As a standard feature, Move would see cheaper production cost due to economy of scale, devs spending more time on Move solutions because its present in every box and Sony would more readily invest in improving the tech as its use expanded into the userbase.
Business Approach Comparison Sony PS4 and Microsoft Xbox
- Thread starter BRiT
- Start date
As a standard feature, Move would see cheaper production cost due to economy of scale, devs spending more time on Move solutions because its present in every box and Sony would more readily invest in improving the tech as its use expanded into the userbase.
I agree the cost scales but how much? A camera, move controller and nav unit are all integral to that application and again you still need a DS4 bc only the camera works well outside of that set up. That adds up....
This is a good post, I agree with your points here.
All you would need is a cam and if the Move/Nav setup actually provide greater utility thats indispensible, you could design the DS4 so that it splits apart.
You do realize in skyrims case kinect voice control was patched in after the games release .
If it was as simple as you seem to think why is not every game patched with voice controls being as a hell of a lot of gamers have mic's for online play .
To be fair, the $3 mic provides the same quality voice input. It's the software that makes the difference (every bit of voice control MS has with Kinect they could implement via headset. Kinect just enables 'hands-free' input, which requires all the fancy hardware and voice isolation software coupled with image tracking to pinpoint the origin point to listen to).
I don't need a fancy mic to do basic voice controls.... Which is the whole point of the discussion we've been having for the past page or so - what am I getting for my money and is it worth it...
Rather surprisingly this is not true unless it's position very close to the mouth, or there is a second mike to help cancel ambient noise. So probably a $10 mic.
Absolutely.
But I think voice input is just a part of what Kinect can offer.
I've become a big proponent of video chat since I started working remotely, it changes the dynamic of a conversation.
If the gesture recognition is good enough to identify relatively small motions while seated, I could see a number of things that could be compelling.
Gestures to direct computer controlled "buddies" for example, now obviously you can map those to a button, but it complicates the interface, and games already use too many of those.
I think the value of Kinect will be measured in augmenting controller based conventional games rather than full body control games, though I'm sure they will exist.
It could be a waste of $100 for MS to include kinect, but I wouldn't dismiss it out of hand, just because we haven't seen a compelling use yet. Putting in the box radically changes how it's viewed by designers, if it weren't in the box most designers wouldn't give it a second thought. With it there it becomes something that at least gets consideration.
No one wants to pay for it? There has to be an economic incentive to do this work, Skyrim was probably paid for by MS to showcase the technology.
His points stands, any mic can work. The magic is the software.
agree with this...the most compelling real aspect of Kinect sadly seems to boil down to voice commands. It seems like that could be done in a better, cheaper way.
I also think a camera, especially given MS skype tie ins now, is a good idea. Especially being cheap. A 2D camera is also dirt cheap. I think it's possibly better included for interactivity with other humans-they same reason FFC's are on tablets- than game commands,
The thing that seems of possibly dubious and adds great expense is motion control. It does have one possible payoff, casual/family games (which can mean greater console sales, but isn't really aimed at me). Will it be worth it?
I was sort of surprised we didn't see anything at E3 which spoke to need for Kinect 2.0 but the reality is MS was likely trying to play to the core market and felt that Kinect would/could be a distraction. Hopefully we'll get more details in the coming months, I am sure they have thought thru some of this as the decision to include it was not taken lightly. The amount of services and features of XB1 do make marketing it a little tougher and it seems MS is struggling a bit with message but I'm confident that they will sort things out on both fronts.
I announced this back at E3. Where were you then? LOL
http://forum.beyond3d.com/showpost.php?p=1750274&postcount=443
Tommy McClain
My guess? Why include a piece of shit $4 mic when Kinect with noise-cancelling mics will probably do a better job? $4 * 10 million = $40 million = production costs of a game (and yes, EVERY PENNY COUNTS, even to a multi-billion dollar company).
Did anyone seriously use the included shit mics that the 360 came with anyway? If you were really into voice chat, you upgraded to something a lot better like this Xbox 360 Wireless Headset.
I did for a better part of this generation. Eventually I did move to the official wireless headset, but one I dislike about it is the battery. Always keeping it on charge was a pain & it eventually would reduce its capacity after awhile. The old trusty mic came in handy more than a few times. I might reconsider next time getting something that supports both a rechargeable battery & cheap user replaceable batteries, kinda like the wireless controller did. It's great to have choice.
Tommy McClain
I've used it many of times. I didn't think it was all that bad, but then again I wasn't listening to it either. LOL If we ever play something together I'll use it so you can hear what it sounds like.
Tommy McClain
Agreed i never liked people's voices blaring over my surround system, I much prefer them isolated to a chat headset. Maybe its because the XBL chat quality was lower quality and that, imo, detracts from high quality game sounds/audio.
Similar threads
