• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Gizmodo: Xbox One is worse for everyone if Kinect not mandatory

S

Septimus Prime

Member
But shutting down Kinect because of it is anti-technology, anti-future.
Click to expand...
Every avenue leads to the future. Kinect is one way, but it's not the only way, and it's something people have shown they don't want.

I don't get Gizmodo's agenda here. Are they trying to dissuade people from buying Xbox One now, or what?
 
D

Deleted member 13876

Unconfirmed Member
I can see the argument with removing Kinect from the box, restricting things in the long run. But giving people the choice to actually use it or not at all times is very much a good thing and for some people a make or break issue.
 
V

Vic20

Member
If Kinect 2.0 is so great, then Surely MS or a 2nd party will make a game or games that will become a massive hit. Then people will turn those kinects on...I doubt this is a problem.
 
N

NullPointer

Member
NullPointer said:
You could always turn the thing off, from day one, in software. It would be disabled or paused.

The difference now is that you can physically unplug the thing without bricking your xbox.
Click to expand...
Repeated for emphasis.

You could disable/pause the Kinect from the beginning, before ANY of the 180s.

This was always the case.
 
A

Agent Icebeezy

Welcome beautful toddler, Madison Elizabeth, to the horde!
As long as it still comes in the package, then everything will be fine but admittedly, I want Kinect included.
 
T

Toxi

Banned
Like the hat? said:
The fact that it's included in the box makes me think it'll get a lot more support than people are afraid of. The majority of people will surely connect it, if it comes in the box.
Click to expand...
Look at how much support the Wii U tablet is getting.

I was willing to give the Kinect a chance this gen, and there wasn't a single game I enjoyed on it. I doubt that will change next gen.
 
C

ChiliManiac

Banned
This article is actually correct, the Kinect is such a huge part of the Xbox One that not having it included would seriously downgrade the experience of multitasking and easy navigation. Or am I the only one who actually thinks that's awesome? Kinect 1.0 didn't work at all...the technology in Kinect 2.0 looks amazing and I say this from the standpoint of a Computer Science person not a Gamer. I'm excited. Though it's my opinion, so I guess it's not that important.
 
M

Mask

Member
What they don't seem to understand, is that you could easily unplug the kinect when doing something like Netflix or a XBLA game, but there's absolutely nothing stopping you from just, you know, PLUGGING it back in to play Kinect games. Gizmodo seem to think the Kinect disintigrates when you unplug it.
 
S

SpecDotSign

Unconfirmed Member
Kinect sucks. Gizmodo sucks.
If Microsoft wants "the living room", why not sell the Kinect separately? Don't force it on gamers and make them pay an extra $100 over the competition. Xbox is the only thing MS has that doesn't have a negative stigma behind it in the public eye (with gamers it's different).
 
A

AbortedWalrusFetus

Member
If people have it and are given compelling reasons to use it they will use it. It's not like removing the requirement that it be plugged in and giving them an option to plug it in is going to completely rule out the possibility of people plugging it in. If you want people to use it give them a reason to and they will.
 
T

test_account

XP-39C²
Concidering that you cant buy a new Xbox One without Kinect, there is no reason why developers cant take full advantage of it. Everyone who buys a Xbox One will have a Kinect anyway, so they can "force" (not sure which word to use) people to use it if they want.
 
G

Guevara

Member
Mask said:
What they don't seem to understand, is that you could easily unplug the kinect when doing something like Netflix or a XBLA game, but there's absolutely nothing stopping you from just, you know, PLUGGING it back in to play Kinect games. Gizmodo seem to think the Kinect disintigrates when you unplug it.
Click to expand...

If the Kinect were "free", as in packed into a $399 bundle, I would literally leave it in the box it came in. That's the optional part. If enough people were like me then devs would rightly ignore the device except for games like Just Dance. That's the danger if you are a fan of the device.
 
T

ThoughtsOfSpeaking

Banned
Gizmodo can piss off. They look at the device through the lens of a gadget, we look at it as a gaming device. The two are not mutally exclusive, but the typical gadget whore is more swayed by gimmicks than the seasoned gamer who just wants solid well made games to play.


To the typical gizmodo reader/contributor I have a simple question. How many of these immersive and innovative Kinect 1 games are you still playing today? How many Shovelware Wii games? etc etc.



Do you really see in 10 years time you still playing this crap? of course not, because there will be bigger and bigger tech out there and what you are clamoring for today will be obsolete.


Forgive me for not caring about your opinon on my hobby when even your Ipad 1 is gathering dust. This industry cannot survive on tech alone, it need solid gaming experiences and these are never created by mandate.
 
E

ElTorro

I wanted to dominate the living room. Then I took an ESRAM in the knee.
NullPointer said:
You could disable/pause the Kinect from the beginning, before ANY of the 180s.
Click to expand...

Exactly. I think people are just overly concerned about privacy, but think about the outrage (and the consequent legal and economic consequences for Microsoft) if they would still use a "disabled" Kinect for stuff like ad-related profiling. Here in the EU they would be grilled, and that's putting it lightly. I can understand concerns on an emotional level, especially since the NSA scandal, but on a rational level I think people exaggerate the risks.
 
R

Raxus

Member
Bullshit.

Everyone bought a Wii but that didn't encourage developers to think outside the box even after every other system copied them in some way. If you want to draw attention to the Kinect you need a blockbuster title and if you want a blockbuster title to get made you need money and nobody is willing to bet on Kinect nor will they ever bet on Kinect.

If you want to make Kinect a viable platform make a Halo Kinect only game and have Microsoft put their money where their mouth is. Until then they can take the Kinect and shove it.
 
B

Brickhunt

Member
Agreed. If you don't want Kinect then don't buy the console at all. You want the option to buy a Kinect-less console? Just buy a Playstation 4 instead, but stop this retarded bullcrap of removing Kinect 2 from the Xbox One because you don't like it.

It would just like if Nintendo bundled the Wii with a traditional controller and made the Wiimote an optional peripheral. You would have completely destroyed the idea behind the console.
 
K

knitoe

Member
I don't understand the big uproar. Kinect is still in the box which means it can be connected and turn on anytime. Thus, if game developers want to make a Kinect enable game, it would still be available to 100% of the install base. The game box and/or title screen just has to say "Kinect Required" so the user knows. I am sure a few will bitch about installing Kinect, but most will do it without any care.
 
O

Owzers

Member
I know when i buy things, i want to spend $100 extra so that it's POSSIBLE other people will have a better experience with something i don't care about.
 
N

NullPointer

Member
ElTorro said:
Exactly. I think people are just overly concerned about privacy, but think about the outrage (and the consequent legal and economic consequences for Microsoft) if they would still use a "disabled" Kinect for stuff like ad-related profiling. Here in the EU they would be grilled, and that's putting it lightly. I can understand concerns on an emotional level, especially since the NSA scandal, but on a rational level I think people exaggerate the risks.
Click to expand...
Well I *am* glad you can physically disconnect the thing now, but that's just a physical analog to what you could always do in software, for people who want absolute certainty the damn thing is off.

Which means the bone was designed for scenarios where the Kinect is not available/enabled/online, so I'm not sure why people are considering it to be more optional now. It was never a requirement that the Kinect be always enabled, not as far as we've ever seen.

Is it easier for MS to ship a version of the bone without Kinect if they wanted to? Sure, but that hasn't happened. With the changes we know about, nothing significant has changed from a Kinect software/adoption point of view.
 
V

VeryGooster

Banned
Everything Kyle Wagner has written about the Xbox One being a lesser device post-"180" seems mostly based on assumptions and hypotheticals. That NSA quote is telling.
 
J

Jarmel

Banned
I definitely agree that multiple SKUs is an absolutely horrible idea. That said, Kinect being mandatory to power the system on is a separate issue.
 
E

ElTorro

I wanted to dominate the living room. Then I took an ESRAM in the knee.
Enter The 36 Chambers said:
I will buy an Xbox One and leave the kinect unplugged
Click to expand...

I don't get it, why? If you don't care about Kinect at all, why not just buy a PS4 and spare yourself the wasted money on Kinect. If you still want an Xbox because of exclusives (or whatever) the games won't change just because you haven't Kinect plugged in. They will still have the gimmicky "better with Kinect" features, hopefully optional ones. Just disable it in the preferences or disallow it for games where you don't want it.
 
I

ironcreed

Banned
Please don't try to tell me that I would be better served by being forced to use a device that I have no use for.

off-is-the-general-direction-i-wish.jpg
 
T

TheRealTalker

Banned
it's still in every box so I don't see the big problem here... developers still have the option to use it or not... making it mandatory for every game wasn't one of the options to begin with I believe it just that it worked with the OS which would be running as you played the game
 
M

mrklaw

MrArseFace
better chance
Click to expand...

er, if it's ok with you, I'd prefer not to spend money on a 'chance'. MS had their chance with Kinect 1 and failed to deliver, and now I'm supposed to believe it'll all be different this time?
 
E

ElTorro

I wanted to dominate the living room. Then I took an ESRAM in the knee.
ironcreed said:
Please don't try to tell me that I would be better served by being forced to use a device that I have no use for.
Click to expand...

It is still forced since it'll be in every box and you'll have to pay for it.
 
K

Kabuki Quantum Lover

Member
I kind of agree with this. Developers would have had a better reason to integrate Kinect functionality into their games. Now it is the same as it always was -- they no longer can assume it'll be connected.
 
C

CaptainTiptop

Member
gaming_noob said:
Just because he wrote a positive article on the One he's a shill? As if there's not enough positive PS4 articles out there. As for WiiU, nothing can save it.
Click to expand...
No, he's written MANY articles defending the Xbone's anti-consumer policies and then whining at the gaming community for 'making the Xbox One worse' when its policies were reversed. He penned "You don't hate the Xbox One, you're just jealous". He is awful and Gizmodo is awful for publishing his clickbait garbage.
 
M

mrklaw

MrArseFace
ChiliManiac said:
This article is actually correct, the Kinect is such a huge part of the Xbox One that not having it included would seriously downgrade the experience of multitasking and easy navigation. Or am I the only one who actually thinks that's awesome? Kinect 1.0 didn't work at all...the technology in Kinect 2.0 looks amazing and I say this from the standpoint of a Computer Science person not a Gamer. I'm excited. Though it's my opinion, so I guess it's not that important.
Click to expand...

you might be the only one that thinks the only way to multitask is to use kinect. You will be able to do that just fine with a controller. Frankly I don't want to make the screen bigger by doing a goatse gesture to my TV.
 
P

Penguins&PolarBears

Member
Perhaps Microsoft should make two systems. One aimed at a more mainstream audience with heavy focus on Kinect motion control (no controller in the box) and video/app consumption, require mandatory online and the hybrid disc/digital system or no disc drive. Sell that system for $250 like the Wii.

Then make a high end graphics system with controller in box, optional Kinect, optional online, no linking of disc and digital. Sell this for $400. This would allow them to develop Kinect in parallel of the systems and adopt forward thinking designs before core gamers are ready to accept them.
 
N

NullPointer

Member
CambriaRising said:
Only because they didn't give you the option to use your own hard drive.
Click to expand...
No, because devs couldn't count on a HDD being in every console. It was a bad decision.

Kabuki Quantum Lover said:
I kind of agree with this. Developers would have had a better reason to integrate Kinect functionality into their games. Now it is the same as it always was -- they no longer can assume it'll be connected.
Click to expand...
But even if it was connected devs couldn't assume it would be enabled. You could always turn it off in software.
 
I

ironcreed

Banned
ElTorro said:
It is still forced since it'll be in every box and you'll have to pay for it.
Click to expand...

Indeed, we are still being forced to buy it even though it is not mandatory. I would rather pocket that $100 and maybe spend some of it on a game. Just another reason why I will be getting a PS4 first without hesitation.
 
M

Mask

Member
Guevara said:
If the Kinect were "free", as in packed into a $399 bundle, I would literally leave it in the box it came in. That's the optional part. If enough people were like me then devs would rightly ignore the device except for games like Just Dance. That's the danger if you are a fan of the device.
Click to expand...

I'd imagine people buying the One will maybe put the Kinect aside at first, but I'm sure they would eventually try it out and maybe like it. At the end of the day, it isn't going to appeal to everyone, and those people were never going to buy kinect games in the first place. The vast majority of people will probably just leave it connected though, and everyone will have one, so the userbase is there for kinect games. I'll wait for the PC version of kinect 2.0, as it looks like a useful device to have in combination with an Oculus Rift.
 
D

dhonk

Member
I forgot Gizmodo was a website until now, removed it from all my bookmarks 2 years ago.

Now I remember why I removed it!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Microsoft has officially ended production of its Kinect hardware
Hardware 2
56
2K
Badlucktroll replied
Microsoft is working on an Xbox AI chatbot that can help with support queries and game refunds
News
28
2K
JackMcGunns replied
Eurogamer: What is the point of Xbox?
2 3 4
159
12K
mckmas8808 replied
Xbox One reveal 10 years ago today
2 3
147
8K
Hawking Radiation replied
[Jez Corden] If Microsoft really IS bringing Steam, Epic Game Store, etc. to Xbox consoles, it needs to answer these big questions
2 3 4
155
10K
sachos replied
Top Bottom