I think having Kinect 2.0 mandatory is essential. I think it will be very useful for what we have already seen - navigation, voice controls, etc. Plus their will be many new features that people haven't even thought of yet.

The complaining that 'movement can not be a core gamer' reminds me of how people complained about 'two joystick' back when they were introduced. Too complicated, too hard on your thumbs, not fun - a total fail. An how has that worked out?

I am thankful that they included Kinect and think it will be as essential as a mouse/ball/pad on a PC.

I had fun with Kinect once, it was aweful.

When I mentioned second screens I was talking more about the whole tablet, smart glass add on crap, but I get your point.

Also, do you really believe that people in America buy Xbox out of nationaism? I don't see that. The reason 360 took off in US is because it came out first and was cheaper, allowing it to establish itself as the dominant brand. National sentiment has nothing to do with it. I'm pretty sure American's still prefer Toyota over Ford.

Great point. Even if there is a kinect with every xbox most developers aren't developing solely for xbox so that will not be their only consideration. Will multiplatform titles really bother trying to add features for kinect when the other console doesn't have kinect or even a mandatory eye camera?

It feels almost ironic that I am one of the very few people defending Microsoft's decision here, considering that I'm often a harsh critic of Kinect and am still angry that I paid 130 Euros for that crap that's collecting dust ever since.

The decision to include a camera/microphone with every console is a good one. What's not good is forcing the user to attach it, and the fact that the depth sensing technology is way too expensive for the little use it brings to the average customer.

Sony would have taken the ideal route if they had included the PS4 camera with every console, because the PS4 camera is cheap, yet the most versatile.

Smart Glass, I don't really care for, Windows Phones account for what 3% of Smartphones? Not going to make a difference. Vita-PS4, it's a nice feature, but I don't see it being used much. Chances are most people with a Vita and a PS4 probably have 2 TV's. WiiU's Gameplad, it might not be too bad, especially for the type of games on Nintendo platforms.

Yes, I think a large portion of 360 sales in USA are because of Nationalism, same for PS3/Wii in Japan, but USA is a larger market. 360 doesn't have as much of a grip on the market as it does in the USA/UK as it does anywhere else. I mean over half the 360 sales are in the USA alone.

I think people on forums are different then real world people, there aren't too many Microsoft fans on forums, but in the real world a lot of people see the 360 and PS3 as similar products and simply go 360 because it's domestic.

Also, the vast majority of Americans I talk to like Toyota over Ford, and understand while Ford is okay, the majority of American cars are poorly built, but the best selling car in the USA is still a Ford F150, not a Toyota Tundra, or a Carolla.

That's a bad comparison. Dual analog did not cost $100 extra and worked next to the key pad. The evolution to dual analog is similar to adding a touch pad on the ds4, nobody is complaining about that...

I don't think it will change much. People that wanted Kinect already bought one, 20 million of them. That didn't bring the must have games. Feedback wasn't all positive either. The rest still doesn't care about voice control or making gestures at menus. The upgrade doesn't seem that big either, the promised finger tracking still isn't there, just open/closed hand.
Let the games do the talking and people will buy the add-on if they want it. Now they see $100 more for something they're not interested in, Microsoft's loss.

More importantly I think, what's coming in 2014/2015; IllumiRoom and Project Fortaleza (Kinect glasses). 

By including Kinect with the console, Microsoft removes or reduces an additional barrier to adopting IllumiRoom and or Project Fortaleza. 

For instance, had Sony included the PS3 Eye with the PS3 from the get go, then more likely you would have had greater Move adoption and usage when they released Move.  Those who already owned the PS3 Eye didn't have the same cost barrier that those without it did. 

Beside that point, I think Kinect provides some essential features.  The ability to sign-in by facial recognition, for example, is not built in and automatic.

My guess is that developers will actually develop common features for both Kinect and the PS4 Camera because they have shared features.  The difference is that for Kinect, developers know they'll likely be used.  With the PS4, only if the person has the PS4 Camera.

For example, the developer will offer voice controls on both the Xbox One and the PS4.  Developers will do the development once, and if it doesn't get used on the PS4 then it doesn't get used.  But it's there.

@snyps " I think the majority fear change. Innovation is change."

Right... that's why Nintendo Wii flopped because so many people were afraid of the innovation.

No it won't change anything even Crytek just said "fuck it" and decided to make Ryse a controller game with some voice commands, if a game published by MS don't want to do it I don't see other devs wasting their time.

Now Kinect + Oculus Rift could be really something special.