Unable to see Technical Advances due to Fanboy Syndrome

[SlimJim]

I am curious if you felt the same way about Kinect back at the reveal? Or did you warm up to the Kinect after using the Xbox One console?

Great point. To me, it seems like 2010 all over again. Myself, I find the concept of Kinect extremely exiting, but, thinking about it... Did the Kinect 1 not do all those things as well? The human interaction. Face-login can happen with a cheap lo-fi webcam/frontcam on an android phone, so there is nothing even in the Xbox1 (2001) that couldn't handle that.
The voice stuff was all present in Kinect 1 as well.

So tech wise, it's not that 'new'

 

[BRiT]

Great point. To me, it seems like 2010 all over again. Myself, I find the concept of Kinect extremely exiting, but, thinking about it... Did the Kinect 1 not do all those things as well? The human interaction. Face-login can happen with a cheap lo-fi webcam/frontcam on an android phone, so there is nothing even in the Xbox1 (2001) that couldn't handle that.
The voice stuff was all present in Kinect 1 as well.

So tech wise, it's not that 'new'

I suggest you check out in more detail what the new Kinect on XB1 brings to the table. There are numerous improvements and entirely brand new experiences the new version has over the old version.

Also, your post reads like this "The Voodoo 1 video card could render pixels and triangles, so since then the R9 290x tech wise it's not that 'new' ".

 

[SlimJim]

I suggest you check out in more detail what the new Kinect on XB1 brings to the table. There are numerous improvements and entirely brand new experiences the new version has over the old version.

Also, your post reads like this "The Voodoo 1 video card could render pixels and triangles, so since then the R9 290x tech wise it's not that 'new' ".

No it's more like:
"The Ati radeon 9600 has about the same feature set as the radeon 9800xt turbo pro 512MB Overclock edition, tech wise it's not that 'new'"

Also, I don't think people stopped buying games for the Kinect 1 because the of it's resolution or reaction time.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

No it's more like:
"The Ati radeon 9600 has about the same feature set as the radeon 9800xt turbo pro 512MB Overclock edition, tech wise it's not that 'new'".

Kinect and Kinect 2 use completely different depth sensing systems. It's not comparable to 9600 vs 9800 xt turbo. It's more like Graphic Synthesiser vs Xenos. Yes, they both put coloured triangles on the screen, but Xenos does it in a far better way.

Kinect 2 is a remarkable piece of technology. It just doesn't have the software to show it off to the
self-confessed fanboys who can't see it for what it is. And that software might never happen - I've been openly pessimistic about the new-wave devices. However, the technology is amazing and that's the bit of interest to us in this Technology forum, in a thread about XB1's Technology.

 

[SlimJim]

Kinect and Kinect 2 use completely different depth sensing systems. It's not comparable to 9600 vs 9800 xt turbo. It's more like Graphic Synthesiser vs Xenos. Yes, they both put coloured triangles on the screen, but Xenos does it in a far better way.

Kinect 2 is a remarkable piece of technology. It just doesn't have the software to show it off to the
self-confessed fanboys who can't see it for what it is. And that software might never happen - I've been openly pessimistic about the new-wave devices. However, the technology is amazing and that's the bit of interest to us in this Technology forum, in a thread about XB1's Technology.

They both deliver a xxx * xxx resolution (320*240 vs 640 * 480) with a depth value, so I thought the 'were the same'.

Btw I was super psyched when Kinect 1 hit, because of the promise/concept that it would enhance 'normal' games. I just think the Kinect 1 is never fully realised, so that is why I am skeptical towards the new one. If they cut the reaction time from 66ms to 16ms, that's a really big difference (maybe more than the 9600 vs super 9800 which I described), but the game Kinect Adventures (I think) was fun regardless. I don't think it will be beter on the new one.

Same with 6 player tracking vs 2. I don't think that people thought "just dance only supports 2 people, well then, I don't want it!" and the same with the resolution buffer: it was adequate for full body tracking.

So still, I don't believe a single thing has been shown (outside of more people tracking maybe, or faster response) that could not have been done on the Kinect 1.

edit: just found this on google, it's more articulate so I hope you understand where I am coming from:
http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/156436-kinect-for-the-xbox-one-sensor-revolution-or-marketing-hype

 

[Shifty Geezer]

They both deliver a xxx * xxx resolution (320*240 vs 640 * 480) with a depth value, so I thought the 'were the same'.

One infers depth from a projected pattern. The other measures depth by measuring the time if takes a photon to reach the surface. It's also one of the best TOF sensors in existence, if not the best (certainly under $thousands), going by other sensors I've looked up that have a tiny fraction of the resolution of K2 (like 160x120).

 

[BRiT]

SlimJim, please realize you're talking about the perceived applications of technology. That is not entirely what the technology forum is about. You're free to have those close minded perceptions but don't go polluting and derailing the technology discussions with them.