Microsoft: Kinect Is Like Super Mario Bros.

[Nick Holmgren]

Here is how I see it:
Core games- good games with depth
Kinect Adventures- Wii sports for kincet.
Wii Sports- sallow as a puddle.
You might be able to make a good game on kinect but there is no depth to it when you are going to have 5 of them on a disc (orange box doesn;t count as only 3 of them were new and this is valve we are talking). You can make a platformer that isn't a core game, see Robot Unicorn Attack. Sports Champions (Move sports in all by name) won't be core either, neither will Start the Party (sports shovelware as far as I can see). Motion control does not preclude being a core game but it seems to encourage shovelware that is bought by the casual players en mass.

 

[Truly-A-Lie]

Any respect I was struggling to cling onto about Kinect is severely damaged by a statement like "it's like one of the most important games in history". I'm not sure how many people managed to stay awake through Microsoft's E3 conference, but anyone who did saw that Kinect Adventures was laggy, bland and controlled about as precisely as surgery with a shotgun.

 

[Mr. Mike]

Mario is more hardcore than casual. Some levels get very difficult after a while. However, I'm much happier with platformer/TPS games like Ratchet and Clank because, you know, they have personality.

 

[Magnalian]

Hey, Microsoft, you might want to ask why Super Mario Bros. is a core game? The answer is - it requires dedication, finesse, skills.
You can't have finesse and skills with motion controls... Well, you can, but I doubt you will.

I think it's possible, but not with full-body motion controls. No matter what way you look at it, each and every one of those games is gonna end up with you flailing around the living room.

 

[VanityGirl]

That's an interesting thing to say, but like I've said, we'll have to wait and see.
I want to see all of these games before I make judgement... I'm skeptical of both Kinect and Move and until I get some real hands on stuff with both of them, I will refuse to form an opinion.

 

[DeadlyYellow]

There's something that seems rather unclean about that comparison.

And I still don't see how they are hoping to draw a bigger crowd into it with a gimmick peripheral, but it does happen. I just don't feel it likely.

 

[Anticitizen_Two]

Nintendo's been making games with dual appeal for around 30 years. How many first party games has Microsoft even made? I'm sensing some unfulfilled promises in Microsoft's future...

 

[Jezzascmezza]

Nothing I've seen for Kinect so far looks remotely appealing for hardcore (proper) gamers.
Yes, even that Star Wars game looks dodgy and tacky.
As someone who doesn't even own a PS3, I gotta say the "Move" controller does look more appealing to a hardcore gamer.

 

[FungiGamer]

Comparing Super Mario Bros. to Kinect? That's like claiming the Xbox 360 ISN'T a chunk of non-functioning plastic!

 

[Gamegodtre]

didn't Mario get most of his popularity after Super Mario Brothers 3 release. so the Kinect won't be popular til Kinect 3? and since they own the Halo series why not make Super Chief 3 for the Kinect.

 

[FungiGamer]

Mario is more hardcore than casual. Some levels get very difficult after a while. However, I'm much happier with platformer/TPS games like Ratchet and Clank because, you know, they have personality.

Personally I prefer to give people who claim the Mario franchise are casual games the Purple Coin Toy Time Galaxy Challenge, my how their opinions change so drastically

 

[poiuppx]

*sigh*

This sort of thinking? It's why Kinect is in trouble even before launch.

See, Move's positioning makes sense to me. It's got an eye for general purpose titles, but it's also being employed for outright brawlers and tactical shooters. It's the movement control, one might say, aimed out of the box at drawing in the core audience in addition to potentially importing some of the casual family audience.

Kinect, on the other hand, sees poised expressly to tackle the casuals. The family. The young gamers. This is doomed to fail because:

A) It ignore their core customer base, which is far from casual, which means this new base needs to buy its way in from the ground floor with a new console AND Kinect.

B) It means going toe to toe with Nintendo who own and have owned that market share, but with no real backdoor to the strategy. Can Kinect do more indepth gameplay then, well, what we got out of the Eyetoy's games? If not, Wii wins there as well; it can do rail shooters, platform games, racing titles, sports titles, fighting games, RPGs...

Now, mind, having not had hands-on experience with the unit, I can't claim Kinect doesn't have the potential for all of these things. But by the sound of it, it's sorely lacking the capabilities to pull these genres off. Purely hands-off controls sound good to an extent, but if it means massive chunks of the gaming world are closed off to it, your library is going to look like crap. And that at the end of the day is what sells consoles and their related control units like the Kinect; the games. If they can't offer something unique, AND they can't offer genres with built-in audiences amongst the core demographics, you're left trying to compete directly in Nintendo's airspace.

 

[orangeapples]

If Kinect was free and bundled with the 360, I might be inclined to buy one again. Too bad Sony hasn't done something like this with their Eye systems. being able to control my TV with voice commands is a really good idea. I like the science future of Star Trek.

voice commands and 3D (eventually holodeck) are the future.

 

[Chamale]

Don't. You. Fucking. Dare.

Super Mario Bros. is easily one of the greatest and most innovative games of all time. Until the Kinect sells 40,000,000 copies and has been universally loved for decades, you're not allowed to compare.

What have we seen of Kinect so far? Some games that will be fun for those who don't know how to hold a video game controller.

Within 1 second of turning on the Nintendo Entertainment System, every player who bought the Super Mario Bros. bundle loved the game. Kinect has had weeks to make a better first impression, and it's failed completely.

 

[Feste the Jester]

Didn't they just say the Kinect wasn't for hardcore players before this?

 

[NickCaligo42]

*sigh* Okay. Game series with an instantly iconic character cobbled together from a series of practical design problems from the 8-bit era, IE creativity from limitations, or a motion controller made by a company with too much money and infinite freedom to throw it at high-tech toys...

Don't. You. Fucking. Dare.

Well said.

Didn't they just say the Kinect wasn't for hardcore players before this?

They probably realized that--oops--that's the demographic that already owns the $300 console you need to run this $100+ piece of equipment and its games. Granted we probably need to be a bit more open-minded about it until we try the thing for ourselves, but it doesn't bode well when even journalists have had so few experiences with demos of the thing...

 

[Timbydude]

I personally doubt that'll be the case, but I won't write Kinect off until it's actually released.

I feel like it would've been smarter to compare Kinect to Guitar Hero. That game definitely showed a dual casual/core appeal, but a lot of people thought it just looked stupid before it was released. I'm crossing my fingers that Kinect will be like that, but I'm kind of doubtful.

 

[Autofaux]

Wahhh, is my response.

So far motion controls on HD consoles has been lukewarm at best, with Kinect being the colder of the duo. The tech is still sketchy in execution.

I'm sure Microsoft would like to emulate the success of Super Mario Bros. but that was a different era with different standards. If it really wanted to be like Super Mario Bros. it could remake the same game several times over the course of twenty years or so.

Yeah, that.

 

[Ninonybox_v1legacy]

Spoiler: oh....god

Spoiler: you have failed me for the last time microsoft

it had to be done