- Status
Bunch of posts pertaining to PS4/X1 pros/cons moved to http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=63792 as they seemingly pertain to sales/choice... somehow. Instead of rumours.
Kinect never was required to play games.
They would never do that, I think.
Xbox One
with Kinect... without it to me it's like the value of every console and all the work engineers did on it is greatly deprecated.It's interesting to read or hear what other people think and some people who want it out express their opinion because they actually feel it's not for them. Then there are others who just want it out because since the DRM-thing worked they probably feel entitled to ask for more and more, til the console gets terribly unrecognisable. -which is obviously utterly uncalled for, abusive-
The first group I can understand because it's an actual choice. The others...I don't know. It seems to me that by doing so it would give those more radical people with a 'we are a hivemind' mentality undeserved credibility.
Do you work for ms? I'm not trying to be smart but I'm taking my cues from an interview with an ms guy who said it will be required vs what I hear on the enet from posters.
No platform owner is ever that draconian to require tons of extra work. You just end up with shitty Kinect functionality that will make everyone hate it.
Kinect is like cheesecake, best eaten a bit at a time, eating an entire cake will sour you on the experience. For most games it should be an ADDITIONAL input, not the only input.
No, I don't work for MS, Kinect was required to be plugged-in, at system level. Just take a look to the games, none of the games requires Kinect at gameplay EDIT: Except Kinect Sports Rivals.
Every first party game is required to use Kinect. They are not required to use only Kinect, but they must incorporate Kinect into their game in a non-trivial way.
I don't know about third parties, but there was talk of making Kinect support a TCR.
Well, they can comply using voice commands, I guess.
Well, it's easy to force your own studios to use it when you own them. There's no such thing as backlash. 3rd parties however would be far more difficult decision and would really come down to the strength of their SDK tools. History has shown that 3rd parties tend to rarely use such features well. I mean, the PS3 controller has Sixaxis, and I struggle to think of a good 3rd party game that makes use of it. Same with Wii MotionPlus.
If it's a TCR, they'll use it.
How well is a different question.
It would not be close to the most onerous TCR they have to comply with.
I generally don't like TCR's that dictate mechanics, but even without the TCR I could see 3rd parties at least playing with it. A lot would come down to how the lead designer perceived the device.
And it only takes one use that's critically acclaimed and everyone will feel it's necessary.
I think the future of this type of interface is in more subtle uses, not standing in front of a TV pretending to wave a sword around, question is if the technology is good enough yet.
(((interference)))
Veteran
No, Verge said their own sources have corroborated
the claims made in the pastebin about MS looking at time limits for sharing.
And really, it seems like the far more plausible scenario than sharing without any limits (besides 1 person playing a game at a time).
Except that it's been explicitly denied by 2 different MS execs on twitter.
No. The Verge's source(s) and the origin of this rumor are completely wrong.
Simple question: why on earth would anyone care if multiple people are playing a 45 minute demo at the same time? I'm not trying to insult anyone, but that just sounds stupid.
- Status
Similar threads
- Sticky