Then why not allow it to be unplugged.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Why is everyone upset about mandatory Kinect?
- Thread starter JayDub
- Start date
Android18a
Member
It's not even the privacy stuff that bothers me, it's the fact that most Kinect games are just pretty bad. At best they are heavily compromised for the motion controls. And no amount of "accuracy" from the camera will help if the game itself isn't fun.
I bet we'll just get the same old experience as classics like Kinectimals, Sonic Free Riders and Fable The Journey. Fun!
Swap the Kinect for a WiiU style tablet and make a Lost Odessey with dreams that appear on the second screen instead.
I bet we'll just get the same old experience as classics like Kinectimals, Sonic Free Riders and Fable The Journey. Fun!
Swap the Kinect for a WiiU style tablet and make a Lost Odessey with dreams that appear on the second screen instead.
Wickerbasket
Member
Man, his living room is huge and he apparently has no furniture.
I suspect Kinect wouldn't even work in my living room; I have a coffee table in front of my couch.
From what I saw of it (Tested's video from E3) I agree. But there's an uphill battle for MS in terms of overcoming negative perception.
MR BLACKMAGIK
Member
I wont be using it at all, and I'm being forced to pay for it. This seems like an obvious question...
Baraka in the White House
2-Terms of Kombat
I have zero interest in Kinect and it sounds like the system took a spec hit to make room for it.
And the competition is offering a cheaper and more powerful system without the camera requirements. So your argument is nullified by simply buying the competing device. This is technology.
Wha...what? No, it's not. That shit is stupid and shouldn't be forced down peoples throats.
That makes too much sense.
Beer Monkey
Member
Developers, try coding a game that works when there is no power cord or controller. Ooops, you have a problem.
Now try coding an Xbox game that doesn't use Kinect. Easy. Code a PS3/4 game that doesn't use SixAxis. Easy.
Like SixAxis, Kinect is to this day a tech that is not needed by the vast majority of games, ever.
AlanzTalon
Member
You will use it. It is core to the system. You aren't being forced to pay for anything. The camera is not optional.
Zen_Arcade
Banned
1) I don't care about Kinect games.
2) It adds to the price of the console.
3) It has to be connected, so I still have to make room for it on my shelf even though I will never use it. (Though this may have changed, I have no idea.)
2) It adds to the price of the console.
3) It has to be connected, so I still have to make room for it on my shelf even though I will never use it. (Though this may have changed, I have no idea.)
PanicFreak
Member
You have to be interesting enough for the DOJ to decide to get a rubber stamped subpoena.
Which you probably aren't.
Fox Mulder
Member
The kinect was an overhyped piece of shit that only worked in dancing and wii knockoff games, sometimes.
Nothing about the kinect appeals to me, and they console costs more because of it. I also usually play the 360 in my bedroom, which isn't a giant ass well lit room with plenty of space to move around.
Nothing about the kinect appeals to me, and they console costs more because of it. I also usually play the 360 in my bedroom, which isn't a giant ass well lit room with plenty of space to move around.
Actually they won't be using it. The people saying this stuff are not buying an XBO.
This time yesterday the Xbox One was a very different system to what it is today. The idea that this decision is final is far from solid fact right now.
This is a competition, and the Kinect is a poison pill for the early adopters.
Why is it so difficult for some people to understand.
If you want Kinect and you want motion control games then you go and buy it.
I dont see why the rest of us should have to join you & pay for your hobbie of pretending to have an epileptic fit in your living room.
Options = Good
Mandatory = Total & Utter Bollocks
If you want Kinect and you want motion control games then you go and buy it.
I dont see why the rest of us should have to join you & pay for your hobbie of pretending to have an epileptic fit in your living room.
Options = Good
Mandatory = Total & Utter Bollocks
All the cool things that separate the console from the ps4 is enabled with Kinect. Being able to say "Xbox On" alone will sell a million units once they play that up in their ads. Being able to search for all your content with its advanced mic array separates it from the other solutions out there. Couple that with the advances Microsoft is making with machine and natural language processing makes its inclusion a no brainer. When all the marketing starts demonstrating all of this begins, it will make the ps4 look like a last gen/hardcore gamer only console and that's Microsoft ace in the hole. Hell, "Xbox On" should be the tagline in all their commercials. Its futuristic and something the base model of the ps4 can't do and something Sony doesn't want it to do. Plus $100 over the 8 year life span of a console isn't shit.
Of course, not many people on a forum like this will ever see the potential of something like this because all they want is a game console but MS isn't just trying to sell to people on this forum.
Of course, not many people on a forum like this will ever see the potential of something like this because all they want is a game console but MS isn't just trying to sell to people on this forum.
LittleJohnny
Banned
Wow, that looks like a generational leap over the original Kinect.
Project Natal et tu?
Randolph Freelander
Member
Microsoft, this is market research you should be doing before announcing things. FYI.
Rodney McKay
Member
Exactly! *WARNING* Fun timez with analogies ahead! *WARNING*
To expand on your analogy, lets say you are buying a nice pair of shoes for $300. And you're forced to pay an extra $100 for a shitty pair of socks you don't want.
These socks are uncomfortable, look like shit with the shoes, and aren't even the right size for you (same way people don't like motion controls and don't want the Kinect uglying-up their TV).
Now imagine your favorite hiking trail starts requiring that you can only wear those shoes IF you are also wearing those shittier socks you didn't even want in the first place. (a game you really like starts requiring motion controls you don't like)
NOW imagine that there are 2-3 other brands of shoes that don't require you to buy or wear any kind of uncomfortable, ugly socks when you are wearing your shoes. (PS4, PC, Wii U, 3DS, Vita)
The only reason ANYONE would have to buy those first shoes would be for the couple of trails (franchises) that you can only walk on with those shoes. 90% of trails would still be open to you (multiplatform games) and there are even a few new trails you might get to try (Sony, Nintendo, and PC exclusives).
GillianSeed79
Member
It's not the privacy stuff that bothers me (though I do want to be able to opt-out of any data mining thing they will have.)
On the one hand, while I'm not a fan of Kinect and never have owned one, it's mandatory inclusion means it will have a guaranteed install base and more developers will or might use it for optional stuff that enhances regular controller play.
On the other other hand, and this is big, it's a big part of reason there's a $100 difference between the P4 and Xbox One. Since I've yet to see any compelling reason to use a Kinect outside of novelty voice commands, that extra $100 tacked on to the price is hard to swallow and will probably lead me to getting a PS4 first.
On the one hand, while I'm not a fan of Kinect and never have owned one, it's mandatory inclusion means it will have a guaranteed install base and more developers will or might use it for optional stuff that enhances regular controller play.
On the other other hand, and this is big, it's a big part of reason there's a $100 difference between the P4 and Xbox One. Since I've yet to see any compelling reason to use a Kinect outside of novelty voice commands, that extra $100 tacked on to the price is hard to swallow and will probably lead me to getting a PS4 first.
The article you linked does not back up what you said.
D
Deleted member 17706
Unconfirmed Member
It really comes down to me just not trusting Microsoft with having visual and audio access to my living room whenever the thing is plugged in and connected.
Even before that, though. I don't want more motion and voice nonsense in my games. It's simply not appealing to me. Having it included with every console means games are going to require it, and just like SmartGlass, it's going to mean a lot of bullshit ham-fisted gimmicks that I won't enjoy.
Then screw early adopters. That's like saying that Apple should have included a keyboard on the first iPhone because the "hardcore" want their keyboards. You're not going to change the world with optional add-ons and catering to hardcore users who are notoriously opposed to change.
schwabdizzle
Banned
Buying an Xbox One with Kinnect is almost like buying a car with ugly rims. The seller includes them in the price but you do not want them.
You know, I could turn on my old Mac from, like, 12 years ago, using Mac OS 8, by a voice command telling it to turn on, and it was built in to the system software for free. I used to impress visitors with it. Never made any of them go out and buy a Mac though.
RedNumberFive
Banned
More than anything, I just don't want that stupid looking thing on the top of my TV.
GreatMightySymp
Member
To be honest, though, the Move outside of a breakout game (LBP2 was a good use of the Move) or two was gimmicky like the 360 Kinect was. It's pretty much what happens when the accessory isn't bundled, expecting the same shovelware will happen with the PS4 camera.
That's probably why MS wanted to bundle it so it didn't fall as easily into that territory.
cpp_is_king
Member
Because motion controls are bad and they should feel bad. It's that simple. They can try all they want to force a bad future on me, but I'll fight tooth and nail against it.
I never gave the datamining/spying much thought but given that Microsoft was the FIRST company to partner with NSA on PRISM in 2007 makes me wonder why were they so eager to sign up?
Fast forward and we have MS making a device that would be amazing for datamining a mandatory fixture despite it having not one necessary function.
So ya PRISM, I hate motion controls, $100 more etc there are several reasons it blows.
Fast forward and we have MS making a device that would be amazing for datamining a mandatory fixture despite it having not one necessary function.
So ya PRISM, I hate motion controls, $100 more etc there are several reasons it blows.
This is really nonsense. I highly doubt that MS will be listening in your living rooms.
Haunted
Member
Disagree.
Kinect is a pos, I don't want it, I don't want to pay for it. It's not appealing to me, none of the games I've seen made for Kinect were interesting or compelling, none of the things shown with Kinect 2.0 were interesting or compelling to me. I don't think it's good for navigation - swiping is sketchy, voice control won't work in my language, having to hover over a certain spot brings all the disadvantages of a motion pointer with none of the benefits - it's just fucking terrible all around.
I want it to go away, and voting with my wallet is the only thing I can do and that means no buy as long as the Kinect is mandatory and driving the price up, even past the more powerful PS4 (which is just fucking ridiculous).
LittleJohnny
Banned
Hmm, not sure if that's true. I think most people expected next Gen to retail for about $500 bucks. Had both the PS4 and X1 retailed for $500, everyone would see it as a free Kinect peripheral. Sony's move however was a complete surprise, they happen to be charging less for the PS4 and likely taking a hit.
MS charging $100 more because of Kinect is a fallacy, Kinect or no Kinect $500 was reasonable until Sony dropped the $399 bomb, that's what its really about
For me, it is convenience. I move my console around a lot between my living room, home office and even office at work. If I could leave the Kinect in the Living Room all the time, I wouldn't mind. If I understand it correctly, the Kinect must be connected for the One to function. The mandatory connection kills me more than the $100, limited usefulness and any personal paranoia.
AlanzTalon
Member
You have no idea how much that feature factored into development and ultimately the cost of that mac.
Its made to be presented in the front or on a shelf. Too bulky to be on top of modern TVs.
Oh but MS made sure it was necessary by making it so that you wouldn't be able to use the Xbox One without Kinect, they thought an argument like yours could come up
AppleSmack
Banned
How the hell is more Kinect shovelware a good thing? Kinect is making Xbox One more than $100 more expensive than the PS4 and it seriously pisses me off. I will never pay $100 for something I do not want and will never want.
BolognaSoup
Member
Extra price
Big stupid ugly camera sitting on or in front of my TV
Has never made a game better not called "Dance something"
Big stupid ugly camera sitting on or in front of my TV
Has never made a game better not called "Dance something"