The Xbone

[ODX]

Hardcore games are what are primarily played on consoles...

Oh christ just stop. That's not the damn point at all, consoles are not built for just hardcore games even if that's what might appear to be played most. They are built for GAMES, aka, entertainment and fun. Microsoft notes this and is moving forward with the general gameplay experience by researching and experimenting further with Kinect.

You know game input won't just be done by a controller forever, right? We have to start somewhere, and I god damn applaud Microsoft for their efforts. My opinion still stands that Kinect is pretty cool and has tons of potential, Amit you're just being a little too stubborn to see it.

Project Spark is pretty interesting, but the whole idea of it is a gimmick: build your own games purely through Kinect 2.0.

The whole idea of it is a gimmick? How does that make any goddamn sense, it's a GAME, not a reality simulator, something that only Nintendo would usually make. It looks pretty damn awesome, and there's only so little we've seen so far. It's not all about using Kinect, you probably don't even have to use Kinect in the game at all. But seriously, how is it a gimmick? Was Little Big Planet a gimmick because it was just building levels? Because that's the impression I'm getting from you . (and we all know LBP was fucking awesome)

[ThePlague]

I can understand about the not being controlled with a controller for the future, but with kinect it's completely different. The future is in things like the oculus rift, which actually immerses you into the game. Up next would be controls based on sensory outputs, such as your mind. Yeah sure, the kinect can be included to handle things like your movement and shit like that, but if anything it will be in controls built into gloves, or weapon controllers. Something to further immerse you into the game. Like that walking pad thing that you strapped into and you could actually walk with it in the game, shit like that.

[kid908]

I can understand about the not being controlled with a controller for the future, but with kinect it's completely different. The future is in things like the oculus rift, which actually immerses you into the game. Up next would be controls based on sensory outputs, such as your mind. Yeah sure, the kinect can be included to handle things like your movement and shit like that, but if anything it will be in controls built into gloves, or weapon controllers. Something to further immerse you into the game. Like that walking pad thing that you strapped into and you could actually walk with it in the game, shit like that.

Last I checked, The Omni uses the kinect. the strap platform has no sensory. It's just solid for you to walk.

[Zeph]

Last I checked, The Omni uses the kinect. the strap platform has no sensory. It's just solid for you to walk.

Yeah, the kinect was used solely for lower body skeletal input to determine the equivalence of a joystick on a controller.
The strap was to keep people trying it from falling over and breaking the rig (something that happens when people lose physical orientation of their body in a headset).

[Donut]

I don't think anybody is arguing that the Kinect is useless. It seems to be just that people don't want to be forced to either use a Kinect or not be able to run their console at all. There's a couple good reasons for this:

1) It's another thing you need to stick on top of your TV setup, which can cause problems with some setups (e.g. flat screens)
2) It's an always-on camera and microphone sitting in your living room watching you game. It's pretty reasonable for people to be wary of that whether you personally are or not.
3) Microsoft's statement was that they wanted the Kinect to be necessary to game developers could assume the Kinect will be on every platform, and not have to worry about alienating potential customers due to hardware restrictions. This alone is an issue because now developers are inclined to do all sorts of unnecessary things with the Kinect.

All 3 of those things would be issues for me. I get that the target audience of the Xbox One wasn't just the hardcore demographic, and that a lot of people would love more "hands-free" Kinect games. I'm super excited to see what kind of new game play mechanics arise from the inclusion of the Kinect with every system. I just don't want to see it get involved in titles that it shouldn't be involved in, such as waving your hands to reload a gun or something. #3 is still sort of, kind of an issue since the Kinect is still included with the Xbox One, but I'd assume developers would take note of the public's preference to have it be optional and develop accordingly (i.e. be less inclined to needlessly use the Kinect).


tl;dr I want to see what new games and game play arises with the Kinect. I just don't want it ruining titles that don't need it, and I want the option to disable it if I'm not using it (which I already have). I think the majority of the people are arguing something similar.

[PlasbianX]

They've said you don't need kinect on at all times. I don't see why people are arguing that. I do feel people are arguing that kinect is useless though by making the argument that its going to be used for gimmicks.

[Donut]

Of course it will be used for gimmicks. Every other thing like that always is. Star Wars Kinect, for example. Same deal with the Wiimote. I haven't seem much meaningful gameplay innovation with that. Super Monkey Ball was cool as fuck with motion controls, but you could just as easily (and more precisely) control that with an analogue stick. It's the crazy, outside-the-box approaches to using the new technologies that I'm interested in. Like the MIT team that strapped a Kinect on a robot and had it generate 3d images of the room it was in.

The problem is that the majority of developers try to use the "traditional" approaches to game design to work with the new sensors, and of course that's not going to work well, because traditional approaches are designed around controllers with buttons. To properly utilize the Kinect, developers need to revolutionize how they design games. The problem is that a lot of publishers won't be willing to take a risk on a big, new IP designed around the Kinect, so they'll compromise by pushing the Kinect on an established IP. The problem there is that the IP has an established play style designed around the controller with buttons. Of course the Kinect will feel like a gimmick there. That's why opening the console to indie development is so important, because indie developers have a lot more room to experiment.

What I'm saying (and what I think most other people are trying to say) is that I don't want to see a new Banjo Kazooie game with a Kinect worked in. I want to see a new Banjo Kazooie with the traditional control it was designed around, and then I want to see a totally new idea that was build from the ground up around the Kinect.

[Amit]

Oh christ just stop. That's not the damn point at all, consoles are not built for just hardcore games even if that's what might appear to be played most. They are built for GAMES, aka, entertainment and fun. Microsoft notes this and is moving forward with the general gameplay experience by researching and experimenting further with Kinect.

I know there's no true way to know exactly what is the most played game on consoles, but in terms of online play, there is. According to Major Nelson and Microsoft, for the week of July 24th, 2013, the following were the most played games on XBOX LIVE:

• BlOps 2
• Minecraft
• FIFA 13
• MW3
• NBA 2K13
• GTA4
• ACII
• Halo 4
• BF3
• BlOps
• Skyrim
• MW2
• BL2
• Reach
• GoW3
• NCAA Football 14
• Spartacus Legends
• ACIII
• Forza 4
• Madden 13

16/20 games on that list can be considered "hardcore" games. Most of those games (or a game in their series) are also the best selling X360 games so far. And for over a year it's been those same games that have been top of the list.

Obviously, consoles aren't created just for those game alone, but those games are primarily what is played on the X360. Now whether you want to play the Kinect games or not, you have to make a choice. That choice is either to spend money on something that you know you will not use or to not purchase the XBOX at all. That's not really what you want to force on your consumers. But, I'm guessing that if Microsoft didn't make this decision, then the Kinect 2.0 wouldn't sell well enough. This way there's a 100% sales success rate for a decently expensive piece of non-essential hardware.

You know game input won't just be done by a controller forever, right? We have to start somewhere, and I god damn applaud Microsoft for their efforts. My opinion still stands that Kinect is pretty cool and has tons of potential, Amit you're just being a little too stubborn to see it.

To be clear, I'm not saying that the Kinect doesn't have any potential. Technologically, it's an impressive piece of hardware, but it's optimal match is not on the closed platform of the console. I'm not so delusional to think that we'll be using M/Kb and gamepads exclusively forever, but I think that the applications for Kinect on XBOX is limited. The Kinect 2.0 is used in the Virtuix Omni (Oculus Rift + low-friction foot platform + Kinect 2.0) for motion tracking and so far it's doing a damn great job. You make it sound as though Kinect 2.0 is the only thing reaching out to new ways of gaming when there actually working prototypes of many other awesome peripherals that actually do more for the game than Kinect. That's not to say that the tracking is inferior for some bullshit reason on the XBOX, but the potential for more advanced and innovative gaming is not possible on the XBOX because the software is not open the way it is on PC.

Your opinion stands, yes, as your own opinion. I'm not suppressing your right to that.

The whole idea of it is a gimmick? How does that make any goddamn sense, it's a GAME, not a reality simulator, something that only Nintendo would usually make. It looks pretty damn awesome, and there's only so little we've seen so far. It's not all about using Kinect, you probably don't even have to use Kinect in the game at all. But seriously, how is it a gimmick? Was Little Big Planet a gimmick because it was just building levels? Because that's the impression I'm getting from you . (and we all know LBP was fucking awesome)

Keyword: idea. The way Microsoft is showcasing Project Spark is like a gimmick. At least, that is the impression I have gotten with it, even if the game itself isn't a gimmick. I don't think anyone is stupid enough to expect a "reality simulator" as you put it. That's simply not possible due to a whole host of reasons. What sets LBP apart from Project Spark from the marketing perspective is that the main push of the game wasn't for it to be created using tools other than the controller. So far Kinect on the X360 has been used as a gimmick tool. While I believe that Kinect 2.0 can enhance Project Spark, I think Microsoft Studios is marketing the game a bit to much to push the Kinect 2.0. It's to the point where it becomes a gimmick.

I think you need to take a step back and stop taking my skepticism of Kinect 2.0's uses on the XBOX personally.

[Donut]

relevant:


Guy said he coded this entirely in C# using the Kinect SDK. Pretty cool stuff here.

[ODX]

Alright then, I see the errors of my ways and raise you one win/I understand so much better now as opposed to everything you said before which had me confused and angrified. Thank you for the super clarification really, I just thought Kinect was much better now and Modacity always seems to like bashing things so I tried to stand up for it. Oh well, I gotcha now.