This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
I'll disagree with you on this one. I won't use Kinect and vastly prefer the Xbox lineup to the PS4. It's all a matter of opinion.
No. Microsoft specificially stated they were not receiving a dime on the selling/trading transactions.
That's fine -- personal preference. What started this exchange though was the observation that Ryse is an exclusive that ended up being essentially wasted -- from the perspective of people like you and me -- due to Kinect. Instead of making Ryse, Crytek could have produced another Far Cry installment instead. I think both of would rather have had that than a Kinect or QTE-based game.
I disagree with you totally, RIU. I was super excited about the sharing possibilities with my friends, and now that we will be losing that, it sucks. Having access to every game on 10 different friends' game list (as long as it was not currently being played)? That would have been one of the greatest features of all time, on any system. I want to play that single player game from 3 years ago that I missed for one reason or another? Odds are that one of your 10 friends would have it on their list.
What's stopping Microsoft from implementing this? You don't need DRM to do what you're talking about -- you just need people to buy the game digitally.
What is stopping it is the game developers, most likely. I would bet that in order to get a concession on sharing with friends, Microsoft had to agree to implement a DRM system similar to Steam. Now that the authentication system is gone, there is no way that developers would want to go along with the sharing program. You can't have your cake and eat it too...
Honestly, it seems to me that the people who think Kinect, motion controls, touchscreen pads, etc. have no place in gaming are the same people who think that there shouldn't be games without massive amounts of gore, sex, and violence.
I have to agree with Larry here. I haven't seen it yet but my guess is a developer will truly innovate with the Kinect and make something very cool. And they will do it because they know they have a built in audience.
I think I'm going to have to wait for the system and game in question to be released before I proclaim that kinect is actively harming the hard core gamer market. Besides, we really have no idea how any of the resources that were spent on kinect capabilities for Ryse would have been otherwise spent.
Love my 360 and the Kinect on the X1 is the #1 reason I am not buying it. None of my friends are purchasing it for the exact same reason so while the sample is small, the kinect is hurting sales.
You don't need to wait for that. Every development team that spends its time making Kinect games is a development team that could have produced a traditional game instead. That's just basic economics (resources are scarce).
I'm not complaining about anything. I'm explaining why a mandatory peripheral (like Kinect) might be a strike against a gaming console (for one particular subset of consumers) because it leads to resources being redirected in a manner that that subset wouldn't like.
I agree with both of you actually, developers will continue to make great games, and they will continue to divert resources to gimmicky peripherals in an attempt to make them more appealing.
Yes. There is not a single Move game I want to play. I would personally prefer that every single development team that made a game for the Move (like the guys that made Sorcery, for example) spend their time, money, and talent making a traditional game instead. I was disappointed when Sony released the Move; I would have preferred that it not exist at all. Likewise, I've been happy that they haven't pushed it since then.
The 360 came out in 2005 but the Kinect has only been around since 2010, give it time. I wasn't impressed by Kinect but the new version seems much more useful. Now that it will be a part of the system we should see some more creative uses of it from developers.
I'm fairly new to the 360 (Christmast 2011) and the only Kinect games I have are Just Dance 3 & 4. Which are really fun - and the kids love them. I'd also like to have a very nice golf game that others had mentioned previously. Otherwise, for now, I've got little use for Kinect.
Of course it does, but developers won't develop for Kinect if there isn't a market for it - that's also Econ 101.
Thats the way its being presented at least, by the hippest hipsters in the video game industry.
I do have an issue with the $100 extra for the X1 but that's a really minor part of the purchase decision for me.
More off my lawn. The constant railing about touch screen undercuts your everyone else must be a hipster argument.
The whole argument against the XB1 as it was originally intended is. I think once people saw and used the conveniences it provided, things like used games would have become an afterthought.
Kinect adventures sold 19 millions units in total. (or about 86k less than Black OPs on both Xbox 360 & PS3 for 2012)
Really? I'm 26 in August, I didn't realize that common sense observations made me a hipster. I really have a hard time understanding why people love this crap. At the technology expo this year they showed off electromagnetic gel that could be injected underneath a screen and when electrical pulses were sent through it it could alter its density and created raised buttons from flat surfaces, they used it to make a touch screen with a keyboard. Thats another example of good innovation, get the browsing functionality of a touch screen (the good aspect) and the input functionality of a keyboard. Taking an idea and throwing stuff at it and marketing it as the coolest thing ever does not a good innovation make.
Right. We all know there's a market for this stuff. The Wii sold a bazillion consoles.
I remember when they unveiled this, its supposed to be XBONE compatible. It looks cooler than most augmented reality technologies, but I don't think it would be fun to use at all.
I agree that I wouldn't want it or haven't seen anything to convince me that I would want it in the games that I typically play, although its present in Madden. What I do find compelling are the voice commands that work outside of any games. I am not sure if what they announced means that if you had an X1 that you need to leave the disc in to play it, which would suck. But being able to switch between games, TV, and internet easily would be nice.
Seems pretty evident. We got one guy claiming if they develop for kinect, which he doesn't like because he doesn't want to move?, and then all games will suck because of limited resources. We got another comparing kinect to touch screen as we are being told touch screen sucks and is worthless. Very Luddite.
Nobody is saying that all games will suck because of Kinect. I'm saying that if a company makes a Kinect game, it gives up the opportunity to make a traditional game. Or if you want to flip that around, every time a developer makes a traditional game, it gives up the opportunity to make a Kinect game. That's undeniably true.
II hate 1st person shooters but you don't see me railing on developers for making those games do you? There's plenty of room for all types of games.
Did you watch the video in the link? They stated explicitly that they use Kinect as the camera to detect the furniture in the room. That's actually a cool use for it.
No I don't care for any of the kinect games I have seen so far. But I am also not saying I won't buy a XB1 because it comes with kinect or that kinect is going to lead to game manufacturers not making other games and therefore trash it. I think that's a difference in our positions here.
