I never liked Kinect. It was always so clunky and didn`t seem useful to a game with any real depth. The head, hands and fingers are where the moneys at, that`s where all our most precise movements are made. Kinect struggled so much with any of those appendages. Kinect II on the other hand hopefully can. If it can, having it packed in is awesome.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
A lot of people seem really upset about Kinect 2.0
- Thread starter DocSeuss
- Start date
Ban Puncher
Member
Kinect is more of a useless piece of shit than R.O.B.
At least I could use the latter in epic battles with my Transformers and Legos.
moozoom
Member
Kinect is probably the less used and least working electronic device we've ever bought, and we've a lot of stupid gaming stuff/gadgets.
> I don't live in a loft, but in a parisian appartment and even if the living room is not tiny, kinect wants me to move all my furniture so it can register my feet. I tried one time to push the couch in another corner (that means moving the table, chairs and putting it all against the bookshelves ) and it finally saw my limbs. The problem was that it asked me to jump back during a game, and I was already with my back on the wall. Changing games and having to re-calibrate is a fucking bore.
> Voice commands barely works in languages other than English, and having to repeat several times a command is stupid when you can push a button to do the same thing instantly. Besides having to say "X_BOX" before a command is silly and makes me feel like a Dalek.
> The only game I thought I'd like with Kinect was Child of Eden, and I was incredibly disappointed. The lag, and the way you fire missiles by doing a "kamehameha" movement made me stop playing after a few levels. Just selecting levels by waving the hand wasn't really working and was simpler to do on the pad.
If they make it work flawlessly and actually make stuff easier to do than pushing a button, this technology could be interesting, but so far I prefer pointing at things with the wiimote or move controller.
> I don't live in a loft, but in a parisian appartment and even if the living room is not tiny, kinect wants me to move all my furniture so it can register my feet. I tried one time to push the couch in another corner (that means moving the table, chairs and putting it all against the bookshelves ) and it finally saw my limbs. The problem was that it asked me to jump back during a game, and I was already with my back on the wall. Changing games and having to re-calibrate is a fucking bore.
> Voice commands barely works in languages other than English, and having to repeat several times a command is stupid when you can push a button to do the same thing instantly. Besides having to say "X_BOX" before a command is silly and makes me feel like a Dalek.
> The only game I thought I'd like with Kinect was Child of Eden, and I was incredibly disappointed. The lag, and the way you fire missiles by doing a "kamehameha" movement made me stop playing after a few levels. Just selecting levels by waving the hand wasn't really working and was simpler to do on the pad.
If they make it work flawlessly and actually make stuff easier to do than pushing a button, this technology could be interesting, but so far I prefer pointing at things with the wiimote or move controller.
Basically what I wanted to say. It's completely worthless to gamers and I don't want it in my house or inflating the cost of the system even though it's (rumored to be) weaker than PS4 and packing this in is a large reason why.
It's simple, really. I don't like motion controls and I damn sure don't want to play games by flailing my arms around and jumping around the room. I have no problem with it being an optional add-on for those who do find that enjoyable, but I will have a problem if it is shoved into every game and has to be on to even run the next Xbox.
This. I'm really not convinced I have the *space* for it, not without planning to shift a lot of furniture around. This may be an inaccurate stereotype - and I fully acknowledge that fact - but it feels like a product designed around large American houses.
I actually have no objection to motion controls, and I'd love to be able to use Kinect, but since it also tracks your lower body, it's much more demanding on space than Move and Wiimote. At least, that's the possibly-inaccurate impression I get.
I don't think people are "upset", they're simply saying they don't want to be forced to pay for Kinect 2 to buy the Xbox 3. Thats really simple.
Frankly though I can't wait to see what completely fabricated and impossible to live up to Kinect 2 "demos" we get at the reveal. Kinect 1 was sold on a massive pile of lies which doesn't help its reputation.
Frankly though I can't wait to see what completely fabricated and impossible to live up to Kinect 2 "demos" we get at the reveal. Kinect 1 was sold on a massive pile of lies which doesn't help its reputation.
This is exactly what I mean. That was 8 years ago, since then people have become accustomed to buying yearly updates to the same phone at that $600 a pop.
Going cheap like $300-400 will only bring problems in the future...
A decent PC still runs you about $600, you can't pay that for a console that will last 8 years?
ShiroAmakusa
Member
Well, besides the usual haters, tastes are different. Fair enough. My Kinect is being used mostly at parties and of course there are always some people who just don't want "to make a fool of oneself" in front of a TV, while everybody else is having a blast. 
As for as I'm concerned, I'm very exited for Kinect 2.0. But if you talk about Kinect 2.0, why don't you talk about IllumiRoom as well?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoUGRGjG07E
As for as I'm concerned, I'm very exited for Kinect 2.0. But if you talk about Kinect 2.0, why don't you talk about IllumiRoom as well?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoUGRGjG07E
I have had a kinect since launch and it has easily failed on ever level possible for me.
You have to be 8 foot from the TV standing or sitting straight up. I usually play games laying back in a recliner.
I have the voice commands a try me3. The kinect kept picking up commands from the dialog in the game.
Nope I don't care about kinect at all.
You have to be 8 foot from the TV standing or sitting straight up. I usually play games laying back in a recliner.
I have the voice commands a try me3. The kinect kept picking up commands from the dialog in the game.
Nope I don't care about kinect at all.
I dont have enough room for a kinect.
That and i dont like it , my freind has the kinect , and i was utterly not impressed.
I also have the ps move and dont like it much either , i have enough room to play like killzone with it but not the fight etc ...
The idea of having it bundled with every console is good as it will have a lot of support , but bad at the same time as it will force people to use it.
I wouldnt mind if i could just not plug it in , but it needs to be on and calibrated for the console to even boot , that is really stupid.
Looks like i might actually skip the xbox over this , sadly.
That and i dont like it , my freind has the kinect , and i was utterly not impressed.
I also have the ps move and dont like it much either , i have enough room to play like killzone with it but not the fight etc ...
The idea of having it bundled with every console is good as it will have a lot of support , but bad at the same time as it will force people to use it.
I wouldnt mind if i could just not plug it in , but it needs to be on and calibrated for the console to even boot , that is really stupid.
Looks like i might actually skip the xbox over this , sadly.
thomasmahler
Moon Studios
I guess it's a little bit shortsighted that we'd condemn the idea behind Kinect completely just because Kinect 1.0 wasn't very precise. Let's say the tech works perfectly - if that'd be the case, you could add interesting features like head tracking and so on to existing games that are being controlled with the controller without hurting the game.
Yeah, you'll probably never play a 2d Shoot em Up JUST with Kinect, but I think as an addition to classic controls it CAN be a very powerful device, if it becomes more accurate now.
Yeah, you'll probably never play a 2d Shoot em Up JUST with Kinect, but I think as an addition to classic controls it CAN be a very powerful device, if it becomes more accurate now.
megashock5
Member
Exactly. Use the current model and offer two SKUs, one with Kinect and one without and I think all of the complaints will go away. It's simply people not wanting to pay for something they don't have interest in using.
megashock5
Member
For one thing, the economy isn't much better now than 8 years ago and it didn't work then.
Also, PCs (and tablets, for that matter) serve more purposes than game consoles. As far as phones go, these days it's hard for people in the workforce to get by without them. It's become standard issue for doing business, and therefore not as much a luxury item as a game machine.
I have never been impressed with the Kinect.
Yeah, this pretty much sums it up. If they can really nail all bodily movement, I'll buy two. A 1:1, head tracking, wrist tracking, momentum calculating boxing and/or golf game would be fantastic. That's really the only two games I'd want out of this thing; anything else would just be icing on the cake.
Yeah, this pretty much sums it up. If they can really nail all bodily movement, I'll buy two. A 1:1, head tracking, wrist tracking, momentum calculating boxing and/or golf game would be fantastic. That's really the only two games I'd want out of this thing; anything else would just be icing on the cake.
I honestly think that's what they will do. Everything else just sounds a very bad idea.
Interfectum
Gold Member
As probably said in this thread:
- Forcing Kinect as a pack-in will raise the price of the overall package thus causing MS to potentially make sacrifices elsewhere (system power, included goods, etc).
- MS is not making Kinect 2.0 for consumer benefit. It has a lot of advertising and licensing perks that publishers could use should MS be brave enough to enable it.
- Kinect may be decent for certain games but the games I'm interested in, the reason I even enjoy this hobby in the first place, are games that Kinect will ever be able to do well.
- If Kinect is simply used as a mic 90% of the time they could easily include a mic in the controller or on the console itself. So the whole "bu bu voice commands" means shit to me because it could be easily done without Kinect.
- Forcing Kinect as a pack-in will raise the price of the overall package thus causing MS to potentially make sacrifices elsewhere (system power, included goods, etc).
- MS is not making Kinect 2.0 for consumer benefit. It has a lot of advertising and licensing perks that publishers could use should MS be brave enough to enable it.
- Kinect may be decent for certain games but the games I'm interested in, the reason I even enjoy this hobby in the first place, are games that Kinect will ever be able to do well.
- If Kinect is simply used as a mic 90% of the time they could easily include a mic in the controller or on the console itself. So the whole "bu bu voice commands" means shit to me because it could be easily done without Kinect.
i dont have to use the pad on my wiiu?
pretty sure zombiu is not playable without it, and thats the issue
its gonna force a lot of games to shoehorn kinect controls in them that i would otherwise want to play
i refuse to use motion controls
Deadly Cyclone
Pride of Iowa State
You do realize it wouldn't be using Kinect 1 right? The second iteration should have a processor and work much much better.
I think people are imagining Kinect 1 being forced on them when it'd really be a vast hardware improvement in Kinect 2.
Lets see how much improved it is first. From the leaks the number of joints are hardly increased, but who knows what it really can do. I HOPE it's far better and less of a hassle to set-up accordingly.
I don't really see what can enhance Kinect to tangibly improve gaming experiences, so far from what we've seen the main accomplishments of Kinect for 'hardcore' gamers generally boil down to advanced voice recognition in titles like Mass Effect 3. Many of the hardcore titles like Steel Battallion were terrible, with only Dance Central and Child of Eden really standing out for the device. Then there's also the added drawback of increased system price, use of resources and all of the other shit.
I'll wait and see what the next iteration is like, but from what has been rumored, this is textbook, incompetent Microsoft, across the board.
I'll wait and see what the next iteration is like, but from what has been rumored, this is textbook, incompetent Microsoft, across the board.
The hardware was terrible. Plain and simple. It could not deliver on its promises in any meaningful way.
The only useful feature, voice recognition, is something that could have been done with any microphone (after all, the 360 hardware itself is handling the processing).
I also don't really much care for controller free gaming as it lacks any sort of tactile feedback. I'm not really sure what Kinect can bring to most gaming experiences.
If the technology improves a GREAT deal it could be a neat addition to the machine but it's not there yet and I don't think it will revolutionize anything.
The only useful feature, voice recognition, is something that could have been done with any microphone (after all, the 360 hardware itself is handling the processing).
I also don't really much care for controller free gaming as it lacks any sort of tactile feedback. I'm not really sure what Kinect can bring to most gaming experiences.
If the technology improves a GREAT deal it could be a neat addition to the machine but it's not there yet and I don't think it will revolutionize anything.
I don't think it's that hard to understand.
Some gamers just don't like motion controls, or anything beyond a controller and screen for their gameplay experience. So if it's true that the Kinect has to always be connected in order for the system to work, I think the fear is - there won't be an option to shut it off. That the system will require you to use the Kinect (obviously this is all assumption/speculation).
But that's why it's getting so much backlash.
Some gamers just don't like motion controls, or anything beyond a controller and screen for their gameplay experience. So if it's true that the Kinect has to always be connected in order for the system to work, I think the fear is - there won't be an option to shut it off. That the system will require you to use the Kinect (obviously this is all assumption/speculation).
But that's why it's getting so much backlash.
3rdamention
Member
Well if the rumors are correct, it is bundled in every box, meaning everyone is paying for it whether they want it or not. Also, always having to be connected is a bit frustrating. What if it breaks, or falls off the TV Stand, and you cannot play your Xbox anymore till it is fixed?
Those are two complaints I see a lot, and those have nothing to do with how it works, how it is integrated, or how it has improved. I just don't think some people want it forced on them.
Those are two complaints I see a lot, and those have nothing to do with how it works, how it is integrated, or how it has improved. I just don't think some people want it forced on them.
Just because there is a market for kinect doesn't mean they have to force it onto everyone else that has absolutely 0 interest in it.
I don't want or need voice commands, i don't want or need motion controls. I want to sit down and play my game and not have to yell at my TV.
Alx
Member
You can still do that.
There are many things on my laptop that I don't use : SD card reader, embedded cam, bluetooth connectivity... I still don't question the fact those are common features of a standard config.
This.
Anything that forces motion control is trash imo. Wii, Move, Kinect are all equally worthless to me, no bias
plutoknight
Member
Kinect as a feature is cool.
Kinect as a mandatory gate-keeping mechanism ("Only you can use this machine!") is not cool.
I don't trust MS to keep it as the first thing without figuring out how to turn it into the second, or beyond (I'm sure we've seen the patent of MS wanting to identify who is in a room watching content, and CHARGING for them.)
Kinect as a mandatory gate-keeping mechanism ("Only you can use this machine!") is not cool.
I don't trust MS to keep it as the first thing without figuring out how to turn it into the second, or beyond (I'm sure we've seen the patent of MS wanting to identify who is in a room watching content, and CHARGING for them.)
Omegasquash
Member
I've had loads of fun with my kinect, and some frustrating experiences as well. I hope that they improve it, and look forward to hearing about it from early adopters.
JimiNutz
Banned
Microsoft have got a huge task ahead of them if they are going to reverse the negative perception associated with Kinect.
At the moment version 1 of the device has done nothing to convince me that the device is ever going to appeal to me.
I don't have the space to stand and play, so I will need a device that accurately tracks finger, hand, head movement etc. so that I can use it while sitting down (preferably in conjunction with some kind of physical controller).
If the device is going to come as standard then MS need to prove that it is more than just a novelty or risk the console being viewed as a toy.
I am yet to play a single game that greatly benefitted from motion controls or voice commands (on the 360) and really MS need to really innovative games that are only possible with Kinect 2.
At the moment version 1 of the device has done nothing to convince me that the device is ever going to appeal to me.
I don't have the space to stand and play, so I will need a device that accurately tracks finger, hand, head movement etc. so that I can use it while sitting down (preferably in conjunction with some kind of physical controller).
If the device is going to come as standard then MS need to prove that it is more than just a novelty or risk the console being viewed as a toy.
I am yet to play a single game that greatly benefitted from motion controls or voice commands (on the 360) and really MS need to really innovative games that are only possible with Kinect 2.
I'm not that worried either, because once everything is actually announced, you have the option whether to buy or not buy something. So I figure, if MS is really going to go THAT bold and force Motion Controls, then those that don't like Motion controls don't have to buy an Xbox. Choices are a good thing.
I have a very small area I use downstairs for gaming both console and PC. Basically if I were to stand up in front of my TV and move over to the left 2 or 3 feet I would hit a wall. I haven't tried Kinect down here but from what I've read my setup wouldn't work with it. That is why I am leary of it personally. I'm also not a huge fan of motion controls in general.
NervousXtian
Thought Emoji Movie was good. Take that as you will.
I love the idea of the Kinect.. just MS released a beta version that didn't have the tracking that was powerful enough.
Hopefully this version will be the goods.
Hopefully this version will be the goods.
It's a Wii U situation basically. GAF in general seems to think that the dual stick controller is the absolute end of the road of input evolution for video games.
That and they're probably all assuming it'll be just like the original Kinect -- used solely on its own. I think Microsoft would be crazy to not allow Kinect 2.0 to be used as an addition to the standard controller instead of a replacement of it.
That and they're probably all assuming it'll be just like the original Kinect -- used solely on its own. I think Microsoft would be crazy to not allow Kinect 2.0 to be used as an addition to the standard controller instead of a replacement of it.
Wait, can somebody give me like a super-quick some up of these Kinect 2.0 rumors?
But yeah, if it was egregious then there's always Sony.
There is no rumor suggesting motion controls will be forced. That is just the speculation/fear of some gamers. The only rumor is that in order for the system to function, Kinect must always be connected.
I was just saying, if they do in fact force motion controls (again, 100% speculation) - then people have the choice before launch, to decide if they want the system or not. I was just using an extreme situation. I will say though, I do personally find it odd that Kinect must always be connected (if true) to work. Why would they do that, and then have an option to turn off? I guess to encourage more people to use it. Maybe they figure, if Kinect is always connected, those that don't like the feature (or who are lukewarm to it) will eventually try it out.
Oh...well then that's definitely shitty. That seems like way too dumb a move, but like you said before, there are other choices so I'm not too worried.
Makes sense, for ad placement research. Scan the environment, scan the people, do analysis and target advertisements to them. This is scary and nobody should support this.
If Kinect ire required for the machine to function I'd suggest everyone boycott it.
I don't mind having the Kinect 2.0. I am just not convinced that it has a real benefit to games, and nothing I have seen in the past 2 years of Kinect 1.0 has convinced me otherwise.
However, I also see no reason to criticize people who are not so enthused about this development. People also forget that the Kinect is not an unknown quantity. This is an evolution of an existing device that people already experienced for themselves, and they've had plenty of time to judge whether they like it or not. You cannot deny that the Kinect has shifted resources and focus away from the more traditional games that these people have enjoyed more.
However, I also see no reason to criticize people who are not so enthused about this development. People also forget that the Kinect is not an unknown quantity. This is an evolution of an existing device that people already experienced for themselves, and they've had plenty of time to judge whether they like it or not. You cannot deny that the Kinect has shifted resources and focus away from the more traditional games that these people have enjoyed more.
Well played.
Well my take (which is what I posted above), is that MS is just forcing it to be connected, in the hopes that those who are lukewarm to it, will maybe eventually come around to it by trying it. And consumers are more likely to try something, if it has to be connected (vs. just leaving it in the box).
But I've read posts on here talking about Data Mining and scanning rooms - that that is apart of the actual OS itself. That's even worse. I hope that shit isn't true.
i'm not a kinect or motion controller gamer and would rather have the resources be dedicated elsewhere (more power, cheaper price) but i'm not ready to write off kinect 2.0 just yet.
not quite worst case scenario - i see a more functional, near flawless kinect experience. for me that will translate to some nifty UI interaction with the OS and games, and possibly some fun gaming experiences in its own right. mostly small app stuff and xbla, but i'd kill for a disc golf game that tried to accurately recreate the sport. also, ensuring everyone has one may lead to interesting joint uses with a controller.
most of all though, i think with the console designed with it in mind, i'm willing to bet there will be all sorts of kinect uses no one has imagined yet, and that has me kind of excited.
not quite worst case scenario - i see a more functional, near flawless kinect experience. for me that will translate to some nifty UI interaction with the OS and games, and possibly some fun gaming experiences in its own right. mostly small app stuff and xbla, but i'd kill for a disc golf game that tried to accurately recreate the sport. also, ensuring everyone has one may lead to interesting joint uses with a controller.
most of all though, i think with the console designed with it in mind, i'm willing to bet there will be all sorts of kinect uses no one has imagined yet, and that has me kind of excited.
Similar threads
- Poll