Is Microsoft too focused on Kinect?

[pulse2]

http://uk.xbox360.ign.com/articles/117/1179187p1.html?RSSwhen2011-06-26_195700&RSSid=1179187&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+ignfeeds%2Fall+%28IGN+Complete%29&utm_content=Google+UK

Was reading this debate, some of it has reason, admittedly once I sold my 360, I haven't since found a reason to buy one again for this exact reason, but in Microsoft's defence, the Kinect is innovative and could (in the right circumstances) be great for gaming. It just (in my opinion) hasn't been utilised in the way I would like, I don't like Mass Effect 3's implementation as much as I thought I would, if anything, it seems more tedious then just selecting a speech option, I don't like Ghost Recon's implementation either, it looks obscure and I personally think Star Wars looks slow and monotonous, but then I haven't played them, maybe they will FEEL better to play then they look. I was expecting motion WITH the controller, throwing grenades, giving hand gestures, subtle motions like that while using the controller that make the biggest and most interesting gameplay differences.

Saying all that, are Nintendo and Sony any better for focusing so much time and effort on handhelds instead?

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/111297-Xbox-Exec-Thinks-Handhelds-Are-a-Bad-Bet

Who knows, but what is your opinion, would you rather Microsoft pump out more exclusives, bearing in mind that the exclusives they DO produce are serious money makers, except for the ones that didn't do so well.

 

[Flutterguy]

I don't think they are focused enough, sure i don't own one and I have no plans to but for a almost 200$ price tag when it released its selection is really lacking.

 

[NLS]

I think developers should just focus on making good games. Whether or not Microsoft is pulling exclusives or motion controls doesn't really bother me.

 

[Danceofmasks]

I own too much stuff to even use my kinect properly (i.e. not enough room in front of the TV).
Then again, I'm trying to use my kinect as a sensor for my mecha, so it's not like I care if microsoft is focusing on it or not.
Heck, I don't even have a functioning 360, nor am about to get one in the forseeable future.

In other words, I don't think microsoft is focusing on what kinect does best: being awesome at everything except motion control for games.

 

[JoshGod]

Of course microsoft is heavily focused on Kinect, the R&D on it would of been very expensive and they need to make the money back from the Kinect.
As for handhelds, I think that microsoft has enough trouble with their 360 still being an attractive choice as their exclusives seem to be gears and halo, I doubt a handheld would do very well, especially as sony and nintendo are already established.

 

[Arakasi]

Microsoft can shove its kinnect back where it came from.
All they're TRYING to do is to steal the Wii's market.

They should concentrate on what they are good at and everyone enjoys.
People do not generally buy an xbox for motion controls, they buy it because they despise them.

Edit: I did try the kinect for the brief 20 minutes I had it, and my room is too small for it.

 

[Jordi]

I agree with Flutterguy. There is no decent offering of games for the Kinect. I think making it an optional enhancement for games that can also work without it is a good idea though. Furthermore, I think the Kinect needs (a) controller(s) if it wants to be successful as a gaming device. Most notably to walk around, but probably also for some other things. It will somewhat limit the user's (hands) mobility, which is the Kinect's strength, but it will allow it to play vastly more games.

I don't think focusing on handhelds is a mistake either. I'm pretty sure there is a huge market for this. Sure, they are getting competition from phones and tablets, but that doesn't mean people don't want to game on the go. But if I was Sony and Nintendo, I would try to integrate the handheld and console branches better together so that you can play your handheld games on your console if you're at home and maybe even vice-versa.

 

[Folksoul]

They've sunk too much money into the Kinect to jut ignore it. I wish they wouldn't, but I can see why they are.

 

[Gamer_152]

Are we talking from a personal or an economic standpoint? Personally I have little interest in the peripheral myself but as a business decision, my God, of course Microsoft should be focusing on the Kinect. There's a lot of money for them to make there. Really though, if you're expecting motion controls to integrate that well into traditional video games you may be somewhat disappointed, they're just not suited for that kind of input at all. Traditional controls offer a speed of input and an easily memorable variety of inputs that you just can't get with motion controls.

 

[pulse2]

To be honest, I'm at a point where I believe that if Kinect was used effectivly in thw way I'd like, it could be more than JUST optional, there are several things that would be made easier if we didn't clutter the controller. The controller isn't a keyboard which has lots of keys to choose from, it is limited, so simple hand gestures in FPS games which STILL use the controller would make having to press Y to open up a control and command interface and select a command a lot less annoying.

Also speaking wouldn't be too bad either if I didn't have to talk to my Xbox all the time and look like a plank ¬_¬ As long as it was used effectivly in the games I play. So at the end of all that, I personally think Microsoft could do with more exclusives, but first and foremost, implement Kinect into games subtly but in a way that gamers will WANT the device to make gameplay far more easier and fun.

 

[Arakasi]

Now that I think about it.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/zero-punctuation/1838-E3-2010
That is all.

 

[Capt. Crankypants]

Yes. Because they should not focus on Kinect. They've made the hardware, and it's nice and accessible now, which is good, but now they should leave it alone and let other people write programs for it, like using it to control freaky cool robots, and having it for medical shenanigans, and that sort of thing.

 

[Ashcrexl]

i'd say any sort of attention they give to the kinect is too much focus.

yeah yeah, you guys spent a bajillion dollars developing this thing, but let it die.

 

[Gunner 51]

I think Microsoft is a little too focused on Kinect for it's own good in my opinion. The way they implemented it alienated it's core gamers. (Too much emphasis on party and family friendly games which they filched from the Wii.)

However, what could have been nifty is if Kinect could recognise a light gun and work that into an FPS. If implemented properly, the PC crowd would be eating their mice in jealousy. OK, so you won't be able to circle-strafe one's targets like in Doom. But several buttons on the side of a lightgun could go some way to remedy this.

If something like Call of Duty implemented this - it'd be like the next step in first person shooter evolution from something like Time Crisis. (Played with a lightgun made the game a damn lot of fun when compared to a controller.)

 

[Murray Whitwell]

They thought of Kinect. That is too much.

 

[Staskala]

Looking at the 360's upcoming exclusives I can't help but agree that MS seems to have abandoned most of their "core audience" in favor of the Kinect.

 

[Arakasi]

Of course microsoft is heavily focused on Kinect, the R&D on it would of been very expensive and they need to make the money back from the Kinect.

Yeah, it's almost like they're panicking.

Considering I couldn't buy an xbox360 without a Kinect box about a week after it was released, yeah, they are paniking because they know no one wants it.

 

[Trololo Punk]

Yes, they should focus more on the games their making and then mention that they are kinect enabled, instead of making 70% of their E3 conference just about the kinect and its casual games.

 

[minimacker]

They're working too much with kinect, and not enough ON kinect. They shouldn't dump the controller and go all hands-free in my opinion. Imagine playing a new Rainbow Six game and you can control your squadron with hand gestures or even voice command.

Because I don't want to be holding air. I would much rather swing around a Wii mote than being able to clench nothing at all. Think lightsaber, with or without the actual handle.

 

[pulse2]

They're working too much with kinect, and not enough ON kinect. They shouldn't dump the controller and go all hands-free in my opinion. Imagine playing a new Rainbow Six game and you can control your squadron with hand gestures or even voice command.

Because I don't want to be holding air. I would much rather swing around a Wii mote than being able to clench nothing at all. Think lightsaber, with or without the actual handle.

That's pretty much my point, but unfortunatly that's not what we've been seeing, its almost as if they are scared to do that because it would mean that Kinect is only being used 25% rather than a full 100%.

Flailing around is fun for a while, but after that it becomes a drag, I did enough of that when I first obtained a Wii, I don't want to have to do it again, its boring now.