Major Kinect Patch Eventually Allowed Players to Sit
- Thread starter Tom Goldman
- Start date
I wouldn't say just completely give up, but it should be kept apart from mainstream gaming. Oh sure, you can make a hardcore game for it, but motion controls really should have been kept to the Wii. The Move is essentially a Wii with a $150 premium for HD gaming and a slightly different button map. I guess having competition does start a drive to out-innovate the others though. Will we start seeing more ergonomic controllers in the future (something like this glove mouse here http://www.theairmouse.com/)?Lightslei said:
In the next console generation, maybe Nintendo could start putting in more power into their consoles.
I'm still reminded of a very valid point that Extra Credits brought up---the sorts of people who want to play motion-control games already own a Wii. I don't see where there's a market for Sony and Microsoft to get into. Nintendo's got that solidly nailed down with a more recognizable brand and lower price point.
Bogus title. Microsoft never intended to launch Kinect and have you stand up to control video playback and music on your TV. Sitting just wasn't the first priority because most motion control games regardless of system require you to stand up to play them properly.
The title of this article makes it sound like MS only added the ability to sit and control Kinect because developers complained. B.S.
The title of this article makes it sound like MS only added the ability to sit and control Kinect because developers complained. B.S.
OH COME ON! I can't play video games and lie down on the floor! Next you're going to tell me I also can't have liquefied pizzas intravenously fed to me while I use Kinect! RAARG! Kinect I hate you!
Also I was told by a friend of mine who tried it way back it could always handle sitting. The reports of it not doing so were as bogus as "it can't recognize black people", "It can't recognize asians" or "it doesn't work for fat guys." Misinformation is something a lot of people seem to cling to ardently when it supports specious beliefs. Especially when the subject is one of contention.
Also I was told by a friend of mine who tried it way back it could always handle sitting. The reports of it not doing so were as bogus as "it can't recognize black people", "It can't recognize asians" or "it doesn't work for fat guys." Misinformation is something a lot of people seem to cling to ardently when it supports specious beliefs. Especially when the subject is one of contention.
I'm a little confused, is kinect out yet if there's a patch? Wait. You mean Kinect is not even out yet but they've already patched it? Well that is certainly... reassuring. The Kinect news is bolstering my impression that at Microsoft they actually think that they aren't going to strike lightening get struck by lightning twice with rushed hardware.
Doesn't sitting defeat the whole purpose of having a "controller free" motion controlled gaming peripheral?
Doesn't sitting defeat the whole purpose of having a "controller free" motion controlled gaming peripheral?
I concur as this is something I've felt for a long time. What incentivises a customer to buy a 360, Kinect, and its Wii-knock offs, for instance, when Nintendo offers more than simply motion control restricted games, along with their more renowned exclusives to boot? I would rather see Microsoft and Sony focusing on doing what they could do best and invest more towards their primary stance.SimuLord said:
It was something like "Microsoft previously didn't value sitting kinect users" or some abrasive thing like that.cairocat said:
So did they kill your kid or rape your wife? Which one was it?CTU_Loscombe said:
I won't lie, when I imagine the possibilities that Kinect brings to the table in terms of game interactivity I become slightly giddy. I revert back to that child like glee I would have on Saturday mornings watching the Power Rangers (the original) every so often trying to imitate their fighting moves on my mother's tailoring dummy. Add about a decade and a half onto that of games like God of War, Force Unleashed, and the KH series and my list of "stuff I want to fight things with" has grown exponentially.
Imagine, if you would, putting a future installment to the God War series into your Xbox (because in this fantasy its not a Sony exclusive) as the intro rolls and Kratos is put up against his first batch of minions to the slaughter instead of waggling your arm or phallic controller awkwardly you instead make similar sweeping arm movements to deal out the pain or quick strafes to the side to avoid attacks. How about Street Fighter, want to slam a hadouken into the face of your oppent; well then don't just stand there nerd it up and shout "HADOUKEN!!" as you make your attack motions. Let's say Final Fantasy 20 brings us back to the days of turn based combat, well now you can do co-op in battles by wrangling up a few friends to take on the roles of the in-game party.
I suppose we are going to have to put up with the inevitable wave of bowling, tennis, and snowboarding simulations as developers get their bearings with this new technology. With any luck we'll see some forward thinkers attempt to adapt some big name titles. Right now though, the technology seems to be stagnating as it gains its reputation as the "gimmick" hardware; almost like 3D movies and TV's. I don't like seeing that and I don't want to see it be saddled with such a stigma. Microsoft and Sony are attempting to sell their motion control systems in the same light that Nintendo does and I don't feel it is healthy encouragement for the type of game development that would bring the kind of innovation I hope for.
Certainly by marketing to the masses rather than to core gamer audience both systems will garner massive sales. Sales are the proof needed to show the investors that motion controls sell. Yet what happens in the long term? The core audience is driven away because we despise that which seemingly invades our domain of dominance; because we do not want the common person to sully our golden kingdom of plumbers and space marines. Developers who typically create games targeted at the core audience will shy away from development in motion controls and at best produce shoddy ports because their target audience has shown an aversion to motion controls due to their seeming "gimmicky-ness". It is because we have been told that motion controls are not for us. Like hell they're not.
(to bring this string of thought full circle) Talk to any person who considers themselves a member of the core audience and tell them they have a chance to get as close to actually going toe to toe with their favorite villain. Better yet, imagine being able to put yourself in Kratos' position in that final fight with Zeus. I know my adrenaline gets pumping simply thinking about it. Despite how interactive experts say about traditional gaming, it is still very much a spectators experience. We can remove ourselves from the spectators chair and onto the playing field (in a way we already have) lets hope we can apply that to something more epic than bowling or tennis.
On a side note: Imagine what would happen to the obesity rate if some of the more energetic action games got Kinect overhauls that forced the player to (somewhat) copy their character's attacks on screen. I guarantee you it would plummet like...well like a fat kid off a cliff.
Imagine, if you would, putting a future installment to the God War series into your Xbox (because in this fantasy its not a Sony exclusive) as the intro rolls and Kratos is put up against his first batch of minions to the slaughter instead of waggling your arm or phallic controller awkwardly you instead make similar sweeping arm movements to deal out the pain or quick strafes to the side to avoid attacks. How about Street Fighter, want to slam a hadouken into the face of your oppent; well then don't just stand there nerd it up and shout "HADOUKEN!!" as you make your attack motions. Let's say Final Fantasy 20 brings us back to the days of turn based combat, well now you can do co-op in battles by wrangling up a few friends to take on the roles of the in-game party.
I suppose we are going to have to put up with the inevitable wave of bowling, tennis, and snowboarding simulations as developers get their bearings with this new technology. With any luck we'll see some forward thinkers attempt to adapt some big name titles. Right now though, the technology seems to be stagnating as it gains its reputation as the "gimmick" hardware; almost like 3D movies and TV's. I don't like seeing that and I don't want to see it be saddled with such a stigma. Microsoft and Sony are attempting to sell their motion control systems in the same light that Nintendo does and I don't feel it is healthy encouragement for the type of game development that would bring the kind of innovation I hope for.
Certainly by marketing to the masses rather than to core gamer audience both systems will garner massive sales. Sales are the proof needed to show the investors that motion controls sell. Yet what happens in the long term? The core audience is driven away because we despise that which seemingly invades our domain of dominance; because we do not want the common person to sully our golden kingdom of plumbers and space marines. Developers who typically create games targeted at the core audience will shy away from development in motion controls and at best produce shoddy ports because their target audience has shown an aversion to motion controls due to their seeming "gimmicky-ness". It is because we have been told that motion controls are not for us. Like hell they're not.
(to bring this string of thought full circle) Talk to any person who considers themselves a member of the core audience and tell them they have a chance to get as close to actually going toe to toe with their favorite villain. Better yet, imagine being able to put yourself in Kratos' position in that final fight with Zeus. I know my adrenaline gets pumping simply thinking about it. Despite how interactive experts say about traditional gaming, it is still very much a spectators experience. We can remove ourselves from the spectators chair and onto the playing field (in a way we already have) lets hope we can apply that to something more epic than bowling or tennis.
On a side note: Imagine what would happen to the obesity rate if some of the more energetic action games got Kinect overhauls that forced the player to (somewhat) copy their character's attacks on screen. I guarantee you it would plummet like...well like a fat kid off a cliff.
Does anyone there even PLAY console video games? Playing while lying on the floor is about 30% of my gaming time.Tom Goldman said:
I'm heroically avoiding any "geek unfamiliarity with the horizontal position" jabs, as well.
A push-up and sit-up game, eh? I know, just an example, but I can't possibly see that being any more enjoyable than doing the exact same without the console.
Anyway! My main concern remains that this will likely be a pointless addon for me. See, I usually have the console in my room when using it, on a desk about a meter to the left of the screen. The screen faces my bed, which I sit on while gaming, with little room inbetween. I'm failing to see how I could get it to work in those circumstances.
Admittedly I don't play it much any more because of the huge hassle involved in setting it up (probably not Microsoft's fault in this case), so it'll probably be set up elsewhere, but to me personally there's not much use for it outside of entertaining guests in the lounge. Which so far is a job taken by the Wii, which itself got stale pretty quickly.
Anyway! My main concern remains that this will likely be a pointless addon for me. See, I usually have the console in my room when using it, on a desk about a meter to the left of the screen. The screen faces my bed, which I sit on while gaming, with little room inbetween. I'm failing to see how I could get it to work in those circumstances.
Admittedly I don't play it much any more because of the huge hassle involved in setting it up (probably not Microsoft's fault in this case), so it'll probably be set up elsewhere, but to me personally there's not much use for it outside of entertaining guests in the lounge. Which so far is a job taken by the Wii, which itself got stale pretty quickly.
This is why motion controls scare me, they started out TRYING to take away our ability to sit and relax, turning gaming into actual work...thank goodness we caught it and made them explain themselves
The only way I'd ever get Kinect is if someone gave me on...and even then I wouldn't buy the games. The Wii and even Sony's Move I don't mind AS much, since at least I still get a controller to hold in my hand, but without it, gaming just wouldn't feel the same. It's like wearing boots, a jacket, and snowpants to go sledding, but no underwear, jeans, or a shirt or socks underneath. It still gets the job done, but it's not enough to satisfy you for what you want to do
All I know is that the fact that Kinect started off with a bug this big means it, like the original 360s, were rushed out to make them the money they wanted, and ultimatley it's going to be written off as a mistake in gaming history. Virtual reality is one thing, if you look cool flailing around to yourself that's fine, but if you know you're flailing limbs makes you look retarded, that's another. And not being able to sit down after you're flailed your way halfway red makes it all the worse
The only way I'd ever get Kinect is if someone gave me on...and even then I wouldn't buy the games. The Wii and even Sony's Move I don't mind AS much, since at least I still get a controller to hold in my hand, but without it, gaming just wouldn't feel the same. It's like wearing boots, a jacket, and snowpants to go sledding, but no underwear, jeans, or a shirt or socks underneath. It still gets the job done, but it's not enough to satisfy you for what you want to do
All I know is that the fact that Kinect started off with a bug this big means it, like the original 360s, were rushed out to make them the money they wanted, and ultimatley it's going to be written off as a mistake in gaming history. Virtual reality is one thing, if you look cool flailing around to yourself that's fine, but if you know you're flailing limbs makes you look retarded, that's another. And not being able to sit down after you're flailed your way halfway red makes it all the worse
The thing is, developers did complain, and then MS patched it, in that order. It's hard to not to come to the same conclusion as the title.cool8man said:
It's actually an interesting bit of 3D modelling. Whenever you see the 3D 'skeletal' models produced by motion capture (which Kinect basically is), the 'base node', the core of the entire structure, is always the base of the spine. (It has a rather amusing behaviour when models fail to render properly, or a node attachment fails, characters tend to fold up into their own arse.) This is partially for convenience, partially an accepted standard, and actually fairly logical given the composition of the body. That's why it was the default for Kinect, they just didn't anticipate the problem of it being masked. In a regular motion-capture system, with the ball-suits, it's very rare that a point will become so obscured that tracking will fail.Catalyst6 said:
By shifting the point the human body is measured from, from the base of the spine to the neck, there's a higher chance that 'core node' will always be in view of the Kinect's camera, allowing a wider range of motion and recording. When a person is sitting down, their base-of-spine node is obscured by their legs, preventing accurate positioning data for any node dependant on it; when it's the base node, the entire system would fail when you sit down! By reducing its importance, only leg-detection will become problematic when sitting, and if you're sitting, you probably don't need to use anything but your arms anyway.