Microsoft Kinect: Why it failed to do what it was supposed to do even though it was successful

[S.T.A.G.E.]

Jazz2K said:

S.T.A.G.E. said:

I never set my expectations high, but it is good for multimedia use and simple things. I've used the Eyetoy and the Kinect  and to me its just a more powerful version of it that was hyped to be more. Trust me, if it had more potential than you say, Microsoft would've never had it and Sony would be using it by now.

How can I trust your judgement when they are severely biased agains't Kinect? You seem to think that Primesense did all the work behind Kinect when they presented the concept to Sony... well not really. Both Sony and Nintendo couldn't figure out how to make this work for games so they refused it. Microsoft in the other hand (a software company) saw how they could make it work for games by creating a software specificaly for Kinect, which they did. If I remember correctly it took them two years to make the software and hundreds unpon hundreds of positions possible for the human body to be recognize by the device. You guys just like to say that Primesense did all the job and MS just plugged it to the Xbox and magically, it worked...

What Eyetoy is is just a basic camera with a motion software attached to it. Motion cameras are not an invention of Sony and their first appearance was way before the Playstation. What Sony did with Eyetoy is essentially take what was already done and make it work with Playstation nothing more. Both technologies are very different. Not the same at all.

How is what I am saying biased against the Kinect? You the R&D interview didnt you?