Mr Puggsly said:
1. You're right, the Kinect doesn't work with normal games. Which was the point of the device to begin with. MS didn't want it using controls because they wanted developers to build new and original software for it. If the best reason to own the Move is to play normal games that work with a joystick... well people are going to stick with a joystick. As far support goes. The Kinect has more games coming for it that both require and have added features for it. In the coming months you're going to be seeing several major titles that say "Better With Kinect."
2. My mistake of saying some games require two. I actually meant two required for the full experience. Maybe I just assumed you knew what I was talking about. You don't see the point of the userbase? The point is a bigger userbase leads to more support because there is potential to sell more software. Coincidentally, Kinect sells A LOT more software than Move. So Kinect will keep getting games designed for it while much of the Move support will be limited to games that already play fine with a joystick. This unfortunately doesn't move much PS Move hardware. For the record, CASUAL hardware/software sell best during the holidays. Hence, expect Kinect to sell millions more this coming holiday.
3. Well bringing Wii into this is just ridiculous. But for what its worth, Wii is part of the reason Move got ignored. Move seemed too similar to something that already existed. I don't know how many people bought Move compatible games for the Move support. But there hasn't been a noticeable boost... if any boost. Killzone 3 has sold less than the predecessor in the same time frame. Resistance 3 is doing worse than its predecessor. Socom 4 was a flop. We can't say Heavy Rain and RE4 became hits thanks to added Move support. Throw in the poor sales of Move required games and its safe to say Move has had little impact. Kinect didn't just sell because of advertising, it sold well because its unique technology that appealed greatly to casual audiences. Advertising is important but you give it too much credit. For example, no amount of advertising is going to make Killzone bigger than Halo. Nor will any amount of advertising make Forza bigger than Gran Turismo (MS would have did it if possible). Advertising only gets you so far, people actually have to like the product. I'm not gonna argue which product is better as they both have their strengths. But its clear as day that people are much more intrigued with Kinect over Move. |
1. No actually the point was to make money off shovelware like the wii did. But even the wii can play real games. No kinect doesn't, Move has far more do some research.
2. So you assumed I knew what you meant when you said something completely different? Even if I was a mind reader I couldn't read someone's mind over the net and even if I could you would've stopped thinking about it when I read your post. I don't see your point not the point about userbase, read much?. Neither device is over a year old, and MS spent hundreds of millions advertising kinect, if that didn't get them a bit of a headstart nothing would but that's all it is a headstart. Again you have no idea how much software move sells since there are dozens of move compatible games that can be play ed without move. In other words you are just guessing. I expect kinect to selling 1/3 of what it did last holiday at best, people just don't want it now that they know it doesn't work.
3. No saying the masses choose kinect is riddiculas and again move is getting more support then kinect how is that being ignored?
Hard to notice a boost when it has move compatible with it from launch and you have no basis for comparison.
Nope just hundreds of millions of advertising and lying about it's capabilities is why it sold.
Nope Kinect just got more sales from advertising 10 times more.
