| ArnoldRimmer said: Unlike the price comparison chart that Microsoft posted yesterday, the only big "problem" with this feature comparison chart is that due to being controller-less, it simply doesn't make much sense to even compare Kinect. It's like a comparison chart with nine Netbooks and one tablet PC. Take the Kinect-column out, and the comparison is actually rather fair. If they wanted to diss Kinect, they could have easily done that by comparing some other features ("precisily measures even small movements", "has no significant lag", "can be played by more than two players at once", "can be played while sitting", "can be played even in small rooms", "works with all clothes", "motion detection consumes lots of processing power", "target audience" etc.) By the way, I wonder why Sony listed "Feedback: Yes - Audio feedback" for Kinect. In that respect, they are presenting Kinect even better than it is. The only audio feedback that Kinect has is the usual sound that comes directly from the console, and which of course every console has. So Sony should either list that as a feature of all consoles (which would be a little unfair to the Wii, because the Wiimote has real audio feedback), or remove it as a feature from Kinect. |
both charts are bs, ms added wii fit, and they didnt take into consideration that you play 4 player on the xbox using kinect you need two tv's to xbox's and two kinects. also they didnt take into consideration that the dualshock 3 can be used as a navigation controller. at the end of the way the wii experience is the least expensive and the best for motion gaming, because it is centered around that.
Being in 3rd place never felt so good
