Don't Write Kinect Off So Early

[Hassao]

If I want to jump and swing my arms around I would go outside and do that shit myself, but I dont want to play fake sports I want to do imposable things only portrayable in games via controler. Just like Yahtzee said we should go in the opposit direction and look for a method of neural interface not arm spasims.

 

[SimSquid92]

the CONSOLE make money but does that mean the GAMES are good? hell no, it only ends in shovel ware.

HAH! You're right. 70 million people obviously don't know what they like or enjoy. I mean, why else would it sell so well, right? The games just suck so bad, that 70 million people bought the system, and enjoy it.

Games like Mario Galaxy, which outsold both Metal Gear Solid 4 and Halo 3.
Games like Mario Kart Wii, which outsold Metal Gear Solid 4, Halo 3, and Gears of War 2...combined.
Games Like Zelda: Twilight Princes that sold a little more then Grand Theft Auto 4.
And many others. About 40 games or so, actually, that sold over one million units.
Yeah. The games totally suck. Those millions of people don't know what they like at all.

Or maybe, just maybe...you don't like the system, or the games offered on it.
Thankfully, though, your word isn't law on what's fun or good.

Millions of other people have a different opinion on what makes a game fun, evidently, and your opinion that you push as objective fact is drowning in contradicting statistics. You don't like the Wii, or it's games. I get it. But it's an undeniable, objective fact that the Wii is a success. Shovelware or not, the Wii kicked the crap out of the 360 and the PS3 in sales, and it's games are selling extremely well.

In fact, the Wii has 152 games that score 75 or higher on Metacritic.
That is, for lack of a better turn of phrase, a freaking butt-load of games.

So what are you basing this 'failure' on?
The financial success of the console?
The financial success of the games?
The consumer satisfaction?
Or the critical success?

Or, more likely, your own opinion and taste.
Huh. Well that doesn't hold water here.
I don't like Metal Gear Solid, but I'm not going to call it a failure. That'd be silly.
You don't like the Wii. Fine.
Don't call it a 'failure'. That's silly.

I just wont to know where those games were sold, like is that one country or the whole world. Also, I would like to say that of course they are going to sell more, they are made for a wider audience. When they say family, it mean's you can add new families to the fans of the series and anyone else that was following.
I would also like to add that I however don't get into it, but that's because I was raised in that awkward phase of games, where I missed out on Mario and Zelda. I have played Mario games like Super Mario, but I entirely missed Zelda.
Also I don't own a Wii.

 

[Pegghead]

Well I think the major complaint is the same that can be said for both the wii and move, why do they think we want to flail our arms around? At least with kinect we have a bit less potential for our screens to cave in.

 

[Omnific One]

Once they put a real game (RPG or good FPS) and it is less than $80, sure. But until then, nope.

 

[migo]

Once they put a real game (RPG or good FPS) and it is less than $80, sure. But until then, nope.

This doesn't make sense to me. An FPS would be best done with something like the Move for aiming. The type of game the Kinect is best suited to is a dance game. I'd take a Kinect over a dance mat any day if it weren't for the fact that I'm just not that into dance games. If you want RPG or FPS games, then the Kinect isn't for you, if you want a dance game then it really is for you (and since DDR mats sell, evidently there's a market for it).

 

[imagremlin]

Having owned a Wii since launch, I can assess that motion control:

1) Whilst not bad, its not as fun as we all thought it would be.
2) Never got any better.

Don't see Kinnect or Move changing any of that. The Wii gets, by far, the least use of all consoles around my house. Even the PS2 gets more action.

 

[migo]

Having owned a Wii since launch, I can assess that motion control:

1) Whilst not bad, its not as fun as we all thought it would be.
2) Never got any better.

Don't see Kinnect or Move changing any of that. The Wii gets, by far, the least use of all consoles around my house. Even the PS2 gets more action.

That's probably the crux of the issue, however having played Okami on PS2 I can see that it would be much better on the Wii. Some games are just designed for it. Dance games will be awesome with Kinect. Move has some good potential with shooters and puzzle games.

 

[Omnific One]

Once they put a real game (RPG or good FPS) and it is less than $80, sure. But until then, nope.

This doesn't make sense to me. An FPS would be best done with something like the Move for aiming. The type of game the Kinect is best suited to is a dance game. I'd take a Kinect over a dance mat any day if it weren't for the fact that I'm just not that into dance games. If you want RPG or FPS games, then the Kinect isn't for you, if you want a dance game then it really is for you (and since DDR mats sell, evidently there's a market for it).

Think about it. Everyone knows the stereotypical way to hold a gun. Use the line of sight down from both hands as the aiming mechanism. It's pretty simple, really.

 

[migo]

Once they put a real game (RPG or good FPS) and it is less than $80, sure. But until then, nope.

This doesn't make sense to me. An FPS would be best done with something like the Move for aiming. The type of game the Kinect is best suited to is a dance game. I'd take a Kinect over a dance mat any day if it weren't for the fact that I'm just not that into dance games. If you want RPG or FPS games, then the Kinect isn't for you, if you want a dance game then it really is for you (and since DDR mats sell, evidently there's a market for it).

Think about it. Everyone knows the stereotypical way to hold a gun. Use the line of sight down from both hands as the aiming mechanism. It's pretty simple, really.

That would make things really slow though, and Kinect requires you to stand up.

 

[Omnific One]

Once they put a real game (RPG or good FPS) and it is less than $80, sure. But until then, nope.

This doesn't make sense to me. An FPS would be best done with something like the Move for aiming. The type of game the Kinect is best suited to is a dance game. I'd take a Kinect over a dance mat any day if it weren't for the fact that I'm just not that into dance games. If you want RPG or FPS games, then the Kinect isn't for you, if you want a dance game then it really is for you (and since DDR mats sell, evidently there's a market for it).

Think about it. Everyone knows the stereotypical way to hold a gun. Use the line of sight down from both hands as the aiming mechanism. It's pretty simple, really.

That would make things really slow though, and Kinect requires you to stand up.

Slow how? It would be much more realistic as it would replicate a person swinging a real weapon. And what's the issue with standing up? I'm perfectly fine with standing.

 

[gamer_parent]

myself, I'm actually looking forward to it. That's mostly because I'm a late adapter to this sort of technology... as in, I still don't own a next gen system yet. (I still play my PS2)

My reasoning? Price and time. As a parent (what, you think the username was just for show?), I don't have much time or disposable income to spend on gaming paraphenilia. So when I DO buy a console, I want to make sure I can get as much use out of it as possible.

And let's face it, 500 dollar price tag for something that only I can enjoy myself just doesn't sit right with me.

So naturally, this means that I would want to get a Wii, right? I mean, it's got family fun written all over it.

except, the games I want to play are not on it. So that means by getting that, I deprive myself of games that I would REALLY like to play.

Enter the kinect. for me, the kinect can resolve this situation once and for all. (If the titles coming down the pipeline don't end up being cheap Wii title knock offs, that is)

Having said that, I think the kinect is a terrible strategy. The reason why is because in terms of competing for the same downstream market that the Wii has zeroed in on, the platform that the Kinect sits on is a lot more expensive, and has a lot less content to go with. So from a NEW sales point of view, they're looking at basically just guys like me. (which is probably not a huge market segment)

In terms of gamers who ALREADY have the platform? well, that's a whole different thing all together. We're talking about a demographic of people who either 1. don't want to have anything to do with the Wii-type games or 2. people who already own both.

For group 1, that's not even a viable market and for group 2, the switching cost just adds another entry barrier.

The ONLY way I can see this work is if devs start coming with some TRULY awesome titles for the kinect. (i.e. a good fighting game that not just detects the position of your gloves but your WHOLE BODY? sign me up!)

The problem is that such games are almost entirely new territories. Most motion sensor games usually have some kind of periphal input device to get around the problem of detecting the input motions. Games without an extra input device usually are limited to just detecting presence, instead of also incorporating input.

This is the major hurdle that game devs for the kinect must overcome. They have to be able to create a way of getting input that extends beyond just presence capture. i.e. how will they know that a punch is a punch, or a kick is a kick? how will they calculate proper strength input? there are a bunch of questions that need to be answered even before the actual game development begins.

And even IF they square away the technology requirements, they then need to actually, you know, make a good game out of it. This means that the company who would want to make games for the kinect needs to first overcome the R&D cost and then they have to put their first string team to develop a kick ass AAA title for it.

Consider the corporate philosophy of most game publishers as of late, it is doubtful whether or not they would actually do that.

 

[migo]

Once they put a real game (RPG or good FPS) and it is less than $80, sure. But until then, nope.

This doesn't make sense to me. An FPS would be best done with something like the Move for aiming. The type of game the Kinect is best suited to is a dance game. I'd take a Kinect over a dance mat any day if it weren't for the fact that I'm just not that into dance games. If you want RPG or FPS games, then the Kinect isn't for you, if you want a dance game then it really is for you (and since DDR mats sell, evidently there's a market for it).

Think about it. Everyone knows the stereotypical way to hold a gun. Use the line of sight down from both hands as the aiming mechanism. It's pretty simple, really.

That would make things really slow though, and Kinect requires you to stand up.

Slow how? It would be much more realistic as it would replicate a person swinging a real weapon. And what's the issue with standing up? I'm perfectly fine with standing.

Some people want to sit down and relax while playing games. Making large arm motions is slower than small finger motions.

 

[Omnific One]

*snip*
Some people want to sit down and relax while playing games. Making large arm motions is slower than small finger motions.

Sure, but the majority of the people who want to sit on the couch all the time aren't exactly the target audience of the Kinect.

 

[migo]

*snip*
Some people want to sit down and relax while playing games. Making large arm motions is slower than small finger motions.

Sure, but the majority of the people who want to sit on the couch all the time aren't exactly the target audience of the Kinect.

The people who play FPS games aren't the type who like to get up and do anything physical.

 

[mechanixis]

I can understand your optimism, but I really expect Kinect is going to be bad. My original reaction to the Star Wars trailer was good. It looked awesome.

And then I realized that you could only move with that awkward little glide forward at timed intervals.

And that's because there was no way to direct your character's movement in any world larger than your living room; you have to stay in front of the camera, after all. If a game requires your character to move in any autonomous capacity, Kinect can't translate it.

 

[Savagezion]

I will admit it'd be pretty cool if they made a Black and White 3 for Kinect...

That may be the bext idea that I'be heard in about a month or so.

Me too. That would make me interested in Kinect.

 

[gamer_parent]

You know what I'm more curious about? If the Kinect at this stage can translate more minute movements like say, can it detect if my fingers are opened or close? can it detect the twist in my wrists? can it communicate when something is done more forcefully than others or is it just limited to speed?

the reason why I'm asking is because one of the things that I still haven't seen much of is a proper sword fighting motion control game. In any given sword fighting game, I can expect to see something that allows you to block (in a game with a periphery input device, the position of the sword acts as the "is it blocking" detection). If the kinect or the move can detect smaller joint manipulation, you can easily get around the peripheral input issue.

the next major hurdle is how to effectively translate body motion of a sword fight? since sword fights require you to move all around, the kinect or the move would have that problem right there. That is, you have to always return to the center. So there's already a limitation on movement.

 

[Teh_Lemon]

I'm writing off Kinect for the same reason as Yahtzee is.

We already have controllers.

Aye. But there is one thing the Kinect has that actually goes in Yahtzee's favor.

"Hey Xbox, play me some music." I really think that voice recognition thing, in combination with the human-recognition thing, is really something that could revolutionize home entertainment. Not hardcore gaming necessarily, but home entertainment without a doubt.

 

[gamer_parent]

let's also not forget that yahtzee assumes that all gamers would rather be couch potatoes if they had a choice. I'm pretty sure there are gamers, "hardcore" or otherwise, who would LOVE to have say, a shooting game where they actually have to dodge and move.