theprof00 said:
vs getting an actual review of the hardware and software potentialities and limitations... is better? It's good marketing, surely. But is it honest? Maybe. Who's to say? If it's good tech, then by all means, this is a great move. If it's lacking, then it is pretty much in line with all the other marketing they've given kinect, which is surmised basically of people "acting" the games, and random celebrity footage. |
Most everyone I know don't read or put much weight into reviews. I'm different as I review almost every major and medium purchase I make and even sometimes trivial ones. But I'm not the majority.
In the end, Kinect, just like Wii before it, cannot be judged by a review. You have to try it and if you have fun you'll like it. THAT is what MS is trying push with this, that its easy to use and fun.
Sadly what most here don't realize is that the hardware and software abilities and limitations DON'T matter if its fun. Its like judging RDR on how many technical hiccups and bugs it has instead of the total experience and if its fun.
Its really sad that so many of us are caught up in this manhood measuring that started with the Sega Genesis being 16-bit (sorry, I loved ya Sega but its true). Games were supposed to be about fun, are supposed to be about fun and WILL be about fun. Sadly that doesn't fit the personality of so many here and other places on the net and sadly most game and tech reviews are doing the same thing (just check out WP7 previews that are a checklist of what its MISSING instead of what it has ...). Sad.
