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

Forums - Gaming - A quick take on MS's E3 and the Kinect as a peripheral

Sevengen said:

see, this is where I get lost on how other people think... why wouldn't you want it as an option, unless you're so concerned about price you arbitrarily choose it's inclusion as the reason for not buying it. essentially blaming Kinect because you don't want to spend an extra $100 in comparison to the PS4 
As a counter argument:
Sony set the bar with their $399 price point, but let's say that $399 was simply too high an asking price for the current market and people were dissatisfied spending that much, I'm sure there would be plenty of posts dissecting what components Sony put into the box and questioning their necessity as in:
I don't want or need them to include a mic because that's just driving up the cost...
I don't need them to include an HDMI cord because that's just driving up the cost, a component cable is fine.
Every last one of them silly.
Point I'm trying to make is that the Kinect is taking a lot of heat for driving up the cost of the Xbox One.. but that's not a choice for people to make, or even a fair argument in my opinion.
You buy what a company sells.. don't want it... don't  buy.
Microsoft decided to include the Kinect with every system. It drove up the cost, but it what it is and that's what they're offering. That people keep referring to the Kinect as a peripheral only helps to exacerbate a problem that really shouldn't exist.. that being that consumers feel they have a right to tell Microsoft what to package in the system and what not to. I know that sounds a little off because we tell companies every day what to sell and how by whether or not we choose to buy their products, but at the end of the day, you either buy into a companies vision or you don't.
If Microsoft comes in a far second to Sony this gen.. which is more than likely going to happen.. I don't think it matters much if they succeed on their own terms and get enough people to buy into their vision and make profits along the way.
I just think all the complaints about the Kinect are baseless. I think the Kinect is used as ammunition by those that really have no intention of buying an Xbox One either way, Kinect sku or not.
If Microsoft came out at $399 and decided to give the Kinect away as a mail-in rebate... I'm sure close to 100% would take that offer.
Same could be said about Sony and their camera.
So it's really about price.. and not the Kinet, which is why I wrote the OP in the first place.
People should stop bitching about 

Those who don't want it aren't buying it. Those people are excluded. People are acting like this kinect situation is new. Sony had the exact same problem with the original ps3 with backwards compatibility. Sony was even worse off cause the Bwc was internal rather than external. If the MS wants kinect to be accepted as integral they need to spend more. Either take the loss, stipend kinect game development, or both. The only reason this is an issue is cause it's more expensive. And for most people price is the number 1 factor.

Simply put its Kinect Apoption Vs. Xb1 sales



In this day and age, with the Internet, ignorance is a choice! And they're still choosing Ignorance! - Dr. Filthy Frank

Around the Network
cmay227 said:
ArnoldRimmer said:
cmay227 said:
ICStats said:
MS can go ahead and ignore what the majority is saying. It will only lead to worse sales of XB1.... better for us PS4 fans.

This has got to be the dumbest statement, are you retarded? just asking, please explain how that is better for PS4 fans?

You didn't ask me, but:

If nothing else, It's better for PS4 fans because of its psychological effect. The current huge sales gap between PS4 and Xbox One gives PS4 owners the great feeling of having bought what is obviously the best console. while people who bought Xbox One will suffer from cognitive dissonance, giving them unconscious fears that they may have thrown 100$ out of the windows for a console that is actually inferior.

But there are other, more clear advantages that bad XB1 sales have for PS4 owners:

With bad XB1 sales, many video game developers will hesitate to make their game an Xbox One console exclusive title just because Microsoft is offering them shitloads of money to stop them from releasing a PS4 port.

With bad XBone sales, If the developers consider their own game to be bad or mediocre, they might still accept. But if they believe their own game to be a great game that will actually sell well, it would be a dumb idea to not release the game on what is easily the most successful console, and only release it on a console with a low market share. So: Bad Xbox One sales = Even more good PS4 games.

Maybe for the effect of PS4 owners feeling better, but from a business aspect it would cause quite a few developers to shutdown. My company would close and i would be out of a job if all we had was PS4 to make games for. PS4 alone is not enough to keep the game industry alive. Alot of companys would go bye bye. Which would cause less games for PS4.Like i said ,That's one dumest statement. How has PS4 benifited from poor Wii U sales? it won't, that's not the way it works. To want one console to fail is idiotic. It's pure ignorance. It would kill alot of 3rd part developers.

Why does it hurt your company if people choose PS4 instead of XB1?  Unless you're making XB1 exclusives...

And you misunderstand.  I wouldn't be happy that MS would lose a sale, I would be happy that Sony would win a sale.

What I'm saying is if MS doesn't listen to consumer's complaints then they will sell worse.   That will be bad for your studio, and it won't be the fan's fault, it won't be Sony's fault.  It will be MS' fault if they don't sell their consoles with expensive remote controls and your studio's business shrinks.

If Sony get a sale where MS or Nintendo failed to get any, that will be good for the industry.  Do you think the industry is happy with Nintendo?  Do you think they'll be happy if MS flops too?



My 8th gen collection

Sevengen said:
@Shinobi and Vitro..

I am the one that wrote the OP and my understanding of peripheral is fine.
Like I already stated to you Shinobi.. you don't need the traditional controller to use your xbox one, unless of course you want to play games that require it.
Both the traditional controller and the Kinect are integral to the system, they both do the same thing with respect to operation, that they use different schemes to control the Xbox One is inconsequential.. they are both 'main' controllers.
Neither one can be considered a peripheral.
You simply choose to see it the other way because you either have a dislike for Microsoft and/or the Xbox One, or you're a PS fan itching to throw a couple digs at the Xbox.
Maybe both, I don't know.
Why is it that you can't accept the fact that the Kinect was designed to be an alternative, main controller for the Xbox?
Seriously. What's the problem?

Tell you what, we'll play a game of The Apprentice.

You sell Xbox One E edition (entertainment box with no gamepad but with Kinect) at $479 (est cost of controller)

I'll sell Xbox one G edition (gamer edition without Kinect and with gamepad) at $419 (est cost of Kinect)

And we'll let the market decide which is an optional peripheral and which is an integral component.



“The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.” - Bertrand Russell

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace."

Jimi Hendrix

 

The main point of the OP is "innovation" and not once was HDMI in mentioned? Crazy.

That's by far the system's biggest innovation. Kinect's been around since the 360 so it's disqualified. Plus the PS4 can do 99% of the things Kinect 2 can, just not as good. In fact if you ignore HDMI in, the PS4 is more innovative than the XBOX ONE considering game streaming.



JoeTheBro said:
The main point of the OP is "innovation" and not once was HDMI in mentioned? Crazy.

That's by far the system's biggest innovation. Kinect's been around since the 360 so it's disqualified. Plus the PS4 can do 99% of the things Kinect 2 can, just not as good. In fact if you ignore HDMI in, the PS4 is more innovative than the XBOX ONE considering game streaming.

if the main point of the OP was about innovation, well then, maybe I would have written more about the X1 being innovative.. maybe even put that in the thread's title.
To be honest though you're right. The OP is about innovation, I just thought I'd trick everybody and not put that in the title, instead going with E3 and Kinect and then expading on those two bits of devious misinformation in the main body by talking about E3 and Kinect.

You're the first one to catch on to this.



Around the Network
Sevengen said:
JoeTheBro said:
The main point of the OP is "innovation" and not once was HDMI in mentioned? Crazy.

That's by far the system's biggest innovation. Kinect's been around since the 360 so it's disqualified. Plus the PS4 can do 99% of the things Kinect 2 can, just not as good. In fact if you ignore HDMI in, the PS4 is more innovative than the XBOX ONE considering game streaming.

if the main point of the OP was about innovation, well then, maybe I would have written more about the X1 being innovative.. maybe even put that in the thread's title.
To be honest though you're right. The OP is about innovation, I just thought I'd trick everybody and not put that in the title, instead going with E3 and Kinect and then expading on those two bits of devious misinformation in the main body by talking about E3 and Kinect.

You're the first one to catch on to this.

lol

Let's go back to elementary school. Remember the sandwich?

That's how the op is structured, more or less. Here's your conclusion.

"The PS4 is the more powerful, less expensive machine; the Xbox One is the more interesting and forward thinking alternative.
Price or innovation?
Innovation always wins in the long run.. would you be reading this on your tablet or smartphone if it didn't?"

According to pretty much any website:

A conclusion should

  • stress the importance of the thesis statement,
  • give the essay a sense of completeness, and
  • leave a final impression on the reader.

 

Silly me for assuming your conclusion included the main point of the OP.



JoeTheBro said:
Sevengen said:
JoeTheBro said:
The main point of the OP is "innovation" and not once was HDMI in mentioned? Crazy.

That's by far the system's biggest innovation. Kinect's been around since the 360 so it's disqualified. Plus the PS4 can do 99% of the things Kinect 2 can, just not as good. In fact if you ignore HDMI in, the PS4 is more innovative than the XBOX ONE considering game streaming.

if the main point of the OP was about innovation, well then, maybe I would have written more about the X1 being innovative.. maybe even put that in the thread's title.
To be honest though you're right. The OP is about innovation, I just thought I'd trick everybody and not put that in the title, instead going with E3 and Kinect and then expading on those two bits of devious misinformation in the main body by talking about E3 and Kinect.

You're the first one to catch on to this.

lol

Let's go back to elementary school. Remember the sandwich?

That's how the op is structured, more or less. Here's your conclusion.

"The PS4 is the more powerful, less expensive machine; the Xbox One is the more interesting and forward thinking alternative.
Price or innovation?
Innovation always wins in the long run.. would you be reading this on your tablet or smartphone if it didn't?"

According to pretty much any website:

A conclusion should

  • stress the importance of the thesis statement,
  • give the essay a sense of completeness, and
  • leave a final impression on the reader.

 

Silly me for assuming your conclusion included the main point of the OP.

Ha..! Silly you.
I fucking love sandwiches!!
(they usually fall apart on me though)