The challenge for kinect.

#1Cowboy082288Posted 10/23/2013 10:43:10 PM
I saw something interesting the other day. My niece who is 1 year and 7 months old was playing a video game on an iPad. It was not a game in the same sense that most of the people on GF will think of but it was in a basic form a video game. Well it got me to thinking, my niece could not play a game on a console or PC. The interface mechanism is to complicated.

This to me this is what tablets offer that is so appealing to so many people. You simply touch what you want to interact with. Unlike a mouse or keyboard or controller, there is no 'middle man' button to press. How many times have you seen some one pick up a controller for the first time and have to constantly look down at the controller to see what they are doing? This is a big barrier for many to even attempt playing a video game.

This to me is the challenge for kinect. Make interacting with the game simpler. The point should not be to give hardcore audiences a reason to jump around in front of their TV. The point should be to create a simple interface that anyone can start using quickly and have fun with.

MS says that kinect will help navigating your TV. Well maybe, I'm still not sold that it will work better than a remote control. What I think is more important is that they use the voice+motion control to make games/programs accessible to everyone from a 2 year old to a 70 year old grandmother.
---
PSN/XBL/Steam - cowboyoni
#2ImThe8thWonderPosted 10/23/2013 10:47:48 PM
Well, that's where the problem lies. It's perfectly fine if the kinect is there for the casual gamerbase, and I can see how it would of use to them, but it is being forced upon the core gamerbase as well.

I think it will only offer supplemental, minor actions in games that I would most definitely be able to live without- and this is considering a 100% adoption rate. At best, the kinect won't replace the controller, only assist it. They might as well should just remove the forced kinect bundle and drop the price, since I don't believe a 100% adoption rate will even provide much more of a relevant experience than a non-100% adoption rate. It punishes people who really don't want it.
---
All fanboys are equally terrible. Hypocrisy and double-standards are at every corner, nobody is a saint.
#3Cowboy082288(Topic Creator)Posted 10/23/2013 11:05:14 PM
ImThe8thWonder posted...
Well, that's where the problem lies. It's perfectly fine if the kinect is there for the casual gamerbase, and I can see how it would of use to them, but it is being forced upon the core gamerbase as well.

I think it will only offer supplemental, minor actions in games that I would most definitely be able to live without- and this is considering a 100% adoption rate. At best, the kinect won't replace the controller, only assist it. They might as well should just remove the forced kinect bundle and drop the price, since I don't believe a 100% adoption rate will even provide much more of a relevant experience than a non-100% adoption rate. It punishes people who really don't want it.


Well maybe, but in my experience, peripherals get little to no support. I think MS bundling it at least shows they are serious about supporting the device. Anyone remember the Power glove :) If I buy an X box one and then find 'o hey here is a program my kids can mess with on it' because of the kinect I think that is a success for MS. All yet to be seen though.

I personally have serious doubts that motion interaction will ever factor into 'hardcore' games, voice though.... maybe, I'm not sure.
---
PSN/XBL/Steam - cowboyoni
#4Orange_ApplesPosted 10/23/2013 11:06:41 PM
The 100% Kinect adoption really means nothing to the AAA section of gaming, but the Indie side could be the major game changer. Indie devs do like messing around with the Kinect and already aren't expecting millions of sales. Indie games have been doing a lot more interesting things than the AAA side who are inflating budgets and making the same tired looking games.
---
PC + Nintendo
Winning combination in the late 80s, winning combination in the 90s, winning combination today.
#5Dev0311Posted 10/23/2013 11:21:26 PM
The real challenge for Kinect is to be able to do 1:1 motion control.
#6Cowboy082288(Topic Creator)Posted 10/24/2013 7:05:42 AM
Orange_Apples posted...
The 100% Kinect adoption really means nothing to the AAA section of gaming, but the Indie side could be the major game changer. Indie devs do like messing around with the Kinect and already aren't expecting millions of sales. Indie games have been doing a lot more interesting things than the AAA side who are inflating budgets and making the same tired looking games.


I somewhat agree, I think a lot of innovative new directions come from smaller budget stuff. And yeah mostly because there is less risk involved for those guys. That being said, I think some people are bit overly critical of large budget AAA titles. It would be irresponsible for a dev studio to close their eyes and just roll the dice on a 100 million dollar budget game. Also AAA titles tend to have a lot of content and polish to them, even if they are a bit repetitive in design.
---
PSN/XBL/Steam - cowboyoni
#7TerraUniversePosted 10/24/2013 7:29:49 AM
Kinect has already sold over 20 million units. It is very popular with families.

You're right that iOS games are easier to get into than console games. Xbox One is a machine that is specifically made for gaming and so a person who buys the Xbox One is buying it mainly as a gaming machine. This is unlike an iOS device which has a lot more features and uses for it.

That being said, the Kinect is very good for dancing games and fitness games, which is what a lot of girls and moms like to play with.

With Xbox One shipping with a Kinect, it means people are more willing to try Kinect games, which should help encourage the development of exclusive Kinect games.

To talk about your initial point, the iPhone will always be more accessible, because it's just a more popular device and easier to make a game for. The Xbox One requires that you have a console, and an HDTV, and an HDMI cable, and the space to move around. It requires more preparation. It's not as spontaneous as picking up an iOS device and quickly playing with it. With the gaming consoles, you have to go out of your way to pick up the consoles. With iOS devices, you are usually getting the devices for other things, and gaming is just something you do for fun. iOS devices are not designed to be gaming devices. That's not Apple's focus or priority, it's just a functionality that app-makers have been able to build around Apple. Plus the iTunes store has thousands of free games. Most of them are shovelware, but they're still free.
#8Reflex-ArcPosted 10/24/2013 7:34:14 AM
"Core gamers" need to start realizing that they are a dying breed and a diminishing market and that to replenish their herd they need to embrace "casual gamers" if they want the gaming industry to grow. The casual gamer is far more accepting of "new" than the stubborn core base and casual gamers don't all (or always) remain casual gamers Tastes evolve, and the games will evolve to suit.

The more I think about it, the more the Xbox One and Kinect make sense to me. It really is a deviation from the path console gaming has been on, and that appeals to me.
---
Case | Mother Board | CPU (OC'd!) | Video Card x 2 | RAM | PSU | SSD | HDD | Some Fans | Monitor | Mouse | Keyboard
#9Cowboy082288(Topic Creator)Posted 10/24/2013 8:03:01 AM
TerraUniverse posted...
Kinect has already sold over 20 million units. It is very popular with families.

You're right that iOS games are easier to get into than console games. Xbox One is a machine that is specifically made for gaming and so a person who buys the Xbox One is buying it mainly as a gaming machine. This is unlike an iOS device which has a lot more features and uses for it.

That being said, the Kinect is very good for dancing games and fitness games, which is what a lot of girls and moms like to play with.

With Xbox One shipping with a Kinect, it means people are more willing to try Kinect games, which should help encourage the development of exclusive Kinect games.

To talk about your initial point, the iPhone will always be more accessible, because it's just a more popular device and easier to make a game for. The Xbox One requires that you have a console, and an HDTV, and an HDMI cable, and the space to move around. It requires more preparation. It's not as spontaneous as picking up an iOS device and quickly playing with it. With the gaming consoles, you have to go out of your way to pick up the consoles. With iOS devices, you are usually getting the devices for other things, and gaming is just something you do for fun. iOS devices are not designed to be gaming devices. That's not Apple's focus or priority, it's just a functionality that app-makers have been able to build around Apple. Plus the iTunes store has thousands of free games. Most of them are shovelware, but they're still free.


Your really loosing me with some of this stuff. I don't think making a game is inherently easier on an iPad than a console. It's all just working in the api. Making a 99 cent game for MS or Sony digital store should not be any more difficult than making a 99 cent game for iOS or android. HDMI cable?? Have a console?? Thats like saying 'The iPad requires that you have a tablet and a charging cable.'. Both these things come in the box when you buy it.

You said:
"With the gaming consoles, you have to go out of your way to pick up the consoles."

I don't understand what your saying. Yes you have to buy the console at a store or order it online.... how is this different from an iPad?

As for the other stuff... yeah I know that an iPad is not a dedicated gaming device, just like PCs are not. I don't think the X1 or PS4 will sale anywhere near as many units as an iPad. That is not what I'm talking about. I'm saying that the focus of development for kinect oriented games should be to create easily accessible games for a broader audience than just the 'hardcore' crowd.
---
PSN/XBL/Steam - cowboyoni
#10TerraUniversePosted 10/24/2013 8:49:32 AM
Cowboy082288 posted...


Your really loosing me with some of this stuff....


Angry Birds is much easier to make than most Xbox 360 games, including some Xbox Live Arcade games . I think you're talking about the "Playstation Minis" or "Xbox Live Indie Games" which are the equivalent to what most iPhone games are like and cost 99 cents, and while these are available on the Playstation and Xbox, they are not very popular, probably because most gamers aren't looking to play these games, when they can play more advanced games, and also because simple games are just not as fun to play on an HDTV sitting down. Most people aren't going to sit down, find the controller, boot up the console, go to the "mini-game" and play 2 hours of very casual mini-games. Part of the reason why people play iPhone games, is not because that's the best game they could think of playing, but it's more because of the circumstances that surrounds the iPhone. When you're out and about, and you want to quickly play a game for like 3 or 8 minutes at a time, it's fun to play a simple, yet addictive game. That's what makes it fun. It's something you can flip out quickly and then stop quickly a well. That's not how console gaming works. If you're going to sit in a couch and have a powerful system, you might as well play Halo or Call of Duty.

As far as HDMI cables and having a dedicated console, it is different from iOS device, because a lot of people are buying iPads for non-gaming reasons, whereas with a gaming console, you specifically buy it for gaming. This goes into the idea that buying a gaming console requires some preparation. You have to figure out what you need, how the online system works and what games you can buy, etc. It requires money and time to learn things, and then you have to develop the skills needed to learn how to console game. Buying an iPad is not like this at all. Most people aren't initially buying an iPad so they can game on it. They're buying it for other reasons. They were going to get an iPad/iPhone anyway, and the iTunes store just so happens to sell game apps, and that's why you buy Angry Birds. With console gaming, you have to be willing to spend hundreds of dollars on a device that you don't necessarily need and you may or may not like. Some people don't like spending 20 hours to complete a console game. Some people are not attracted to console gaming at all, I know a lot of girls that feel like it's a complete waste of time, and many adults feel this way too.

You don't need a gaming console, whereas with an iPad or iPhone, you have more uses for them, with the iPad being a web browser and mini-computer, and the iPhone is a phone, which most people see a use for. You don't have to go out of your way to get an iOS device, because Apple makes quality products that you are probably going to use anyway. Gaming consoles you have to go out of your way to get. Most non-gamers don't go out of their way to get it, unless there's a reason to get it, like the Wii. The Wii was a fad and a phenomenon and most people got it, played a couple of games on it and then didn't play it anymore.

I disagree that the Kinect is complicated. Kinect is the casual version of console gaming. I'm not sure why you're saying Kinect is very complex, because in fact, I think most Kinect games are quite accessible and intuitive. Maybe not to a toddler 2 year old, but definitely to a child or adult.

There is now an upgraded Kinect that is included with every Xbox One and this will help encourage families who may not otherwise think about getting a gaming console, to think about getting the Xbox One. A family will say, hey, if we're going to get a gaming console, we might as well get the one with the cool motion-sensing-thingee. I guess what I'm saying is that the Kinect IS a casual device, and it's not too complicated.