By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - Will putting kinect in every box really change anything?

wilco on 20 June 2013
snyps said:
wilco said:
snyps said:
One mans gimmick is another mans advantage. I think the majority fear change. Innovation is change. Therefore the majority fears innovation. Kinect will be amazing when a developer spends the time developing the right game for it. That can only happen if the attach rate is high. So yes. Kinect will change things. It's only a matter of time.


That didn't really work out for the WiiU. Unlike the kinect with xbone the gamepad has been a central part of the marketing for the WiiU from day 1 and still nothing compelling has come out of it. Third party developers are barely trying anymore. Just because its bundled with every box does not guarantee support from developers.


Wrong!  In the case of WiiU, every developer is required to have off-tv play or gamepad features of some kind.   Where did you get your information?

 

I'm talking about actually using it in a significant way. Putting a placeholder screen on the gamepad doesn't count.



Around the Network
snyps on 20 June 2013
wilco said:
snyps said:
wilco said:
snyps said:
One mans gimmick is another mans advantage. I think the majority fear change. Innovation is change. Therefore the majority fears innovation. Kinect will be amazing when a developer spends the time developing the right game for it. That can only happen if the attach rate is high. So yes. Kinect will change things. It's only a matter of time.


That didn't really work out for the WiiU. Unlike the kinect with xbone the gamepad has been a central part of the marketing for the WiiU from day 1 and still nothing compelling has come out of it. Third party developers are barely trying anymore. Just because its bundled with every box does not guarantee support from developers.


Wrong!  In the case of WiiU, every developer is required to have off-tv play or gamepad features of some kind.   Where did you get your information?

 

I'm talking about actually using it in a significant way. Putting a placeholder screen on the gamepad doesn't count.


I still say It's only a matter of time!



zuvuyeay on 20 June 2013

but kinect is needed for the new interface/os functions which is a big part of the X1 isn't it.merging all the media capabilities



                                                                                                                                        Above & Beyond

   

tuscaniman99 on 20 June 2013

Personally I would probably buy the Xbox One without Kinect if they gave the option but I'm not mad that I will have a Kinect. I'm excited to use the voice commands and some of the other nice features included. My wife is getting into this fitness kick so she can use it too. MS will get the price right in the future. In a few years time both consoles will be priced similarly. Right now its all about the hardcore early adopters. I predict a $100 price drop next year right before Halo 5 releases.



Adinnieken on 27 June 2013
LemonSlice said:

Kinect is bundled so that developers can be certain everyone has one and can develop features for it. Casuals will like the improved Kinect, but I hope no core games force you to use it.

IMO despite the inferior camera, PScamera + Move, or maybe just with the light on the controller if that works well, will be a superior combo (see media molecule Feb demo), albeit underutilized because of it not coming as standard.

Maybe Sony ends up bundling the camera with every system down the line, should only add 50$ to the price. But as you said, with the privacy paranoia, it was smart of them not to include it with the system right now. And with only costing 60$, maybe it will be a no brainer accessory if they end up bundling it with some cool new motion based games (not Playroom for sure).

The Kinect can track the Xbox One's controller due to a built in IR LED.   So, a lot of the features Move has, the Xbox One now has too.



Around the Network
Adinnieken on 27 June 2013
Machiavellian said:

That probably would be true if both devices operated the same but they do not.  It will be much easier for MS to give a little fund for developers to use Kinect in their games compared to developers adding the same features to Sony product when the install base is a wild guess.  Always remember time is money and i a developer isn't getting paid for it or can confirm enough install base then its not worth their time, money or resources to do it.


I sort of agree with you, but there are features that both will definitely support that a developer can build in and make optional.

That said, I think Kinect requires seeing the bigger picture and not the myopic viewpoint of a "core"gamer.



Areal-Llort on 27 June 2013

Personally, I was planning to buy the Kinect at some point for games like Kinect Sports, Dance Central, and the Fantasia game. Since it's bundled with the system, I guess that saves me time.

However, I find it strange that they don't have a separate bundle on the side for people not interested in the Kinect. Suppose the Kinect was a $200 device, they can really bring up the pre-order sales offering the XB1 system for $299 if Kinect wasn't bundled with it.



Michael-5 on 27 June 2013
wilco said:

Developers do not like developing for gimmicks (Second screen thing will soon die as well)

Gamers don't care for it and considering the current privacy paranoia sweeping the nation, the device has gone from useless waste of space to something that people don't want to touch with a ten foot pole.

That's what they said about DS.... I think a second screen could make a big difference, especially for games like Mario Party.

I agree with what you say about Kinect, I don't understand Microsoft. I think with Kinect built in, it just returns more of a profit, and a lot of Americans will still buy an X-Box One over a PS4 because it's American and "good for the economy." I'm sorry, but competition is good for the economy, not greedy capitalist corporations.

I wouldn't mind Kinect if MS would stand behind it, but with Ryse being playable with a controller now......I dunno. I think Ms is trying to make this system appeal as a multi-media device. They want people to watch TV off their X-Box one, and the Kinect interface is kinda cool. I wouldn't mind owning a One with a Kinect sensor if I could play the One with the Kinect physically unplugged.

After their involvement in various scandals about e-mail security, and my bad experience with Microsoft customer service, I can't trust them anymore.



What is with all the hate? Don't read GamrReview Articles. Contact me to ADD games to the Database
Vote for the March Most Wanted / February Results

Goatseye on 27 June 2013

This time developers will put full thought into Kinect based games and will have way better working conditions with a marvelous piece of tech.



ChrolloLucilfer on 27 June 2013

Making the Kinect with the X1 mandatory seem a major mistake to me. The Xbox brand very reliant on third party titles and third party want an equal split between Sony/Microsoft, as if one console becomes to dominate over the other console theirs lesser competition on royalties fees. It's simply not in third party interest to spend extra money to make either xbox1/ps4 version superior to one or the other, unless they get paid handsomely for it.

If they want Kinect to be major selling point for the X1 they can only realistically rely on their own first party development. Looking at Kinect past track record on the Xbox 360, they look likely to struggle to make any worthwhile titles themselves for Kinect 2.