A question for those who prefer the XB1.

#1ImThe8thWonderPosted 7/30/2013 8:57:57 PM
If you had a choice to get the XB1 without kinect for a $100 dollar drop in price, would you?

I have to ask since there are a lot of people around here who seem to step up and defend the kinect any moment they get. Is the kinect 2 alone, without the XB1 in the picture, something you are looking forward to get?
#2RedFive3Posted 7/30/2013 8:59:34 PM
Yes I would. I am not happy about kinect being required, but I can live with it.
---
I'm your huckleberry...
You spend nine months trying to get out, and the rest of your life trying to get back in.
#3TBONE_OGPosted 7/30/2013 9:00:38 PM(edited)
No. I would get the Kinect 2.0 easy. Looks to be far better than 1.0 and some impressive tech.
---
Always O.G.
#4Big FanPosted 7/30/2013 9:00:44 PM
Actually yes. I've been considering Kinect for my 360 for awhile, but would rather pick up a game. So this is basically an excuse for me to have Kinect. It's an interesting piece of hardware and I'd like to see the potential when it's in the hands of every gamer with an X1
---
GT: Code XxX
#5ImThe8thWonder(Topic Creator)Posted 7/30/2013 9:08:42 PM
An extra $100 for motion controls and voice commands? Is that not even the slightest bit crazy to you guys? I mean, if at least AAA titles would make the kinect a fundamental piece to the game, then maybe. But I can't see most major games in the future adding in major kinect integration. The controller would still be the prime way to play games.
#6FinzFan4lifePosted 7/30/2013 9:09:11 PM
No I want the kinect I will pay 500
---
Not Changing until Miami Dolphins Win a Super Bowl signed 02-09-2012
#7CapwnDPosted 7/30/2013 9:13:29 PM(edited)
If it works at short distances, I would get it more for the voice control over anything. But I would rather see it as an optional choice at this point.

If games utilize it well, then I know I will have been wrong, and that it was a good thing it's mandatory. Kinect 1 was bad, and delayed the console generation by at least a year. If this turns out to be turd, there better not be a Kinect 3 (or Kinect One as they would call it)
---
Death to Videodrome, Long Live the New Flesh
#8TBONE_OGPosted 7/30/2013 9:29:31 PM(edited)
ImThe8thWonder posted...
An extra $100 for motion controls and voice commands? Is that not even the slightest bit crazy to you guys? I mean, if at least AAA titles would make the kinect a fundamental piece to the game, then maybe. But I can't see most major games in the future adding in major kinect integration. The controller would still be the prime way to play games.


No, it's not crazy. It's 100 bucks. Big deal. It's worth the value for all the pros it comes with. Voice and motion integration throughout all the features of the X1. I'm not looking forward to All-Kinect games per say... more like Kinect improving AAA controller based games. Like what Dead Rising 3 is doing. Just the beginning.

Basically the way I see, you're going to buy a normal, controller based X1 game, then if you want, have it greatly improved (varies) by Kinect.

I have Kinect 1.0, BTW.
---
Always O.G.
#9TeremeiPosted 7/30/2013 9:34:55 PM
of course I would get it without it. Kinect sports rivals no longer is a launch game. And I wouldn't buy one until (and if) there were a couple games for it that looked amazing.

But since it's bundled I'm excited that there will be more incentive to make games and features for it.
---
last $$: Skyrim Legendary PS3, Last of Us, Max Payne 3 PS3, Project X Zone, Shin Megami Tensei IV, Wii U
Playing: tLoU
#10BudWisenheimerPosted 7/30/2013 9:49:56 PM
ImThe8thWonder posted...
If you had a choice to get the XB1 without kinect for a $100 dollar drop in price, would you?

I have to ask since there are a lot of people around here who seem to step up and defend the kinect any moment they get. Is the kinect 2 alone, without the XB1 in the picture, something you are looking forward to get?



No. I would cancel one of my pre-orders if MSFT removes the Kinect from any SKU. No mandatory Kinect = No purchase.