Rumors Xbox one with out kinect

Keith Wallace

New member
Nov 8, 2012
3,179
0
0
Visit site
I'd rather not see it included, but as an optional accessory like with the 360. It's kind of creepy having an always on eye following you even when the console isn't on.

It would also bring the price down to a range that people could actually afford. Instead of just the wealthy owning them. I feel like Microsoft is making their products more and more exclusive.

Sent from the stars...

They've already said that the thing doesn't have to be plugged in, so the spying-while-off issue isn't really a problem now.
 

Villain

New member
Mar 6, 2011
672
0
0
Visit site
Isn't going to be a kinectless unit sold and that's a good thing because 100% adoption rate means nothing but good things for getting developers developing.

The thing can't just spy on you period let alone offline... Take the tinfoil hat off and realize most of the negativity has been spun up by Sony.... Which has breached everyone's privacy more than enough in the last number of years.
 

spaulagain

New member
Apr 27, 2012
1,356
0
0
Visit site
Ahead of the curve? Have you heard of this 1989 motion tech?

View attachment 41337


Uh, what does that have to do with anything? He didn't say Microsoft was the first for motion controls. Pretty sure the tech and concept has been around for decades (kind of).
What he's saying is that the market is mainstreaming motion/gesture control. The technology is becoming more accurate and more affordable every year.

Microsoft was smart and invested in a company/tech a few years ago that places them ahead of the curve. The Kinect is far superior in concept and execution than the Wii and PS Move.

For them, gesture (and voice) is a primary form of interaction going forward. Its not just an "accessory." one of the quickest ways to speed up technology is normalize it or make it standard.
 

Keith Wallace

New member
Nov 8, 2012
3,179
0
0
Visit site
He said that Microsoft is ahead of the curve. No, they waited for a technology to develop and popularize (like the Wii), then they followed suit. They're basically doing what Apple does--wait for someone else to dictate the market, then use your brand to take that market over.
 
Nov 7, 2012
540
0
0
Visit site
He said that Microsoft is ahead of the curve. No, they waited for a technology to develop and popularize (like the Wii), then they followed suit. They're basically doing what Apple does--wait for someone else to dictate the market, then use your brand to take that market over.

The Wii and the Kinect are two completely different things. If you think the Kinect was nowhere to be found in Microsoft Research until the Wii was revealed, then you are mistaken.
 

spaulagain

New member
Apr 27, 2012
1,356
0
0
Visit site
At the same time, to think Microsoft has led the charge in motion gaming is silly, at best.


Seriously? No one said they have "led" the charge. We're simply saying that they are positioning themselves a head of the curve with the new Kinect.

And yes, a device that can detect your motion without you holding something (and use voice control) is AHEAD of a device that still requires you to hold something. That's why Microsoft invested in PrimeSense's technology.

I don't know what your problem with Kinect is, but you seem completely devoted to belittling it and dismissing Microsoft's success with it. Did it catch you masturbating and send the photo to your wife or something?
 

Keith Wallace

New member
Nov 8, 2012
3,179
0
0
Visit site
No, they're not ahead of the curve. They've just made better tech. The Kinect's not even the first sans-controller form of interaction on the 360. Saying that the Kinect is ahead of the curve is like saying that iOS is, when it's just refining the tools of the competition and making a bunch of money as a result.
 

spaulagain

New member
Apr 27, 2012
1,356
0
0
Visit site
No, they're not ahead of the curve. They've just made better tech. The Kinect's not even the first sans-controller form of interaction on the 360. Saying that the Kinect is ahead of the curve is like saying that iOS is, when it's just refining the tools of the competition and making a bunch of money as a result.

Ok, whatever you say. Better tech doesn't qualify you as being a head of the curve?

I'm pretty sure iOS was a head of the curve when it launched in 2007 as it completely redefined the mobile phone market. Yes, touch screen operating systems were available before. But what they did with it pushed the market (or should I say pulled the market). Even if the technology already existed, if what you do with it changes the market and standardizes the market, then yes, you are ahead of the curve.
 
Last edited:

Reflexx

New member
Dec 30, 2010
4,484
4
0
Visit site
No, they're not ahead of the curve. They've just made better tech. The Kinect's not even the first sans-controller form of interaction on the 360. Saying that the Kinect is ahead of the curve is like saying that iOS is, when it's just refining the tools of the competition and making a bunch of money as a result.

You do realize that when you have BETTER and more advanced tech than others, that makes you AHEAD of the curve, right?
 

martinmc78

New member
Oct 30, 2012
2,745
0
0
Visit site
Clearly common sense and logic is completely out of the question when Keith discusses the Kinect.

He seems to have a blind hate of the device.

Go back to the first page of the thread - I asked Keith why he disliked the Kinect. He gave a pretty grounded and comprehensive answer. There is no point attacking someone because his opinions and circumstances differ to yours or anyone elses.
 

Reflexx

New member
Dec 30, 2010
4,484
4
0
Visit site
It's perfectly fine to not like the Kinect.

But thinking that it would be good strategy to create a sku without it, and basically make everything they promised developers a lie, isn't exactly well thought out.
 

TonyDedrick

New member
Dec 8, 2011
671
0
0
Visit site
It's perfectly fine to not like the Kinect.

But thinking that it would be good strategy to create a sku without it, and basically make everything they promised developers a lie, isn't exactly well thought out.

And as I said before, what are the developers going to do? Not develop for the console?
 

Keith Wallace

New member
Nov 8, 2012
3,179
0
0
Visit site
And as I said before, what are the developers going to do? Not develop for the console?

Yeah, I don't get the problem with doing so. It didn't kill the 360 to not have a Kinect in every bundle. I get that they want to push the tech, and that's why I even suggested a compromise of not offering the option for 6 months to a year. What it boils down to is Microsoft is forcing all Xbox One owners to purchase a Kinect without proving its value and quality beforehand. If this was the third-generation Kinect, and the second was a high-quality product, it would be different.

Instead, the first-gen Kinect had loads of input lag and ignored commands until the fifth time you said them (assuming you didn't just get frustrated and close the disc tray yourself). There were neat features of the Kinect, and it has loads of potential, but I really dislike the idea that they are expecting everyone to pay an extra $100 for the console on what amounts to users' hopes that it will be 5 times better (because that's probably the low-end of what the improvement needs to be to make the games responsive). Even the demo that I saw showed noticeable lag, and that means that fast-paced games like shooters (which could be argued to be the console's main selling point) might not work well with the Kinect just yet (maybe tweaks and such since that demo will prove to make it more responsive).

I don't know that it REALLY matters to me, though I know it will to many. I've accepted having to buy the Kinect, but it also means I will be waiting until next year to do so (probably would have happened either way, but I would have been more-likely to get it this year if it was $400). It also means that I will have time to read reviews about the Kinect (as I'm 99% sure I am the first person I know who will take the plunge on it, so I cannot test it out first-hand before purchase, most likely). If it turns out that the second-gen Kinect is lag-prone again, it's going to cause problems. No one will like it if using the Kinect slows down your gameplay and gets you killed in shooters (though non-shooter fans won't care about it). However, it will mean waiting for a significant price drop or a non-Kinect option before I buy it, because I simply cannot justify the waste of $100 for a piece of tech that won't do its job when I want it to (as I don't do Netflix of any of that, I'd want it only for its gaming purposes).
 

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
322,902
Messages
2,242,867
Members
428,004
Latest member
hetb