Sony Playstation is not innovating

[soniqstylz]

Oh look, we can all make skewed comparisons:

PS4 does have tablet / phone controls.

[dead.cell]

Completely agree. All that Sony is doing is building on what the PS3 is by improving graphics and the user interface. They aren't innovating new ways to play or new areas that the console could be used for at all.

Totally subjective, if you consider the fact that Microsoft is trying to compete with existing markets by throwing features of a Smart TV and other competing devices into their game console, while placing access to those features behind a paywall...

[Yogurtmaster]

Im playing games on my console not watching tv, i have a tv for that.

I watched the Sony Playstation E3 2013 press conference and they are talking about the same kind of thing. Watch the video here:

Go to 58 minutes in... Talking about Sony Movies, Music, and TV. Whoops... I guess you done goofed.

[Yogurtmaster]

PS4 has instant switching between apps as well, it also has Ustream live streaming as well as the game DVR stuff that XB1 has.

Can it switch to different games at will using your voice without putting a disk in the drive? Can it run Windows 8/8.1 apps while games are running or full screen?

[Yogurtmaster]

There's a difference between buying/renting media and building the whole system around TV when people have lots of other devices that do it better, DVRs, Smart TVs ,etc..

Notice how they spent a whole 5 minutes talking about it, when Microsoft announced XB1 in May they spent an hour talking just about TV functionality, its a freaking games console why do I need to plug my receiver into it.

The idea of Xbox one is to have one input using multiple devices.

1) This allows you to save an HDMI port on your TV

2) This allows you not to have to switch inputs on your TV (just have one input all of the time)

3) This allows for ease of use to have your TV and your Xbox One connected so the Xbox can play Bluray movies, it can play TV using your regular DVR, you can play games at will using your voice, listen to music, do everything with one input on your TV.

4) You can play any game from your library using your voice (where you left off on the save point)

It's convenience.

Let me show you what I have to do right now to play a game... If you play games in your basement because you live with your parents you might not have these problems, but if you have a family you may have to do what I have to do. My TV is used for many things, Bluray, TV, and console games.

1) Turn on my TV (on the front of my TV)

2) Find the remote for my Dish Network so I can change the input from my Dish box to my console

3) Find the controller (not always around, my wife plays games and sometimes we put it away when guests come over)

4) Turn on the console

5) Find a game disk to play (I have a busy life so I don't organize them properly and my wife plays games too)

6) Stick a disk in the drive and wait until it spins up and we can start to play.

7) The disk is the loudest sound on the console.

I also have an entertainment set with doors on the front to prevent dust, so I have to open the doors to put the game in the console.

With Xbox one, I don't have to do anything like the above. One HDMI input on my TV does everything I need.

Also when you get 500 channels you want to view something but you don't have a guide with channel numbers, now I can just say something like "Spike TV" without knowing what number it is and I get it. I fail to see how this is so bad.

With Sony, they are still acting like it's 2006 with the PS3, they offer no convenience at all and nothing that is next generation. Their E3 show was the worst I have ever seen, it was boring. The only good thing was the price and that is all. It was an epic disaster of having no games so they had to attack Microsoft (its a classic strategy when you don't have anything to offer).

[strotee]

"Innovation" is one of those generic, abstract terms that means one thing to one person and something completely different to someone else, so arguing is practically pointless. For me personally, having powerful hardware, amazing games, and the ability to sell a game (anywhere I desire) I no longer want, are at the top of my list.

[Yogurtmaster]

I have a thick Northern England accent and the first Kinect really had troubles with my voice so I don't give a flying fig whether I can change it with my voice or not. But yes it can switch around the OS just as fast as XB1 did, to different games, the store, videos, etc..

Microsoft hasn't said that the XB1 will be able to run Windows 8 apps, it has modern apps designed for XB1 that run using the XB1 modified Windows 8 Kernel, so try again.

The voice recognition has been improved drastically.

Watch this 2013 video to show you what I mean (this is on phones, but they will use it on Xbox as well).

It's going to run Windows 8 apps. That is the two OSes. They are in a Virtual Machine environment, one is the Xbox OS that allows games to use the metal of the hardware and the other is Windows 8 Apps that run.

[Nick H. Supervisor]

Can it switch to different games at will using your voice without putting a disk in the drive? Can it run Windows 8/8.1 apps while games are running or full screen?

I don't care about the first argument, since I don't want to use my voice to switch games. I'll stick to my controller.

But that second argument...wow. Here's a question: can you play your Microsoft console on your Microsoft TV? Of course not, Microsoft don't do TVs. The exact same way that Sony don't make operating systems for the PC. Arguing that Microsoft are unifying their applications when Sony isn't is a silly argument to make. One company has multiple operating systems to have that strategy work, the other doesn't.

[Yogurtmaster]

I like your little passive aggressive dig insinuating I am some little kid who lives in a basement in my parents house.

Let me show you what I have to do right now to play a game, and yes I do have a family also. I guess you have never heard of AV Receivers.

1) Turn on my TV (my AVR is already switched on)

2) Turn on my console and my AVR automatically switches input

3) Play game

4) Turn console off and my AVR switches back to the primary input my DVR on HDMI 1 without having to press any buttons or find any controllers

Most people don't have AV Receivers. Even if they did, it's even easier than that.

1) Turn on TV

2) Tell Xbox to turn on

3) Tell Xbox to play whatever game you want (no need to find the game and put in the disk, which you forgot to add)

4) Tell Xbox to turn off if you don't want to use it beyond gaming. (I just added this to be equal with your list, but you don't

even have to turn it off because you can continue using it overlayed on the TV).

Xbox One has one HDMI input, I have 4 devices plugged into my AVR, what do I do with the rest?

A minority of people use a AV Reciever, a huge minority. Most people use the speakers that are built in with their TV and only use the HDMI jacks on their TV.

Love the old "omg Playstation has no games", I'm not sure which conference you were watching but I definitely saw games, here is a convenient list:

• The Order + Exclusive
  
• Killzone Shadow Fall +Exclusive already shown on Feb 20th, 2013
  
• Drive Club +Exclusive Shown already on Feb 20th, 2013
  
• Infamous Second Son + Exclusive already shown on Feb 20th, 2013
  
• Knack + Exclusive already shown on Feb 20th, 2013
  
• The Dark Sorcerer (Prototype) * A movie with no game play
  
• The Witness * An indie game that will be multiplatform (big whoopiedoo)
  
• Transistor * PC indie game
  
• Mercenary Kings * PC indie game
  
• OctoDad Deadly Catch * PC indie game
  
• Secret Ponchos * PC indie game
  
• Oddworld: Abe's Oddysee New N' Tasty! - PC game
  
• Diablo 3 -PC game from years ago
  
• Final Fantasy Versus XIII *Multiplatform
  
• Kingdom Hearts 3 * Multiplatform
  
• Assassins Creed 4 Black Flag * Multiplatform
  
• Watch Dogs * Multiplatform
  
• NBA2K14 * Multiplatform
  
• The Elders Scrolls Online *Multiplatform
  
• Mad Max * Multiplatform
  
• Destiny * Multiplatform
  

Here I updated it. The most boring conference that I have ever witnessed at E3. No games at all, worst conference that I have ever seen. It's so bad that the only interesting thing was the price of the PS4. No innovation since they dropped the camera, not very interesting games, boring conference. I give Sony's conference a D+.

You know Sony is in a bad position when the most excitement about the conference was the price and they had to throw DRM at Microsoft because they had nothing. This makes the Microsoft conference of the last three years look awesome!

Are you sure you want to continue being a Sony fan? Worst conference for a launch console, ever (I am not exaggerating nor am I emotional). I walked away and said this is all Sony really has?

[Nick H. Supervisor]

1) Turn on TV

2) Tell Xbox to turn on

3) Tell Xbox to play whatever game you want (no need to find the game and put in the disk, which you forgot to add)

4) Tell Xbox to turn off if you don't want to use it beyond gaming. (I just added this to be equal with your list, but you don't

even have to turn it off because you can continue using it overlayed on the TV).

I forgot that Microsoft had an exclusive on digital downloads. I'm not sure how many games I downloaded on to my Playstation the other day, but they must have been imaginary so it doesn't matter...all the other steps I just substitute my voice for the controller, the thing that I use to play my games anyway. Interestingly I can do all of the above steps without getting up from my couch. And that's with the PS3.

Are you sure you want to continue being a Sony fan? Worst conference for a launch console, ever.

I know the question wasn't directed at me, but I will continue to buy a product that serves my purposes.

[dangel]

I don't care about the first argument, since I don't want to use my voice to switch games. I'll stick to my controller.

But that second argument...wow. Here's a question: can you play your Microsoft console on your Microsoft TV? Of course not, Microsoft don't do TVs. The exact same way that Sony don't make operating systems for the PC. Arguing that Microsoft are unifying their applications when Sony isn't is a silly argument to make. One company has multiple operating systems to have that strategy work, the other doesn't.

For me MS has the edge on the software side - part of that is precisely because they can unify their platforms and that Sony doesn't have a version of that doesn't really change that appeal. I can't see why not having a MS 'TV' is in any way comparable - there's no disadvantage in that and no benefit from greater integration - it's just a dumb panel after all.

I'd quite like to be able to switch TV channels when I can't find the bloody controller (again) because the small humans have hidden it ;) I can think of circumstances where having the *option* is great - just like motion control too. You don't have to use it, it's not mutually exclusive now is it? :)

BTW i'm part of the 'huge minority' with a AV Receiver :)

[Yogurtmaster]

I forgot that Microsoft had an exclusive on digital downloads. I'm not sure how many games I downloaded on to my Playstation the other day, but they must have been imaginary so it doesn't matter...all the other steps I just substitute my voice for the controller, the thing that I use to play my games anyway. Interestingly I can do all of the above steps without getting up from my couch. And that's with the PS3.

I know the question wasn't directed at me, but I will continue to buy a product that serves my purposes.

You forgot that disks are actually real and still being sold and people are putting disks in everyday. You should buy a PS3 instead because that is what the PS4 is already.

The PS4 even has features that the 360 has... That is the future...

I am sure your right, you can search for games much easier using your controller than just using words. Aren't you supposed to be rational and full of reason. Please. LOL The biggest joke on this forum.

I'm sorry, I actually laughed in real life several times. You should do stand-up comedy.

[Yogurtmaster]

I wasn't sure at first but its obvious the guy is a troll, not sure why multiplatform and indie games are a negative, they are still games coming to the console, reported.

Because anyone with a laptop can play the games on steam and a lot of them are free to play. That is why. I don't need to buy a PS4 for those games. Those games also don't need to have a high end PC, so you could still play them with an old PC.

I am not a troll. I don't drink the Kool-Aid you do. I just can't believe that people actually think that Sony conference was great. The price is great, but there is very little that makes it worth owning.

[Nick H. Supervisor]

I'm sorry, I actually laughed in real life several times. You should do stand-up comedy.

Glad I could help. Attempting to insult me doesn't mean you're correct though, it just means that I don't want to have a discussion with you on yet another subject.

[Yogurtmaster]

Glad I could help. Attempting to insult me doesn't mean you're correct though, it just means that I don't want to have a discussion with you on yet another subject.

I am not attempting to insult you at all. It's just that you claim to be so rational and so full of reason, but nothing you said was either rational or reasonable. That is why I laughed. What you gave me really didn't make sense. It's a complete joke.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

Funny thing is Sony actually released a DVR for PS last gen, PlayTV/Torne.

Sure it wasn't in America, but you Americans are quick to dismiss the rest of the world when MS launch all of their TV functionality exclusively there.

[Fourjays Veteran]

Geez, there is a lot of passive aggressive "passive aggressive" remarks in this thread. You'd think half the people here were married to the flippin' consoles. :rolleyes: Long time since I last posted on Neowin, but I thought the OP came up with an interesting discussion point and it prompted me to think about it a bit.

I'll be straight up and say I have had a PS3 since 2007/8 (I can't remember, but it was shortly after Fallout 3 and GTA IV were released), so feel free to call me a fanboy if that is the best argument you can come up with. However, I don't have anything against Microsoft and went into E3 open minded about whether to get an Xbox or PS this time round. To the point and in response to the OP...

I believe he is right. The PS4 isn't really innovating. But to me that is the wrong question. The real question for me is are the innovations presented by the Xbox worthwhile? While innovation is nice, I've found in recent years there is a lot of "innovation" where the problem it solves has to be invented after the fact. To me that isn't innovation. That's coming up with something, saying "this is cool" and then finding a way to sell it. Unfortunately, this is what I see with the Xbox One. Actually, it is all I see from Microsoft these days and it rather disappoints me because they were pretty good at coming up with actual innovations... innovations that solve existing problems. But I digress and will explain further.

What innovations does the Xbox have? Can control your TV via it (do stop calling it "all-in-one"... you still need your cable/satellite box so it is "all-in-two" if anything), has better Kinect and can multi-task apps. I'll cover why I don't see these as genuine innovations.

I'll start with the multi-tasking. I'd imagine most people just use their phone or tablet. Invariably I'm not the only one watching TV or playing a game, so "snapping" would be a bit selfish of me. I'm not saying it isn't a "nice to have" feature, but as I can already solve this problem in an arguably better way, it certainly isn't a deal breaker or a real innovation.

The TV integration is a again a nice feature, but again, what problem does it solve? I often see the "don't have to find the remote control" argument, which makes me wonder just what on Earth people do with them? :huh: I've never had to "hunt" for a remote control in my life. I don't have an urge to speak to my TV either. It is very cool, but that is where it ends for me. Going by the voice recognition features of my (Windows) phone, it is nearly always quicker and easier to just click/tap/type than to talk to it. The TV integration would be more innovative if it was truly an "all-in-one" box, or focused on this digital future that Microsoft is apparently convinced is the future of games but not TV.

Lastly the Kinect. Microsoft is very heavily invested in this, but going by their conference I have to wonder why they didn't just include a microphone in the console and ditch the camera. Having gone all in for motion control last(this?) generation, I came to the realization that pure motion control in games is dead in the water. It is a gimmick, will probably always be a gimmick and its time has already passed. And all for one simple reason - it is 2D. They can throw as many stereo cameras, thermal imaging, infra-red lenses and what-not at it they like, but pure motion control can never be anything but a 2D input (well, until we can get VR goggles and some sort of treadmill that simulates a never-ending room). Because as long as it is tethered to a TV and camera/console you can only do left/right/up/down and a very small degree of backwards/forwards. All the evidence you need of this is "Ryse". With Kinect alone it'd have to be on-rails. Add a controller and remove the rails, and you are no longer able to have sword-play without putting a controller through the TV, leading to the horrible button-mashing that was shown at E3. That isn't to say it is impossible to correct it, but you would need a special "left-hand controller" to provide the depth that motion control alone can not provide.

Having said that, Kinect is very clever. I like it a lot. But it is an innovation being used on the wrong platform. Kinect games all looked "meh", as do all the motion control games. What was interesting with the Kinect though was the uses people were finding for it outside of gaming. This is frankly where Kinect's future should be, not the Xbox.

So to me, neither Microsoft or Sony truly innovated on the console front. The only "new" features of the consoles that really interested me were the impulse triggers on the Xbox, and the touchpad on the PlayStation. Where I look for innovation on a games console is with the games themselves though and only one company at E3 did that - Ubisoft.

Sure, Forza looked interesting (but as with the 360 there isn't enough variety and creativity in the other Xbox titles to make it worthwhile) and inFamous Second Son has me sold (despite me skipping the prior games). But Ubisoft was the only company there that was truly trying new ideas in its games. And it was the only conference where I was genuinely "wowed". The Division, Watch Dogs, The Crew, and to a lesser extend Assassin's Creed IV, are all reasons why I'd want a next-gen console. All they need to do now is make Rainbow Six more like Rogue Spear and I'll be huge Ubisoft fan. :D

[Yogurtmaster]

None of the games listed in Sony conference are free to play, PC or otherwise.

You are a freaking troll questioning why I want a PS4 just because you personally thought the conference was rubbish and had no games and then when I call you out on "no games" you said "......but........but you can get them on the PC", other than Diablo 3 none of the games are currently on the PC.

Troll on.

It's not called a troll. Most people already have a computer Mac, Windows, Linux. I didn't say but.... but...., you said that.

There were not any games. They are games that already are on a platform that anyone can use.

It's not like they are exclusive to the PS4 and it's not like they were made specifically for the PS4, they are just ported from the PC which everyone has access to, even if their PC is crap. So PS4 owners lose. They are paying $399 to play already existing PC games and yet you some how spin that as having games. That is laughable and a lot of damage control.

What would happen if the Xbox one went on stage and said hey we have backward compatibility in our system with the 360 and everything is compatible and just walked off the stage, sure you would have some games alright.

I can see you are in full damage control mode. Well, the way you are talking about everything else, you deserve it.

[0nyX]

There were not any games. They are games that already are on a platform that anyone can use.

It's not like they are exclusive to the PS4 and it's not like they were made specifically for the PS4, they are just ported from the PC which everyone has access to, even if their PC is crap. So PS4 owners lose. They are paying $399 to play already existing PC games and yet you some how spin that as having games. That is laughable and a lot of damage control.

What would happen if the Xbox one went on stage and said hey we have backward compatibility in our system with the 360 and everything is compatible and just walked off the stage, sure you would have some games alright.

I can see you are in full damage control mode. Well, the way you are talking about everything else, you deserve it.

You are not making any sense.

[Kami-]

I am not attempting to insult you at all. It's just that you claim to be so rational and so full of reason, but nothing you said was either rational or reasonable. That is why I laughed. What you gave me really didn't make sense. It's a complete joke.

TFT (total ****ing troll) Detected.

[Graimer]

There's a difference between buying/renting media and building the whole system around TV when people have lots of other devices that do it better, DVRs, Smart TVs ,etc..

Notice how they spent a whole 5 minutes talking about it, when Microsoft announced XB1 in May they spent an hour talking just about TV functionality, its a freaking games console why do I need to plug my receiver into it.

The thing is, that the console is STILL made for gaming. That's why it has it's own exclusive OS for games. The fact is that MS separated the announcement into two parts. One for media-features, and one primarily for games. E3 is for games, so they focused on games. Sony however, mixed their two events, some media/social and gaming in both. It's just two ways of doing the same thing. Just because MS combined all non-gaming media features into one whole event(+ platform tech stuff), you believe that they used a lot more time on the non-gaming part because it *FELT* longer.. Combine the social/media time from both Sony events and I'm sure it took about the same time. It doesn't mean that both companies says f*ck gamers, it means that both companies want MEDIA and GAMING features.

I don't care about the first argument, since I don't want to use my voice to switch games. I'll stick to my controller.

But that second argument...wow. Here's a question: can you play your Microsoft console on your Microsoft TV? Of course not, Microsoft don't do TVs. The exact same way that Sony don't make operating systems for the PC. Arguing that Microsoft are unifying their applications when Sony isn't is a silly argument to make. One company has multiple operating systems to have that strategy work, the other doesn't.

I agree, but just as a suggestion. They have experience with Android and could have added ex. support for that. It would offer a great platform which developers are familiar with and already has lots of features. :-)

[Yogurtmaster]

Geez, there is a lot of passive aggressive "passive aggressive" remarks in this thread. You'd think half the people here were married to the flippin' consoles. :rolleyes: Long time since I last posted on Neowin, but I thought the OP came up with an interesting discussion point and it prompted me to think about it a bit.

I personally am not married to a console. What I am is disappointed. Lots of things in life have changed since 2005/2006. I am not just disappointed in Sony, but everyone really. Sony being the worse offender out of all of them.

1) I am disappointed in the price of XB1 and only 500GB hard drive (that is really dumb, put in at least 1TB hard drive)

2) I am disappointed in Nintendo because of the lack of innovation in their games. Same mario, same Zelda. Boring and nothing new. Wonderful 101 being the only neat game at all on this platform.

3) I am disappointed in Sony the most, because there is nothing from games to innovation that makes me want to buy one at all.

A 20 year old touch pad is their new innovation? Really? Their conference was worse than 2005, only the price was good this time around and that is all, what a train wreck.

I believe he is right. The PS4 isn't really innovating. But to me that is the wrong question. The real question for me is are the innovations presented by the Xbox worthwhile? While innovation is nice, I've found in recent years there is a lot of "innovation" where the problem it solves has to be invented after the fact. To me that isn't innovation. That's coming up with something, saying "this is cool" and then finding a way to sell it. Unfortunately, this is what I see with the Xbox One. Actually, it is all I see from Microsoft these days and it rather disappoints me because they were pretty good at coming up with actual innovations... innovations that solve existing problems. But I digress and will explain further.

Innovation doesn't need to solve problems. Innovation needs to have something different that works. Inventions are something that can solve problems for people, for example solving world hunger or pollution or something like that.

If you can evolve something through innovation and it works, then that is fine. I see no problems with that. It can help solve problems as well though, for example people that think using a controller is too complicated. Now maybe that isn't a big deal to you, but older people don't want to play games because they are too complicated for them. People that used to play games and don't anymore a lot of times don't because the controller looks too complicated, well Kinect can solve this problem and since Kinect 2.0 uses better, more accurate technology than this can work for them. Just like the Wii, that is why the WII was so popular, because it addressed this problem.

What innovations does the Xbox have? Can control your TV via it (do stop calling it "all-in-one"... you still need your cable/satellite box so it is "all-in-two" if anything), has better Kinect and can multi-task apps. I'll cover why I don't see these as genuine innovations.

I will explain all of the innovations later, but it is an all in one if only because it is on one input. I don't have to change inputs for multiple devices. I can play a bluray disk, I can watch TV, I can play a game, I can listen to music. I can layer my existing Dish network receiver on the screen along with the channel guide that works together so I can find the channels that I need. When you have something like Direct TV or Dish, you have 500 channels. When I first had Cable back in 1977, I just had maybe 20 channels so they were easy to remember, I don't know what number my number is if I want to watch Spike TV, I can say all of this using my voice and wham I am good to go. I can't do that now. I can't search for what I want right now using my voice without channel scanning. That is fixing a problem right there. I didn't even mention Skype that can be used on all computers, phones, and tablets around the world.

I'll start with the multi-tasking. I'd imagine most people just use their phone or tablet. Invariably I'm not the only one watching TV or playing a game, so "snapping" would be a bit selfish of me. I'm not saying it isn't a "nice to have" feature, but as I can already solve this problem in an arguably better way, it certainly isn't a deal breaker or a real innovation.

The tablet interacts with your Xbox just like Sony here. I can use it with Windows 8 or Xbox games to control functions or use it as a second screen. So it is an enabler of different experiences that you can't get solo on your phone or tablet. It works with them together.

The TV integration is a again a nice feature, but again, what problem does it solve? I often see the "don't have to find the remote control" argument, which makes me wonder just what on Earth people do with them? :huh: I've never had to "hunt" for a remote control in my life. I don't have an urge to speak to my TV either. It is very cool, but that is where it ends for me. Going by the voice recognition features of my (Windows) phone, it is nearly always quicker and easier to just click/tap/type than to talk to it. The TV integration would be more innovative if it was truly an "all-in-one" box, or focused on this digital future that Microsoft is apparently convinced is the future of games but not TV.

Do you have a family? Because I can't find my remote often. Different members of my family grab the remote control and I had to find it in a couch cushion a few times. Speech recognition is becoming practical now. I am not embarrassed to talk to my TV just like I am not embarrassed to talk to a computer over a phone. When you have 500 channels and don't know what is what, it makes it easier to talk than it is to try to find it via channel surfing. I have no idea what channel ESPN is on and I love sports, but sometimes I watch the highlights online, but sometime I want to watch it on my HDTV. Microsoft is also headed towards digital over the network TV as well (you know you can do both these days right? You know you can't get local channels online right?)

This is a phone demonstration, but Microsoft is going to use this speech recognition for Xbox ONE as well....

Lastly the Kinect. Microsoft is very heavily invested in this, but going by their conference I have to wonder why they didn't just include a microphone in the console and ditch the camera. Having gone all in for motion control last(this?) generation, I came to the realization that pure motion control in games is dead in the water. It is a gimmick, will probably always be a gimmick and its time has already passed. And all for one simple reason - it is 2D. They can throw as many stereo cameras, thermal imaging, infra-red lenses and what-not at it they like, but pure motion control can never be anything but a 2D input (well, until we can get VR goggles and some sort of treadmill that simulates a never-ending room). Because as long as it is tethered to a TV and camera/console you can only do left/right/up/down and a very small degree of backwards/forwards. All the evidence you need of this is "Ryse". With Kinect alone it'd have to be on-rails. Add a controller and remove the rails, and you are no longer able to have sword-play without putting a controller through the TV, leading to the horrible button-mashing that was shown at E3. That isn't to say it is impossible to correct it, but you would need a special "left-hand controller" to provide the depth that motion control alone can not provide.

There is a lot and I mean a lot you are missing here. Kinect isn't one strategy, it's not one technology. It's a part of the ecosystem of technology. There are two games at launch that use motion control for Kinect. A new Kinect sports game which scans your entire body and puts it in game and then there is Fantasia which is one of Game Spots best of E3. Motion control isn't dead at all nor is it a gimmick. It is only just a part of a piece that isn't the whole.

1) It can be used for Augmenting games such as the game pad or your body while sitting

2) It can be used with cloud technology to change the way a game plays by studying your game play.

3) It can be used with the 3D augmented Glasses that Microsoft is working on

4) It can be used with the illumiroom technology to interact with virtual objects in real-time

5) It is going to be used with the Interactive TV shows Microsoft is working on with the cloud + kinect to give you not just a regular TV Show, but an interactive experience. It's pushing boundaries.

It can help gain feedback from the user to change gameplay on the fly with using Kinect and the cloud.

You could actually do a real-time milo game now, you have the power to interact.

There is a lot more, but it's 5:00 am and I have to get to bed.

Having said that, Kinect is very clever. I like it a lot. But it is an innovation being used on the wrong platform. Kinect games all looked "meh", as do all the motion control games. What was interesting with the Kinect though was the uses people were finding for it outside of gaming. This is frankly where Kinect's future should be, not the Xbox.

Wrong, Kinect has a lot of innovations and I can post more when I can think clearly, there is a lot it can do, because it knows where you are in the room and what you are looking at, when you switch controllers it knows what controller you have. With the cloud it can update facial expressions it can read your heart rate and it can tell what sports team you like based on the Tshirt you are wearing and it can do that in the dark. It can track multiple fingers, it can track when you look away from the screen it can tell where your eyes are looking. There is a lot you can do with that.

Did you know that Kinect can track the controller and did you also know that the controller has next generation HD rumble that can not just use the triggers but put to where the fire is coming from in an FPS? You can actually use the controller in a game to find gold in an RPG.

Sure, Forza looked interesting (but as with the 360 there isn't enough variety and creativity in the other Xbox titles to make it worthwhile) and inFamous Second Son has me sold (despite me skipping the prior games). But Ubisoft was the only company there that was truly trying new ideas in its games. And it was the only conference where I was genuinely "wowed". The Division, Watch Dogs, The Crew, and to a lesser extend Assassin's Creed IV, are all reasons why I'd want a next-gen console. All they need to do now is make Rainbow Six more like Rogue Spear and I'll be huge Ubisoft fan. :D

Did you see Quantum Break, Ryse (which does not use quick time events, that is false), TitanFall? Witcher 3? Dead Rising 3?, Crimson Dragon? D4? Sunset Overdrive?

I completely disagree with you there dude. This isn't all of them either, there is going to be more at the euro game show.

Dude you're a ****ing moron, stop typing your idiot is showing.

You have shown you have lost and have offered nothing of value to this thread. You lack understanding and common sense.

That isn't my problem.

[Woelfel]

You have shown you have lost and have offered nothing of value to this thread. You lack understanding and common sense.

That isn't my problem.

Hey, even though I agree with you on the basics of your argument...there's no reason to say someone lacks common sense. Keep it civil please. Thanks.

Also (generally speaking now), motion control is not a gimmick, it is necessary for the gaming industry to move forward. In 50 years, do you expect us to still be using another iteration of the same controller and nothing else? I hope we don't (I'll be pretty old and gaming will probably be the least of my worries). Having it mandatory to even work means developers can (especially for exclusive games) target it for little enhancements to games. Yes, right now voice is the most used feature of the Kinect and I think the reason why is because it's the easiest to understand to enhance gaming for developers. Just say <word> and function is called. I'm waiting for developers to put in head-tracking for games because I think it's awesome and can change some gameplay elements that would have been the same ole, same ole before. Having to lean in a direction in order to dodge, or having to hold out your hand to grab a partner instead of a QTE are the little things that developers can do.

A total motion control AAA game is going to be a difficult problem to solve, but I'd rather have a problem to solve than not having a problem like that at all.

[Graimer]

I'm waiting for developers to put in head-tracking for games because I think it's awesome and can change some gameplay elements that would have been the same ole, same ole before.

Forza 4 does this. Worked well when I tried it at launch : ) With the new graphics, physics, drivatars(or whatever), haptic feedback and head-tracking, forza 5 will hopefully be great! :D

[Krome]

After I read the entire OP post and skims through the first page of posts, I had to skip to the very end. I call this, Microsoft-is-at-work. Paying someone to say crap about their competition just to get their product sold. Happens to Zune, then Windows 8, now the console.