I agree that adding the controller is against what kinect is about. Didn't you disagree with me on this subject in an earlier thread? Didn't I say adding a  traditional controller to kinect would defeat the purpose of kinect, but you argued that it would enhance games? Or am I mistaken?

I love how people take the comments made by a COMPETITOR about the competing product as face value.  Of course there would be no agenda for a Sony engineer to try and belittle the competitions tech while praising their own.  This same engineer couldn't possibly be downplaying the benefits of the competing tech or anything, no, that isn't possible.  

Seriously people (i.e. S.T.A.G.E.) you are taking biased comments from a biased person at face value.  Sony is most definitely kicking themselves in the butt now that Kinect is out and it is such a success.  They bet on the wrong horse and they know it.

I didnt take Sonys comments at face value. I stated that I was thinking about it and Sony made a lot of sense when they were doing their R & D. I am not the most fond person of Sony nor Microsofts business practices; however, Sony was correct about the control of a character in a 3D space. It would remain fundamental until an answer was found to break out of the box of motion so you can move as if you had a controller in your hand. The FAAST software solves this problem and I already stated it.

yeah that wasnt me. The closest I said to that if people wanted to use a device that is close Kinect shouldnt penalise them, though they also shouldnt award them. As far as I know Kinect looks at your hand and not at an external device, hence why controller wouldnt work correctly. As Squilliam said some games will have xbox controller and that is prob the fps/tps. 

But otherwise its just going to be Kinect. Though as I mentioned if someone wants to use a sword to make it easy for themselves, kinect should allow it, I wont I am just saying if someone wanted to. Though it would prob be harder to track as they track through infrared so it would be harder.

Yet I would trust Microsofts word as they make more in a quarter then sony does yearly I am pretty sure. You have to make pretty smart choices to do that. Sony was not right about 3D space actually. 3D is only saying this after Kinect started doing really well.

As some people have said, Sony seems to be just pissed that Kinect is doing well. Sony went for the safe option (the more accurate wii controls) Microsoft took a leap, Microsoft is gaining the early points for this, we will se who will be ahead in the long run.

Nah, I dont think Sony is pissed that Microsoft is doing well. The problem with Sony is they couldn't loosen their grip from the core. Microsoft obviously can. Sony was thinking aboout how gamers like me and you would get something out of their peripheral as well as non-gamers and other specific demographics. It was expected the Microsoft would reach a broader audience. Sony is too tech focused as it were where Microsoft seems to be looking for the quick fix.

The Move and Kinect are going to make playing Just Dance and its ilk obsolete on that console. It's only a matter of time until the people begin to notice. Nintendo will be forced to survive with newer titles that harness the power of the Wii mote because they have no scanning technology.

The thing with that is, by the time people DO notice, new consoles will be out, so it wont even matter. The battle for motion controls was joined too late by the HD systems to really pull any crowd away from the Wii userbase. BTW, theoretically Wii does have scanning tech, it was made by Ubisoft. The Ubicam does body scanning/motion detection.