Kinect Reportedly Costs "Almost As Much" as Xbox One

[MrBaskerville]

The only sensible thing i can think of that you can use Kinect for is dancing games. In all other aspects i´d much rather use a controller, the problem is that Kinect is included from the get go, so tons of games will feature annoying gimmicks like handwave QTE and redundant voice commands and there will be no options to switch it off. That is one of the main reasons why i would never buy an Xbox as long as Kinect is mandatory, i just don´t have any faith in it. 1:1 gaming is useless and i personally hate talking to machines so yeah...

I´m old and i don´t like this kind of thing. I´d much rather have a standard controller, if it´s good enough to play something as complicated as Street Fighter, it should be good enough for anything .

 

[MrBaskerville]

So Microsoft basically screwed themselves out of the position they had with the 360...
Because they wanted Kinect to see in the dark?

Which reminds me, Spying aside, what actual use is that to someone? Voice Commands, I get, but being able to Kinect Sports in the dark? :/

You will be able to high-fi military dudes in games, it will be awesome.

 

[Diablo1099_v1legacy]

You will be able to high-fi military dudes in games, it will be awesome.

...But why do we need Night Vision on the Kinect?

 

[erbi79]

You will be able to high-fi military dudes in games, it will be awesome.

...But why do we need Night Vision on the Kinect?

Do you want an honest answer?

We don't

A lot of the features the kinect has are really interesting on a technology side, but at least at this point seem to have no relation to gameplay at all.

 

[Diablo1099_v1legacy]

Do you want an honest answer?

We don't

A lot of the features the kinect has are really interesting on a technology side, but at least at this point seem to have no relation to gameplay at all.

Yeah, I've heard some cool things about Kinect outside of gaming.
In Fact, in my research, there is only one video that really shows off the use of it in a Gaming Setting And that was on Garry's Mod

Still, you'd think there would be some reason some MS PR person would spout in order to justify it.

 

[CardinalPiggles]

So this totally legitimate developer who absolutely works for Microsoft is confirming that the Kinect is at least partially there to spy on us in order to hit us with targeted advertising?

Thanks Microsoft but I really don't feel like having more ads thrown my way.

 

[Roofstone]

I literally cannot (I wouldn't even if I could, but that is another issue) buy this. Because my flat doesn't have enough room for it.. I don't have several feet of open floor space.. I barely have several feet of living room at all!

 

[purf]

I really want one but I don't like where this is going. Microsoft takes pre-orders for a dev kit. For...
$400. Now, I don't feel like being able to estimate the worth of said kit minus the actual sensor, but I do know that with the old Kinect, all I needed to spend was ~$90. For now, sadface.

 

[rodneyy]

even if the kinect is as good as they say and mana falls from heaven at its mear pressance will the wiiu and ps4's motion controles be of the same level, if not then you make a game that relys heavely on kinect then you are basically going 1 platform.

with the statment from ubisoft saying they dont bother with new ip unless it can spawn a sequel as its not worth the risk. while other publishers have not said the same they seem to be in a smiliar mindset.

up untill now the only real uses found for the old kinect were dancing games, mini games and the odd gimmick in pre exsisting games that was often a step back and less usfull than doing it the old way.

i can see in the future the kinect or something similar taking off and being the next level of gaming but i am unsure if that time is now. the tech might be up to speed but if the publishers are unwilling to take the risk on the game and make a stand alone, no controler better than before, version of one of their games then it wont go anywhere.

then there is the consumer, not everyone wants to be jumping about infront of a tv, no matter how realistic and accurate it is, they want to unwind at the end of a day and the extra physical exsertion might be beyond what they are willing to put up with.

 

[1337mokro]

Whilst this is a smart strategy they have to also realize that they are basically including a piece of shitty hardware with a gaming system for no reason. Nobody WANTS a Kinect because it is IMPOSSIBLE to control a game fluently based on upper body position and movements.

Ask yourself when did you last play a good Kinect game that was not a bunch of minigames or a dancing game. We saw what happens when you attempt to push the Kinect to it's limits. You get Steel Battalion, an utter atrocity that has possibly buried the franchise for a second time.

It is a pipe dream Microsoft, wake the fuck up! The Kinect is to inaccurate to register detailed movements. It is to expensive to offer at a reasonable price. No games can be played with it that require any kind of movement. Even Steel Battalion had to rely on a controller for that.

Basically you tried to do what Nintendo did, only you went for the Sony PS2 route with a motion detection camera rather than a cheap gyroscope stick.

I know i'm gonna get flamed and get called a fanboy for this but fuck it.
have you even SEEN the video demonstrations done by the press?
every reporter that has tried it loved it!
how about you Look up some info before you make baseless assumptions on a product you haven't even tried or seen in action?
Also bashing something based on the hardware that came before it is downright stupid in my opinion.
and as per your first point a LOT of people do want kinect, they're children and casual players and parents (including myself, my kids love playing with kinect and my wife likes that nike trainer game.) that want to play with they're kids, you know the other 2/3ds of the fanbase?
"hardcore gamers" need to stop being so selfish and self centered and accept that we're a small part of a larger ecosystem of consumers.

I'm sorry since when do I have to consider the desires of other demographics? Especially children who already have a Wii, with more games for it that they can flail around with. I don't usually walk into a lingerie store and buy a set of lingerie along with my regular boxers because women seem to like the stuff.

As such I don't desire to have the Kinect should I ever consider to buy an Xbone. It's the third wheel, the flimsy attachment, the vestigial organ to what should be a gaming console. They long since gave up on it actually being that and instead decided to fight a losing battle as a multimedia device. They shoot themselves in the foot by adding 150$ on top of the console price to at least partially recoup the added Kinects. A colossal mistake when your competitor releases a cheaper console than you. As we saw in the last pointless console war.

"The gaming press was absolutely raving about the new Kinect!" Yeah they were doing the same thing over the first Kinect, then the regular version got released and they also hyped that one up to the max and it was a collosal dissapointment. You basically saying "The GaImeJurNAlisTs" liked it is like telling me Nintendo power (RIP) wrote a positive review about the WiiU. Yeah I am totally shocked that they liked it.

Why would I resort to calling you a fanboy when I can pick your arguments apart in so many different ways?

i never told you to consider other demographics, all I said is that "hardcore gamers" arent the only demographic and pretending you are and speaking for the entire community by saying "NOBODY WANTS IT" is a little immature. and as for the press raving about the first kinect you're right they were in several write ups, what i'm saying is that i've SEEN it being used and working as advertised.

Going by the losing battle argument trying to be a multi media device is a little dumb it's like saying "oh this truck has tv's in the headrests so it's trying to be a tv and not a truck." It's called having other features because as i've said "hardcore gamers" or gamers in general aren't the only demographic in existence. Them trying to expand their userbase by bringing new things to the table can only be good for the gaming industry, reviling a product based on new features totally baffles me considering that the competition literally just upped the graphics and nothing else and are called the white knights of the industry for it, is vexing to me.

on another note ps3 launched to the same price point i believe and that was a huge success to this day so i don't see how it's shooting themselves in the foot seeing as how last gen was just how this one is going to be.

and as for picking my post apart in different ways (which i really don't see) coming back with wet paper tissue thin responses doesn't really do it.

P.S. I applaud you for not resorting to calling me a fanboy, a spirited debate is very refreshing.

"The PS3 launched at the same price point and did just fine" If you call third place fine then be my guest. What I saw however was that the 360 was a cheap piece of crap and outsold the PS3 phenomenally well. With a margin of several millions even. The Wii did even better basically dominating the console scene for several years. Comparatively you'd be hard pressed to find a 360 owner with a PS3 and vice versa but the Wii was basically there in almost every household. So they did fine?

It took them 5 years to get the damned thing profitable. That is a massive fucking loss when their competitors were selling the thing WITH a profit AND turned a profit several years before them. The PS3, the overpriced console, is the clear loser here, I expect the same for the Xbone.

So a guy who is a trucker is going to buy the fancy truck with a 500$ added on pricetag rather than the equally functional less pricey truck standing right next to it? Oh sure the family standing next to him will think it's great and dandy, unless they already have one of those nasty portable TV's (Apple devices) they can take anywhere and don't require the truck to be always running (analogy for always online) to actually be used. Oh of course the family might enjoy it, but they don't matter.

Nobody wants it. Nobody who matters to my demographic. I do not give a shit about the Kinect, the more resources that are devoted to getting this thing in your house so it can spy on you, the less resources go to actually doing what I bought the damned thing for. Which is to play games. Along with about everyone that will buy it. They are eyeing a demographic that doesn't exist nor has any interest in buying their game. They want the mobile users to buy a 360 and play their games on it when these people already have their mobile devices that they don't have to leave behind every time they move more than 6 feet from it and the Kinect loses them.

They want to fight the battle for the living room rather than convince gamers to buy their stuff. Which is what the primary demographic (or should I say basically only) interested in a Xbone is, previous 360 owners and new gamers. The people who used their 360 to play games and are now looking for another console to play more games on. No apple kid is going to walk into the store and say "Hey a 500$ motion detector DVD player! I'm going to buy this now rather than get a new IPad that can do everything this thing does AND I don't have to leave it behind when I go anywhere other than my living room!" It is a pipe dream Microsoft has, one that nobody wants to be a part off simply because it benefits no one to have all this crap tied into it.

The funny thing about your entire Kinect argument is "But I saw it work, it's awesome" yeah people said the same thing the first time around with the Kinect, the device formerly known as Natal. It didn't turn out so great, in fact it was a HEAVY disaster. Oh it's fine in a controlled spacious setting with games optimized to showcase it's capabilities, but in your living room? Heck better yet your bedroom as I am sure no kid is actually going to put it in the living room, another strike against Microsoft's stupid multimedia idea. It's not going to do well at all.

Unless you wear the particular shirt that it likes and if you clean your room properly and stand up straight and articulate properly and if you don't move out of this small spot where it can see you. Why does the Kinect sound like an overly attached nagging girlfriend?!

To close this statement capitalize your I's.

 

[Pilkingtube]

With Microsoft so deeply in bed with the NSA, it wouldn't surprise me to hear that the NSA has access to all the Kinect feeds they want, which terrifies me

 

[masticina]

If every xbox one has an Kinect Sensor then yes games could all use the joy of Kinect.

Except multi console games.. those would not have as much kinect addition as one would hope. Oh yes multi-console games are about 95% of the console game market.

And beyond that I can't wait for Call of Duty: Black Ops III lobbies.. XBOX OFF

And the lobbies are cleared deliciously of those fools who still had their Kinect On.

And the kinect replacing the crappy headset, yeah.. I will love hearing that in shooter gamers. I mean ALREADY you can hear some nasty background sound over those crappy headsets.. But with Kinect it will be awesome. Oh little Jimmy is screaming again.. guess what everybody in CodBLopsIII will hear that. Oh deary mother just barged in complaining about you not cleaning your room. Please Kinect 2.0 tell us more! We love to hear such things during our GAMING. Oh look at that we found a player who isn't cussing like a drunken sailor awesome..to bad Kinect 2.0 picks up the cussing of what must be his uncle.. and that lovely sound of a weedwhacker just hitting the trailerhome. Awesome I always wanted to hear where you are living. Oh you got dogs? I love dogs definitely if they are howling and barking all the time!

Microsoft do you see the problem? I have one solution.. XBOX OFF

 

[targren]

"The sensor costs almost as much as the console to make"

Even more reason to abandon the stupid idea before it's too late. Dump the Kinect bullshit, chop the MSRP in half, and dominate the crap out of this generation.

 

[TwoSidesOneCoin]

"I often see people dismiss the Kinect instantly because they haven't seen it work like I have," the developer continues.

You know what else most gamers don't have that you have? A fucking large room completely devoid of any furniture except the tv stand that the kinect sits on to play it's games!

Fucking ass...

 

[themilo504]

Look Microsoft here is the thing, if the Kinect is good and truly adds something to games people will buy it, and if people buy it companies will want to use it, the fact that you force it onto anybody who wants a Xbox one means that you either know it sucks or you?re not sure if people will like it.

As long as you created a good product, you can have some faith in that product.

 

[Church185]

short answer yes because going by how the original one sold like gangbusters for a $150 for the sensor alone then this time around microsoft just has to show off the new capabilities on magazines and late night tv and they'll flock to it just like the first one. mass consumers are like magpies you see, if something is new and popular they'll swoop in to buy it to be "hip" and such, just think about the YEARLY installments of the iphone and how it always sells out. That alone proves what I mean.

Actually Kinect 1.0 only sold about 1/3 the amount that 360 did, so I wouldn't necessarily say it sold like gangbusters. I'll concede that it was "the fastest selling consumer electronic of all time", but sales sharply dropped when people realized that there were only a handful of fun uses for it. It was an interesting gimmick at the time and nothing more. I feel like the ADD average consumer won't give this device the time of day for a couple reasons.

Right now mass appeal for kids is in the mobile market, because the products are relatively cheap, new apps are either cheap or free AND the device is portable so they can take it with them anywhere they go. The Xbox One has a high entry price at $500 (compared to $150 if they already had an 360 before), the games themselves aren't going to be cheap along with an Xbox LIVE membership, even if the family only wants to use it as a media device. On top of that, the device is large and not easily portable. People don't understand that console manufactures aren't competing against themselves in the realm of the average consumer, they are competing against everything else. Those people who don't visit forums like these and have a compulsion to play the newest games can simply move on the next shiny thing.

 

[Church185]

So Microsoft basically screwed themselves out of the position they had with the 360...
Because they wanted Kinect to see in the dark?

Which reminds me, Spying aside, what actual use is that to someone? Voice Commands, I get, but being able to Kinect Sports in the dark? :/

I think I may have a legitimate answer being a Kinect 1.0 owner (pity me), they may have added in the night vision so that you now longer have to have PERFECT lighting to make the sensor work properly. Used to be if it was too light or too dark in a room the Kinect wouldn't be nearly as responsive.

 

[tdylan]

"I often see people dismiss the Kinect instantly because they haven't seen it work like I have," the developer continues. "It is an integral part of the Xbox One experience ... The number of features on the Xbox One that uses the Kinect is almost too many to count. I can't imagine using the console without it."

There they go throwing around that experience buzzword again.

 

[CriticalMiss]

Wow, so Microsoft decided to double the price of their console just to include a tacky webcam gimmick that nobody ever really wanted in the first place. Here I was thinking the Kinect was just a hundred dollar waste of money, but it's the same price as the Xbone?!

Oh and I'm fairly sure that the 'anonymous Xbone developer' is just someone from the PR department. Who would honestly call using the Xbone an 'experience' other than their marketing/PR team? Also this:

I have confidence in our management that all their decisions are always well debated before they come to a plan of action

Tell that to Adam 'Deal with it' Orth.

 

[theuprising]

you should probably look at some articles with video links that show the press taking it for a spin themselves and being impressed with the new sensor.

Even if the new sensor was ten times more accurate than the old one, it still wouldn't make games work any better than just pressing a bloody button.

And the media was also gushing all over the original Kinect sensor, too. You know, the one that didn't fucking work. Go ahead and look at those review scores if you don't believe me.

So basically, your point isn't a good one. At all, really.

Good thing this Kinect is made not to fail b/c its several times as precise and is bundled into every console so devs know the userbase for it is large enough to develop for it. Durr

Exactly! That's why the Nintendo Wii and Wii U are flooded with third-party games designed specifically to use the technology these consoles offered in meaningful, unique ways.

Oh, wait, silly me. They're not.

See, your logic falls apart when you realize that no rational developer is going to dedicate any significant portion of their resources into making a game have extra special functionality on one specific console UNLESS said company has some manner of exclusivity deal with the console owner.

What's going to end up happening is that most developers will put the "Wii waggle" into their games. What's a "Wii waggle"? Well, many games on the Wii played almost entirely with buttons. However, Nintendo wanted companies to include some motion-control functions into any game that went on their console. So usually devs would insert a single token function (usually something non-essential) that would utilize the console's motion-control sensors. Except that the actions were usually poorly coded and would respond to any sort of random waggling. Thus, a "Wii waggle".

What you're going to see in terms of developers making "special features" for the Kinect will be almost entirely token garbage. They might slide some voice commands in there (of course you'll still be able to do those things with just a button press too so the gesture's useless) or make some non-essential feature use the camera at some point. But most games will not use the damn thing in any meaningful way at all.

Why? Because it's cheaper to design games with the same approximate framework and then to tack on extra shit at the end. Most games will not be specifically built with the Kinect in mind, and will barely use it if at all.

Thank goodness, though, that we'll still have games which are exclusive to the Kinect system itself. You know, all of the best classics. Like Kinectimals, Sonic Free Riders, Steel Battalion, DBZ Kinect, Star Wars Kinect, and all of those other really great games that we might have missed out on if not for the wonders of the Kinect.

Lol you think you're right b/c you stated popular opinion. But popular opinion is often wrong and you are wrong. No third party games are coming to Wii U because of its poor sales. This has been stated several times. Also third party games don't sell well on Nintendo consoles in general. Having a Kinect in every XB1 also helps FIRST party developers since it doesn't lower the sales of a game b/c they can develop freely on the kinect without having to worry about how many of its consumers actually have the product installed.

Also the Wii without the Wii plus was just a gimmick. Along with the Xbox Kinect and partly the PS Move. They lacked the fidelity to be used to any degree of usefulness in hardcore games. The Wii+ and Kinect 2 are different, far different.

You're type of unwillingness to the see the positives in anything new is just aversion to change, even if the change is good. Its ok, breathe and let it in. You are the same type of person who would have said adding a thumb joystick instead of a 4 way arrow pad was pointless and doesn't offer any real benefits, or that rumble packs were just a gimmick and wouldn't stick.