Because without Kinect 2.0 it would rival PS4 as the most boring, most predictable next-gen console.

What benefit of the doubt should I give MS outside of the Illumiroom has Microsoft invested in for peripherals that Sony or Nintendo haven't already invested in themselves? I love this guy, always on the attack.  As for the whole PS Vita thing, I don't believe I ever said that It was revolutionary, I said its superior tech. Nintendo was the first to do work on console to gaming connectivity with the GBA and the GC.

I said the Move is revolutionary, in a sense that they are pushing the camera based motion control space being the first to accurately control, move through and manipulate a 3D environment. If you want to answer the the questions you must realize there is a problem and they've known the answer since 2004, stating it numerous times on video. Nintendo has pushed infrared sensor motion controls even though the started motion controls with outside help during the attempt with the Power Glove.

Why does everyone forget that the PSEye is optional with the Move? The Xbox and Playstation have been at parity in offerings since the Xbox was created. They have a tug of war over services and peripherals because MS is going after the same crowd Sony commanded.

So let me get this straight. MS spent millions in R&D on Kinect.  Sold the first one at a profit at a pretty good price.  Updated the second one with advance tech and decided to bet the farm that people will love this device by adding it to their console.  By doing this, their console comes with a premium price which is a hundred dollars more then their competitor but you are telling us that MS does not have confidence in their device.  

Then we have Sony who spent millions on the PSeye, updated the device with another camera, updated their controller to be seen by the PSeye, spent a good chunk of cash developing the Move and nav controller, hell they even have a free game on launch to use the PSeye.  Instead of having confidence to sell that PSeye with their new console they did not.  Sony says its an option.

If I were to think about this in a logical way, it would appear that MS is a hell of a lot more sure about their device since they are willing to include it with every console sold, increase the base price of their console over their competitior.  In other words, they are so sure people will want the new connect they are willing to start the console war at a disadvantage in price.  It also seems MS is making all the efforts to make Kinect central to an experience.  Sony appears to do the same thing but regulated the PSeye as an add-on  thus ensuring a split within their userbase.

When I really think about it, I would say that Sony isn't sure if they included the PSeye with the PS4 they can compete with MS.  I am sure its much easier to compete with your competitor on price then it might be in features where your device just does not cut it when compared to the competition.

It's cute to bring up Sony peripherals no PS owner cares about, let alone Sony themselves.

The kinect and move were invented to compete with the wii remote. Simple as that. Microsoft had already succeeded in taking a significant chunk of sony's crowd prior to the kinect launch. Though they could lose them again this coming generation.

Anyway for the thread question, the 360 kinect has already proven that kinect can sell fine on it's own. Bundled or not 25million people payed at least $100 extra for the kinect device than they would have if they chose to skip it. What that means is that microsoft is risking losing potential sales by people who are admanent about not wanting kinect or want the cheapest console just to foster more innovation on the platform. Basically Microsoft wants to bundle the kinect with every single xbox so the userbase doesn't get fragmented. Short term it will probably hurt sales. But the long term goal is for xbone owners to view the kinect as something that is vital for the system and that will only happen if more developers are willing to innovatively incorperate the kinect.

Imagine if when the nintendo ds came out, there was a cheaper model that didn't have a touch screen. Games that just use the touch screen for inventory management and such would hardly be affected. But games that make extensive use of the touch screen like warioware, brain age, World ends with you, professor layton, elite beat agents, etc. would have probably never come out or been completely different. Add on prepherials are an increased risk to develop for because they decrease the pool of potential buyers for your game. 

Personally the original kinect never impressed me and I would have loved for it to have been a huge failure that microsoft swept under the rug. But that isn't what happened. So if there must be a new kinect, it just makes sense to bundle it with every xbox. Because that is the best way for the kinect to be an attractive platform to develop real games for. That is why I wish sony bundled the move with all playstation 4's. I think the move works well with the games I've tried, but being a seperate addon almost guarantees that only first party games will make good use of it.

makes sense. smart house all the way. no copying... good work microsoft. Kinect 2.0 is going to be bad ass.

So revolutionary that no one, even Sony, seems to give a crap.

Not going to bother bickering about the the Nintendo/Sony stuff, I don't care enough to search for it and you'd just try to backpedal anyway. But LOL @ bolded.

you won't be getting an xbone for 350$ microsofts just too greedy.why not just get the ps4!

Since you asked no way. I find the Xbox way better than PS I'm cool paying 500+ it's not like it's going to sit and collect dust. Will probably get used everyday. So yea I'm good. I spent that much for my phone lol