Should MS pack Kinect as standard with every XB3? *spawn
- Thread starter N2O
- Start date
Well, it's been argued that pubs/devs won't seriously support a peripheral that isn't included with every console. I would guess that a "killer app" would need to be planned from the start with Kinect functionality in mind. Perhaps that wouldn't happen if Kinect remains only an optional peripheral?
That development is typically 'me too' and hasn't supported controller based gaming (because MS have discouraged it AFAIUI). To get development of truly new, always present features, you need the hardware to be present. The investment in optional extras is always less as the returns aren't there. eg. If every console has Kinect 2, Halo and Gears and whatever will be designed around various natural interface additions. You play on the controller but the camera is following your head and face and voice and making game adjustments or control adjustment - whatever. These techs aren't going to be developed if during design phase the devs are thinking maybe no-one's going to shell out £150+ just for optional gameplay enhancements.
A whole new push in game interfaces needs full support, at the API level, the game design and TRC level, and the hardware level. If any of those is missing, you end up with another sixaxis, which is very expensive when you're talking about a 3D camera.
Generally I agree that publishers don't support peripherals and that's because peripherals rarely sell to enough of the userbase to warrant the investment. That's not really the case with Kinect though IMO. There are enough units out there to justify the investment if a publisher wishes to create a game for it. The problem is the lack of functionality IMO. If you're making any kind of complex game, you probably don't want to use Kinect as your primary input device. Even as a secondary or additional input device, it's use is questionable, at least judging by games like Steel Battalion. If the device worked better on more genres, I'm sure we would be seeing more support out of the expected genres.
Maybe I'm way off on this, but as long as the device and bundle sells well enough next gen, they wouldn't need to make it a standard pack in to receive support. Depending on the capabilities of Kinect 2.0, it may receive even more wide spread support if it's better tailored to handled those types of games, regardless if it was packed in with every SKU.
How I see it, and I'm curious to see some thoughts on why this is or isn't a good train of thought, is if MS markets the device properly, and it sells well, the support and investment will be there. By making it an optional SKU and accessory, they give themselves additional wiggle room regarding specs and/or prices and they give consumers options instead of forcing people not interested in Kinect to pay for it. I'm all about giving the people options, and if the Kinect bundles and accessories don't sell, then that could be a clear sign for MS to drop the device and invest their time/money elsewhere.
Edit:
Ok, I can see your point here. However sixaxis was included in every SKU and we didn't see support take off. Maybe you're trying to say it was missing on some other level.
I can't deny that I'm speaking from my personal view where I don't want a Kinect forced on me next gen, I don't care about kinect integration in future games, and I much rather wait until compelling software is there for a device before it's my only option when I want the platform. Including Kinect can also eat into the overall BOM for the system, which may effect the specs unless MS wish to take a bigger hit on the hardware (which sounds doubtful).
I still think we're seeing enough Kinect support now even though the device isn't standard on the 360 and as long as Kinect 2.0 is more capable, there's no reason not to include additional support if there is a market for it. However with Kinect being standard, it would be harder to tell or at least take longer to figure out if there is a viable market for games with Kinect support. As an optional pack in, both MS and the publishes can better gauge the public's interest in the device and invest accordingly.
Last edited by a moderator:
Sixaxis lacked imagination on the part of the devs, who failed to see and use its potential. they only really tried the obvious direct control things, instead of looking at extended control functions such as telling by how much the player was waving the controller around that they were trying to get their character to jump a little higher and so adjust the motion accordingly. Their are two aspects to game control. One is the player learning new skills to play the game. The other is the game making it as seamless as possible. Something like Tumble requires the player to have motor control skills but the intrinsic interface is natural and instantly used. Sixaxis could have added all sorts of control extras to conventional controls, like player dribbling skills in FIFA.
That's because you associate it with in-your-face games. What you do want is an amazing game experience that immersive and enjoyable, and presumably you can't get elsewhere (others you'd buy some other console much to MS's annoyance!). If Kinect can provide that experience in novel ways, then you won't begrudge its inclusion. The problem at the moment is a justified lack of faith that Kinect as a technology can bring anything worthwhile to core gamers.
Kinect support should be translucent and ubiquitous, reading people's natural interfacing with their games. We all interact with our games, cussing, smiling, frowning, and these cues could be read and used to make the whole thing more immersive, less frustrating at times, more complex at others, adapting to play to give the best possible game. If Kinect isn't a pack in and the console goes with monster hardware at a $400+ launch, that pushes the price of XB3+K2 to maybe $550 ($150 Kinect 2) which means a small market. And if the system is positioned at a $400 price for XB3+K2 but there's a no Kinect SKU, those wanting monster hardware will still complain while core gamers buy the cheap console thanks to their lack of faith in Kinect meaning Kinect never gets the support it needs to actually be made into something special.
This lack of faith is perhaps justified, and maybe Kinect will be in every box in XB3 and it'll sit mostly unused. That wouldn't be the first time such a thing happened. But if Kinect and console vision are ever to have a chance of getting anywhere, it needs to be packed in with every console, at least for a couple of years until it can be seen if it can't support itself and add value.
Exactly, and despite this failing, practically every bloody game released on consoles is a FPS.And it still is
So despite Kinect's clunkiness, there's still a good chance that 10 years from now, every game could be using it.
(((interference)))
Veteran
I somewhat disagree with this. I find it more comfortable to play FPSs on my 360 (and to a lesser degree, PS3) than my PC. The WASD and mouse combo gives me RSI and hand cramps quicker.
While aiming is less accurate than PC, it doesn't matter so much since everyone is saddled with the same controls, and it probably cuts down on all the sniping (though as numerous videos on YouTube or MLG can attest you can definitely be a crackshot with a console controller.)
Consoles also have full analog controls for character movement compared to the 8 directional digital control offered by the WASD combo, allowing for more complex strafe manouvers and fine control of movement speed.
And thumbsticks are much more natural for driving vehicles, flying planes/helicopters etc compared to a mouse and keyboard. So for FPSs with lots of vehicular gameplay like Halo or Battlefield, that might also be an important advantage.
...
On topic, I hope MS include Kinect with the 720 as that's the only way for it to get traction and get devs thinking seriously about how to integrate Kinect into games that rely on the normal controller..
Last edited by a moderator:
Agreed. Nintendo is killing itself with lackluster, infrequent software (from the POV of its new audience) and ADD-like obsession with 3D. Therefore there is no need for MS to spend any more resources on Kinect.
Look at how it was marketed, the Avatars, the games, everything. The thing was supposed to be a Nintendo-killer. First, it failed to kill Nintendo. Second, Nintendo is killing itself anyway. So what's the need? It's one more thing adding costs that probably has at best a marginal effect on their platform's popularity.
K&M would be infinitely superior than thumbsticks for controlling vehicles if it were implemented with the same total disregard for physics as it is for on-foot controls. Imagine being able to 180 a tank in a millisecond in Battlefield. Someone using a controller would get destroyed.(((interference))) said:
Kinect might have been conceived in response to the Wii motion controls, and yes, Nintendo might no longer be the same threat, however I think MS's true concern now is Apple with their heavily rumored voice/gesture-controlled Apple TV. From that perspective Kinect is an excellent head start in the "battle for the living room".
Total LTD sales of the Kinect are a rounding error in the kinds of sales targets Apple goes for with major-release products. Remember, the iPhone alone is a bigger business in revenue terms than all of Microsoft. Apple TV is selling ~4 million units a year, and Apple currently considers it a "hobby," not a flagship product. The only benefit Kinect gives MS a benefit is in internal skills and tech development. The next Xbox is going to be received by the market as a video game console. MS can put all the features they want in it, but it's going to be viewed as a game console and put up the sales numbers of a game console. And you don't really want to sell a game console to someone who won't buy games for it, since the hardware's usually a loss leader. I'm pretty sure Apple makes money on its hardware.
Anyway, judging by MS's complete inability to keep pace with Apple's development for the last few years, by the time they come up with their copycat product, it'll be the Zune of TV boxes, so it doesn't really matter.
Last edited by a moderator:
SlickShoesRUCrazy
Newcomer
Depends.
If they were to planning on packing in kinect with every xb3 sold, would that in turn mean that they had to limit the technology in the console in order to keep the price down for the consumer.
If they are going to sacrifice power in order to pack in kinect, then I would say it should not be packed in.
That being said, I am not a fan of kinect. I think it has been a horrible gaming peripheral and has better use in other situations then gaming, but just my opinion.
If they were to planning on packing in kinect with every xb3 sold, would that in turn mean that they had to limit the technology in the console in order to keep the price down for the consumer.
If they are going to sacrifice power in order to pack in kinect, then I would say it should not be packed in.
That being said, I am not a fan of kinect. I think it has been a horrible gaming peripheral and has better use in other situations then gaming, but just my opinion.
You know,except people's expectation or media's prediction,i didn't see many Kinect 2 rumors there,even the IllumiRoom still use Kinect 1(well,Kinect for windows)
Personally i start to doubt Kinect 2 will come with Durango at launch,mabye 1 or 2 years later?
Personally i start to doubt Kinect 2 will come with Durango at launch,mabye 1 or 2 years later?
Every 1st party will pointing at casual,BUT,they can also pointing at core in same time,it's not like they're very poor so they can only focus on casual or core market.
Prophecy2k
Veteran
Kinect IS a very important part of MS' strategy for Durango next-gen as with this gen.
However MS won't bundle Kinect with every Durango because not every user will want one, and frankly MS loves $$$ and there's little business sense in absorbing the divce cost in bundling. Face it... Kinect isn't a great device for gaming. Most casuals probably don't even care about it as a gaming device. However, for non-gaming applications devices like Kinect, guitar hero and Wii Fit balance boards have shown to be excellent for very specific applications that people will buy into and pay top dollar for a premium device.
We all think about Kinect as a gaming peripheral, and so we think for it to be useful for devs to target and maximise software development support it needs to be bundled. MS however think Kinect is great for dance and fitness apps, and superb for providing a premium multi-media entertainment experience that cannot be found elsewhere (hence its heavy integration into the 360's firmware).
Kinect 2.0 will be sold again as a stand-alone premium multi-media & entertainment experience enabling device, for Durango again at a premium price. Durango will have a Win8-based OS and thus all the Kinect integration enhancements will spill over into Win8 and thus Kinect and Kinect for windows will be one. Basically, I see Kinect being pushed as the touchscreen or Siri "new innovation" for win8 computing devices, and Durango will be the central driver for it.
So Kinect won't need to be bundled and will have no effect on the HW design of the console beyond the processing concerns it requires. Of this i'm practically certain.
If Microsoft want devs support Kinect, it must be bundle with the console. EDIT: But I agree with you in some points.
Last edited by a moderator:
It would be nuts, as it will increase the price by what? $100.
So what non party/fitness/dancing etc games does kinect do already? (as in the main form of control)
I remember here ppl were saying it was gonna help out with halo etc, how did that work out?
they'll be better served by knocking $100 off the price
So what non party/fitness/dancing etc games does kinect do already? (as in the main form of control)
I remember here ppl were saying it was gonna help out with halo etc, how did that work out?
they'll be better served by knocking $100 off the price
not going to be impossible, unless you have some device mounted on the head (glasses)
I admit it would be really cool, but then again Ive always loved VR, ever since I tried it back in 1994
RancidLunchmeat
Veteran
Agree with most everything you've said except your conclusion.
I think the majority of those in this thread are missing the point. Kinect isn't a gaming peripheral. If it can be used in "classic" games to some extent to improve the experience, fine. But it's main purpose is outside the box games and in terms of a unique user interface.
I still don't think people fully grasp that MS's purpose isn't to provide the best gaming experience, their goal is to be the content provider or the gateway between the user and the content provider. That's why they want to control the living room, and a stumbling block to controlling the living is the controller itself.
I don't know who the commercial is for that is running on the radio right now (Geiko?), where they talk about how TV has too many channels, too many options, too many remote controls, etc.. etc.. How technology is making things more difficult instead of making things easier.
Kinect exists to make things easier. It's a very large part of convincing consumers to use their Xbox as the brain of their home entertainment system. If you can use it also for games, great. But that's not their main focus. Just like the main focus of the Xbox itself isn't to be used for games.
It should absolutely be bundled with every NextBox, or at least all the ones available during the launch window. If they want to make two sku's later, it's possible.. but I think that's a losing proposition for MS because they want you to have the Kinect so you can best interact with Live so you can best purchase content from/through them.
I firmly believe that MS only offers games on the 360 in order to get users accustomed to their ecosystem so they can then sell you Live subscriptions and then provide you with the ability to purchase content through Live Music or Live Video. And when they make it so you can take all that content wherever you want via a Windows 8 PC or Surface Tablet or Windows 8 phone or the Xbox, consumers will see both the value proposition as well as the ease of use (purchase) with Kinect.
It's about access to content and Kinect will make it easier. Using the dualshock or controller S works, or maybe you spent extra $$ for a multimedia remote. But it's still a bunch of button pushing and a bunch of menu navigation that can be better accessed with simple, quick, and short hand movements and voice commands.
Well Kinect already has the IR laser and camera and much of the R+D costs has probably been paid back by the success of Kinect 1.0. If they can launch with say a 16MP sensor they ought to do well if they can do some kind of zoom and target the laser towards the eye.
The really good thing about Kinect with gesture plus eye tracking is that you can use a gesture to 'click' and use the eyes for pointing which would be far more efficient. To really move beyond being a killer microphone plus dance machine it would be well worth the effort even if they end up with very low margins to start with.
Similar threads
- Locked
