What I don't get is why people are trying to argue that an expensive external-camera-centric controller for an already-expensive console is going to do anything compared to a $20 capability-expanding add-on to an already motion-centric controller. Let alone how an external-camera-centric controllerless system that will likely cost almost as much as the console itself does will stand a chance.
I mean really, if you were a newcomer to this industry, what would look more appealing to you? Paying $500 for a system and nonstandard peripheral for said system with no guaranteed support, or paying $300 for a system with integrated motion control, an expansion of its capabilities, and two games designed to make the most of said motion control? Argue all you like about how it's a move to draw in the "core gamers", but those arguments fall pretty flat when you consider that Sony and MS basically already HAVE the "core gamers" anyway.
Sky Render - Sanity is for the weak.
