Here is why I think Kinect harmed the core 360 gamer, and I am one of those mind you. The existance of Kinect meant a shift away from what USE to be Xbox's strength. When the first Xbox launched, that console and brand was designed and marketed towards the hardest of core gamers. It was by FAR the most powerful console ever, with an online service that put the other consoles to SHAME. It had an HDD built in and more than a hand full of HD games. It was a gamers console first and foremost. As the years went by, MS shifted away from that and towards casual experiences. Kinect became their focus, their priority, if you will. That meant letting exclusives go, ignoring what got them there, and shifting revenue and entire E3's AWAY core gaming in general.

The death of the blades and advent of avatars were the warning signs. Kinect? It was the trumpet. Now they aren't even denying it.

Yes, because it didn't happen that way at all.

Point for point:
1)  Shrek, not a hard core.  Fusion Frenzy, not a hard core game.  Xbox Launch Games.   Post launch?  Barbie Horse Adventures doesn't sound too hard core to me.  So, maybe the Xbox was intended for a diverse range of gamers?  Not the "hard core" gamers you think it was.

2)  The Xbox was designed for four reasons, to push DirectX game development and to stem the tide away from a Microsoft platform development, as a means for Microsoft to make in-roads into the family/living room of homes, and finally to go toe-to-toe with Sony.

3)  The Xbox 360 has more than a handful of HD games.  There were at 110 HD games shortly after the Xbox 360 launch in January 2006.   Are there fewer 1080p games, definitely.  However you might be surprised to learn that there are only a handful of 1080p games on the PS3 too.  Neither console, despite their specs, were capable of the graphic fidelity anticipated.  I couldn't even begin to suggest how many HD games are actually available on the console but I'm pretty sure the vast (99%) are HD games.

4)  I guess one of those hardcore uses for the original Xbox was using it as a karaoke machine, because Microsoft released an official kit/software update that allowed you to turn your console into a karaoke machine.  I didn't realize that was hardcore.

5)  Microsoft added a camera to the Xbox 360 in 2006.  It was used for both casual and hardcore games.  No hardcore gamers complained.

6)  Kinect was released 5 years after the Xbox 360 was released.  It does everything that the original Xbox Live Vision camera did, and more, just better.

7)  The majority of Microsoft's exclusives were timed exclusives, which actually worked against Microft more often than helped them.  PS3 development required more time and effort and more financial resources.  Susequently, the money Microsoft paid for timed exclusivity went to fund the games PS3 development.  The only game that Microsoft lost was BioWare's Mass Effect.  That was clearly because EA bought them.  Every other game was a contractual exclusive.  The developers can do what they want past that contract term.  The only thing Microsoft could have done is buy BioWare.  Microsoft actually obtained more, bigger exclusives from the PS2/3 camp than the opposite.

8)  When has Microsoft ignored it's customers?  The major difference between this generation and last generation has simply been the longevity of this generation.  Not to mention an economy which up until 2010 had seemed to not touch the gaming industry, but by the end of the year had hit it full force.  There are far fewer developers today than 2000 or even 2005 due to aqusitions and attrition.  There are going to be fewer games.  The average game developer produces 1 game every 2 years.  You have fewer game developers producing a limited number of games.  How is that Microsoft's fault?

Yes, Microsoft has introduced the Kinect.  Yes, they have invested some of their billions to aquire technology and create the device, but they've also aquired game studios, as well as created them.  

Your assessment of the environment is a complete fantasy and fallacy, grounded in absolutely zero reality.  Perfect definition of your comment, an Absolute Zero Reality comment. 

Prior to 2006 no one cared about casual games, because casual games were just games.  All of a sudden the Wii comes out and people, in an effort to distinguish the HD consoles and diminish the value of the Wii, have to categorize games into casual and hardcore.  Guess what, they're just games!!!  Solitaire is the number 1 game played in the world.  There are more copies of Solitaire bought/sold and played on a daily basis than any other game.  And you can take that statistic all the way back to 1991.

I was playing first person shooters before you were a sperm in your daddy's nut sack.  Guess what, we weren't hard core gamers.  Get over this ridiculous theory that someone because you play a particular genre of game that you're somehow hard core.  If you play games, any kind of game, to the point where you excel at that particular game, you're a hard core gamer in that game.  But I'm sure there are plenty of chess masters that can whoop your whiney-FPS ass any day of the week, six days to Sunday and make you look like a freaking fool.  And who do you think is more hard core, the FPS player that mashes down buttons to kill opponents, or a chess player than has thought ever every possible move you can make before he/she wins the game?

Oh yeah, what was I thinking, you're a "hard core" gamer.  You can press buttons and make things happen on the screen.  You don't have to think.

The oldest game in the world is dice.  Do you know how to play?  Dominos?  Go?  Chess?  All have been played for longer, for more hours, by more people than any FPS.  Yet you think you're hard core.

Drop the argument, it's a stupid argument.  As others have pointed out, from a first-party perspective, Microsoft has demonstrated probably one of the best first-party efforts this late in the console life with Halo 4.  Not only a live-action video series, but an animated series to go with the new content, and top shelf game, and tons of additonal content to appease gamers.

Kinect hasn't done anything to change what Microsoft is doing with gaming.  It has dramatically broadened the market they can reach and it has given the Xbox 360 a technological edge that it didn't have before it was released in 2010.  The impact of Kinect on your gaming next generation will be zero.  The worst it'll do is give you additonal input options, and better player identification (i.e. you're visually recognized rather than by what controller you're holding).

These comments suggesting the downfall of the Xbox because Kinect will be mandatory are complete an utter shite F.U.D. and should be bannable.  The PS4 will include the PS4 eye, in fact it will require it.  The PS4 Eye will offer features similar to Kinect, but certainly not as advanced.  Ideally Sony is trying to sell developers on the motion control/sensing capabilities of the new controller and PS4 Eye.  So guess what.  The only traditional hard core console next generation (by your definition) will be the Wii U. 

Good Luck.   

Yes, because it didn't happen that way at all.

Point for point:
1)  Shrek, not a hard core.  Fusion Frenzy, not a hard core game.  Xbox Launch Games.   Post launch?  Barbie Horse Adventures doesn't sound too hard core to me.  So, maybe the Xbox was intended for a diverse range of gamers?  Not the "hard core" gamers you think it was.

2)  The Xbox was designed for four reasons, to push DirectX game development and to stem the tide away from a Microsoft platform development, as a means for Microsoft to make in-roads into the family/living room of homes, and finally to go toe-to-toe with Sony.

3)  The Xbox 360 has more than a handful of HD games.  There were at 110 HD games shortly after the Xbox 360 launch in January 2006.   Are there fewer 1080p games, definitely.  However you might be surprised to learn that there are only a handful of 1080p games on the PS3 too.  Neither console, despite their specs, were capable of the graphic fidelity anticipated.  I couldn't even begin to suggest how many HD games are actually available on the console but I'm pretty sure the vast (99%) are HD games.

4)  I guess one of those hardcore uses for the original Xbox was using it as a karaoke machine, because Microsoft released an official kit/software update that allowed you to turn your console into a karaoke machine.  I didn't realize that was hardcore.

5)  Microsoft added a camera to the Xbox 360 in 2006.  It was used for both casual and hardcore games.  No hardcore gamers complained.

6)  Kinect was released 5 years after the Xbox 360 was released.  It does everything that the original Xbox Live Vision camera did, and more, just better.

7)  The majority of Microsoft's exclusives were timed exclusives, which actually worked against Microft more often than helped them.  PS3 development required more time and effort and more financial resources.  Susequently, the money Microsoft paid for timed exclusivity went to fund the games PS3 development.  The only game that Microsoft lost was BioWare's Mass Effect.  That was clearly because EA bought them.  Every other game was a contractual exclusive.  The developers can do what they want past that contract term.  The only thing Microsoft could have done is buy BioWare.  Microsoft actually obtained more, bigger exclusives from the PS2/3 camp than the opposite.

8)  When has Microsoft ignored it's customers?  The major difference between this generation and last generation has simply been the longevity of this generation.  Not to mention an economy which up until 2010 had seemed to not touch the gaming industry, but by the end of the year had hit it full force.  There are far fewer developers today than 2000 or even 2005 due to aqusitions and attrition.  There are going to be fewer games.  The average game developer produces 1 game every 2 years.  You have fewer game developers producing a limited number of games.  How is that Microsoft's fault?

Yes, Microsoft has introduced the Kinect.  Yes, they have invested some of their billions to aquire technology and create the device, but they've also aquired game studios, as well as created them.  

Your assessment of the environment is a complete fantasy and fallacy, grounded in absolutely zero reality.  Perfect definition of your comment, an Absolute Zero Reality comment. 

Prior to 2006 no one cared about casual games, because casual games were just games.  All of a sudden the Wii comes out and people, in an effort to distinguish the HD consoles and diminish the value of the Wii, have to categorize games into casual and hardcore.  Guess what, they're just games!!!  Solitaire is the number 1 game played in the world.  There are more copies of Solitaire bought/sold and played on a daily basis than any other game.  And you can take that statistic all the way back to 1991.

I was playing first person shooters before you were a sperm in your daddy's nut sack.  Guess what, we weren't hard core gamers.  Get over this ridiculous theory that someone because you play a particular genre of game that you're somehow hard core.  If you play games, any kind of game, to the point where you excel at that particular game, you're a hard core gamer in that game.  But I'm sure there are plenty of chess masters that can whoop your whiney-FPS ass any day of the week, six days to Sunday and make you look like a freaking fool.  And who do you think is more hard core, the FPS player that mashes down buttons to kill opponents, or a chess player than has thought ever every possible move you can make before he/she wins the game?

Oh yeah, what was I thinking, you're a "hard core" gamer.  You can press buttons and make things happen on the screen.  You don't have to think.

The oldest game in the world is dice.  Do you know how to play?  Dominos?  Go?  Chess?  All have been played for longer, for more hours, by more people than any FPS.  Yet you think you're hard core.

Drop the argument, it's a stupid argument.  As others have pointed out, from a first-party perspective, Microsoft has demonstrated probably one of the best first-party efforts this late in the console life with Halo 4.  Not only a live-action video series, but an animated series to go with the new content, and top shelf game, and tons of additonal content to appease gamers.

Kinect hasn't done anything to change what Microsoft is doing with gaming.  It has dramatically broadened the market they can reach and it has given the Xbox 360 a technological edge that it didn't have before it was released in 2010.  The impact of Kinect on your gaming next generation will be zero.  The worst it'll do is give you additonal input options, and better player identification (i.e. you're visually recognized rather than by what controller you're holding).

These comments suggesting the downfall of the Xbox because Kinect will be mandatory are complete an utter shite F.U.D. and should be bannable.  The PS4 will include the PS4 eye, in fact it will require it.  The PS4 Eye will offer features similar to Kinect, but certainly not as advanced.  Ideally Sony is trying to sell developers on the motion control/sensing capabilities of the new controller and PS4 Eye.  So guess what.  The only traditional hard core console next generation (by your definition) will be the Wii U. 

Good Luck.   

Yes, because it didn't happen that way at all.

Point for point:
1)  Shrek, not a hard core.  Fusion Frenzy, not a hard core game.  Xbox Launch Games.   Post launch?  Barbie Horse Adventures doesn't sound too hard core to me.  So, maybe the Xbox was intended for a diverse range of gamers?  Not the "hard core" gamers you think it was.

2)  The Xbox was designed for four reasons, to push DirectX game development and to stem the tide away from a Microsoft platform development, as a means for Microsoft to make in-roads into the family/living room of homes, and finally to go toe-to-toe with Sony.

3)  The Xbox 360 has more than a handful of HD games.  There were at 110 HD games shortly after the Xbox 360 launch in January 2006.   Are there fewer 1080p games, definitely.  However you might be surprised to learn that there are only a handful of 1080p games on the PS3 too.  Neither console, despite their specs, were capable of the graphic fidelity anticipated.  I couldn't even begin to suggest how many HD games are actually available on the console but I'm pretty sure the vast (99%) are HD games.

4)  I guess one of those hardcore uses for the original Xbox was using it as a karaoke machine, because Microsoft released an official kit/software update that allowed you to turn your console into a karaoke machine.  I didn't realize that was hardcore.

5)  Microsoft added a camera to the Xbox 360 in 2006.  It was used for both casual and hardcore games.  No hardcore gamers complained.

6)  Kinect was released 5 years after the Xbox 360 was released.  It does everything that the original Xbox Live Vision camera did, and more, just better.

7)  The majority of Microsoft's exclusives were timed exclusives, which actually worked against Microft more often than helped them.  PS3 development required more time and effort and more financial resources.  Susequently, the money Microsoft paid for timed exclusivity went to fund the games PS3 development.  The only game that Microsoft lost was BioWare's Mass Effect.  That was clearly because EA bought them.  Every other game was a contractual exclusive.  The developers can do what they want past that contract term.  The only thing Microsoft could have done is buy BioWare.  Microsoft actually obtained more, bigger exclusives from the PS2/3 camp than the opposite.

8)  When has Microsoft ignored it's customers?  The major difference between this generation and last generation has simply been the longevity of this generation.  Not to mention an economy which up until 2010 had seemed to not touch the gaming industry, but by the end of the year had hit it full force.  There are far fewer developers today than 2000 or even 2005 due to aqusitions and attrition.  There are going to be fewer games.  The average game developer produces 1 game every 2 years.  You have fewer game developers producing a limited number of games.  How is that Microsoft's fault?

Yes, Microsoft has introduced the Kinect.  Yes, they have invested some of their billions to aquire technology and create the device, but they've also aquired game studios, as well as created them.  

Your assessment of the environment is a complete fantasy and fallacy, grounded in absolutely zero reality.  Perfect definition of your comment, an Absolute Zero Reality comment. 

Prior to 2006 no one cared about casual games, because casual games were just games.  All of a sudden the Wii comes out and people, in an effort to distinguish the HD consoles and diminish the value of the Wii, have to categorize games into casual and hardcore.  Guess what, they're just games!!!  Solitaire is the number 1 game played in the world.  There are more copies of Solitaire bought/sold and played on a daily basis than any other game.  And you can take that statistic all the way back to 1991.

I was playing first person shooters before you were a sperm in your daddy's nut sack.  Guess what, we weren't hard core gamers.  Get over this ridiculous theory that someone because you play a particular genre of game that you're somehow hard core.  If you play games, any kind of game, to the point where you excel at that particular game, you're a hard core gamer in that game.  But I'm sure there are plenty of chess masters that can whoop your whiney-FPS ass any day of the week, six days to Sunday and make you look like a freaking fool.  And who do you think is more hard core, the FPS player that mashes down buttons to kill opponents, or a chess player than has thought ever every possible move you can make before he/she wins the game?

Oh yeah, what was I thinking, you're a "hard core" gamer.  You can press buttons and make things happen on the screen.  You don't have to think.

The oldest game in the world is dice.  Do you know how to play?  Dominos?  Go?  Chess?  All have been played for longer, for more hours, by more people than any FPS.  Yet you think you're hard core.

Drop the argument, it's a stupid argument.  As others have pointed out, from a first-party perspective, Microsoft has demonstrated probably one of the best first-party efforts this late in the console life with Halo 4.  Not only a live-action video series, but an animated series to go with the new content, and top shelf game, and tons of additonal content to appease gamers.

Kinect hasn't done anything to change what Microsoft is doing with gaming.  It has dramatically broadened the market they can reach and it has given the Xbox 360 a technological edge that it didn't have before it was released in 2010.  The impact of Kinect on your gaming next generation will be zero.  The worst it'll do is give you additonal input options, and better player identification (i.e. you're visually recognized rather than by what controller you're holding).

These comments suggesting the downfall of the Xbox because Kinect will be mandatory are complete an utter shite F.U.D. and should be bannable.  The PS4 will include the PS4 eye, in fact it will require it.  The PS4 Eye will offer features similar to Kinect, but certainly not as advanced.  Ideally Sony is trying to sell developers on the motion control/sensing capabilities of the new controller and PS4 Eye.  So guess what.  The only traditional hard core console next generation (by your definition) will be the Wii U. 

Good Luck.   

Point is why hasn't any one of MS's first party create a new aaa core ip non kinect experience since oh what crackdown?? I see that microsoft has even brainwashed xbox gamers into thinking that media applications and kinect games are great for the xbox while when the ps3 first came out it was oh it has no games is not a true gaming console like the xbox. I never did see Microsoft take risks with new ip's and creating exclusives from a variety of genres as I have seen Sony do with the PS3. Platforming is my favorite genre and PlayStation and Nintendo is where those games reign supreme. Are there any good platformers on xbox? 

Call me whiney but lets say your particular favorite genre is killed off because mainstream media (microsoft paying everyone off) feels that shooters are more important and profitable than platformers and lets say the ps4 fails because mass market is buying xbox because again of mainstream media and Sony quits with gaming. Then where will I get my aaa platformers (more of a sony platformer fan) or you with your fav genre? Sony takes risks with new gaming experiences while MS does more of the same. Thus I never get why people can be supportive of xbox.

Yes, because it didn't happen that way at all.

Point for point:
1)  Shrek, not a hard core.  Fusion Frenzy, not a hard core game.  Xbox Launch Games.   Post launch?  Barbie Horse Adventures doesn't sound too hard core to me.  So, maybe the Xbox was intended for a diverse range of gamers?  Not the "hard core" gamers you think it was.

2)  The Xbox was designed for four reasons, to push DirectX game development and to stem the tide away from a Microsoft platform development, as a means for Microsoft to make in-roads into the family/living room of homes, and finally to go toe-to-toe with Sony.

3)  The Xbox 360 has more than a handful of HD games.  There were at 110 HD games shortly after the Xbox 360 launch in January 2006.   Are there fewer 1080p games, definitely.  However you might be surprised to learn that there are only a handful of 1080p games on the PS3 too.  Neither console, despite their specs, were capable of the graphic fidelity anticipated.  I couldn't even begin to suggest how many HD games are actually available on the console but I'm pretty sure the vast (99%) are HD games.

4)  I guess one of those hardcore uses for the original Xbox was using it as a karaoke machine, because Microsoft released an official kit/software update that allowed you to turn your console into a karaoke machine.  I didn't realize that was hardcore.

5)  Microsoft added a camera to the Xbox 360 in 2006.  It was used for both casual and hardcore games.  No hardcore gamers complained.

6)  Kinect was released 5 years after the Xbox 360 was released.  It does everything that the original Xbox Live Vision camera did, and more, just better.

7)  The majority of Microsoft's exclusives were timed exclusives, which actually worked against Microft more often than helped them.  PS3 development required more time and effort and more financial resources.  Susequently, the money Microsoft paid for timed exclusivity went to fund the games PS3 development.  The only game that Microsoft lost was BioWare's Mass Effect.  That was clearly because EA bought them.  Every other game was a contractual exclusive.  The developers can do what they want past that contract term.  The only thing Microsoft could have done is buy BioWare.  Microsoft actually obtained more, bigger exclusives from the PS2/3 camp than the opposite.

8)  When has Microsoft ignored it's customers?  The major difference between this generation and last generation has simply been the longevity of this generation.  Not to mention an economy which up until 2010 had seemed to not touch the gaming industry, but by the end of the year had hit it full force.  There are far fewer developers today than 2000 or even 2005 due to aqusitions and attrition.  There are going to be fewer games.  The average game developer produces 1 game every 2 years.  You have fewer game developers producing a limited number of games.  How is that Microsoft's fault?

Yes, Microsoft has introduced the Kinect.  Yes, they have invested some of their billions to aquire technology and create the device, but they've also aquired game studios, as well as created them.  

Your assessment of the environment is a complete fantasy and fallacy, grounded in absolutely zero reality.  Perfect definition of your comment, an Absolute Zero Reality comment. 

Prior to 2006 no one cared about casual games, because casual games were just games.  All of a sudden the Wii comes out and people, in an effort to distinguish the HD consoles and diminish the value of the Wii, have to categorize games into casual and hardcore.  Guess what, they're just games!!!  Solitaire is the number 1 game played in the world.  There are more copies of Solitaire bought/sold and played on a daily basis than any other game.  And you can take that statistic all the way back to 1991.

I was playing first person shooters before you were a sperm in your daddy's nut sack.  Guess what, we weren't hard core gamers.  Get over this ridiculous theory that someone because you play a particular genre of game that you're somehow hard core.  If you play games, any kind of game, to the point where you excel at that particular game, you're a hard core gamer in that game.  But I'm sure there are plenty of chess masters that can whoop your whiney-FPS ass any day of the week, six days to Sunday and make you look like a freaking fool.  And who do you think is more hard core, the FPS player that mashes down buttons to kill opponents, or a chess player than has thought ever every possible move you can make before he/she wins the game?

Oh yeah, what was I thinking, you're a "hard core" gamer.  You can press buttons and make things happen on the screen.  You don't have to think.

The oldest game in the world is dice.  Do you know how to play?  Dominos?  Go?  Chess?  All have been played for longer, for more hours, by more people than any FPS.  Yet you think you're hard core.

Drop the argument, it's a stupid argument.  As others have pointed out, from a first-party perspective, Microsoft has demonstrated probably one of the best first-party efforts this late in the console life with Halo 4.  Not only a live-action video series, but an animated series to go with the new content, and top shelf game, and tons of additonal content to appease gamers.

Kinect hasn't done anything to change what Microsoft is doing with gaming.  It has dramatically broadened the market they can reach and it has given the Xbox 360 a technological edge that it didn't have before it was released in 2010.  The impact of Kinect on your gaming next generation will be zero.  The worst it'll do is give you additonal input options, and better player identification (i.e. you're visually recognized rather than by what controller you're holding).

These comments suggesting the downfall of the Xbox because Kinect will be mandatory are complete an utter shite F.U.D. and should be bannable.  The PS4 will include the PS4 eye, in fact it will require it.  The PS4 Eye will offer features similar to Kinect, but certainly not as advanced.  Ideally Sony is trying to sell developers on the motion control/sensing capabilities of the new controller and PS4 Eye.  So guess what.  The only traditional hard core console next generation (by your definition) will be the Wii U. 

Good Luck.   

Microsoft has moved away from traditional gaming experiences most associated with a games console in a tradition sense to non-traditional games experienced in a non-traditional sense.

That is what he was saying, and your points, although all factually correct don't actually address his post in the slightest, not to knock what your saying, it's nice to read an informed and intelligent post from someone who clearly has a grasp of MS's moves and direction.