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

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.


I actually like what you wrote above, anyone that can slip the term cognitive dissonance into a discussion should be appluaded... lol.
nicely done.
but I have to disagree you.
anything that dominates it's respective sales demographic is actually bad for the consumer in the long run, both by severly mitigating choice and creating complacency in the leader.
If the Xbox One completely tanks and developers head en masse towards Sony, it's simply a short term victory for the Sony faithful as games and innovation suffer.
If the present situation were reversed, I would not consider Sony's perceived collapse as a victory. It would be bad for all.



Around the Network
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.



Its definitely a peripheral i dont see how you can argue otherwise. This isnt an opinion it either is or isn't a peripheral. I think people fail to understand this and it causes unnecessary arguments.

Take out the Kinect and the X1 works perfectly without it. The UI works fine and MOST importantly the games work without it.

Take away the traditional controller and you cant do jack shit with your X1.

Now if MS took away your ability to control the UI with the traditional controller and made it mandatory to use the Kinect then yes its an intergral part of the system but they havent done that and they never will.

The wii remote is good example of not being a peripheral where the move is...yet they do exactly the same thing...



Intel Core i7 3770K [3.5GHz]|MSI Big Bang Z77 Mpower|Corsair Vengeance DDR3-1866 2 x 4GB|MSI GeForce GTX 560 ti Twin Frozr 2|OCZ Vertex 4 128GB|Corsair HX750|Cooler Master CM 690II Advanced|

Good writeup @ Kinect.

Each and every other notion made me surprised, made me laugh, and then made me sad.



Shinobi-san said:
Its definitely a peripheral i dont see how you can argue otherwise. This isnt an opinion it either is or isn't a peripheral. I think people fail to understand this and it causes unnecessary arguments.

Take out the Kinect and the X1 works perfectly without it. The UI works fine and MOST importantly the games work without it.

Take away the traditional controller and you cant do jack shit with your X1.

Now if MS took away your ability to control the UI with the traditional controller and made it mandatory to use the Kinect then yes its an intergral part of the system but they havent done that and they never will.

The wii remote is good example of not being a peripheral where the move is...yet they do exactly the same thing...

exactly. unfortunately what you stated is actually an opinion and here's something 'you' failed to recognize.

Take away the traditional controller and you can still do everything on your Xbox One that you need to.. except play games that 'require' a traditional controller.

hmm. kinda seems the same both ways don't it?

I wonder if that mean the traditional controller is actually a peripheral?.. lol



Around the Network
Sevengen said:

I'm just as entitled to question your perception as you are mine...

You seriously wonder why I have such a problem accepting that word???
Alright, fair being fair, than you have to agree with me wondering why you can't accept that it's not a peripheral.
Right?

Huh? It's not like everyone can simply define his own meaning of a word, a word like "peripheral" has a rather clear definition, that one can, for example, look up on Wikipedia. And the Wikipedia article makes perfectly clear that something similar to a webcam is indeed a "peripheral" - as are, for example:

  • computer mice
  • keyboards
  • graphics cards
  • scannners
  • microphones
  • speakers
  • webcams
  • DVD drives
  • and even hard-disks

Wikipedia states "According to the most technical definition, the only pieces of a computer not considered to be peripherals are the central processing unit, power supply, motherboard, and computer case."

I'm just pointing out that unlike other definitions, the definition of a computer/console peripheral is very clear and specific, and according to that definition, Kinect is clearly a peripheral.

Well, so that was my rationale for not accepting that it's not a peripheral: The usual definitions of "peripheral" clearly state otherwise.

 

So now, please explain why YOU cannot accept the official definition of a "peripheral", as to me it seems like for some reason you consider the word "peripheral" to have a negative touch that questions the usability of a device. (I would for example say that the word "gimmick", which the Kinect is often called, indeed has a certain negative touch).



sorry about this, but I have to pat myself on the back for that last comment 'cause it was simply awesome.
I love putting people in their place.....
and there's no denying it there Shinob,

gotcha!!



ArnoldRimmer said:
Sevengen said:

I'm just as entitled to question your perception as you are mine...

You seriously wonder why I have such a problem accepting that word???
Alright, fair being fair, than you have to agree with me wondering why you can't accept that it's not a peripheral.
Right?

Huh? It's not like everyone can simply define his own meaning of a word, a word like "peripheral" has a rather clear definition, that one can, for example, look up on Wikipedia. And the Wikipedia article makes perfectly clear that something similar to a webcam is indeed a "peripheral" - as are, for example:

  • computer mice
  • keyboards
  • graphics cards
  • scannners
  • microphones
  • speakers
  • webcams
  • DVD drives
  • and even hard-disks

Wikipedia states "According to the most technical definition, the only pieces of a computer not considered to be peripherals are the central processing unit, power supply, motherboard, and computer case."

I'm just pointing out that unlike other definitions, the definition of a computer/console peripheral is very clear and specific, and according to that definition, Kinect is clearly a peripheral.

Well, so that was my rationale for not accepting that it's not a peripheral: The usual definitions of "peripheral" clearly state otherwise.

 

So now, please explain why YOU cannot accept the official definition of a "peripheral", as to me it seems like for some reason you consider the word "peripheral" to have a negative touch that questions the usability of a device. (I would for example say that the word "gimmick", which the Kinect is often called, indeed has a certain negative touch).

look man.. it's included with every Xbox One sold, it's intergral to the operation of the system. Period.
End of story.
It's not a peripheral and it doesn't matter how many responses you come up with to try and contradict me.
Like I just got done telling Shinob...
take away the traditional controller can you still do everything you want to do on Xbox One other than play games that 'require' a traditional controller....
Yep!
Soooooooooooooooooooo.. it if the traditional controller gets hit by a bus, or stolen by thieves, or flushed down the toilet, or thrown away by your mom, or used in a weird way by your sister and hidden beneath her mattress... can you still use your Xbox One.
Yep!
we're done here.



Kinect for Xbox One DID launch with a GREAT and FREE game called 'Xbox Fitness.'

It's awesome.

I bought Xbox One BECAUSE I wanted the advanced Kinect.



Shinobi-san said:
Its definitely a peripheral i dont see how you can argue otherwise. This isnt an opinion it either is or isn't a peripheral. I think people fail to understand this and it causes unnecessary arguments.

Take out the Kinect and the X1 works perfectly without it. The UI works fine and MOST importantly the games work without it.

Take away the traditional controller and you cant do jack shit with your X1.

Now if MS took away your ability to control the UI with the traditional controller and made it mandatory to use the Kinect then yes its an intergral part of the system but they havent done that and they never will.

The wii remote is good example of not being a peripheral where the move is...yet they do exactly the same thing...

Actually, the Wii Remote (and the traditional controllers as well of course) are peripherals as well. Even the hard drive inside the XBone and PS4 is technically a computer peripheral, despite being absolutely mandatory for the console to work.