I didn't say realistic, I said feasible.

Sure, leaping five metres is more realistic than moving a stick. It would just be completely impossible to play like that. Which is exactly why I'm saying that this isn't something that motion control can handle.

He's not.  Jump to 1:02 where he opens his hand to fire, quite clearly there is no nunchuck in his hands and his other is flat on his leg.

From the Youtube page:

"MaxFPS is a high speed kinematic tracker; one hand (yes only one) is used for direction control (turn right/left), forward/reverse (variable speed), look (and target) up/down, jump, change weapon, fire and continues fire."

Forward is being controlled by the position of his hand relative to the camera.

There are MANY other examples I've seen, such as leaning forward and backwards to move.

I'm not saying these are ideal controls by any means but you said no one had done it, which is false. 

Having said that, you don't need to move the entire length of a court to get the feeling of playing.  Your brain can adjust to using a scaled ratio of your movements to the movements of your character.  Obviously they feel it works just fine or they wouldn't release it. 

Perhaps you should hold off on saying it's not possible until you actual see the product?

Is moving your hand forwards and backwards to walk and run any closer to real life than moving a stick? Not really, no.

The whole point of motion control was to make gaming feel more natural and fluid. Moving your hands around to control an FPS, while cool, does not achieve that goal.

Think about moving forward while crouched in a game. You're moving far slower than you expect, and it's horrible and disorienting. This would be much worse.

but eliminates the supposed 'need' for a controller, there is none needed, that is what kinect is about. I am sure Ms has their own little developers figuring this out as well. Everyone is getting amazed at the developers. Ms is focusing on other things, they prob knew you could do that all along.

They just did eyebrows for gods sakes. There are ways around it

No, but it shows what's possible.  There were times when the thought of having to aim with a thumbstick was a ridiculous notion to people who played FPSs with a mouse.  How could a slow thumbstick compete with the ultrafast mouse?  Well that proved to be quite false, didn't it?  It's all a question of what people are used to.

What is horrible and disorienting to you might feel much more natural to someone else, especially when a game is designed to use real world motions.  The issue with "gamers" is they're used to pressing a button to jump, which is an almost instantaneous action and seeing the reaction on screen, whereas a real life action needs to be anticipated and executed sooner. 

Once you get used to having to use a "real" motion however I think it will become much more natural.

Again though, I think you should wait until you can play it to judge if it'll be "horrible and disorienting"

Feasible meaning the tools you have at your disposal. You then talk about you play tennis so you are bringing realism into it.

Neither option is realistic, Kinect is more so... IF it does the mini tennis court theory. The feasibility Kinect would be the most feasible without a nunchuk in that case. And no, we are 100 percent in agreeance that tennis will never imo be realistic on a home console with motion control or not, so as i was saying before.

For the feasibility reasons without a nunchuk is prob more so when Kinect is concerned, again this is my opinion.

Aiming with a thumbstick is still a ridiculous notion to PC gamers. It's an inferior control scheme, and most people, even non-PC gamers will admit that.

I suppose we can't really know how good the game will be until it releases. But I'm going to predict with some degree of confidence that, if it is controlled solely with motions with Kinect, the Xbox 360 version will be greatly inferior to the other two.

We invented the button to make a difficult task easier, so removing it will be a difficult procedure. Roundhouse kick like in the original Natal trailer, anyone? Motion control is supposed to make gaming accessible, not limit it to professional athletes. As has been correctly stated, tennis in real life is separate from tennis in a game and should remain so to some degree.

Kinect is more realistic.

I suppose it could be argued that pure motion control is more feasible.

However, it's certainly not more practical, and it just seems to me as though they're shoving motion control where it's not going to fit. Would you want to drive your car by blinking?

Of course, only time will tell.

KINECT COMPATIBLE!!!!

Woooooooohoooooooooo

Nice, I always welcome more motion plus games, since they are so few, especially a quality one like Virtua Tennis