Xbox One Will Work Without Kinect

SeventhSigil

New member
Jun 24, 2013
273
0
0
Baldr said:
SeventhSigil said:
Baldr said:
spartandude said:
Baldr said:
spartandude said:
now when they release a Kinect free bundle (which would be significantly cheaper) i will put strong consideration in buying it
Then that is probably what they will end up doing, because they're going to want to make the extra income from higher software sales to recoup their losses. Reversing online connection once a day, I can understand.
Reversing Kinect always being on, I can understand.

Not including a Kinect would undermind all the technology architecture that went into the Xbox One.
except isnt making the Kinect an optional thing already doing that? if so then there is no further harm in manufacturing less and opening up your consumer base to a much larger market
The biggest problem with developing for the original Kinect is there wasn't a large enough player-base to make it worth developing for. If every system has a Kinect, developers do not worry if a player has a Kinect or not. Most of the innovation around the Xbox One was around minizing Kinect latency and integrating it into the operating system. Microsoft spent a lot of money on that part.
While I agree that an optional Kinect free SKU would likely damage the device's prospects in terms of software, whether or not Microsoft ends up doing it is pretty much going to boil down to what their sales are, versus what they want them to be, And probably even what the competition's sales are in relation. If they think they can make a substantial number of console sales by releasing an optional model, they will.

That being said, I don't think we're likely to see it happen until perhaps six months or a year after launch. As you said, they invested a considerable amount of money into its development, and so they are likely going to wait and see how the sales pan out. If there is any chance that the number of sold consoles will reach whatever target they have, being absolute numbers or relative a spot against Sony's console, Then they will be satisfied and leave the Kinect package as it is. If on the other hand they feel they are lagging behind, and whatever analysts work for them suggest that the mandatory inclusion, or even just the price, are what is holding them back, I would be seriously surprised if they didn't take action. Considering just cutting the price but still including all the hardware might just be throwing bad money after good, and dig them a deeper hole, if it is an option, they'll probably just end up releasing a cheaper option without the sensor.

I do agree, releasing a separate option can't help the Kinect's install base. But bottom line is they're always going to be far more interested in helping the Xbox One's install base instead. If the second one is faltering, the first one won't really matter much to them.

Please keep in mind I'm not advocating one option or the other. I am just predicting how the company will respond, in the event their sales continue as they supposedly are.
I think Microsoft has really done a bad job with showing off what they changed in the Kinect 2 to consumers. They really need a solid Kinect/Controller hybrid game to really show off the power of the Kinect to consumers and game developers. Project: Spark seems like a great title to try this.

Then there what could happen to any console, RROD-type problem on the PS4, Network issues to either the PSN or XBL/Azure that hamper cloud abilities, OS glitches that brick the machines for no apparent reason, ect...
Indeed, Really anything could happen after launch. It could even turn out that the preorder slump is just because a bulk of people are waiting to see the independent third-party feedback on the Kinect 2 after launch. What should be considered is that despite its relative success in sales, the Kinect 1 wasn't quite the tour de force to immersion that was suggested. While the newest model might indeed deliver everything promised, there are probably going to be a number of people who purchased the first one, and didn't enjoy it so much, who are going to sit back and wait until after launch so they can determine if it is something they want. It doesn't help that Ryse, A game that began development as a Kinect-only title for the 360, is being released on the more advanced platform as a primarily controller-manipulated game. Since it is coming from Microsoft directly, it doesn't suggest much faith in their own technology.

Anyway, as said, I'm not really expecting any sort of model without the sensor to be announced before launch, if one ever is. They're going to want to see whether there are a sizable number of customers hiding in the bushes as it were, just to find out if they can have their cake and eat it too.

That being said, it might turn out that the slump continues. In that event, what you should keep in mind, what is pretty much inevitable about any company, is that Microsoft's development of the Kinect was done because they felt that the technology would set them apart from their competitors. In other words, that it would be a dealmaker, and would bring in a flood Of customers on its own merit. Their continuing support of it will last so long as they continue to believe that it brings in more people than it loses. If they believe at any point that continuing to make it mandatory is costing them significant revenue, then they are going to drop its mandatory status.
 

Genocidicles

New member
Sep 13, 2012
1,747
0
0
As long as I am still forced to pay extra for a gimmicky piece of garbage I have no desire of owning, I will never buy a an xbone.

Of course considering they've changed everything else about the console, I reckon it's only a matter of time until they job the Kinect too. Good riddance.
 

Lightknight

Mugwamp Supreme
Nov 26, 2008
4,860
0
0
Finally, what a terrible PR company. It's like chewing glass to get a straight answer out of them.

We get that the kinect does stuff. We just wanted the option to not use it if we don't want to. We want the perks you're trying to shove down our trousers to be optional. Geeze. Just make it worth our while and we'll want to use it. But being unnecessarily forceful just makes us hate you.

Now I guess I'd have to ask how functional it'll be. From the sounds of it you just can't do things like control things with your voice or body movements. If that's the case, then great. My kinect 2 concerns are abated. This only leaves

1. My overall distaste for their Expo Shenanigans
2. Cloud computing being pushed for by a weaker machine which will make all games utilizing it de facto always online. I don't want single player experiences being subject to Always Online DRM just because they make a server process the lighting. They're just going to legitimize companies like EA saying Sim City 5 requires server-side processing.
3. That the kinect 2 isn't necessary and yet I'm still paying for it when it cost almost as much as the weaker console to make.
4. That the dashboard's goal is to clutter us with ads.
5. That microsoft is still anti-indie in a lot of ways, even after their 180 on indie devs.

This list is admittedly much shorter than it was before. I only really consider 1 2 and 3 to be the major points so I am impressed with the job they did. But they're still only catching up to the other console. They're just making themselves "not as bad as they wanted to be" to begin with, they aren't actually making themselves better than the competition.
 

Baldr

The Noble
Jan 6, 2010
1,739
0
0
Kalezian said:
Baldr said:
Kalezian said:
Baldr said:
Kalezian said:
Baldr said:
spartandude said:
Baldr said:
spartandude said:
now when they release a Kinect free bundle (which would be significantly cheaper) i will put strong consideration in buying it
Reversing online connection once a day, I can understand.
Reversing Kinect always being on, I can understand.

Not including a Kinect would undermind all the technology architecture that went into the Xbox One.
except isnt making the Kinect an optional thing already doing that? if so then there is no further harm in manufacturing less and opening up your consumer base to a much larger market
The biggest problem with developing for the original Kinect is there wasn't a large enough player-base to make it worth developing for. If every system has a Kinect, developers do not worry if a player has a Kinect or not. Most of the innovation around the Xbox One was around minizing Kinect latency and integrating it into the operating system. Microsoft spent a lot of money on that part.

too bad not everyone wants a Kinect, let alone has the room for it to work right.

I know with how little space I have in my room the Kinect, hell, even the Move or a Wii would have a horrible time attempting to work with the games I have absolutely no interest in.


Maybe once Microsoft pulls at the very least their ears our of their ass and listens to customers, thus actually making a console people would want to buy, by example, a console that doesn't include bullshit that a majority wont use, then maybe they will see a small increase in pre-order sales.


I know for sure that I still wont get a Xbox one until they make a bundle that doesn't have the Kinect, and by their own admittance, would then be $100 cheaper, if not more.

Hell, I'm still sure the 'completely customizable homepage' really isn't, I mean with how much Ad's they showed I can guarantee that you cant remove any of them.

Because why should you get a discount on a subscription if there is Ad's, it just means more money for Microsoft.
It is an integral part of the system. It like saying WiiU should sell without the Tablet controller. If almost all games use it's function and consumer complain that they don't have it, then it becomes a problem.

You still basing your decision on the Kinect 1 and not the Kinect 2, which will work in limited spaces.

Integral in this sense means that the Xbox One wouldn't ever work without the Kinect, but Microsoft just said that it would.

so, no, it is not 'integral' to the Xbox One, or the system would not work without it plugged in.

Which is funny, because:
tdylan said:
Does anyone recall:

"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."

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/7.822167-Kinect-Reportedly-Costs-Almost-As-Much-as-Xbox-One
Looks like they got someone in there that is capable of imagining using the console without kinect.
This guy just pulled up the post where Microsoft said that the Xbox One wouldn't work without the Kinect.

So, either way Microsoft is lying once again.

Not all games are going to use some gimmick motion control either, if I can get two version of a game, one requiring me to stand up and act like I'm having a seizure to play the game, and one where I can just use the controller like any sane person would, which one am I more likely going to buy?

which leads me to this next part:


No one has ever convinced me that I absolutely need a Kinect. No one has ever claimed a Kinect game was an absolute must buy for 360 owners. No game has ever used the Kinect in a way that actually utilizes it to the extent people claim it has.

Star Wars Kinect is an example, the one part of the game that should of been easy beyond fuck, the lightsaber duels, where you could actually play like you were having an actual duel was the second worst part of the game, the first of course is the dance mini-game. The only portion of the game that actually worked was, yet again, the one where you flail around the room like you are having a seizure. Which makes another point, nearly all Kinect games are nothing more than bundled mini-games.

I can hear it now though, "BUT KALEZIAN, Skyrim uses the Kinect! So does Mass Effect 3!"

Voice commands. Even then there is the technology available to make it so that the headset can do the exact same thing.

In fact, it was made last generation.

If you want to go farther, it was first introduced back with the SNES.


yea, think about how these 'new and innovative' mechanics hold up now.


Let's make this easy, name one game that I should absolutely must own that uses the Kinect as a primary input device.


just one.
Your making the assumption that the Kinect 2 is exactly the same as the original Kinect.

You're making the assumption that I wanted a Kinect in the first place, regardless of what version.
This discussion is not about what "you" want or not want to begin with, that is called entitlement. You can have your opinions about it, but the world does not revolve around you.
 

natster43

New member
Jul 10, 2009
2,459
0
0
Cool, now if they announce a version of it that doesn't include a Kinect and is like 100 dollars cheaper, I'll actually get an Xbox One.
 

SeventhSigil

New member
Jun 24, 2013
273
0
0
Baldr said:
Kalezian said:
Baldr said:
Kalezian said:
Baldr said:
Kalezian said:
Baldr said:
spartandude said:
Baldr said:
spartandude said:
now when they release a Kinect free bundle (which would be significantly cheaper) i will put strong consideration in buying it
Reversing online connection once a day, I can understand.
Reversing Kinect always being on, I can understand.

Not including a Kinect would undermind all the technology architecture that went into the Xbox One.
except isnt making the Kinect an optional thing already doing that? if so then there is no further harm in manufacturing less and opening up your consumer base to a much larger market
The biggest problem with developing for the original Kinect is there wasn't a large enough player-base to make it worth developing for. If every system has a Kinect, developers do not worry if a player has a Kinect or not. Most of the innovation around the Xbox One was around minizing Kinect latency and integrating it into the operating system. Microsoft spent a lot of money on that part.

too bad not everyone wants a Kinect, let alone has the room for it to work right.

I know with how little space I have in my room the Kinect, hell, even the Move or a Wii would have a horrible time attempting to work with the games I have absolutely no interest in.


Maybe once Microsoft pulls at the very least their ears our of their ass and listens to customers, thus actually making a console people would want to buy, by example, a console that doesn't include bullshit that a majority wont use, then maybe they will see a small increase in pre-order sales.


I know for sure that I still wont get a Xbox one until they make a bundle that doesn't have the Kinect, and by their own admittance, would then be $100 cheaper, if not more.

Hell, I'm still sure the 'completely customizable homepage' really isn't, I mean with how much Ad's they showed I can guarantee that you cant remove any of them.

Because why should you get a discount on a subscription if there is Ad's, it just means more money for Microsoft.
It is an integral part of the system. It like saying WiiU should sell without the Tablet controller. If almost all games use it's function and consumer complain that they don't have it, then it becomes a problem.

You still basing your decision on the Kinect 1 and not the Kinect 2, which will work in limited spaces.

Integral in this sense means that the Xbox One wouldn't ever work without the Kinect, but Microsoft just said that it would.

so, no, it is not 'integral' to the Xbox One, or the system would not work without it plugged in.

Which is funny, because:
tdylan said:
Does anyone recall:

"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."

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/7.822167-Kinect-Reportedly-Costs-Almost-As-Much-as-Xbox-One
Looks like they got someone in there that is capable of imagining using the console without kinect.
This guy just pulled up the post where Microsoft said that the Xbox One wouldn't work without the Kinect.

So, either way Microsoft is lying once again.

Not all games are going to use some gimmick motion control either, if I can get two version of a game, one requiring me to stand up and act like I'm having a seizure to play the game, and one where I can just use the controller like any sane person would, which one am I more likely going to buy?

which leads me to this next part:


No one has ever convinced me that I absolutely need a Kinect. No one has ever claimed a Kinect game was an absolute must buy for 360 owners. No game has ever used the Kinect in a way that actually utilizes it to the extent people claim it has.

Star Wars Kinect is an example, the one part of the game that should of been easy beyond fuck, the lightsaber duels, where you could actually play like you were having an actual duel was the second worst part of the game, the first of course is the dance mini-game. The only portion of the game that actually worked was, yet again, the one where you flail around the room like you are having a seizure. Which makes another point, nearly all Kinect games are nothing more than bundled mini-games.

I can hear it now though, "BUT KALEZIAN, Skyrim uses the Kinect! So does Mass Effect 3!"

Voice commands. Even then there is the technology available to make it so that the headset can do the exact same thing.

In fact, it was made last generation.

If you want to go farther, it was first introduced back with the SNES.


yea, think about how these 'new and innovative' mechanics hold up now.


Let's make this easy, name one game that I should absolutely must own that uses the Kinect as a primary input device.


just one.
Your making the assumption that the Kinect 2 is exactly the same as the original Kinect.

You're making the assumption that I wanted a Kinect in the first place, regardless of what version.
This discussion is not about what "you" want or not want to begin with, that is called entitlement. You can have your opinions about it, but the world does not revolve around you.
To be fair, the world doesn't revolve around those who want the Kinect packaged with every system either. o_O Like I said, it's all going to come down to a numbers game; Majority versus minority, and we don't really have any way of knowing who is on which side. Not reliably anyway.
 

Jabberwock King

New member
Mar 27, 2011
320
0
0
Well that certainly is nice to see. I have some good friends on Xbox, and I'd like to jump into a few next-gen games with them. Not having to worry about my living room be some permanent microphone for targeted advertising makes me feel better.
 

CardinalPiggles

New member
Jun 24, 2010
3,226
0
0
Baldr said:
Kalezian said:
Baldr said:
spartandude said:
Baldr said:
spartandude said:
now when they release a Kinect free bundle (which would be significantly cheaper) i will put strong consideration in buying it
Reversing online connection once a day, I can understand.
Reversing Kinect always being on, I can understand.

Not including a Kinect would undermind all the technology architecture that went into the Xbox One.
except isnt making the Kinect an optional thing already doing that? if so then there is no further harm in manufacturing less and opening up your consumer base to a much larger market
The biggest problem with developing for the original Kinect is there wasn't a large enough player-base to make it worth developing for. If every system has a Kinect, developers do not worry if a player has a Kinect or not. Most of the innovation around the Xbox One was around minizing Kinect latency and integrating it into the operating system. Microsoft spent a lot of money on that part.

too bad not everyone wants a Kinect, let alone has the room for it to work right.

I know with how little space I have in my room the Kinect, hell, even the Move or a Wii would have a horrible time attempting to work with the games I have absolutely no interest in.


Maybe once Microsoft pulls at the very least their ears our of their ass and listens to customers, thus actually making a console people would want to buy, by example, a console that doesn't include bullshit that a majority wont use, then maybe they will see a small increase in pre-order sales.


I know for sure that I still wont get a Xbox one until they make a bundle that doesn't have the Kinect, and by their own admittance, would then be $100 cheaper, if not more.

Hell, I'm still sure the 'completely customizable homepage' really isn't, I mean with how much Ad's they showed I can guarantee that you cant remove any of them.

Because why should you get a discount on a subscription if there is Ad's, it just means more money for Microsoft.
It is an integral part of the system. It like saying WiiU should sell without the Tablet controller. If almost all games use it's function and consumer complain that they don't have it, then it becomes a problem.

You still basing your decision on the Kinect 1 and not the Kinect 2, which will work in limited spaces.
Wouldn't it be better for everyone if they sold these things separately as well as bundled? That way those who don't care about using the Kinect (or the Wii tablet for that matter) can ignore it, then buy it later if they decide they want it. Customer choice is important to most people, including myself.

I'd be very surprised if everything needs the Kinect to even function.
 

RicoADF

Welcome back Commander
Jun 2, 2009
3,147
0
0
Well I always said that if they dropped the Kinnect requirement I'd buy one, so time to put my money where my mouth is *pre-orders day one edition*. PS4 will still be my primary system :p

EDIT: Thats primary console system, PC is my primary gaming system.
 

Ariyura

New member
Oct 18, 2008
258
0
0
RicoADF said:
Well I always said that if they dropped the Kinnect requirement I'd buy one, so time to put my money where my mouth is *pre-orders day one edition*. PS4 will still be my primary system :p

EDIT: Thats primary console system, PC is my primary gaming system.
I also said I'd buy one when they dropped the Kinect requirement but they still need to sell me a console without it in the box for about $100 dollars cheaper. I wont pay for hardware I don't want to use.
 

RicoADF

Welcome back Commander
Jun 2, 2009
3,147
0
0
Ariyura said:
RicoADF said:
Well I always said that if they dropped the Kinnect requirement I'd buy one, so time to put my money where my mouth is *pre-orders day one edition*. PS4 will still be my primary system :p

EDIT: Thats primary console system, PC is my primary gaming system.
I also said I'd buy one when they dropped the Kinect requirement but they still need to sell me a console without it in the box for about $100 dollars cheaper. I wont pay for hardware I don't want to use.
Fair enough, personally I don't mind the kinect as a peripheral that I can use if I feel like it, I was against the fact they wanted to force it to be required to play. I believe in options, for it to be my choice if I want it plugged in/to be used. Was never against Kinect as an optional peripheral. I can see why you wouldn't want to waste the $100 if you never plan to use it though.
 

Infernal Lawyer

New member
Jan 28, 2013
611
0
0
Baldr said:
You still basing your decision on the Kinect 1 and not the Kinect 2
So, where are all these videos showing how awesome the Kinect 2.0 is and how it works, with actual gameplay use? This is an honest, serious question.
I've been on Escapist since the XBone launch and other than the original tech demos, I've only heard promises and PR words from Microsoft and XBox fans saying "Oh, you've just got bad memories from the original Kinect."
Just as I was writing this, I decided to actually bother trying to look it up on Youtube... Sure, there's a genuinely impressive tech demo, but with all the aforementioned promises, shouldn't we have in-game video trailers by now showing off how it works in action by now? Microsoft may have this awesome technology, but they don't seem to have enough confidence to show it in action yet.

Btw, yes, I know I'm taking what you said a little out of context, I just wish that people would give actual evidence as to why the Kinect 2.0 going to be good rather than saying "Oh it will be, because Microsoft said so, honest!" I WANT to be impressed by the damn thing, really.
 

Lightknight

Mugwamp Supreme
Nov 26, 2008
4,860
0
0
Ariyura said:
RicoADF said:
Well I always said that if they dropped the Kinnect requirement I'd buy one, so time to put my money where my mouth is *pre-orders day one edition*. PS4 will still be my primary system :p

EDIT: Thats primary console system, PC is my primary gaming system.
I also said I'd buy one when they dropped the Kinect requirement but they still need to sell me a console without it in the box for about $100 dollars cheaper. I wont pay for hardware I don't want to use.
Note that the kinect 2 costs almost as much as the console to make. If they only took $100 off the price then it'd be their little way of sticking it to everyone who made them do this.