By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - Will Price of Games be a reason to pick up Move instead of Kinect?

SpartenOmega117 on 06 October 2010

in the end of the day kinect is a revamped eye toy and move is  a revamped wiimote. I agree with the people here that say that software makes the difference for all of these.



Around the Network
daroamer on 06 October 2010
AnthonyW86 said:
daroamer said:
AnthonyW86 said:
daroamer said:
AnthonyW86 said:

I don't get why people keep implying that Kinect get's it's capabilities from somekind of hardware advantage, it's just a camera and mostly the same as a PS Eye. It's the software that makes the difference, Microsoft have said so themselves on numerous occassions. The Kinect camera just feeds information to the 360 the same way as the PS Eye does with the PS3, it's the software that tells the 360 what it can do with the information.

That's why Kinect is so expensive for ''just a camera'', they need to earn back the development costs for the software.


Everything you said is pretty much wrong in every respect.  Try reading up on the actual technology.

No it's not, the only thing Kinect has extra is an depth sensor wich is needed because otherwise it wouldn't be able to track the player because there is no controller involved. Kinect was suppossed to have a dedicated chip aswell, but that was removed because it was to expensive, so now the X360 cpu has to do all the calculating.

The only thing different here is that Kinect can track all the body parts, instead of just a controller used by the player. The difficulty in achieving full body motion tracking doesn't lie in adding an extra sensor for depth, it lies in the software that has to decode all the information. And that is what i'm trying to point out here, Kinect doesn't really track anything it just ''films'', it's the X360 that has to recognize all the motions.


Please show me where Microsoft said it's just a camera.  It should be easy to find since they've said it on "numerous occasions".

In fact, they say the opposite - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uC0FNNPs61k

A 3D depth sensor is the same as a 2D RGB camera how?

And AGAIN, if the PS Eye is basically the same, why did Sony need to create controllers?  Why didn't they just make software like Microsoft did (apparently)?

@daroamer: You cleary didn't read my post correctly, Microsoft never said ''it's just a camera''. They did say that the software is the part that makes Kinect different and is the complicated part of the device.

@hyruken: The PSEye has a microphone, but can't do voice control. Why? Because it lacks the software. Same goes for facial recognition, all done by software and the Xbox 360 cpu, nothing special in Kinect itself that makes it possible. The depth sensor is partly necessary for the full body scan, but again it's the software that really ''scans'' you.

It took Microsoft years to develop the software for Natal/Kinect so it's not something any competitors could pull of anyday if they wanted to, but people have to stop talking about the Kinect camera as if it's some miracle device, if anything give the software developers at Microsoft some props because that's the part that makes it possible.

 

It would be impossible without the depth sensor.  The software is a huge part of it, but you're implying that the Eyetoy could do the same thing given the right software, that categorically false.

Was the Eyetoy a similar concept?  Yes, no denying that, but what bothers me is people saying "it's just this" when the tech isn't nearly the same.  If you had said We're In The Movies is similar to Eyetoy games I would agree with you but the fundamentals of how Kinect works is very different.  It's not magic software making an regular RGB camera be able to read 3D.  Without the depth array it wouldn't work and THAT'S the part that makes it unique.

Why would Hideo Kojima say "(Kinect is) like the 2D to 3D shift, or the first time that I ever played with Family Computer [NES]. I wanted to share my surprise to everybody… but I had to restrain myself. [It] has the potential to change everyone’s lifestyle dramatically. [I want to make] a completely innovative game that nobody has thought of in the past"   I mean, you would think the guy would know what he's talking about, right?

I don't see anyone slamming the PS3 for just being a souped up PS2, yet Kinect is a huge advance over the primitive Eyetoy and it get's dismissed as simply being a copy.  That's obsurd.