Is Kinect really that innovative?
- Thread starter IamSofaKingRaw
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Wrong. You initially stated that the Kinect was ripping off the eyetoy. I then answered that the Kinect was based on a completely different technology. I did not say that the gameplay of what few Kinect games we have seen was original. We may liken your claim that Kinect is an upgraded eyetoy to a claim that DVDs are merely an upgraded version of VHS: Just because both things can do the same thing, doesn't mean one is a ripoff of the other.IamSofaKingRaw said:
And you did bring the move into the discussion, but you did not do it in any sensible way: You began, out of nothing, to make arguments against a claim I did not make, and that was not related to the discussion we were having. Frankly, it was confusing. I thought you were talking to someone else.
For the record: The reason people think of the Move as a Wii ripoff, is because its control peripherals look very similiar to the Wii's.
I think Kinect has the ability to work alongside the hardcore games, as long as it focuses games which will work on the platform and not try to port other games onto it or copy the Wii too much. In terms of innovation the only thing I can think of which is similar is eye toy and that was... well not very good.
They both use camera's to track movement, one came out years before the other, I think it kind of speaks for it'self.Xzi said:
Even if it is just the idea "hey, we can take the eye toy and take it a bit further".
Sorry but your basically saying kinect is so much better than move, it works better, you make it sound like it's brand new idea, it's not based off any other tech etc. I think it's you who sounds like a fanboy, I assume you have a 360.Xzi said:
Oh for fuck's sake.Xzi said:
look, I just wrote a really really nice post that had an awesome point regarding innovation and sony move/kinect and then just after I clicked post the fucking internet went, thanks Eircom.
here is what it was simplified.
Sony's isn't that stupid. for the Wii, I've heard people ***** about the Wii not having good enough graphics and the system being too slow, so naturally Sony making a faster and prettier Wii is (economically and conceptually) a good idea.
As for innovation, Innovation is defined as "the act of starting something for the first time; introducing something new" (src; princeton.edu), accepting that as a truth it is logical to say that neither Sony nor Microsoft are being innovative at all. and you can go on about tracking accuracy and voice recognition until the cows come home, but that doesn't stop the Kinect from being a glorified Eyetoy in the same sense that my argument doesn't stop the Move from being a glorified Wii.
So there you go, point made, not as pretty but it does what I intended.
Fuck you Eircom.
As a concept yes, Kinect is basically EyeToy+.
But, the technology underneath is different and whether or not it descends into the same shovelware based slow decline is still in Microsoft's court.
If they can get it working and working well I see no reason why it can't take off as Eyetoy so very nearly did before get shovelled to Hades.
But, the technology underneath is different and whether or not it descends into the same shovelware based slow decline is still in Microsoft's court.
If they can get it working and working well I see no reason why it can't take off as Eyetoy so very nearly did before get shovelled to Hades.
Please prove your statement. also, It's called an "Eyetoy" (or more recently just "Eye").C95J said:
There once was a video game company that released a next generation console that had motion control.
The fans of this company were both excited and sceptical, "will it really be that good?" one fan asked, "I can't wait to have sword fights!" said another.
The competition just laughed at the company and said "motion control? What a joke!" and released consoles that could play movies, since everyone apparently did not have a dvd player.
Several years later, while the company's motion control has not been exactly what gamers had hoped for, it has been really innovative, fun, and the competition is doing the exact same fucking thing.
I have no idea how accurate or good Kinect will be, I don't really care.
Until you can play a FPS without a controller, I will continue not caring.
I know for a fact that the Kinect will run into small problems that will make people rage, just like the Wii has.
As far as I'm concerned, if Nintendo can make a console that takes the competition many years to replicate and "do better", then Nintendo's next console will most likely be cybernetic implants that let you play games in your mind by inserting the game chip in your nose. By then, Sony (as "innovative" as always) will most likely have their games be playable on 3D TVs.
The fans of this company were both excited and sceptical, "will it really be that good?" one fan asked, "I can't wait to have sword fights!" said another.
The competition just laughed at the company and said "motion control? What a joke!" and released consoles that could play movies, since everyone apparently did not have a dvd player.
Several years later, while the company's motion control has not been exactly what gamers had hoped for, it has been really innovative, fun, and the competition is doing the exact same fucking thing.
I have no idea how accurate or good Kinect will be, I don't really care.
Until you can play a FPS without a controller, I will continue not caring.
I know for a fact that the Kinect will run into small problems that will make people rage, just like the Wii has.
As far as I'm concerned, if Nintendo can make a console that takes the competition many years to replicate and "do better", then Nintendo's next console will most likely be cybernetic implants that let you play games in your mind by inserting the game chip in your nose. By then, Sony (as "innovative" as always) will most likely have their games be playable on 3D TVs.
In terms of technology, I'm gonna say yeah, it's pretty innovative. The whole "track different parts of the body," is pretty advanced, considering it requires no controler to track motions.
That being said, in terms of ideas and creativity, I'm gonna say hell no. The guys who run Microsoft aren't dummies: they know the potential power of the casual market, and they aren't going to let Nintendo dominate in this area. They wanted to make something that was *like* the Wii, but different enough so they could pull the "originality," card in the ads.
That being said, in terms of ideas and creativity, I'm gonna say hell no. The guys who run Microsoft aren't dummies: they know the potential power of the casual market, and they aren't going to let Nintendo dominate in this area. They wanted to make something that was *like* the Wii, but different enough so they could pull the "originality," card in the ads.
ah sorry, my typing error.Accountfailed said:
Well probably the most obvious point is that Kinect was released 7 year after eyetoy it does imply a technological improvement. It's all about the technology inside the systems. sure they both track your movement but inside the tech isn't the same.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8cvBKgn7hd8
This video should explain it PERFECTLY.
It also explains the PSMove as well.
watch video aboveIamSofaKingRaw said:
Thank you, it's bad writing to make a statement and not back it up with evidence ^_^C95J said:
In my opinion, more advanced(a little, anyway, considering the Playstation Eye), but different? I disagree. the Eyetoy and the Kinect have (seriously) the same basic guts, one RGB camera, one multi array microphone with voice recognition capabilities and noise cancellation, and their respective depth solutions (src; wiki!). While it IS true that the Kinect is seven years more advanced than the Eyetoy. It borrows very heavily from the more advanced(than the Eyetoy, I mean)recent Eyetoy, the Playstation Eye, but the basic guts for all three peripherals are the same.
In concept, the Move and Kinect are just copies of the Wii and Eyetoy, respectively. In technology, we know they're very different but that's not "innovative" since they're trying to achieve the exact same effect. It was a cool idea originally, but they couldn't really pull it off properly. Kinect and Move are both alright, but they're nothing new.
Improvement =/= Innovation.
Improvement =/= Innovation.
Two things:
1. While it is better than the eyetoy, it's the same thing with BONUSES!!! And it does detect via shadows, cuz you can't play while wearing black.
2. Molyneaux shouldnt have advertized it, because I seriously doubt Milo is a fully interactive AI.
1. While it is better than the eyetoy, it's the same thing with BONUSES!!! And it does detect via shadows, cuz you can't play while wearing black.
2. Molyneaux shouldnt have advertized it, because I seriously doubt Milo is a fully interactive AI.
I honestly can't believe how many people seem to get off on the Kinect even though it's far outdated technology.
People go on an on comparing the EyeToy to the Kinect, and the fact is, yes the EyeToy came out first and did all the same things that the Kinect does. BUT that's not the fucking point, because we have the PS Eye now which is better than the EyeToy was and still is better than the Kinect which DOES THE EXACT SAME THING AS THE PS EYE, only the PS Eye DOES MORE. BOTTOM LINE.
So Microsoft can go on and on alienating HC gamers and they can keep going on and on saying how good the Kinect is for all anyone gives a damn, because we're all DESPERATELY waiting for the day MS resigns from the console gaming community. No one cares if you're JUST NOW coming out with something that everybody else came out with 7-3 years ago.
The Kinect does nothing different than the competition, and it would be hard for anyone to argue that it does anything more at all. And even more, it's underhanded to try and boast that the Kinect is anything new at all. New for MS maybe, but I'd expect nothing less from a company that has no respect for real gaming.
Is it just that the COD players want to put there hands somewhere else when they play their poor excuse for a game?
People go on an on comparing the EyeToy to the Kinect, and the fact is, yes the EyeToy came out first and did all the same things that the Kinect does. BUT that's not the fucking point, because we have the PS Eye now which is better than the EyeToy was and still is better than the Kinect which DOES THE EXACT SAME THING AS THE PS EYE, only the PS Eye DOES MORE. BOTTOM LINE.
So Microsoft can go on and on alienating HC gamers and they can keep going on and on saying how good the Kinect is for all anyone gives a damn, because we're all DESPERATELY waiting for the day MS resigns from the console gaming community. No one cares if you're JUST NOW coming out with something that everybody else came out with 7-3 years ago.
The Kinect does nothing different than the competition, and it would be hard for anyone to argue that it does anything more at all. And even more, it's underhanded to try and boast that the Kinect is anything new at all. New for MS maybe, but I'd expect nothing less from a company that has no respect for real gaming.
Is it just that the COD players want to put there hands somewhere else when they play their poor excuse for a game?
I am subscribed to him already <3, so I'm certain he will xD you should check out ashens ^_^C95J said:post that as a comment to Blunty3000, he'll goes crazy at youAccountfailed said:
I recommend subscribing to him his videos are awesome.
new internet friend! ^_^C95J said:ha, watched his "Vii" review, absolutely brilliantAccountfailed said:subbed to him now as well
A consumer device that costs less than 200 USD that uses optics to determine the position of a complex moving object in 3 dimensional space and performs voice recognition services as well? I'd call that innovative just because no consumer device has put together a similar package.
The eye-toy comparison fails largely because it is, at best, capable of determining the position of a complex moving object in 2 dimensional space and does not perform any voice recognition service.
Does this innovation mean anything by virtue of being innovative? Nope. Just because it hasn't been done before is irrelevant when the device in question does nothing in and of itself. Without a useful application of the product, it is just a neat piece of technology. What I have yet to see out of Kinect, with the exception of Dance Central, is any application of the technology that couldn't have been achieved with a traditional controller. And even then, I'm certainly not going to pay 200 USD to play a game. I did that once with Steel Battalion and I vowed [/i]never again[/i].
The eye-toy comparison fails largely because it is, at best, capable of determining the position of a complex moving object in 2 dimensional space and does not perform any voice recognition service.
Does this innovation mean anything by virtue of being innovative? Nope. Just because it hasn't been done before is irrelevant when the device in question does nothing in and of itself. Without a useful application of the product, it is just a neat piece of technology. What I have yet to see out of Kinect, with the exception of Dance Central, is any application of the technology that couldn't have been achieved with a traditional controller. And even then, I'm certainly not going to pay 200 USD to play a game. I did that once with Steel Battalion and I vowed [/i]never again[/i].