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

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - Sony: Kinect is a bunch of tech problems

Edgeoflife on 13 February 2011
NotStan said:
Edgeoflife said:
He did mention alot of the positives, if you read the interview you would know that 

 

Yes I am sure I should have read the long ass 3 page interview instead of reading the sum up. Oh my, please remind me next time to click through to the original article, then from there to click through onto the next one. Read the summary. That was posted in the OP, that's what I read. If you expect me to whip out my magnifying glass and scrutinize every little bit of that interview, I am seriously beginning to think that you're trolling me. Very hard.

Actually now I think about it..

Or you really are that naive.

You do know the sum up specifically picked out the parts where he said something negative about kinect to start arguements like this, if you refuse to read the original source don't comment on it 



Around the Network
NotStan on 13 February 2011
Edgeoflife said:
NotStan said:
Edgeoflife said:
He did mention alot of the positives, if you read the interview you would know that 

 

Yes I am sure I should have read the long ass 3 page interview instead of reading the sum up. Oh my, please remind me next time to click through to the original article, then from there to click through onto the next one. Read the summary. That was posted in the OP, that's what I read. If you expect me to whip out my magnifying glass and scrutinize every little bit of that interview, I am seriously beginning to think that you're trolling me. Very hard.

Actually now I think about it..

Or you really are that naive.

You do know the sum up specifically picked out the parts where he said something negative about kinect to start arguements like this, if you refuse to read the original source don't comment on it 

You know what, you're not even worth the effort, you've trolled me. Hard. For 2 pages, I can't believe I actually believed you for that long.



Disconnect and self destruct, one bullet a time.

Edgeoflife on 13 February 2011
fordy said:
Edgeoflife said:
fordy said:
Edgeoflife said:
Not sure about ps1 but ps2 it was a big part of it, the other part though was getting all the 3rd parties in exclusivity contracts, but if it wasn't for marketing and those deals dreamcast would of kicked its ass 

Marketing does not always imply success. Microsoft threw a ton of money towards the Xbox last gen, and it barely managed to scrape into second. There are always multipkle factors.

For instance, which one would you consider an average consumer to stop at with interest at a department store: a Move setup with The Fight, or a Kinect setup with Kinect Adventures?

One thing I would give Sony credit for, and that is trying to make motion more appealing to the hardcore, but I don't think it's going to work, as stated before, plus on top of it, there's a risk of alienating potential casual buyers, which is supposed to be the base for this kind of tech.

Depends completely on the demographic, if it was a street punk he would go for the fighting game where he can actually punch, if it was a soccer mom she'd go for the cartoony looking game, and marketing doesn't always equal sucess but it plays a major role in it and the fact remains that move is the better product for the application of gaming, it doesn't have the same appeal though but when looked at objectively even for causual games move is the better choice in most cases 

I honestly dont know of any "street punks" who arent hardcore gamers, or better yet, hang around a department store.

Which leads me back to the original argument. Move might be better or it might not be. The way casuals see it (keep in mind that these are people who do NOT follow any gaming news whatsoever. They do not look at area resolutions, framerates or controller latency) they see the Move marked as new, and their initial response is "That's NOT new".

I'm not really arguing with you, and frankly I'm glad Sony chose to make a quality product instead of catering to the people who don't know better either way



Edgeoflife on 13 February 2011
NotStan said:
Edgeoflife said:
NotStan said:
Don't turn this around at me just because I don't think that a direct competitor of the product is not biased in the slightest. I am just not the one to lap up propaganda quite easily.

Your defense of kinect says otherwise


There is a difference between countering someones views based on the products competitors interview and the defence of the product. I asked you if you have experienced Kinect to comment on whether it's a good product or not, I am still waiting for the answer, because going by your responses it's about as much a use as dog shit, which you have concluded without much experience yourself, I am not defending the product, I just think that your view is skewed and is based upon information that is provided by an engineer of Move. It's like me saying that Move is rubbish just because a Wii remote engineer said so.

you didn't read the full article either did you?



fordy on 13 February 2011
Edgeoflife said:
fordy said:
Edgeoflife said:
fordy said:
Edgeoflife said:
Not sure about ps1 but ps2 it was a big part of it, the other part though was getting all the 3rd parties in exclusivity contracts, but if it wasn't for marketing and those deals dreamcast would of kicked its ass 

Marketing does not always imply success. Microsoft threw a ton of money towards the Xbox last gen, and it barely managed to scrape into second. There are always multipkle factors.

For instance, which one would you consider an average consumer to stop at with interest at a department store: a Move setup with The Fight, or a Kinect setup with Kinect Adventures?

One thing I would give Sony credit for, and that is trying to make motion more appealing to the hardcore, but I don't think it's going to work, as stated before, plus on top of it, there's a risk of alienating potential casual buyers, which is supposed to be the base for this kind of tech.

Depends completely on the demographic, if it was a street punk he would go for the fighting game where he can actually punch, if it was a soccer mom she'd go for the cartoony looking game, and marketing doesn't always equal sucess but it plays a major role in it and the fact remains that move is the better product for the application of gaming, it doesn't have the same appeal though but when looked at objectively even for causual games move is the better choice in most cases 

I honestly dont know of any "street punks" who arent hardcore gamers, or better yet, hang around a department store.

Which leads me back to the original argument. Move might be better or it might not be. The way casuals see it (keep in mind that these are people who do NOT follow any gaming news whatsoever. They do not look at area resolutions, framerates or controller latency) they see the Move marked as new, and their initial response is "That's NOT new".

I'm not really arguing with you, and frankly I'm glad Sony chose to make a quality product instead of catering to the people who don't know better either way


Do you really think that Sony chose quality if they knew that it would sacrifice casual userbase, and therefore, profit?

I'm not saying Move is bad, but sales -> money and money talks. Anywhere where extra money is to be made, you'll see the industry shift towards it, just as we saw Microsoft and Sony rushing to release an answer to the Wii in the form of motion controls.

The big question is, what will Sony's next gen motion control be like (if there is one). It could very well resemble Kinect. A 3D camera will never have as much accuracy as decent electronics, but if there's extra money to be made, Sony might very well be willing to make that sacrifice...



Around the Network
fordy on 13 February 2011
Hyruken said:

Something tells me he thinks the PS3 has a better motion controller. 

 


In other news, Big Oil says that Electric Vehicles are slow, unresponsive and always in need of refilling.



Edgeoflife on 13 February 2011
fordy said:
Edgeoflife said:
fordy said:
Edgeoflife said:
fordy said:
Edgeoflife said:
Not sure about ps1 but ps2 it was a big part of it, the other part though was getting all the 3rd parties in exclusivity contracts, but if it wasn't for marketing and those deals dreamcast would of kicked its ass 

Marketing does not always imply success. Microsoft threw a ton of money towards the Xbox last gen, and it barely managed to scrape into second. There are always multipkle factors.

For instance, which one would you consider an average consumer to stop at with interest at a department store: a Move setup with The Fight, or a Kinect setup with Kinect Adventures?

One thing I would give Sony credit for, and that is trying to make motion more appealing to the hardcore, but I don't think it's going to work, as stated before, plus on top of it, there's a risk of alienating potential casual buyers, which is supposed to be the base for this kind of tech.

Depends completely on the demographic, if it was a street punk he would go for the fighting game where he can actually punch, if it was a soccer mom she'd go for the cartoony looking game, and marketing doesn't always equal sucess but it plays a major role in it and the fact remains that move is the better product for the application of gaming, it doesn't have the same appeal though but when looked at objectively even for causual games move is the better choice in most cases 

I honestly dont know of any "street punks" who arent hardcore gamers, or better yet, hang around a department store.

Which leads me back to the original argument. Move might be better or it might not be. The way casuals see it (keep in mind that these are people who do NOT follow any gaming news whatsoever. They do not look at area resolutions, framerates or controller latency) they see the Move marked as new, and their initial response is "That's NOT new".

I'm not really arguing with you, and frankly I'm glad Sony chose to make a quality product instead of catering to the people who don't know better either way


Do you really think that Sony chose quality if they knew that it would sacrifice casual userbase, and therefore, profit?

I'm not saying Move is bad, but sales -> money and money talks. Anywhere where extra money is to be made, you'll see the industry shift towards it, just as we saw Microsoft and Sony rushing to release an answer to the Wii in the form of motion controls.

The big question is, what will Sony's next gen motion control be like (if there is one). It could very well resemble Kinect. A 3D camera will never have as much accuracy as decent electronics, but if there's extra money to be made, Sony might very well be willing to make that sacrifice...

Sony's whole thing is quality products, they make profit off that, releasing a crap product would cost them more then they would make on the product from the damage to their name, and frankly I think Sony's next motion controller is going to be a 3D camera with the same wand that is reusable, and Sony wouldn't have even made what MS did off kinect since their marketing strategy has never been that good



Uberkiffer on 13 February 2011

This is how I view the Kinect.  It is a new concept brought to the market, it does not stretch beyond its capabilities, and it is extremely intuitive.  I am constantly thinking of cool things that I hope to see it do in the future.  Does that mean that it is a device with only potential as some suggest? I don't think so.  I think it is an excellent device, well worth the fun/time/money  and is only going to get better and better as time moves on.  Folks at Sony seem to think that every tech needs to be "future ready / future NOW," rather than letting the end users enjoy the capabilities that are currently available to us.



fordy on 13 February 2011
Edgeoflife said:

Sony's whole thing is quality products, they make profit off that

And no other company doesn't take quality into consideration?

Need I recall the need to flip hot PS1s upside down to get them to read discs? The PS2 wasn't exactly reliable either in terms of prolonged use...

All of them have their quality issues.



deskpro2k3 on 13 February 2011

Economic Rule: Nothing produced can be allowed to maintain a lifespan longer than what can be endured in order to continue the cyclical consumption. In other words, it is critical that stuff break down, and expire within a certain amount of time which is also called planned obsolescence. So, product sustainability is inverse to economic growth.

Some companies follow that rule. Others dont.



CPU: Ryzen 7950X
GPU: MSI 4090 SUPRIM X 24G
Motherboard: MSI MEG X670E GODLIKE
RAM: CORSAIR DOMINATOR PLATINUM 32GB DDR5
SSD: Kingston FURY Renegade 4TB
Gaming Console: PLAYSTATION 5