First Impressions: Microsoft Kinect

[Phyroxis]

Footage of the Star Wars clip clearly shows the on screen action happen before the guy moves. Either it was a pre-rendered scene or Microsoft have ironed out the lag issues so well that they can read your movements before you make them. (believe it or not this is possible.)

Truth.

They don't have anything good for Kinect and know it, so they chuck in star wars.

 

[Greg Tito]

Am I experiencing some kind of deja vu? I think I saw this article before, on Escapist..Or somewhere. - Goes back to lurk. -

Susan Arendt did an article with regards to an elephant TV and Cirque du Soleil.

We were both at the same show and thought you guys would want to get some different perspectives. The show itself was kind of amazing, but we left with the same feelings that a lot of you guys seem to feel. Kinect is trying to horn in on the Wii audience which has largely dried up.

 

[rembrandtqeinstein]

Do the latest versions of the 360 still sound like jet engines? If so no thanks. However a Police 911 game that doesn't suck would change my opinion real quick.

 

[Greg Tito]

There was one cool thing that I forgot to mention. At one point, an Xbox live menu was shown on a grid and the actor playing the daughter could reach up and point to what she wanted to do, i.e. watch a Zune video of Planet Earth.

It was a little thing that reminded me of the Minority Report possibilities of Kinect.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NwVBzx0LMNQ

 

[ark123]

I seem to be the only one here who's excited for this, I quite like the idea of expanding technology and finding new ways to play computer games. I guess I'm not hardcore enough or I'm too casual, names thrown around a lot these days. Well I like the idea anyway... I just get a little annoyed with how... close minded people seem to be about these leaps, every body seems to just be dismissing it and calling those that don't "Not real gamers" because they like the idea of playing games without a joystick.

Oh yes, that's what it is. I'm sure anyone in this site would scoff at virtual reality because there's no joystick.
Or maybe people criticize these games because they lack originality, depth, vision, graphics and quite possibly decent gameplay (assuming this is the reason they opted to show an actor that memorized the Star Wars scenes moving as if he was controlling anything, instead of showing actual gameplay)

 

[ark123]

Hey, you know what people do when they're confident in their product? They let regular people play around with it and decide if they like it. Go to the iPad keynote, get to fuck around with it after. Go to Google I/O, leave with a new phone with the product in it.
Go see the Kinetic demo, get to see actors act as if they were controlling a big cutscene.

 

[ark123]

Footage of the Star Wars clip clearly shows the on screen action happen before the guy moves. Either it was a pre-rendered scene or Microsoft have ironed out the lag issues so well that they can read your movements before you make them. (believe it or not this is possible.)

Please explain how the machine would be able to predict your future movements before you make them.

 

[solidstatemind]

Actually, I think 'Kinect' is pretty clever: a combination of 'Kinetic' and 'Connect', and implying both. MUCH better in my opinion than the bland 'Move'.

The Star Wars lightsaber game would be a hardware-selling game, if it's worth a crap. Clearly they didn't get it polished enough to be ready for E3. I'll be interested to see what they trot out at PAX.

 

[DigitalSushi]

Am I experiencing some kind of deja vu? I think I saw this article before, on Escapist..Or somewhere. - Goes back to lurk. -

Susan Arendt did an article with regards to an elephant TV and Cirque du Soleil.

We were both at the same show and thought you guys would want to get some different perspectives. The show itself was kind of amazing, but we left with the same feelings that a lot of you guys seem to feel. Kinect is trying to horn in on the Wii audience which has largely dried up.

Just making sure you realise, I wasn't critising you guys, I was just telling Straying that Susan did in fact do the same thing. Its nice to get different perspective, after all thats why alot of us frequent several different gaming sites.

Have you tried out the tech yet?, I'd love to get some feedback, I'm also looking forward to some KillZone 3D feedback, but watching something fail is more fun so Natal or Kinect or whatever looks like it'll be the one to watch.

The problem with the Wii audience is that they aren't the same as the Xbox audience, lets be honest here and say the Xbox audience are the powerful persuayers in the 13 to 25 year old demographic that gets their parents and later there girlfriends to buy them these things. I remember an article with Peter Moore stating that "mothers can get in by micro transactions to buy a character clothing", which just showed the immaturaty of Microsoft and its handling of merely a potential target demographic. I think I read it in Edge magazine, which is ironic since I don't know many mothers with a subscription to that magazine.

Mothers will buy the Wii, or want the Wii, I know my mother, Aunt, Grandmother has one each because they all wanted one so I had to buy the things for them (at the expense of my own games, stupid families).

Not once have I heard someone outside of the Xbox demographic of young men say, I really want an Xbox with MicroFit.

 

[Sovvolf]

I seem to be the only one here who's excited for this, I quite like the idea of expanding technology and finding new ways to play computer games. I guess I'm not hardcore enough or I'm too casual, names thrown around a lot these days. Well I like the idea anyway... I just get a little annoyed with how... close minded people seem to be about these leaps, every body seems to just be dismissing it and calling those that don't "Not real gamers" because they like the idea of playing games without a joystick.

Oh yes, that's what it is. I'm sure anyone in this site would scoff at virtual reality because there's no joystick.
Or maybe people criticize these games because they lack originality, depth, vision, graphics and quite possibly decent gameplay (assuming this is the reason they opted to show an actor that memorized the Star Wars scenes moving as if he was controlling anything, instead of showing actual gameplay)

People aren't criticizing the games, I can understand that... they are criticizing the technology. Pushing it aside as a Wii wannabe when really, if anything it's an eye toy wannabe. I just see potential for more, this tech could have countless possibilities for video games. Playing an RTS on a 360 would be pretty cool with tech like this. The Starwars game is a cool idea (though apparently faked) if they could execute it. Oblivion would be pretty cool if they could find a way in which we could walk around in the world without having to jog on the spot like a pillock.

 

[ark123]

Footage of the Star Wars clip clearly shows the on screen action happen before the guy moves. Either it was a pre-rendered scene or Microsoft have ironed out the lag issues so well that they can read your movements before you make them. (believe it or not this is possible.)

Please explain how the machine is able to predict your future movements before you make them.

We telegraph our movements with, essentially, micro-movements. So if Kinect could pick up on what you were doing before you fully did it, it could, in theory, complete the move before you do. So.. theoretically possible. Personally, I think it's bloody unlikely that that's what's going on though.

So what you're saying is that they might have developed a technology that's amazingly futuristic and made such a small deal out of it that they didn't even think of mentioning it, actually covering it up by making a video that makes it look like the actor's instead doing the equivalent of air guitar in front of a music video.
Might as well go full sci-fi and say it might be reading his brain wave pattern before the electrical signals reach his muscles. I'd say that's about as likely.

 

[ark123]

I seem to be the only one here who's excited for this, I quite like the idea of expanding technology and finding new ways to play computer games. I guess I'm not hardcore enough or I'm too casual, names thrown around a lot these days. Well I like the idea anyway... I just get a little annoyed with how... close minded people seem to be about these leaps, every body seems to just be dismissing it and calling those that don't "Not real gamers" because they like the idea of playing games without a joystick.

Oh yes, that's what it is. I'm sure anyone in this site would scoff at virtual reality because there's no joystick.
Or maybe people criticize these games because they lack originality, depth, vision, graphics and quite possibly decent gameplay (assuming this is the reason they opted to show an actor that memorized the Star Wars scenes moving as if he was controlling anything, instead of showing actual gameplay)

People aren't criticizing the games, I can understand that... they are criticizing the technology. Pushing it aside as a Wii wannabe when really, if anything it's an eye toy wannabe. I just see potential for more, this tech could have countless possibilities for video games. Playing an RTS on a 360 would be pretty cool with tech like this. The Starwars game is a cool idea (though apparently faked) if they could execute it. Oblivion would be pretty cool if they could find a way in which we could walk around in the world without having to jog on the spot like a pillock.

You're wrong. If they'd shown a Star Wars game with PS3 graphics that allowed the player to actually duel with a lightsaber against an AI using kendo/fencing patterns, parrying by flicking your wrist, manipulating two sabers, one in each hand, scissoring a sith warrior's head off, they could just show the game and it would sell a trillion units.
The thing is, it obviously can't do that, or they would have just shown it. They aren't stupid.
Playing an RTS with hand movements would be horrible. Do this: Hold your arms in front of you for twenty minutes straight. See how that feels. Now do this: Drag your mouse cursor across the screen. Easy, right? Had to move the mouse an inch or two? Now imagine having to slash across your big screen TV instead. Every time you want to check a unit. Every time you want to click on an enemy unit to tell its health. Imagine if you had to scratch your face mid combat. Imagine microing a hundred units at the same time in a big battle.
The technology sucks because the games you can play with movements are, by their very nature , simple. Thats what people criticize.

You will not be playing RTS games with this. You will not be playing shooters with this. You will be playing "River raft jump", "whack the ball against screen" and every Wii sports copy you can think of. We know this because if it was capable of more, it would have been shown.
They resort to this air guitar nonsense when they want to hype up a shitty product.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqxkgJkGnro

 

[Sovvolf]

I seem to be the only one here who's excited for this, I quite like the idea of expanding technology and finding new ways to play computer games. I guess I'm not hardcore enough or I'm too casual, names thrown around a lot these days. Well I like the idea anyway... I just get a little annoyed with how... close minded people seem to be about these leaps, every body seems to just be dismissing it and calling those that don't "Not real gamers" because they like the idea of playing games without a joystick.

Oh yes, that's what it is. I'm sure anyone in this site would scoff at virtual reality because there's no joystick.
Or maybe people criticize these games because they lack originality, depth, vision, graphics and quite possibly decent gameplay (assuming this is the reason they opted to show an actor that memorized the Star Wars scenes moving as if he was controlling anything, instead of showing actual gameplay)

People aren't criticizing the games, I can understand that... they are criticizing the technology. Pushing it aside as a Wii wannabe when really, if anything it's an eye toy wannabe. I just see potential for more, this tech could have countless possibilities for video games. Playing an RTS on a 360 would be pretty cool with tech like this. The Starwars game is a cool idea (though apparently faked) if they could execute it. Oblivion would be pretty cool if they could find a way in which we could walk around in the world without having to jog on the spot like a pillock.

You're wrong. If they'd shown a Star Wars game with PS3 graphics that allowed the player to actually duel with a lightsaber against an AI using kendo/fencing patterns, parrying by flicking your wrist, manipulating two sabers, one in each hand, scissoring a sith warrior's head off, they could just show the game and it would sell a trillion units.
The thing is, it obviously can't do that, or they would have just shown it. They aren't stupid.
Playing an RTS with hand movements would be horrible. Do this: Hold your arms in front of you for twenty minutes straight. See how that feels. Now do this: Drag your mouse cursor across the screen. Easy, right? Had to move the mouse an inch or two? Now imagine having to slash across your big screen TV instead. Every time you want to check a unit. Every time you want to click on an enemy unit to tell its health. Imagine if you had to scratch your face mid combat. Imagine microing a hundred units at the same time in a big battle.
The technology sucks because the games you can play with movements are, by their very nature , simple. Thats what people criticize.

The game's are tech demo's, they aren't the finished product. This was probably done within a couple of months just to give an example of the technology... your judging everything on tech demo's. Then you just proved the point I stated at the beginning, people are criticizing the technology... without having the slightest clue on how it really works. I have no clue how it works, I'm not showering it with praise but I'm curiously looking forward to seeing how it all works. Maybe it's going to be a bag a shit, maybe it will be the best thing to happen to gaming... I don't know, I'm just reserving my judgement for when it's out. While people like you have already made up your mind based on tech demo's.

 

[raankh]

First Impressions: Microsoft Kinect

[snip]
The shoulder pads all lit up for the finale in different color patterns, based purely on where we were standing or sitting. The catch was that there was no assigned seating; the placement of the audience was purely random, yet the patterns shown were not. It was a simple, yet amazing display of the technology behind Natal, er, Kinect.
[snip]

Permalink

I'm sorry, but that's impressive in what way exactly? I could pull off the same thing with a bunch of cell-phones and rice-paper

But seriously, that's hardly an amazing display of technology, even if it really did passively detect you (of which I'm veeeery doubtful).

 

[deadguynotyetburied]

My nephews have a Wii. They have, actually, what seems to be a large number of game consoles. They don't play the Wii. I don't know if it's that they don't have any games for it, or if it's that they don't have games for it they like. But they play their hand-helds virtually non-stop, unless they're taking a break to eat, sleep, or play on one of their other consoles. That console hasn't been the Wii since a few months after they got it.

What would have made the white smock demo impressive is if the people in attendance had been moving, but the color patterns had remained constant.

 

[ark123]

The game's are tech demo's, they aren't the finished product. This was probably done within a couple of months just to give an example of the technology... your judging everything on tech demo's. Then you just proved the point I stated at the beginning, people are criticizing the technology... without having the slightest clue on how it really works. I have no clue how it works, I'm not showering it with praise but I'm curiously looking forward to seeing how it all works. Maybe it's going to be a bag a shit, maybe it will be the best thing to happen to gaming... I don't know, I'm just reserving my judgement for when it's out. While people like you have already made up your mind based on tech demo's.

Yes, because the tech demos make it abundantly clear this technology will be a lot like the Wii but without the wiimotes. And that's nothing to be excited about. If the tech demo was someone navigating the web Minority Report style, using hand movements to paint details on a virtual painting or playing Guitar Hero without the guitar by moving his fingers, that would be one thing. That's not what it is, though. This thing can clearly only sort of tell if someone is moving, it can't catch anything subtle.

 

[Greg Tito]

First Impressions: Microsoft Kinect

[snip]
The shoulder pads all lit up for the finale in different color patterns, based purely on where we were standing or sitting. The catch was that there was no assigned seating; the placement of the audience was purely random, yet the patterns shown were not. It was a simple, yet amazing display of the technology behind Natal, er, Kinect.
[snip]

Permalink

I'm sorry, but that's impressive in what way exactly? I could pull off the same thing with a bunch of cell-phones and rice-paper

But seriously, that's hardly an amazing display of technology, even if it really did passively detect you (of which I'm veeeery doubtful).

I think that it's a little more difficult than you think. There were hundreds if not thousands of people in the room, all moving and shifting. To wirelessly coordinate a light show with tech that was light enough to be nearly undetectable by the person wearing the get up, I was impressed.

Of course, you are a tech wizard who could pull that off MacGyver style with a paper clip and an avocado.