 or 5 years more. :P

Yes, actually Mr.Metralha, two posts before yours, added some meaningful reasoning to the thread and answering him I added my thoughts, I should have done it since the beginning, but I had some housework to do away from the PC and I couldn't back then...   

This. If successful, Kinect will make every current console life cycle longer, not only adding peripherals to extend it, by expanding their potential audience, but also because it will take longer, and to wait for the tech to become cheaper, to be able to include such a complete set of controllers in next gen consoles, keeping costs and launch price under control.

Name it the Wii Eye.

And Comine it with the Vitality Sensor so it can track finger movements, just like Kinect!

..well, at least one finger.

It sounds border line pornographic.