05-16-2014 03:05 AM
72 123
tools
  1. T Moore's Avatar
    No, my 360 is my Media Center Extender. This is something the One can not do
    05-13-2014 04:02 PM
  2. JHunsaker's Avatar
    No, my 360 is my Media Center Extender. This is something the One can not do
    This is really annoying. I hope a media center app gets created soon.
    05-13-2014 04:14 PM
  3. snowmutt's Avatar
    Again, I feel this XBOX VS. PlayStation soap opera may be a little mute at this point for 2 reasons:

    With Tablets and mobile, the segment for these gaming machines are actually fairly small. Large enough to make these devices important and profitable, but no where near the segment it was when the original XBOX launched. A lesser priced XBOX just makes sense, while a more powerful XBOX will, in my opinion, still sell more. Why? This small segment is willing to pay for a top end machine, The "kick back" about the Kinect was mostly, in my opinion, from a group of people who won't buy anyways, but would like to. But they will settle for gaming on cheaper, portable devices.

    Secondly, the XBOX is being positioned as a long term media device, not just a game consul. Obviously, gaming is at it's roots, but Microsoft is going to push all kinds of media to it while the PS will be aimed at gaming, with the ability to get media. MS wants the media to push the sales in the future. It is a long term strategy, as is the case for MS these days.

    Like the removal, because a bump in sales will be nice for the PR circuit, as is the "we are listening to you" line. But long term, I would be shocked if the higher priced XBOX unit didn't double up the sales of the lower priced one.
    HeyCori likes this.
    05-13-2014 04:19 PM
  4. ncxcstud's Avatar
    Sony is targeting media stuff just as much as MS. They just aren't as vocal about it. They have entertainment stuff and original programming in the pipeline too. MS is just vocal about it and seem to be giving it more attention...

    Btw its a MOOT point, not a mute or a moo point
    05-13-2014 05:55 PM
  5. Reflexx's Avatar
    1. Why would that be the case? If this was the beginning of Kinect, you might have a point, but I imagine that developers knew for a decent amount of time that Microsoft was going to be full speed ahead with Kinect. There wasn't an issue of introducing the hardware like the first iteration, which launched during the last generation (as opposed to the beginning).
    Risk.

    They probably wanted to see MS do something big with it first.

    2. The problem is that Microsoft didn't seem too interested in a "top-selling" game for Kinect. Their own studios minimized functionality with the thing, and the third-party exclusives did the same or less. Microsoft wasn't pushing the Kinect itself, so it makes sense to unbundle it. It's not like Microsoft was trying but failed; they weren't even trying.
    True on that point.
    05-13-2014 06:36 PM
  6. Reflexx's Avatar
    I don't think it will make any difference. At $399 the PS4 has better graphics and positive press. Micorsoft's name is basically mud. Outside the US, XBox One sales are dead.
    I somewhat agree.

    They took away their true differentiator. So what they have left is a console that costs as much as a PS4, is less powerful, and doesn't really do anything neat.
    05-13-2014 06:38 PM
  7. A895's Avatar
    I like this move because I may just get a Xbox One....next year. I have to replace my razr M and get a Moto 360.
    05-13-2014 07:37 PM
  8. Keith Wallace's Avatar
    I somewhat agree.

    They took away their true differentiator. So what they have left is a console that costs as much as a PS4, is less powerful, and doesn't really do anything neat.
    I would call that better than $100 more for a peripheral many simply didn't feel a strong desire to get. I would have been all over a Day One console without the Kinect for $400. I was planning to wait until the end of this year, but it was suggested as a graduation gift, so I took it. If I didn't get it as a gift, this would have been what sold me on the console.
    05-13-2014 10:43 PM
  9. theeboredone's Avatar
    It will pretty much come down to what games are more appealing to you. Not that wasn't a selling factor in the beginning, but for those who were interested in Kinect + the potential for games to incorporate that in an innovative fashion is pretty much dead.

    What's strange is that the X1 currently is selling at a faster pace than the 360. It's not like things were looking grim. Seems to me MS just wanted to play catchup with Sony. That to me says one thing...

    They were not in it for the long haul as far as their vision goes. Like any corporation, they only care about the money.

    Edit: Random, but I was personally never a believer in the Kinect. I just don't think the technology is there yet. We are still some years away from having the Occulus/VR come out. I think once we get that train going, we can focus on motion gestures becoming more popular.
    05-13-2014 10:45 PM
  10. Chris_Kez's Avatar
    For folks who've spent a lot of time with Xbox One, is Kinect (at the moment) more important/useful/integral to the gaming experience or to general control/media usage? I've yet to play with it, but my sense is that Kinect hasn't added much specifically to the gaming experience (i.e. it's not widely used as a way to move around as a character in a game, or to talk directly to NPCs in a game, or to make things actually happen within gameplay).

    I wonder if Kinect isn't really better positioned simply as a hands-free remote control option for a separate Media box. Maybe it doesn't have wide appeal to the core gaming community as a gaming tool. That could change in a few years as VR comes closer, but I don't think that's happening on this console generation. Perhaps MS thought they could use the Xbox One as a development tool and have gamers subsidize the technology and the platform that will eventually give birth to a low-cost media-only device (which MS needs if they really want to compete for the living room).
    05-14-2014 12:32 AM
  11. Keith Wallace's Avatar
    It will pretty much come down to what games are more appealing to you. Not that wasn't a selling factor in the beginning, but for those who were interested in Kinect + the potential for games to incorporate that in an innovative fashion is pretty much dead.
    This argument is SO tired and annoying. Two reasons:

    1. The Kinect was a known factor, yet we are watching some of the biggest titles (even exclusives to Microsoft) ignore it. Forza, Ryse, and Dead Rising barely use it, and Titanfall and Sunset Overdrive are having nothing to do with it.

    2. We'll see what kind of legitimate influence the Kinect had in 2015. Realistically, it could be argued that some (or many) of these third-party titles in 2014 did not know enough about the Kinect to develop games for it. However, 2013 showed it as an included part, so that would have steered them to it. Therefore, if the Kinect had impact, we'll see it with the 2015 releases.

    So, the only way this idea of ruining Kinect functionality could be semi-proven true would be if we see a surge in Kinect-based games in 2015, then a total catering of that support in 2016 (when the developers will have adjusted for the loss of the required purchase). Until then, pay attention to the fact that even Microsoft wasn't giving software support worth giving attention to.

    Meanwhile, I'll pray this is a sign that Microsoft is close to freeing up GPU resources that the Kinect is hogging, so we can get stuff at 1080p regularly.
    05-14-2014 01:13 AM
  12. Coreldan's Avatar
    Meanwhile, I'll pray this is a sign that Microsoft is close to freeing up GPU resources that the Kinect is hogging, so we can get stuff at 1080p regularly.
    It's not that regular even for PS4 with it's more power, GDDR and not hogging resources. I think if and when the 1080p starts to be regular, it's not gonna be primarly cos of the kinect resources.
    05-14-2014 04:20 AM
  13. minus365's Avatar
    this is really bad decision to sell Xbox One w/o Kinect. I can't get the reason. One of the outstanding features and they took step back and start selling without Kinect, means it will be ignroed by developpers in exact same way as on X360. I dont get it.

    If this came rom Elop's head, I am bit worrying about future of MS gaming division. :/
    05-14-2014 04:22 AM
  14. Coreldan's Avatar
    this is really bad decision to sell Xbox One w/o Kinect. I can't get the reason. One of the outstanding features and they took step back and start selling without Kinect, means it will be ignroed by developpers in exact same way as on X360. I dont get it.

    If this came rom Elop's head, I am bit worrying about future of MS gaming division. :/
    I was expecting them to take action, but I was hoping it would've been taking a loss from console sales to offer the console (and Kinect) at a cheaper price to compete better with PS4. This was the other option, the one I didn't want to happen for the same reasons you stated :/ MS could've afforded pushing units at a loss.
    05-14-2014 04:32 AM
  15. minus365's Avatar
    i'm seriously dissapointed. they should stand by their first decision to not sell XboxOne w/o Kinect. It was good decision I think, so relaly dont know why they've done such sudden change.??
    05-14-2014 06:37 AM
  16. A895's Avatar
    i'm seriously dissapointed. they should stand by their first decision to not sell XboxOne w/o Kinect. It was good decision I think, so relaly dont know why they've done such sudden change.??
    Money. /thread

    Posted via Windows Phone Central App
    05-14-2014 07:00 AM
  17. paulxxwall's Avatar
    i'm seriously dissapointed. they should stand by their first decision to not sell XboxOne w/o Kinect. It was good decision I think, so relaly dont know why they've done such sudden change.??
    if you had to sell about 2 million units and I mean real quick ....bring price down! But you have to remove something so it doesn't go bankrupt....what would you remove?....kinect!
    05-14-2014 07:27 AM
  18. minus365's Avatar
    if it goes banckrupcy 6months after launch, I'd first remove responsible manager as it's clear fail, butI'd never remove the main showcase feature that stands out ahead of the competitors.

    very poor decision....
    Reflexx likes this.
    05-14-2014 09:14 AM
  19. TonyDedrick's Avatar
    I just don't get why people just automatically assumed that by bundling a Kinect, every developer would automatically add features for it. Unless I missed something from Microsoft saying it was a requirement.
    A895 likes this.
    05-14-2014 09:37 AM
  20. Christopher Lindsay's Avatar
    My family has an Xbox 360 and none of us are serious gamers at all and I think it's ridiculous that it took a decade, two consoles and Sony wiping the floor with Microsoft sales to finally allow us to get the Netflix and Hulu we already pay for with the internet we already paid for without an extra middle man fee as if the Xbox did anything. Smdh... That's just greed.
    05-14-2014 09:57 AM
  21. ncxcstud's Avatar
    My family has an Xbox 360 and none of us are serious gamers at all and I think it's ridiculous that it took a decade, two consoles and Sony wiping the floor with Microsoft sales to finally allow us to get the Netflix and Hulu we already pay for with the internet we already paid for without an extra middle man fee as if the Xbox did anything. Smdh... That's just greed.
    Why purchase a games console with media capabilities then? If that was the case you'd have been better off just getting a Roku or Apple TV or something like that.

    The 'double pay' never bothered me - mostly because it didn't really affect me. I was already paying for both and I wasn't paying for XBOX Live to watch Netflix on my TV. It was just an 'added bonus' after paying for it to play video games online.

    Though, at least with the new changes my wife will be able to watch Netflix without having to have my screen name signed in, which was just an added step - not really an inconvenience.
    05-14-2014 10:09 AM
  22. Reflexx's Avatar
    Devs wouldn't automatically make games that required Kinect KBB their own because they are risk adverse. But if MS led the way to show that people were ready to accept innovation then 3rd parties would be willing to follow.

    The problem now is that if you spend $40 million making a game, you will definitely not include any control scheme that requires Kinect even if it would make for a better game. You will target controls that every single consumer has.

    MS just changed Kinect from a real standard controller to an expensive accessory. MS made it significantly riskier to make something that requires Kinect, guaranteeing that we'll be left with little add ons or cheapo games.
    05-14-2014 10:13 AM
  23. ncxcstud's Avatar
    I just don't get why people just automatically assumed that by bundling a Kinect, every developer would automatically add features for it. Unless I missed something from Microsoft saying it was a requirement.
    I don't think its an assumption that every developer would automatically add Kinect features. But, instead that there is an incentive that developers can do creative things with Kinect features in their games without end users requiring the purchase of additional equipment to achieve it since everyone already had one.

    The biggest issue is that Microsoft's 1st party games didn't/haven't used it effectively.

    I think the biggest use for it that I've seen is how Dead Rising 3 used the voice stuff. It heightened tension in the game if you made a noise and the zombies 'heard' you and came after you.

    They need to port over Kinect Party from the 360 as soon as they can. That game is fun.

    There is an indie game that looks interesting that combines controller use and the Kinect where your body 'reveals' the level, so you have to move and twist around to get through it. That's a neat and creative use...
    Reflexx likes this.
    05-14-2014 10:15 AM
  24. Christopher Lindsay's Avatar
    Why purchase a games console with media capabilities then? If that was the case you'd have been better off just getting a Roku or Apple TV or something like that.

    The 'double pay' never bothered me - mostly because it didn't really affect me. I was already paying for both and I wasn't paying for XBOX Live to watch Netflix on my TV. It was just an 'added bonus' after paying for it to play video games online.

    Though, at least with the new changes my wife will be able to watch Netflix without having to have my screen name signed in, which was just an added step - not really an inconvenience.
    I'm not really a gamer at all. My girl plays occasionally and our 7 year old clocks in the most time on the console because she loves all of the dance games. If we paid for the box and Kinect why should I pay the box again to watch content I pay for? If it were apple tv or Roku I wouldn't have to pay twice. MS isn't reversing the policy to look out for the customer. It's because their greedy ways have finally caught up with them.
    05-14-2014 10:24 AM
  25. theeboredone's Avatar
    I just don't think the technology is there yet. I'll wait to see how the Occulus turns out. Maybe then, the Kinect 3.0 will become more awesome.
    05-14-2014 12:01 PM
72 123

Similar Threads

  1. What else do you want Cortana to help you with?
    By Rich Edmonds in forum Cortana
    Replies: 85
    Last Post: 02-25-2015, 08:36 AM
  2. Best LiveScore Appilcation For WIndowsphone
    By Sina Shamsi in forum Windows Phone Apps
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 05-13-2014, 04:11 PM
  3. [Free app] Fast light - free and no ads
    By Pojkar in forum App Spotlight
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-13-2014, 10:28 AM
  4. Deal of the Day: Amzer Pudding TPU Case for Nokia Lumia 1320
    By WindowsCentral.com in forum Windows Central News Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-13-2014, 10:00 AM
  5. Microsoft Lync collaboration app updated for Android tablets
    By WindowsCentral.com in forum Windows Central News Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-13-2014, 09:42 AM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD