56% won't buy Kinects becasue of space requirement

[MaxwellGT2000]

nordlead said:

kowenicki said:

nordlead said:

Wii Fit was $90 ($60 cheaper), specifically marketed as a health product (one of the largest industries), and you only needed 6ft in any one direction, not away from the camera which would typically be placed in front of or on the TV.

While Wii Fit has similar issues as Kinect, its issues are less and overcome by other factors that Kinect doesn't have directly working for it.

ohhh... kinect is more fun!!   :p

and i can say, xbox last fm  so there!

Having an HTPC I don't really care about any features on any game systems other than playing games

As for the being more fun part, well Microsoft needs to show that off to consumers so they can judge that. All I was saying was that Wii Fit had less space/money requirements to overcome. One day I'll try it (along with 3D TV) but that probably won't happen till after the holidays when the demo stations aren't hogged any more by that one guy who refuses to give anyone else a chance

It's also worth noting like 80 to 90% of the Wii Fit games never require you to step off the board, so technically except for certain yoga poses and push ups you really don't need more space than the size of the board.  Kinect doesn't have that ability, it requires a good bit of space to accurately track you.

They have the good zone and recommended zone, playing the recommended zone in my friends room (an average sized room for a middle class apartment) we had to stand against his dresser cause just one step up would put us in the good zone which could be off from time to time especially if the game requires wild movements, he thankfully had the advantage of not having a normal sized bed so it was out of the way, so for everyone else take that as you will.

As for which is more fun... that's completely opinion, the fact that there is a stock pile of proven and fun software for cheaper investments elsewhere...