"It’s not like we’re trying to take controllers out of the equation [..] games that involve both controllers and Kinect as well are totally possible. [...] That’s one of the unique things about the Xbox platform: we can do controllers; we can do controllers with Kinect, which is more than just motion control, it has voice and human recognition as well."

- Kudo Tsunoda

Sept 2010

There are many other examples. Please have come proof to back up your claims before accusing others of lying.  Nowhere have I EVER seen anyone from Microsoft saying you could throw away all your controller because Kinect would be replacing them completely.  That's absurd.  It's was a hyped as a NEW way to interact with games and that's exactly what they have delivered.

Kinect uses both the depth sensor and the RGB camera, it's not strictly reliant on one other the other.  Please show me where people are saying Kinect can do "everything".  I've never heard that from Microsoft or anyone else.  It is a new way of interacting with the 360. 

What are the capablilites of the PSEye that are similar to what is able to be done with Kinect?  If it can do all these Kinect-like things, where are these games?  Is Sony that stupid to have a technology that could do all this stuff and not make ANY games that do it?  Not even one?  Sure would have stolen a lot of Kinect's thunder, don't you think?

Again see the above quote.  Kinect is not a "hybrid controller solution".  It's a means of controlling the Xbox that works independently of any other control scheme for some applications, but also fully allows for the simultaneous use of the controller for other applications if the developer wants to.

Even if you're holding the controller I don't see how it is now mimicking the same type of control scheme as the Move.  While holding the controller it can still be tracking facial expressions (see Avatar Kinect), head movement, foot movement, body position (facing a little left or a little right), voice control, arm gestures etc.  None of this is happening with the Move or Wiimotes.

Nothing will stop Sony from adding a depth camera except then they would be copying not only Nintendo but also Microsoft and I don't think it would look good on them.  Also, Microsoft has purchased both other companies that had depth camera systems similar to Kinect and now hold those patents.  So Sony would have to come up with their own solution that doesn't infringe on those patents.  There is also the decades worth of programming that has gone into the Kinect software. 

The possibilities of Kinect with a CONTROLLER. It's nice that it can do that, but if all the casuals who bought Kinect start to see ads of a Kinect controller or even the existing one to enhance gameplay, that would be like a huge "gotcha!" I'm more excited at what the hackers can do with this. Combine with the other motion controls, the results could be pure awesomeness. Kinect by itself, may not be as good.

I will laugh so hard if I ever see a commercial that goes...

"With Kinect, You don't need controllers to play, you are the controller! *Some games require controllers for enhanced gameplay"

Microsoft was very smart about this.  You don't want to dilute your marketing campaign with all kinds of extra caveats.  They stuck to a very simple message, "You are the controller".  Every game was geared towards that.  It helped them bring in many people to whom controllers are a scary proposition, it's an obstacle for those people. 

Now that they've gotten Kinect into the public mind they don't need to push that message as hard.  If they release a game with hybrid controls it will not likely appeal to the extreme casuals anyway so why would they care if it needs a controller?  They won't be playing those type of games anyway.  You think the casuals are going to perk up at Call Of Duty: Kinect Edition just because it uses Kinect?  No.

It's also not like they didn't get the controller bundled with the system, they're not being forced to buy an addition device.

I have a feeling that next gen consoles will all have a camera like kinect and also some sort of controller like the wii/move combined with them.    But until then we can get a good idea of where our consoles are going by what hackers are doing with these toys right now.  I am very very interested in seeing everything these guys can come up with.  Next Gen Consoles are going to rock it out of the park.

So my main question is why do you guys always have to through rocks at each others console of choice?  Its really silly  since imho they will all be nearly the same next gen anyways.

Right now what probably excites me more than anything else is what the kinect  or (any other console for that matter) will be able to do with head tracking.  That shit is amazing when done right and could be a game changer all on its own.  So I hope to see what these wonderfull hackers will be able to do with that aspect.

The problem is also of costs, but this won't be a problem forever: if nobody does the mistake of starting next gen too early, each competitor will be able to offer a complete controller set, adding what their respective sets currently lack without making the costs and the entry level price skyrocket. In the meantime, each one will have games that really shine only in a subset of all the possible motion controlled games. This won't be pointless, by starting now, MS is taking on its shoulders the effort to make depth detecting camera solutions' costs drop, while Sony is giving a little but welcome help to the adoption of precision wands, that are a little bit left behind because on Wii WM Plus arrived later and 3rd parties preferred to use just WiiMote whenever it was "good enough", to enjoy a wider user base. Finally, both Nintendo and Sony are now contributing to increase production and use and decrease costs of gyroscopes. When next gen starts, adding a wand to a camera-only solution, or a camera with depth detection to a wand-only one, or adding depth detection to a wand plus simple camera one will be a lot cheaper than now. BTW, Sony has the opportunity of completing its own control set with the smallest cost, doing it it could receive 3rd party ports from whichever else platform, while should MS and Nintendo stick with their own solutions without completing them, they could receive ports only from the subsets of 3rd party games running on Sony consoles and using only respectively the camera or the wand.

Edit @damndl0ser: I just read your post just before mine, I agree (I wrote something similar to what I wrote in this one also before, in this thread or maybe in another). BTW, most users aren't interested in console wars, they'll just prefer that their console have a complete control set, using the right feature for each task. And as I wrote, still right now offering a complete set would be too expensive, next gen it won't be anymore, and in the meantime each competitor can start getting part of the job done. And having a longer experience on different parts of what will be the motion control of the future, will  help at least to keep some welcome differences in each competitor's 1st party games library.

just give jack his jacket,microsoft has made the industry stand up and take notice with kinect.and now others(system owners will want their respective console makers to add kinect like tech to their next gen consoles.am i wrong?shouldn,t we all get to play games with kinect like tech implimented.yes a navi-con would be required,kinect is a big step to getting there.

think on it for awhile before coming to get me plssss,peace unto you.

The whole thing about throwing rocks at other consoles; the PS3 and 360 especially, they're actually a lot more similar than most close siblings in the world!

Things are changing quickly!

Check out my  "One Handed Kinect FPS Hack - Better Than Mouse" video on YouTube

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1j9UhxtmWmA