Is Microsoft too invested in Kinect?

#41SirLemontPosted 9/7/2013 10:42:12 AM
Microsoft is only pushing Kinect to attract the casual market. They want all that money the Wii and iDevices made.
#42XtremeWRATH360Posted 9/7/2013 7:30:44 PM
scott_gv_uk posted...
What's wrong with been active while playing a game? I know it's going to be loads of fun playing kinect games with my kids especially now winter coming.

I see it as an innovation rather then something that's been forced upon me. Not all the games made for Xbox are going to require kinect but from what I seen of sports rivals I can't wait to play it but at same time I'm just as eager to play battlefield and cod.



There's nothing wrong with being active when gaming, but that should be up to the player not MS. What if i don't want to be active i still have no choice but to pay more so i can have Kinect. See it how you want, but it should always have been the choice of the gamer and that should have been set as the expectation from day 1. Its never good to force products on consumers.
---
Juan is........NUMBER 1!
XtremeWRATH-Gamertag
#43freecity02Posted 9/7/2013 11:22:21 PM
I agree with most of what people are saying about the kinect. I am not a big fan of motion or voice in my games but one thing i did find cool is the face and body capturing, like in project spark you can create charterers that look like you and your friends. If done well it could be pretty cool and even interest someone who inst a big kinect fan.
---
YouTube gaming channel Mensreaent
#44BruceLee1974Posted 9/8/2013 12:15:10 AM
I think if Microsoft would suck it up and do 1 more 180 and get rid of Kinect and make it optional, I guarantee they would have A LOT more sales. Even from their most hated fans, it would be very hard for them not to buy a Xbox1.

I hope people don't buy the Xbox1 (well not as many as MS are hoping) then it will pretty much force MS to drop Kinect or at least give it a $100 price drop to put it on par with the PS4.
#45MR_Smarty_PantsPosted 9/8/2013 2:24:21 AM
Foxx3k posted...
Microsoft knows that if the kinect is optional, no developer will ever use it. By forcing it to have a 100% attach rate, the market is inherently saturated with Kinect users. Developers cannot shoot themselves in the foot by developing for it.

They are making the play that:
1) With every user having a Kinect, developers will develop for it
2) Users may use a Kinect and like it, despite thinking they hate it

There's a saying in business that I'm probably butchering that's something along the lines of : "Consumers don't actually know what they want."


Ahh, good old misinformation...Lucky though, just a very small amount of common sense will shred this junk.

When EA makes their next game they're not going to develop it for the Kinect, When Activision makes their next game it's not going to be for the Kinect, when Company X and so on make their next game, guess what, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO MAKE IT FOR THE KINECT. So why is this? Because the games will be released on the PS4 and possibly Wii U too. Therefor, there is no 100% attach rate for Kinect when it comes to 3rd party games, and don't kid yourself, the vast majority of games are multiplats. That 100% attach rate crap is put out by these Kinect obsessed fanboys.

Bottom line, nothing will be any different than it is now for the Kinect. Only 1st party games will be made with the Kinects full capabilities in mind. All other games (3rd party multiplats) will do the same thing they always have, make little gimmicky uses for it in their games. Why? Again, there will be no 100& attach rate for 3rd party devs games that are multiplats. Therefor eliminating the excuse that the thing must be mandatory. I just don't understand how people can't understand that.
#46gameboybrycePosted 9/8/2013 3:04:38 AM
MR_Smarty_Pants posted...
Foxx3k posted...
Microsoft knows that if the kinect is optional, no developer will ever use it. By forcing it to have a 100% attach rate, the market is inherently saturated with Kinect users. Developers cannot shoot themselves in the foot by developing for it.

They are making the play that:
1) With every user having a Kinect, developers will develop for it
2) Users may use a Kinect and like it, despite thinking they hate it

There's a saying in business that I'm probably butchering that's something along the lines of : "Consumers don't actually know what they want."


Ahh, good old misinformation...Lucky though, just a very small amount of common sense will shred this junk.

When EA makes their next game they're not going to develop it for the Kinect, When Activision makes their next game it's not going to be for the Kinect, when Company X and so on make their next game, guess what, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO MAKE IT FOR THE KINECT. So why is this? Because the games will be released on the PS4 and possibly Wii U too. Therefor, there is no 100% attach rate for Kinect when it comes to 3rd party games, and don't kid yourself, the vast majority of games are multiplats. That 100% attach rate crap is put out by these Kinect obsessed fanboys.

Bottom line, nothing will be any different than it is now for the Kinect. Only 1st party games will be made with the Kinects full capabilities in mind. All other games (3rd party multiplats) will do the same thing they always have, make little gimmicky uses for it in their games. Why? Again, there will be no 100& attach rate for 3rd party devs games that are multiplats. Therefor eliminating the excuse that the thing must be mandatory. I just don't understand how people can't understand that.

It's because some people are such Microsoft supporters that they refuse to see anything wrong with Microsoft.

I had a conversation with a friend of mines who's a serious Xbox supporter and I said the kinect was pointless and no one cares about it and he said then why is Microsoft putting it into every console. I asked him to name me one Kinect game that was revolutionary and his rebuttal was now that everyone will have it developers will utilize it. I hit him with I doubt that and until we see something truly groundbreaking with the kinect it's still pointless.

People think developers are going to spend an extra 4-6 months implementing motion control for the kinect which will make games so much better. Reality is, they won't. Third party devs may add a kinect controls into their games and more than likely those same controls will be implemented into the PS4 version too for anyone who has the PS4 camera.

Microsoft hasn't realized that people look at the kinect the same way they look at the Wii: it's fun with a group of people, but other than that it's sitting collecting dust in favor of a controller and that's not going to change this upcoming gen. The most use the kinect will get is as a voice controlled remote and I kind of feel bad for Microsoft when they realize they spent hundreds of dollars developing what essentially amounts to a voice/motion controlled remote.
---
This board has become a haven for Sony trolls, you have no idea what it is like going to sleep each night punching your pillow furiously.~TrashBoat
LMAO
#47metroidman92Posted 9/8/2013 3:06:06 AM
Honestly, they've invested too much money into R&D for it to squander it now. And like someone above said, it's honestly an impressive piece of technology, if it does everything MS says it can. It's just the fact they want it mainly for friggin ad revenue is what is the most off-putting.

If they had pitched it as a free bonus, rather than a shackle (as it was when it was required) the reception would've been a lot better. I mean what sounds better?

"Free advanced webcam/ control device that allows for total voice control of the system."

Or

"Mandatory camera attachment that will render the system nonfunctional when detached, and monitors user activity for the purposes of ad revenue."

First impressions are everything, and MS screwed up royaly.
---
Xbox One: It's Good to Pay Together.
Politics... how tiresome.
#48CaIiber345Posted 9/8/2013 3:19:19 AM
gameboybryce posted...
MR_Smarty_Pants posted...
Foxx3k posted...
Microsoft knows that if the kinect is optional, no developer will ever use it. By forcing it to have a 100% attach rate, the market is inherently saturated with Kinect users. Developers cannot shoot themselves in the foot by developing for it.

They are making the play that:
1) With every user having a Kinect, developers will develop for it
2) Users may use a Kinect and like it, despite thinking they hate it

There's a saying in business that I'm probably butchering that's something along the lines of : "Consumers don't actually know what they want."


Ahh, good old misinformation...Lucky though, just a very small amount of common sense will shred this junk.

When EA makes their next game they're not going to develop it for the Kinect, When Activision makes their next game it's not going to be for the Kinect, when Company X and so on make their next game, guess what, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO MAKE IT FOR THE KINECT. So why is this? Because the games will be released on the PS4 and possibly Wii U too. Therefor, there is no 100% attach rate for Kinect when it comes to 3rd party games, and don't kid yourself, the vast majority of games are multiplats. That 100% attach rate crap is put out by these Kinect obsessed fanboys.

Bottom line, nothing will be any different than it is now for the Kinect. Only 1st party games will be made with the Kinects full capabilities in mind. All other games (3rd party multiplats) will do the same thing they always have, make little gimmicky uses for it in their games. Why? Again, there will be no 100& attach rate for 3rd party devs games that are multiplats. Therefor eliminating the excuse that the thing must be mandatory. I just don't understand how people can't understand that.

It's because some people are such Microsoft supporters that they refuse to see anything wrong with Microsoft.

I had a conversation with a friend of mines who's a serious Xbox supporter and I said the kinect was pointless and no one cares about it and he said then why is Microsoft putting it into every console. I asked him to name me one Kinect game that was revolutionary and his rebuttal was now that everyone will have it developers will utilize it. I hit him with I doubt that and until we see something truly groundbreaking with the kinect it's still pointless.

People think developers are going to spend an extra 4-6 months implementing motion control for the kinect which will make games so much better. Reality is, they won't. Third party devs may add a kinect controls into their games and more than likely those same controls will be implemented into the PS4 version too for anyone who has the PS4 camera.

Microsoft hasn't realized that people look at the kinect the same way they look at the Wii: it's fun with a group of people, but other than that it's sitting collecting dust in favor of a controller and that's not going to change this upcoming gen. The most use the kinect will get is as a voice controlled remote and I kind of feel bad for Microsoft when they realize they spent hundreds of dollars developing what essentially amounts to a voice/motion controlled remote.


Bingo MR_Smarty Pants and gameboybryce.

I hate the frigging Kinect. I own one unfortunately. I won't even consider buying Xbox One until they get rid of the damn thing.
---
"There is a lot of middle ground between superhero powers and "Niko, let's go bowling." Dr_Mojo
GTA V: Jet Fighter Deer Hunting
#49MR_Smarty_PantsPosted 9/8/2013 3:33:04 AM
CaIiber345 posted...
gameboybryce posted...
MR_Smarty_Pants posted...
Foxx3k posted...
Microsoft knows that if the kinect is optional, no developer will ever use it. By forcing it to have a 100% attach rate, the market is inherently saturated with Kinect users. Developers cannot shoot themselves in the foot by developing for it.

They are making the play that:
1) With every user having a Kinect, developers will develop for it
2) Users may use a Kinect and like it, despite thinking they hate it

There's a saying in business that I'm probably butchering that's something along the lines of : "Consumers don't actually know what they want."


Ahh, good old misinformation...Lucky though, just a very small amount of common sense will shred this junk.

When EA makes their next game they're not going to develop it for the Kinect, When Activision makes their next game it's not going to be for the Kinect, when Company X and so on make their next game, guess what, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO MAKE IT FOR THE KINECT. So why is this? Because the games will be released on the PS4 and possibly Wii U too. Therefor, there is no 100% attach rate for Kinect when it comes to 3rd party games, and don't kid yourself, the vast majority of games are multiplats. That 100% attach rate crap is put out by these Kinect obsessed fanboys.

Bottom line, nothing will be any different than it is now for the Kinect. Only 1st party games will be made with the Kinects full capabilities in mind. All other games (3rd party multiplats) will do the same thing they always have, make little gimmicky uses for it in their games. Why? Again, there will be no 100& attach rate for 3rd party devs games that are multiplats. Therefor eliminating the excuse that the thing must be mandatory. I just don't understand how people can't understand that.

It's because some people are such Microsoft supporters that they refuse to see anything wrong with Microsoft.

I had a conversation with a friend of mines who's a serious Xbox supporter and I said the kinect was pointless and no one cares about it and he said then why is Microsoft putting it into every console. I asked him to name me one Kinect game that was revolutionary and his rebuttal was now that everyone will have it developers will utilize it. I hit him with I doubt that and until we see something truly groundbreaking with the kinect it's still pointless.

People think developers are going to spend an extra 4-6 months implementing motion control for the kinect which will make games so much better. Reality is, they won't. Third party devs may add a kinect controls into their games and more than likely those same controls will be implemented into the PS4 version too for anyone who has the PS4 camera.

Microsoft hasn't realized that people look at the kinect the same way they look at the Wii: it's fun with a group of people, but other than that it's sitting collecting dust in favor of a controller and that's not going to change this upcoming gen. The most use the kinect will get is as a voice controlled remote and I kind of feel bad for Microsoft when they realize they spent hundreds of dollars developing what essentially amounts to a voice/motion controlled remote.


Bingo MR_Smarty Pants and gameboybryce.

I hate the frigging Kinect. I own one unfortunately. I won't even consider buying Xbox One until they get rid of the damn thing.


Same here. I loved my original xbox and my 360...that being said, I'm not touching the One until the Kinect is optional.
#50gameboybrycePosted 9/8/2013 4:07:00 AM
CaIiber345 posted...
Bingo MR_Smarty Pants and gameboybryce.

I hate the frigging Kinect. I own one unfortunately. I won't even consider buying Xbox One until they get rid of the damn thing.


It's funny because my friend also said why isn't Sony pushing the PS4 camera. In my opinion they realized that it's not the revolutionary piece of tech it's touted to be. Granted part of the reason they removed it from coming with every PS4 is because they wanted to lower the price of the system, I think they also realized no one really cares about it anymore. Also, I think they're taking the time and money and putting it into developing their own Oculus Rift style VR device, which I think will be awesome if it works as well as everyone is saying it does.
---
This board has become a haven for Sony trolls, you have no idea what it is like going to sleep each night punching your pillow furiously.~TrashBoat
LMAO