The Kinect USP Hypocrisy

#1SigmaLongshotPosted 5/11/2014 4:53:56 AM
A topic that comes up constantly these days on this board (whether legitimately or via thinly-veiled, bottom-feeder trolling), is one that has two bullet-points in direct contradiction to one another.

"Kinect should be optional, then I'd buy an Xbox One".

But the topic circles and self-destructs when considering what that would result in.

Effectively, this would mean removing the main USP (unique selling point) of the product; akin to demanding a Mario Kart sans weapons to be more like Gran Turismo.

"But Mario Kart isn't SUPPOSED to be Gran Turismo. They're SUPPOSED to be unique, because people like different experiences!"
, you orate with disdain. And to that, I reply... exactly.

The topics get into contradiction stations when the person states, " I know it would just be a weaker PS4 then, but..." - then what, you're desperate to then purchase an inferior version of a currently-existing product, just for the ability to see both products in a more obvious, comparable niche together? Would you not rather purchase each product for the cool things unique to each, rather than all the things they have in common?

It's not unique to the Xbox One; I've heard people say they'd buy a Wii U "if it had a regular pad". So what, an even weaker version of a weaker version of a PS4?

I finally have all three current consoles, and now that I do, I've found I'm less harsh on Kinect, the Gamepad, the quirks and features used as ammo against peer consoles by fanboys. In fact, I actively embrace and enjoy having three utterly unique consoles.

So, why destroy a console's unique identity for the sake of arbitrary parity, of bland neutrality, between them?
---
Double Jump Game Comics: http://doublejump.thecomicseries.com/
#2L4YER_CAKEPosted 5/11/2014 4:59:45 AM
...because some people arent interested in kinect motion games and might consider buying the technically inferior x1 for their own unique stable of games at a cheaper price?
---
Braid. Save the princess. Contemplate the world. Save yourself.
#3AnakeriePosted 5/11/2014 4:59:50 AM
No everyone has doting parents to buy them toys. 100 bucks is as chunk of change for some folks and many feel its an unnecessary expense for a periphrral they just don't want.
---
GT: CrampedSultana PSN: Ana Kerie
Pawn: Zarianna. CARPE LAMA GLAMA
#4GeistPosted 5/11/2014 5:04:48 AM
People who claim they would buy a Kinectless XB1 are lying. If there was one, they would just be complaining about something else. Ignore them TC, they are not worth any ones time.
---
For I am the Kwisatz Haderach!
#5CharadeSmithPosted 5/11/2014 5:08:13 AM
SigmaLongshot posted...

Effectively, this would mean removing the main USP (unique selling point) of the product


what..?

I'm just going to assume this is a troll topic
---
Master! We are in a tight spot!
#6SigmaLongshot(Topic Creator)Posted 5/11/2014 5:15:40 AM
First, price was the issue; "Kinect-free means cheaper, and if that happened I'd be able to afford it!" - then the price went down and it seemed the Kinect grudge only heightened.

I simply can't see why, now that the price has lowered, it's still an incredible sticking point. Like maintaining spite solely for the sake of continuing a stance that benefits nobody, not least your own self..
---
Double Jump Game Comics: http://doublejump.thecomicseries.com/
#7CharadeSmithPosted 5/11/2014 5:17:54 AM
SigmaLongshot posted...
First, price was the issue; "Kinect-free means cheaper, and if that happened I'd be able to afford it!" - then the price went down and it seemed the Kinect grudge only heightened.

I simply can't see why, now that the price has lowered, it's still an incredible sticking point. Like maintaining spite solely for the sake of continuing a stance that benefits nobody, not least your own self..


If the price goes down while still keeping the Kinect, it means that the price could go further down without kinect. Lowering the price isn't enough, the Kinect needs to go too. If people don't want it they shouldn't have to pay 1 cent for it.
---
Master! We are in a tight spot!
#8TruthAndJusticePosted 5/11/2014 5:19:59 AM
You're missing one large point, and that's exclusives. Unless the Kinect was something that was revolutionarily integral to these "must-have" exclusive games (such as Titanfall, Sunset Overdrive etc.), there's no reason to have a kinect (if you're not interested in it) if you just want to play those exclusive.

And perhaps, some people don't want to justify spending the current price of the Xbox One to play a couple of exclusive, but may think about it if the price was lowered due to a peripheral they're not interested in being omitted.

So in this case, the Kinect isn't the USP to them, rather it's the exclusives that are the USP for the Xbox One.
#9L4YER_CAKEPosted 5/11/2014 5:24:02 AM
Furthermore, if you think principle shouldn't play into one's purchasing decisions, then we must just be very different consumers. I like having choices and options in my purchases and while I'm no longer butthurt at the terrible X1 reveal or the Mattrick attack at E3 I still feel like mandatory kinect purchase for 100 dollars more is a dealbreaker for me. It makes me feel wary to trust them.

I mean, 1st the kinect and always online are hardlined into the system and cannot be removed then suddenly always online is off the table and you never have to hook up the camera if you don't want to...but they'll still make you buy it.
---
Braid. Save the princess. Contemplate the world. Save yourself.
#10spacejamjordanzPosted 5/11/2014 5:43:31 AM
There are still plenty of gamers that want to play Xbox, but could care less about Kinect.
---
"You know you've spotted a fanboy when they simply can not concede that anything is worthwhile on the other console"~ Evel138