Interactive Kinect Ads Coming to Xbox This Fall

[Bvenged]

I love how I've been paying £30-40 a year for the past 3 years for a brilliant Xbox Live experience, with new dashboard updates, party chat, free apps, exclusive content and early DLC etc...

THEN I get told that for 2012 XBL will cost more than before so they (Microsoft) can continue providing better experiences.

[li]I get a crapper dashboard chucked at me with features I have no intention of ever using (beacons, because you know, I can't just ask people and send them invites);[/li]

[li]They've gone and ditched the very video series I actually enjoyed (Inside Xbox UK) so they can make money out of leasing the space off to 3rd parties;[/li]

[li]I've got advertisements on every twatting panel of the dashboard, some of which are videos that destroy my crappy internet connection for everyone else in the house (Oh cool, I pay for adverts!); and[/li]
[li]Half the time you've got to pay for these extra added apps anyway.[/li]

The only positives since the price-raise are the streaming services like BBC iPlayer, and the Bing Marketplace searching. But NOW they want to add even more advertisements for Kinect users?

1. I'm only getting a Kinect when it can be properly utilised with a controller, and I don't just mean voice-commands. My fucking headset can do that.
2. If I do pay an extra £90 for one, I don't want to be inundated with ads.

Microsoft, you're supposed to be taking money from your customers to provide a better service for your customers, not your business - cutting off first-party services and providing ads is not it. I don't mind the odd game add when I'm sat on your dashboard doing nothing, in fact I enjoy them, but video-streamed car ads, beer ads and MORE monthly-pay services on every page? Wtf? What is wrong with you? You were going along the right lines pre-2011.

 

[The Lunatic]

Interactive Adverts?

That sounds incredibly annoying.

 

[Fractral]

Hm. So let me get this straight:

A) Sony is pushing to create hardware that can interrupt my games with ads, hardware that may show up in their next console

And now....

B) Microsoft moves forward on creating "interactive ad services" for the Kinect that you just KNOW they'll insert into their next console as well

And yet....

C) Nintendo's every effort at creating new consoles, whether misguided or not, will continue to be demonized because "lol Nintendo sux".

Does that about sum it up?

This sums up my basic feelings towards the console market at the moment. (though I would also add PC's to the list with no adds) Nintendo seem to be doing everything they can to endear themselves to me, while MS and Sony seem to be trying to push me away. I for one embrace this with open arms.

 

[Epona]

Hm. So let me get this straight:

A) Sony is pushing to create hardware that can interrupt my games with ads, hardware that may show up in their next console

And now....

B) Microsoft moves forward on creating "interactive ad services" for the Kinect that you just KNOW they'll insert into their next console as well

And yet....

C) Nintendo's every effort at creating new consoles, whether misguided or not, will continue to be demonized because "lol Nintendo sux".

Does that about sum it up?

I honestly don't get how Nintendo gets such a bad rap these days when they're at least clearly still in the market for the sole purpose of creating entertainment for their customers. I suppose it's simply because people don't want to admit that perhaps this company has stayed in the video game industry for this long because it happens to know a few things about keeping its customers happy. People always degrade and berate Nintendo's fanbase, but hey, you know something? They have greater brand loyalty than any other console, and there's probably a reason for that. And you know something, those "Nintendo fanbois" aren't going to have to worry about ads in their next console. Enjoy your "higher level of gaming", you darling little elitists. I suspect Nintendo's fans will be quite satisfied with their "inferior" ad-free gaming experience. >_>

Yes, their recent consoles are filled with gimmicky shit that COULD be interesting, but often isn't. Yes, they've been pushing towards a heavy focus on the casual market and lost out on hardcore gamer sales due to heavy hardware limitations. Hell, I'll freely admit Nintendo's made some big missteps and plenty of errors. But on the other hand, they tend to do a pretty good job making up for those mistakes when they can. While I'm not a full blown Nintendo fan myself, I can recognize that they're generally pretty good about the way they do business and I can respect that. And I don't see how other people can't. If I were to pick a company that is at least worthy of a little goodwill, Nintendo would be near the top of that list, because they at least don't seem to generally try to dick with their customers on a regular basis like most of the rest of the gaming industry.

A) Has Sony said that?

B) True

C) No, it's because people want to play games with traditional controllers. Even with ads on the 360 dashboard people would still prefer that to the Wii and the reason is because the 360 lets them play the games they want with the preferred control scheme.

Nintendo obviously doesn't know how to keep their fans happy since they have lost most of them over the last 3 generations. Sure, Nintendo knows we hate ads but they can't get it through their heads that we don't like gimmicky controllers.

The final point is that just because Microsoft is showing it's greed, that doesn't make Nintendo a saint.

As for more ads? No thanks Microsoft, once my Live subscription runs out the 360 is going into storage or maybe I'll sell it. Without Live there is no Netflix and that is all the 360 is used for anyway.

 

[GamemasterAnthony]

This, ladies and gentlemen, is probably one of the reasons I never got the Kinect.

But there's this really...REALLY...evil part of my persona that wants to see an interactive ad for the next Leisure Suit Larry game. (Picture that if you will and let the image BURN!)

 

[Epona]

The patent was filed as far back as 2006, and they recently renewed it. That suggests they still plan on using it some time in the future, since otherwise they're wasting money on a patent they don't intend to use. I don't know why Sony would suddenly become interested in this patent again unless it were considering using it. Do you?

I don't know but then I don't know much about patents. I'll just say that if Sony does do this, I won't be buying their console but so far that haven't made an announcement while Microsoft seems all too happy to announce more ads on their console. In comparison, there is no comparison.

And your opinion speaks for everyone who has ever said "Nintendo sux", I take it?

Most I would say. Let's face it, people love some Nintendo games this gen (like Mario Galaxy) but still think of the Wii as the console to be used only when they are having a party.

Their sales figures on the Wii and 3DS would beg to differ. Or are you going to argue that everyone who bought a Wii or 3DS was brand new to the console industry and had never bought a Nintendo system before this? Because I'd love to hear you prove that argument. Really, I would.

You sure are hostile. No, many hardcore gamers bought a Wii and now it collects dust because they just don't care for the control scheme.

Who is "we", exactly? I'm a gamer and I don't mind the new controllers one bit. So between the two of us, that's 50-50 for and against. And judging from the sales of the console, it doesn't seem like everyone agrees with you.

No, not EVERYONE agrees with me but if you had spent a small amount of time on gaming forums in the last 5 years, you would know how most gamers feel about the Wii. You can pretend that sales are all that matter but it simply isn't true.

I agree with the notion, but I'll note that you haven't provided any evidence that Nintendo is evil.

Why would I provide evidence for a claim I did not make. I never said Nintendo is evil and I really hate the usage of the term so you'll probably never see me use it unless we are having a religious debate. Since I don't debate religion anymore...

Would you mind pointing to any recent news that indicates that Nintendo is as malicious as you claim? I'll wait.

I never made such a claim. Nice strawman but would you mind getting it off my lawn?

 

[Mr. Omega]

Back when I was deciding between the 360 and PS3, I chose the PS3 because I didn't want to pay for the subscription to XBL. Cut to two years later, and I'm actually considering getting PS Plus because of the nice incentives they give you for signing up, while XBL is now putting advertisements in with their all-but-mandatory subscription.

I love it when I can just look back and say "Yup, I made the right choice...", even with all the shit that PSN deals me on a regular basis.

C) No, it's because people want to play games with traditional controllers.

And on the WiiU, they can.

 

[Epona]

Back when I was deciding between the 360 and PS3, I chose the PS3 because I didn't want to pay for the subscription to XBL. Cut to two years later, and I'm actually considering getting PS Plus because of the nice incentives they give you for signing up, while XBL is now putting advertisements in with their all-but-mandatory subscription.

I love it when I can just look back and say "Yup, I made the right choice...", even with all the shit that PSN deals me on a regular basis.

C) No, it's because people want to play games with traditional controllers.

And on the WiiU, they can.

That's not the primary WiiU controller.

 

[Terramax]

I guess the $200+ pricetag for the console, $60 I pay for new games, and $5-$15, depending on what package I choose, for a PREMIUM service thats already littered with ad's doesn't qualify me to just turn the ad's off. Instead, we get treated to MORE ads. On a premium service we pay a premium to use. Because thats good consumerism right there guys

When did it come okay to put ads into a paying service? Yeah, they're making them 'fun' for the kinect, but it doesnt explain why they have to be there in the first place. A major plus for most content you have to pay for is the stripping of ads.

This is the exact reason why I haven't signed up to xbla, even when they've advertised it at £1 for a month's sub. I'm not signing up to it for 0.01p a month if they're playing this bullshit on me.

 

[Zyst]

And this is yet another reason why my natal sits in the corner, collecting dust.

You are such a hipster man..

 

[Epona]

That's because Microsoft is a new player in the console game and doesn't know better. I don't think Sony will announce it if they do decide to use this feature.

This is Microsoft's second generation and they are no stranger to the software business. They know exactly what they are doing. Thing is, Microsoft came into this business to take over the living room and that is exactly the strategy they are following. The 360 is quickly becoming a cable box.

Dunno about that. I never have company but I play on my Wii rather often.

Again, you're using unwieldy words like "most" in a very sad appeal to popularity argument. It's not working.

I know what most people think about the Wii because I read gaming forums. The only evidence you are offering is "I like to play the Wii alone".

Research? Evidence? Do you have any facts to back any of this up? Or are you going to keep pretending that it's right simply because it's what you believe?

Just information I have picked up on forums just like this one.

Again, I notice words like "most", yet you've still not proven this is a majority opinion. Until you do, I'm sticking to my belief that you're just using appeal to popularity here and I'm going to shrug it off.

That's fine.

Also, I am really sorry to break it to you, but yes, sales really are all that matter in the world of business.

Well see we are talking about things from a gamers point of view, not a stock holders point of view. Why do you care so much about the bottom line for big corporations? Are you on this board as a stock holder or as a gamer?

Also, if money (not just sales) is all that matters to a business and you are going to preach that, can I assume that you are in favor of MIcrosoft pushing more ads? It will make them more money and isn't that really all that matters?

And yet you used the word "saint" in an earlier post, which is far more attributable to religion than "evil" is....how interesting.

I should have said "perfect".

You stated that "Nintendo is not a saint", which is fair enough, but you've never provided any evidence to suggest that Nintendo is a bad company either. So either you're trying to argue that Nintendo isn't a good company but have no evidence to suggest malicious behavior, or you have no point at all. I'd just like to know which it is.

Let me clarify.

Just because company B does something bad doesn't make company A perfect. In this case Company A still has problems with third party support, understanding that core gamers like traditional controls and understanding that graphics really do matter.

I guess the WiiU addresses some of that but only in the short term. We still have a gimmicky controller that essentially turns the WiiU into a large DS (maybe the next Zelda game will fill your TV with a map and you will control Link on the smaller touchscreen), they are looking at getting more traditional games on the WiiU but when the PS4 and Nextbox launches, they may be be behind again (just like the Wii).

Rest assured though, if Sony goes down the advertising in game route, count me out. I am already done with Microsoft. Nintendo is still in the running so don't think I am counting them out, my faith just isn't high. If all three consoles fail me, I still have my PC.

 

[FantomOmega]

Wait, you already PAY a subscription to keep the service top tier since running a network cost money, but then you have ads which Microsoft is PAID to feature on Xbnox live....

 

[Epona]

But they ARE a stranger to being second or third fiddle in the market.

Windows has allowed them to dominate the market with a near monopoly over PCs for many years. They're still operating with that same business logic of "we're on top so we can do whatever we want" with their efforts on the XBOX, and that's going to bite them in the ass.

Well, the original XBOX ended in second place last gen.

All three console manufacturers have that arrogance you are talking about here. Sony with their pulling of backward compatibility/OtherOS/5 consoles activated at a time regardless of what their customers wanted. Microsoft, with their insistence on ads and the Metro dashboard and Nintendo with their insistence on friend codes, tying shop purchases to a single console/handheld and no integrated account. Even now we don't know much about the Nintendo Network.

Actually I'm not offering any evidence, because anecdotes are not evidence. Which is precisely what opinions on a gaming forum are: anecdotal. Such information doesn't really say an awful lot.

Fine, you continue to believe that your habits represent everyone and I'll continue to believe what people say on forums in regards to their own opinions. I think the Wii had people excited and then let people down. In other words, the Wii burned people and the WiiU now has an uphill battle, in my opinion based on what I have read from gamers over the last half decade.

What a ridiculous statement. Obviously as a gamer I have my own opinions. I just recognize that the reality of the world is that my opinions as a gamer are very meaningless to a large corporation, whose primary focus is the cash flow. Indeed, the whole reason these ads are being pursued by Microsoft is because of that desire for more money.

If all you think is worthy of discussion is sales, then yes, the Wii sold more than the other two. Are we done now?

That's purposely misreading what I said, and you know it. Now who is sticking words into whose mouth?

Not really, sales = money and that is what matters in business. Well, ads = money too. You should be happy for Microsoft since you are so happy for Nintendo.

Well then it's an awful good thing that Company A is offering significantly high incentives to third party and indie developers to put games on their new console....

I have heard similar since the Gamecube and so far it's just been wishful thinking. Nintendo has a bad reputation of being overbearing with third parties.

....and offering classic-style controllers for their games (in addition to backwards compatibility for casual players who are more comfortable with a Wiimote)....

The classic controller on the Wii was for the Virtual Console, it was used for very few Wii titles and Nintendo was the worst offender of forcing motion controls without a traditional option.

Sure the WiiU has the alternative controller but we have yet to see if it will be treated like the Wii classic controller.

....and offering a console whose graphics capabilities match its competitors, with resolution up to 1080i/p and processing power that may well be higher than its competitors.

For a short while...when the PS4 and Nextbox launch, my bets are that the WiiU will be a generation behind, just like the Wii is now.

I'm curious how the above information is only a short term fix to the problem. Are you anticipating some kind of next-gen technical explosion that no one else knows about? Graphical quality is currently just about peaking out at 1080, and there's no indication at present that there's any tech on the horizon to take that a step further. So barring the addition of greater RAM to make gameplay flow more regularly and (hopefully) cut down on load times, I can't say I'm seeing the technical revolution that you seem to be expecting that will make the Wii U's improvements only a "short term" fix.

Graphic quality is more than simple resolution. The same game that runs on the WiiU at 1080p would likely look even better running on a PC at the same resolution. The PC version would likely have better textures at a minimum.

When you think that consoles can't get any better, look at PC's.

It remains to be seen how well this system will be implemented with its games. The Wii's big problem is that the motion control tended to become pointless in many of the games. Games would contain some sort of token "Wiimote waggle" to recognize that yes, the motion controls are there, but the devs didn't care for it or want to integrate it into their game. If the touchpad controller can actually make itself useful and change the way the game is played, then it's going to be a different situation than the Wiimote was. So far, the games that I've seen do at least seem to use it in some interesting ways. I suppose we'll see if this works out or if it'll become another Wiimote Waggle gimmick.

See, the best case scenario is that devs will take advantage of the touch screen/second screen. Well, that is something that we have experience with in the DS/3DS and other handheld devices and I am really not excited about that at all.

That's all there is. The WiiU is offering to let me play the same games I already have with a DS type interface. Sorry, but I am just not excited about that. It's cool that you are but try to understand where I am coming from.

The Wii sure did awfully well for being "behind".

So did the PS2 but the difference there is that the PS2 could play games from the other consoles because it used a traditional controller and it wasn't so far behind that ports were impossible.

The Wii got people excited and then it let them down, that helped the Wii's sales but it will hurt the WiiU. Nintendo has admitted that they lost the core audience and now they have to win them back. It's going to be an uphill battle but stupid shit from Microsoft will help them and if Sony is ad-stupid too, that will help Nintendo.

 

[Epona]

Mostly due to Halo, but yeah. That's sort of my point. Microsoft's not used to being second, they're used to being so far ahead that they could spit on their customers' heads and still push millions of units by necessity.

You are too biased in favor of Nintendo to hear anything from someone who is still willing to give Nintendo a chance but is done with Microsoft (ie, ME). I mean really, you are just over the top biased. I have been as nice as possible talking to you but my patience has run thin.

I mean, Microsoft isn't used to being in second place BECAUSE the Xbox ended in second place? That makes no sense and BTW, the 360 is in second place too. I would say they are used to being in second or third place in the game industry because that's where they have always been.

I suppose we'll have to wait and find out then, rather than just assuming the worst because ....wait, why ARE we assuming the worst again? You still haven't explained why Nintendo is a bad company, or what they've done to merit a reputation of distrust.

I never said Nintendo is a bad company or that they should be distrusted. Stop with your strawmen. I am not going to provide evidence for things I did not say.

I never claimed my habits were representative of gamer culture as a whole. I merely pointed out that I, as a gamer, have a contradictory opinion to you. Which is precisely why opinions are anecdotal evidence, and thus, worthless.

What you did was claim that what I have read on forums for years doesn't count because YOU like the Wii. You are basically saying that MOST gamers feel as you do about the Wii. Well, they don't. It is pretty universally accepted that the Wii was not a good fit for core gamers, even Nintendo seems to acknowledge that when they talk of getting those gamers back.

Tell you what though, start a poll asking people on here how they feel about the Wii. Bet you won't because deep down you know how that will go.

Then, for the third time, I guess we'll just have to wait and see rather than just assuming the worst of a company for no good reason, eh? Gosh this sounds familiar.

No good reason? Are you serious?

If a company (or a person) makes the same damn promises every generation and has never really fulfilled them, wouldn't you start to lose faith?

The N64, Gamecube and Wii had little third party support. Before the last two of those launches Nintendo said they were going to do better this gen in regards to third parties, they didn't. Now we're just supposed to believe it because...why?

Er, you don't mean generation, because that term refers to the time period during which it was released, NOT its hardware capabilities.

Yeah, I should have said "the hardware will be so far behind that porting will be impossible", just like the Wii is today.

Also you seem to have missed the point entirely. The primary barrier to the Wii getting a lot of the same games that the 360 and PS3 got was the tremendous problems they had with graphical quality. Games had to be downgraded to work on it. The Wii U's proposed technical specs would remove that barrier. Even assuming the new PS4 and whatever-the-next-XBOX-is-called have better RAM/processors/hard drives, that doesn't instantly translate to better graphical quality or better functionality.

Here's what I know, I know the Wii was a little more powerful than the Xbox. I know that the WiiU is a little more powerful than the PS3/360. See the parallels?

It's curious that, later on in this same post, you make a point of saying that the PS2 sold well during the years after Wii's release (when, mind, the PS3 was also on the market at this time and wasn't doing as well).

I never said this. I said the PS2 sold well, that's it.

The simple answer, of course, is that graphical quality isn't everything.

I never said that graphics are everything. I said they were important.

You're fuckin' arguing with yourself here. You conjure up some bullshit in your head and then argue against it. You should debate sober next time.

Now if you'd only drop this overbearing tone of "and everyone else in the gamer world agrees with me" (which is false), we'll be in agreement.

Another example of you making shit up. I never said EVERYONE ELSE and I never said anything like that in relation to the WiiU. I was talking about how MOST gamers feel about the Wii.

Seriously, you keep this shit up and I am going to report you for wasting everyone's time with strawmen.

What's interesting is that people keep bringing this up as if it somehow means something, but the PS2 never outsold the Wii in any given year during the time of the Wii's release up to the present day, and it didn't outsell the Wii in overall units, either.

I wasn't comparing the PS2 sales to the Wii sales. I was saying that the PS2 outsold it competition during it's generation and it was the weakest too. Then I went on to say (my god, why do I have to type this out again, learn to fuckin' read) that games could be ported from the other two consoles of that gen to the PS2 because the gap wasn't as big as it is this gen with the Wii.

The Wii sold on it's gimmick and then it went into dust collecting mode in many homes. It's why third parties stop developing for it, only Nintendo games sold well.