Adinnieken said:
This was why Microsoft removing the additional processor was BS, because even if the pre-processor was still there, the bandwidth to send the data down the pipeline was still limited. So it wouldn't have improved anything short-term or long-term. If you've read anything about Fable: The Journey you'd have read about how there is a negligible delay in response with this game, as compared to Star Wars Kinect. Something, had you read the recent interview with Kudo Tsunoda, you would have known that Microsoft was working on to improve (response time). More importantly, what this means is that when Kinect is mated with the next generation console on USB 3, it'll be able to push down higher quality data (better resolution) and because of all of the work Microsoft has done to improve the response time, still provide a high quality gaming experience if not better than the one which will be available this Autumn.
|
I would love to believe you, but even on the dashboard kinect is laggy. There's no excuse for it, something like Kinect simply demands <50ms response times.
That stuff about USB2.0 is simply not true, I'd be interested to read where you read it.
I assure you that nowhere near 30mbs of data is being transferred with Kinect, which is the practical bandwidth of USB2.0. That is definately not the cause for the bad response time, it's cheap electronics, pure and simple.
The camera in the Kinect will be picking up differential data of certain points determined to be relevent on someone's body between each frame of captured. That certainly does not saturate the USB2.0 bus, don't believe everything you read! I mean the camera's inside are only something like 640x480 and I assume there's 2-3, the number of data points is ridiculously low on a very low resolution camera that isn't even capable of anything more specific than the size of a hand (can't do finger recognition). To seriously claim that USB2.0 is the problem....well let's just say flying pigs are more likely. Believe me I'm not kidding when I say I would like to believe you, I got pulled along on the Kinect train and own one but it's next to worthless in the real world.
With all due respect, it's the first time I've even heard the USB2.0 bus being the cause for the poor response time.
Finally, they've been saying that Kinect response time will improve for about a year or just over now. The latest big game, Kinect Star Wars certainly didn't show that to be true in any way.
One last thing, they won't be improving the resolution of the data received as that person claims, serious BS going on there. 640x480 cameras at the distance Kinect is set to work at won't recognise anything smaller than a hang. It's simply not possible as the resolution just isn't there. Try setting your webcam to 640x480 and stand 12 feet away (Kinect has to work at this distance at least)
...You see what I'm talking about? Yes you can SEE your fingers but, considering environmental factors that have to be taken into account and error correction (let's face it Kinect goes mental now and misses lots of stuff already) do you really think a motion sensing device with a 640x480 resolution camera like Kinect will become anymore accurate with a SOFTWARE update? Not a chance.
That's akin to believing those "image enhancment" scenes on films like the Bourne trilogy where a blurry photo is "enhanced" to proved a higher resolution.
Not possible!
