Apparently kinect uses less than 1% of the 360's cpu
http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=258340
True and false. Don't read too much into percentages.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Apparently kinect uses less than 1% of the 360's cpu
http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=258340
True and false. Don't read too much into percentages.
I'm going to guess this is indirectly saying that your CPU load is going to depend on which features and how many features of Kinect you are using in your game.
Regards,
SB
Apparently kinect uses less than 1% of the 360's cpu
http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=258340
Yeah right, if that's true it probably uses 20% of the GPU!
Seriously though, if body tracking only used 1% of CPU time we would see a lot of core games slotting in some kind of gimmicky Kinect support like the Move enabled shooters on PS3.
The fact that it's not suggests that Kinect titles have to be built from the ground up to support it and that it incurs a fairly large performance penalty
They also use skeletal tracking.They just use the "depth buffer" from the camera to cut your silhouet from the room.I think he's working on that yoga game.He says proudly that they are the only one developper in the world doing that.
with that depth , they can filter out what's not you in the rgb video feed too.That's how they got the scarf.Pretty easy and fast signal processing.
Yes , but with a faster and much simpler way than with ms skeletal libs (they don't use Ms skeletal libs).They also use skeletal tracking.
If that's so, they could use background removal on PSEye a la Kung-Fu Live and have a PS3 version, which would make a lot more financial sense.Yes , but with a faster and much simpler way than with ms skeletal libs (they don't use Ms skeletal libs).
All is in the video link i posted.
Well, that's kinda cheating.The skeleton tracking has lag. Ubisoft have abandoned MS's Kinect skeleton tracking in favour of their own low-latency solution, which defeats in part the wonderfulness of Kinect. how much of their low-latency solution is dependent on the depth information, and how much could be achieved with a basic camera? If the later, Kinect ends up being overkill for this title.
This also means the converse, that skeleton tracking titles will have the higher latency, and titles with low latency aren't probably using that.
The Engadget link posted by LightHeaven shows the skeleton tracking lag, which doesn't look too bad until the movements get quite fast. It also shows a freaking-out skeleton mapping with the guy dressed in black, and the actual depth info is full of holes. It looks like clothing has quite an impact. That said, the 3D image is remarkably good. I'd love someone to create some object scanning system with this!
Of course, but that's missing the point entirely just to pick on a phrase. If everyone uses an optical solution to get low-lag Kinect gaming, what's the point in the depth perception, or certainly skeleton tracking? That's the major selling point of Kinect, and it's unfortunate to hear of a developer ignoring it. As a user experience that's valid, and I have no complaints about their choice. In terms of Kinect technology though, wondering about the future of input technologies, don't you consider it something of an eye-opener that the tooted skeleton tracking is being avoided to get low-latency input? I certainly do.What I was taught is that good programming is all about cheating.