| McDonaldsGuy said: It is the most confusing thing to me besides the Wii U Gamepad. What was Microsoft's intention with it? It has had only like 2 games since launch, 1 which is a legit 2/10 (some fighting game from Ubisoft) game and one which is whatever (Kinect Sports Rivals). It has had some downloadable games here and there but nothing substantial. The Kinect's purpose was clear - get some of the Wii audience. Motion controls were still popular in 2010 but the Wii hype was dying, so for 2 years the Kinect took advantage and sold 24 million. The thing is the Kinect was actually supported. It launched with 15+ games, and was regularly supported for those 2 years. Motion control gaming died in 2012... so what was Microsoft trying to do with Kinect 2? And they couldn't be going after the blue ocean audience because the they didn't have any games for the Kinect and the One was $499 (compared to the Wii's $249 price point and Kinect+360's $299). Only the Gamepad is the weirder choice for controller for the past 15 years. |
I dont think its about motion controls.
Its about execution.
The wii 's Nunchunks where great.
Resident Evil with nunchunks where perfect, and the most enjoyable way to play that game.
XB1 doesnt have that, kinect isnt a controller, the hand based jesturs SUCK for gameplay.
People realised that with the Xbox 360 and arnt falling for the gimmick this gen in XB1.
then to add insult to injury, it cost them a fortune to include in the XB1 at launch, and really hurt their sales and mindshare/market share start of gen.
You want a controller for the hands, even if it has motion control.
Guess what? PS4 has a motion control methode that still has a controller with buttons in your hands, ment for actual game play.
Kinet is good for the internet of things, and for pcs, and specific NON GAMEING software.
Its just not good for gameing, and for some reason microsoft dont see that.
