worthless, expensive f-ing gimmick that actually takes us in the wrong direction for gaming. We need to make movements smaller and more precise, not more exagerated.
Kinect is Actually Fun
- Thread starter Greg Tito
- Start date
Recommended Videos
You didn't have any times where the game read your slight turn as "crash into the street light the opposite way I am turning" or anything like that?Greg Tito said:
it's really not that hard to beat the Wii at its own game baha
but hey, I'm not gonna argue or judge the Kinect
motion sensing overall maybe
but really I just don't have the money saved for it
(I still haven't bought the entire Rock Band 2 set, last summer my friends and I just borrowed it from a friend)
but hey, I'm not gonna argue or judge the Kinect
motion sensing overall maybe
but really I just don't have the money saved for it
(I still haven't bought the entire Rock Band 2 set, last summer my friends and I just borrowed it from a friend)
Wow, you give people an honest opinion based upon actual hands on experience and they are still more willing to hate than to open their minds to the possibility that their blind disdain for a technology still in its infancy might be misplaced. Well, I think the article made good points, and Kinect sounds like a lot of fun.
Again this is a thread that has quickly become full of misinformation and suppositions ("You can't make deep, complex games using Kinect"? Really? So you've explored every design opportunity available? Of course if Bioware want to use it then it can't possibly be capable of games with depth
).
Again this is a thread that has quickly become full of misinformation and suppositions ("You can't make deep, complex games using Kinect"? Really? So you've explored every design opportunity available? Of course if Bioware want to use it then it can't possibly be capable of games with depth
).
No way in hell I'm paying $150 to fail my arms around like I'm possessed and look like a complete idiot.
A lot of this feeling was exactly the same when the Wii first came out. People were novel with the idea of motion controls, now people don't have to fumble around for buttons and we can move our bodies for a more natural way of immersion in games!
But eventually everyone stopped caring, and started labeling it a gimmick. There were no "hardcore" games and playing "Wii Sports" for weeks on end gets boring. Most if not all the games that implemented motion control did so very poorly. Now, I won't comment on the current situation, but suffice to say that most people I know with Wiis and many other people testify this on forums like this barely play with their Wiis anymore.
I bought both a Wii and DS and I hardly play them. I haven't touched my Wii for months and my DS only gets play on long plane rides. I got suckered in to the Wii because I thought "Whoa! Motion control! That's so friggin awesome!" and bought it as an impulse buy. Soon, nothing came out that interested me and most of the motion controls that were used were used poorly.
This is why I'm skeptical of Kinect. It's the same "Whoa, no controllers! This will allow for more immersion in games!" thing that happened with the Wii, and that sticked with "casual" gamers. Again, I won't comment on the current situation, I'm observing the original release of it.
So, I have a challenge for you, Greg Tito, or anyone else who is planning on buying Kinect. If you do purchase Kinect, play the games for it nonstop for maybe a week or two (let's make it 2), nothing else. Just play Kinect non-stop, nothing else, no regular 360 games, no PS3, no PC, just Kinect. If you are still having fun jumping in the rafts or playing with your Kinectimal, then that's awesome for you. If, however, you're already tired of playing with it after 2 weeks then Kinect is essentially just a reformated Wii at the time of release.
Does Kinect have potential? Of course, and I would love to see it's potential used. But part of me can't help but feel extremely skeptical after the horrendous E3 showing that Microsoft put out for Kinect and the $150 price tag. And don't think I'm not thinking the same with the Move, while I admit I'm more partial to the Move simply because I have a PS3(Interest by association I guess, it's apparantly focusing on a more "hardcore" audience, supporting games like Heavy Rain, Killzone 3, LBP, and SOCOM 4) that doesn't mean I'm not skeptical of it as well.
As Furburt said before, Kinect games may be "fun" but what they are not is "deep". "Fun" games are fun for a little while, but you'll get bored of them. "Deep" games are both fun and continue to entertain well past its due point.
But eventually everyone stopped caring, and started labeling it a gimmick. There were no "hardcore" games and playing "Wii Sports" for weeks on end gets boring. Most if not all the games that implemented motion control did so very poorly. Now, I won't comment on the current situation, but suffice to say that most people I know with Wiis and many other people testify this on forums like this barely play with their Wiis anymore.
I bought both a Wii and DS and I hardly play them. I haven't touched my Wii for months and my DS only gets play on long plane rides. I got suckered in to the Wii because I thought "Whoa! Motion control! That's so friggin awesome!" and bought it as an impulse buy. Soon, nothing came out that interested me and most of the motion controls that were used were used poorly.
This is why I'm skeptical of Kinect. It's the same "Whoa, no controllers! This will allow for more immersion in games!" thing that happened with the Wii, and that sticked with "casual" gamers. Again, I won't comment on the current situation, I'm observing the original release of it.
So, I have a challenge for you, Greg Tito, or anyone else who is planning on buying Kinect. If you do purchase Kinect, play the games for it nonstop for maybe a week or two (let's make it 2), nothing else. Just play Kinect non-stop, nothing else, no regular 360 games, no PS3, no PC, just Kinect. If you are still having fun jumping in the rafts or playing with your Kinectimal, then that's awesome for you. If, however, you're already tired of playing with it after 2 weeks then Kinect is essentially just a reformated Wii at the time of release.
Does Kinect have potential? Of course, and I would love to see it's potential used. But part of me can't help but feel extremely skeptical after the horrendous E3 showing that Microsoft put out for Kinect and the $150 price tag. And don't think I'm not thinking the same with the Move, while I admit I'm more partial to the Move simply because I have a PS3(Interest by association I guess, it's apparantly focusing on a more "hardcore" audience, supporting games like Heavy Rain, Killzone 3, LBP, and SOCOM 4) that doesn't mean I'm not skeptical of it as well.
As Furburt said before, Kinect games may be "fun" but what they are not is "deep". "Fun" games are fun for a little while, but you'll get bored of them. "Deep" games are both fun and continue to entertain well past its due point.
It's hard to believe, "It's nothing like the Wii," when every introduction to a game was "Then I saw Kinect game X, which is like Wii game Y." I dunno, just seemed odd. And the damn thing still isn't worth $150. Not when it comes with one casual game and has no hardcore release titles.
Of course it's fun. The Wii was also fun. The problem is can this translate into the sort of A title that will sell a lot or will people who purchase Kinect just fiddle with the pack-in game at parties, like many did with the Wii?
On the one hand, the hardcore gaming audience is dead set against motion controls, which is why they whole reactionary bunch can go fuck themselves. There was a time when hardcore gaming had one button and a joystick. Change happens whether you like it or not. Especially when it's not.
Innovation is a gimmick that becomes the norm. As it stands, I'm not sure if motion controls will become an innovation or not. It could be, but I think the Wii has soured many people's taste for them with all the shovelware.
Aside: interesting that Nintendo allowed such shovelware to go out since many cite the glut of inferior product as a cause of the video game crash of 1983. Nintendo combated this with their "Seal of Quality" when they launched the NES, although that seal was a sham and they gave it to whoever would pay the licensing fee. But they understood this is a potential problem enough to deal with it on a marketing level in the late 80's. To actively engage it now seems like a fucking stupid move.
One of the biggest complains I've seen of motion controls is that they don't work all the time. As in the controls don't always register your movements or register them properly. That gets a big yawn and a condescending pat on the head from me. Complaining that the controller doesn't work is as old as video games themselves. I'm sure that someone playing Spacewar on a DEC PDP-1 at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology bitched the panel switches didn't register properly when they got blown to bits or sucked into the sun. So this is nothing new. It's just history repeating itself. Players always blame the controllers when they fuck up. That is the first commandment of video game playing. Never admit fault. Find someone or something else to blame.
That said, there may be more to it with the Wii. For my money, though, I'll be the problem is less the motion controls themselves so much as that they're wireless. Maybe I'm just old but I can't believe that wireless controllers will have the same precision timing as those hard wired into the console. Wireless transmissions can be iffy with various things causing interference which can be annoying on a phone call and detrimental in a game. I may be wrong about this as I'm no tech wizard and maybe Bluetooth runs on liquid jesus or something. But maybe one of those hackers out there can rig a Wiimote to attach to the console with wires and see if performance is any different.
But all of this is pointless without looking at what you can do with motion controls. That is, what does this technology bring to the table that regular controls do not. There's a reason why the Dvorak keyboard layout did not replace QWERTY.
The first thing it brings is it gives players a reason to get up off the couch and work off some of those Cheetos they've been eating all day. Far be it from me from giving two shit and a bag of rusty screws about the general heath and well being of the world's youth, but with news reports about the growing trend of obesity in ragamuffins, wouldn't incorporating more physical activity in their typical pastimes be a positive step towards stemming the tide?
I'm overweight and I don't exercise much because I don't have an excuse to exercise all that much. Maybe with a motion control video game, I would move around more and possibly prolong my life.
Oh wait. That's a horrible idea.
I do find it interesting that one of the games mentioned in the article was bowling. Bowling? Really? Where have I seen that before? Oh yeah! Wii Sports. Now, I've played the Wii version and it was fun, so it's hard to imagine the Kinect version not being fun as well. But this really don't show us anything new. Bowling games are almost as old as video games. It was a launch title for many systems in the early 80's/late 70's. Sure the motion controls are different. But in the end, you're still just bowling. You could also go to a bowling alley so you could wear uncomfortable shoes, eat greasy fried food from the lunch counter as well. Is the best thing for motion control video games to recreate pastimes that the nation's youth have lost interest in? Maybe they could also make a drive-in movie simulator that's like watching a movie from the cramped confines of your car while listening through a staticy speaker.
So far, I'm unimpressed with what developers have been using the motion controls to do. It's possible that motion controls will remain just a gimmick. It's also possible that this is the last real innovation in video games:
Look at it! Marvel at it. The action comes off the screen and into your living room!
On the one hand, the hardcore gaming audience is dead set against motion controls, which is why they whole reactionary bunch can go fuck themselves. There was a time when hardcore gaming had one button and a joystick. Change happens whether you like it or not. Especially when it's not.
Innovation is a gimmick that becomes the norm. As it stands, I'm not sure if motion controls will become an innovation or not. It could be, but I think the Wii has soured many people's taste for them with all the shovelware.
Aside: interesting that Nintendo allowed such shovelware to go out since many cite the glut of inferior product as a cause of the video game crash of 1983. Nintendo combated this with their "Seal of Quality" when they launched the NES, although that seal was a sham and they gave it to whoever would pay the licensing fee. But they understood this is a potential problem enough to deal with it on a marketing level in the late 80's. To actively engage it now seems like a fucking stupid move.
One of the biggest complains I've seen of motion controls is that they don't work all the time. As in the controls don't always register your movements or register them properly. That gets a big yawn and a condescending pat on the head from me. Complaining that the controller doesn't work is as old as video games themselves. I'm sure that someone playing Spacewar on a DEC PDP-1 at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology bitched the panel switches didn't register properly when they got blown to bits or sucked into the sun. So this is nothing new. It's just history repeating itself. Players always blame the controllers when they fuck up. That is the first commandment of video game playing. Never admit fault. Find someone or something else to blame.
That said, there may be more to it with the Wii. For my money, though, I'll be the problem is less the motion controls themselves so much as that they're wireless. Maybe I'm just old but I can't believe that wireless controllers will have the same precision timing as those hard wired into the console. Wireless transmissions can be iffy with various things causing interference which can be annoying on a phone call and detrimental in a game. I may be wrong about this as I'm no tech wizard and maybe Bluetooth runs on liquid jesus or something. But maybe one of those hackers out there can rig a Wiimote to attach to the console with wires and see if performance is any different.
But all of this is pointless without looking at what you can do with motion controls. That is, what does this technology bring to the table that regular controls do not. There's a reason why the Dvorak keyboard layout did not replace QWERTY.
The first thing it brings is it gives players a reason to get up off the couch and work off some of those Cheetos they've been eating all day. Far be it from me from giving two shit and a bag of rusty screws about the general heath and well being of the world's youth, but with news reports about the growing trend of obesity in ragamuffins, wouldn't incorporating more physical activity in their typical pastimes be a positive step towards stemming the tide?
I'm overweight and I don't exercise much because I don't have an excuse to exercise all that much. Maybe with a motion control video game, I would move around more and possibly prolong my life.
Oh wait. That's a horrible idea.
I do find it interesting that one of the games mentioned in the article was bowling. Bowling? Really? Where have I seen that before? Oh yeah! Wii Sports. Now, I've played the Wii version and it was fun, so it's hard to imagine the Kinect version not being fun as well. But this really don't show us anything new. Bowling games are almost as old as video games. It was a launch title for many systems in the early 80's/late 70's. Sure the motion controls are different. But in the end, you're still just bowling. You could also go to a bowling alley so you could wear uncomfortable shoes, eat greasy fried food from the lunch counter as well. Is the best thing for motion control video games to recreate pastimes that the nation's youth have lost interest in? Maybe they could also make a drive-in movie simulator that's like watching a movie from the cramped confines of your car while listening through a staticy speaker.
So far, I'm unimpressed with what developers have been using the motion controls to do. It's possible that motion controls will remain just a gimmick. It's also possible that this is the last real innovation in video games:
Look at it! Marvel at it. The action comes off the screen and into your living room!
I was looking at Dance Central and Child of Eden. Stuff like that does a good job with your "expected use" of motion controls. I would hope they would add headtracking to FPS, and Racing games, that would be a way to give something to the hardcore gamers to pick up a wider audience that cares about the thing. The article does feal a bit, "well duh". Aside from the squeeling "stroke my ego" 'ardcore gamaz I doubt many people thought they we're going to sit in front of a kinect and not be able to have a little fun.
Valid concerns are raised by the Wii. Nintendo is not just blowing smoke when they say the third parties "didn't get it". Making good use of motion controls is no small feat but a few games have done it well.
For me the biggest letdown of the Kinect, pre-release, is it's apparent limit to two players. The camera should in theory be able to track any number of players but the hardware lacks to muscle to track the extra skeletons.
If somone utilizes Kinect's precision properly and gives you wide ranges of "inputs" with subtle movements they can make something other than the party game. For me the big limiter is, say movement in an FPS, I'd still prefer a stick under my thumb, and a trigger under a finger, which would be getting us closer to the Wii or Move again.
The price is too high for a day one buy in from me though. I'm certianly not going to shell out $150 in the hopes that enough devs will "get it" to make my purchase worthwhile. $100 was my limit on this thing, especially if it's a 2 player max.
Valid concerns are raised by the Wii. Nintendo is not just blowing smoke when they say the third parties "didn't get it". Making good use of motion controls is no small feat but a few games have done it well.
For me the biggest letdown of the Kinect, pre-release, is it's apparent limit to two players. The camera should in theory be able to track any number of players but the hardware lacks to muscle to track the extra skeletons.
If we we're making bets here I would side with you on "won't BE used to tell deep stories or improve immersion". But I don't really believe that it cannot be used for these things. Think about how often you've been immersed in a game world with the most rediculous of controls. I know PC gamers may not realize this but pecking away at a keyboard and mouse really isn't much like running down corridors chasing vortagaunts and belting away with your submachine gun. But by appropriatley utilizing the control scheme they draw you into the world and gradually you stop thinking about the control device itself. The keyboard was certainly not originally designed for games.Furburt said:
If somone utilizes Kinect's precision properly and gives you wide ranges of "inputs" with subtle movements they can make something other than the party game. For me the big limiter is, say movement in an FPS, I'd still prefer a stick under my thumb, and a trigger under a finger, which would be getting us closer to the Wii or Move again.
The price is too high for a day one buy in from me though. I'm certianly not going to shell out $150 in the hopes that enough devs will "get it" to make my purchase worthwhile. $100 was my limit on this thing, especially if it's a 2 player max.
I refuse to believe the Kinect is even a thing, let alone that it's fun.
OK maybe it would be fun, but it's still a gimmick.
OK maybe it would be fun, but it's still a gimmick.
"Snake, to climb a ladder you... uhh..."
Help colonel finish this sentence, keep in mind that this installment of Metal Gear Solid is on the Kinect and remember that ladder climbing scene in MGS3.
I look forward to your replies.
Help colonel finish this sentence, keep in mind that this installment of Metal Gear Solid is on the Kinect and remember that ladder climbing scene in MGS3.
I look forward to your replies.
I'm interested, but I would never buy it at $150. Besides I have a Wii that does the same thing that just sits uselessly in my room.
I am forced by this to remember that game consoles are not just for hardcore gamers such as myself, and are also for little kids. I personally accept kinect from microsoft because I understand that this is microsoft's effort to steal back nintendo's market - and I believe that kinect is a very nice piece of software, regardless of whether I like it or not. So I hope Microsoft gets their child market back from microsoft, even though I shall never touch kinect.
Hey that game is fun as hell, I still play it when I want to shoot baskets or blow off some steam slicing up dudes. Just because a game doesn't fit into your tastes doesn't mean it's not fun for anyone.Yvl9921 said:
I, for example, don't like modern JRPGs for the most part, but I can still appreciate that the John Funks of the world will.
