Recommended Posts

Your nitpicking has hit a new high.  :rolleyes:

 

Obviously, the ambient sound thing is an option.

 

It sounds like a nice feature in theory.  But who would use that feature though?  Your phone rings and you are dead.  It seems like a useless feature to me when you put it in production.

 

But anyway, that is not next gen to me.  It might be to you, but not to me.  I like enhanced graphics, new storylines, physics, game mechanics, and so on.

 

Everybody keeps saying next gen would be pointless without Kinect....why?  Why not offer a cheaper version for people that want nothing to do with Kinect?

 

The 360 has a 4G model....

So you can no longer talk on the phone while gaming, or talk to your friend in your house, or have a party?

 

That would be freaking awesome... can you picture the difficulty...

Because you and friends are partying and the zombies detect the noise...

I have kids, my 2 girls never shut up...LOL.... thats truly next gen...

 

The PS4 gives me what I want.  A console with a controller to play games.  No add-ons that I will not use.

 

If Kinect is so great, people will actually use it without being forced to have it.  I do not see why it has to be forced.  If it is an amazing tech, people will use it.

 

Also, do you really think developers will support it like crazy when they also make a PS4 version of the game?  I doubt it.  It might just have basic stuff, but it will not be an amazing experience.

 

 

Look if you hate Kinect and the X1 games, then you know what your getting : a ps4.

 

Why you guys want to argue this round and round is beyond me.

 

 

Regarding Kinect being successful even as an add-on if its 'good', the problem is developer support. Here is the reality: No matter how 'good' Kinect is, it must have compelling gaming content to be successful. Developers will not give it a serious look if its unbundled. No content, no sell.

 

There is no way around it, MS had to make Kinect more of an integrated feature than an add-on so that developers saw a reason to try and use it. The only way we see Kinect actually get used in serious ways is to tempt developers with a large user base. I get it, some hate Kinect so much that they don't want to pay for it, but I think this is the logical step for Kinect to be more useful.

 

In general, the X1 and PS4 are gaming consoles with a strong launch lineup and great controllers. $100 extra gets you the Kinect feature that offers two input options for gaming and non gaming tasks (gesture and voice control). You can argue whether there are other feature differences, but for the sake of this post, I'll keep it to that. If $100 is too rich, or you just don't like the features/games of the X1, it makes your choice easier.

What the heck is going on lately?  I am getting both the Xbox One and the PS4.  Does that mean I cannot say ANYTHING bad about ANY of them?

 

Just like with Windows 8.  I bought it, and have been using it since day one.  Yet I received a LOT of crap for saying I did not like things.  It seems like we are in a "Sit down and shut up" attitude lately.

 

Kinect is just pointless.  I said I do not care if they bundled it.  Just allow me to freaking disconnect it and put it away.  I only have limited space for my consoles.

 

If PS4 required me to get the Eye and have it connected at all times, I would be annoyed at that too.

It sounds like a nice feature in theory.  But who would use that feature though?  Your phone rings and you are dead.  It seems like a useless feature to me when you put it in production.

 

But anyway, that is not next gen to me.  It might be to you, but not to me.  I like enhanced graphics, new storylines, physics, game mechanics, and so on.

 

Everybody keeps saying next gen would be pointless without Kinect....why?  Why not offer a cheaper version for people that want nothing to do with Kinect?

 

The 360 has a 4G model....

 

 

Wait, you say you like new game mechanics but you reject the ambient sound feature. That is a new game mechanic.

 

I get what your saying though, you prefer a next gen console that evolves the features you like. That means better graphics, better physics, new stories, and better gameplay mechanics that you like. Fair enough.

 

Both consoles look to offer you those things, but since you aren't interested in any game mechanics that involve gesture or voice control, its not shocking you would lean to the ps4. Why pay for something you have no interest in?

What the heck is going on lately?  I am getting both the Xbox One and the PS4.  Does that mean I cannot say ANYTHING bad about ANY of them?

 

Just like with Windows 8.  I bought it, and have been using it since day one.  Yet I received a LOT of crap for saying I did not like things.  It seems like we are in a "Sit down and shut up" attitude lately.

 

Kinect is just pointless.  I said I do not care if they bundled it.  Just allow me to freaking disconnect it and put it away.  I only have limited space for my consoles.

 

If PS4 required me to get the Eye and have it connected at all times, I would be annoyed at that too.

 

Ok calm down. First of all, I had no idea you were getting both. It sounded like you were trying to decide which to get.

 

Secondly, don't take it as an insult when I say get a ps4. I'm not saying that with sarcasm, I'm serious. Anyone trying to pick one has to consider these things.

 

No one should attack you for fair criticisms. For my part, I'm just sharing my thoughts on why things are the way they are. I thought you did say you wanted them to unbundled it, so that's why I was discussing that.

NeoDom explained it. There was an AMA discussion with a verified Xbox One dev that said the Kinect 2 costs almost as much as the console itself. He didn't give specifics, since his credentials were confirmed, that's official enough for me.

 

The vita and eye would only be considered part of the "true" experience if every game used both in interesting, must-have-in-order-to-play/compete/finish ways. They are not, so they are not really part of the "true" experience.

 

They are supplemental experiences that you can choose to have if you want. (as they should be)

 

Options = Dust collection... 

Xbox Vision ... Optional... Dust collector

PS3 Eye.... Optional... Dust Collector

Kinect v1.... Optional.... Some dust/ some use...

PS4 Eye... Optional.... ???

 

If Im a Developer and I knew that the PS4, EYE, and Vita were in the same box no matter what... I'm going nuts with the possibility... 

This would even be better than Smart Glass (and I'm biased towards it)...

Every GAME just becomes that much better...

If you are going to put $$$ into R&D for these camera's they have to be mandated... I've come to realize this more than ever now...

 

All games have just become better rather directly/indirectly through Vita and Eye...and PS4...

Ok calm down. First of all, I had no idea you were getting both. It sounded like you were trying to decide which to get.

 

Secondly, don't take it as an insult when I say get a ps4. I'm not saying that with sarcasm, I'm serious. Anyone trying to pick one has to consider these things.

 

No one should attack you for fair criticisms. For my part, I'm just sharing my thoughts on why things are the way they are. I thought you did say you wanted them to unbundled it, so that's why I was discussing that.

 

Well of course I wish they would unbundle it.  If I have no need for it, its $100 wasted (or however much a potential Xbox One would be without Kinect).

Well of course I wish they would unbundle it.  If I have no need for it, its $100 wasted (or however much a potential Xbox One would be without Kinect).

 

So that's why I thought you were trying to pick one console to buy. $100 could be a deal killer if you don't have interest in the other aspects of the X1 or the games.

So you can no longer talk on the phone while gaming, or talk to your friend in your house, or have a party?

You can do all of those things but the zombies will kill you and game will pause at a checkpoint. You should complain about checkpoints next.

  • 2 weeks later...

with the zombies game you might even be able to turn the kinect feature off for it and on at will, but itll bring a new depth of realism to the game. People want better gfx physics and all that but sometimes you dont get a good storyline, or some games can be graphically inferior but have a great storyline.  The AAA title usually have it all but why stop there why not have an extra depth of realism that youve never tried, for example you watch a horror type film like resident evil.... you could sneak around and be quiet but then there radios go off and the zombies come running at them.  Like in the zombies game your there trying sneak around... tbh boring thats all bin done and its boring as crap....BUT your mobile rings unexpectedly or you reach for your drink and knock your remote control onto the floor ala knocking off a spanner, kinect picks it up zombies hear and come running at you, something that isnt game planned and your in the fight of your life, hearts racing adrenaline booming... feels like your in the movies!!!!

 

Thats probably the whole point of it, most games if you want to you can sneak about and get round stuff easily and its boring but when unexpected stuff like that happens it can make it alot more exciting and i dont think people realise about the extra dimension to the game it could bring... holy crap i hate consoles but im thinking about getting one now lol. hate the game pads if i could plug a kb + mouse in id be golden!!

 

Omg even better say your watching your mate playing the game and your getting abit bored, shout up or accidentally knock someat off onto the floor to mess him up, laughs and giggles :d

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • Python programmers in a nutshell. Now, guess what lang most AI programmers use... :-)
    • There was nothing whatsoever wrong with Vista as an OS after the SP1 update. People who claim it wasn't were using ancient machines for some silly reason. Not kidding, no hyperbole/exaggeration. Vista was good.
    • Windows ME was worse.
    • Dude, im talking about simply disable it from settings app. Because of the eu regulation, you could disable it here for years.
    • One big question about Mars was answered thanks to Einstein's 100 year old theory by Sayan Sen Image via DepositPhotos Scientists at the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) have calculated how time passes on Mars compared with Earth, adding detail to how timekeeping would need to work beyond Earth’s orbit. The study, published in The Astronomical Journal, found that clocks on Mars run an average of 477 microseconds, or millionths of a second, faster per day than clocks on Earth. A microsecond is one millionth of a second, a very small unit used in precise scientific timing systems such as atomic clocks, which measure time using consistent atomic behavior. This difference is not constant. Because Mars moves around the Sun in a non-circular path (an eccentric orbit, meaning its distance from the Sun changes over time instead of staying fixed) and is affected by gravity from other bodies, the daily difference can vary by as much as 226 microseconds over a Martian year. The study also identifies smaller repeating changes of about 40 microseconds per day linked to synodic cycles (repeating periods that describe how planets line up with each other as they orbit the Sun from different positions). These longer patterns affect how time differences slowly rise and fall. To make these estimates, researchers compared Mars with Earth and the Moon. The work looks at relativistic proper time (the time actually measured by a clock depending on its speed and the strength of gravity where it is located, as described in Einstein’s relativity). This shows that each world has its own slightly different “rate” of time. This becomes more important as space missions expand into cislunar space (the region between Earth and the Moon) and toward Mars. On Earth, time systems rely on atomic clocks and satellites, which stay closely synchronized for navigation and communication. The study is based on Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity, which shows that time is affected by gravity and motion. Stronger gravity makes clocks run slower, while weaker gravity makes them run faster. “The time is just right for the Moon and Mars,” said NIST physicist Bijunath Patla. “This is the closest we have been to realizing the science fiction vision of expanding across the solar system.” A day on Mars is about 40 minutes longer than on Earth, and a Martian year lasts 687 Earth days. But the main question is not just about days and years, but how fast time itself passes. An atomic clock placed on Mars would function normally, but compared with one on Earth, the two would slowly drift apart due to differences in gravity and motion. This requires careful calculation of what is similar to a time-zone difference across planets. Researchers modeled Mars using a reference surface and included gravitational effects from the Sun, Earth, the Moon, and other planets. This includes a multi-body gravitational system (often described as a three-body or four-body problem, where predicting motion becomes difficult because multiple large objects all pull on each other at the same time through gravity). Mars also follows a Keplerian orbit (an idealized elliptical orbit based on simple gravitational laws that assume smooth motion, before adding real-world disturbances from other bodies). In addition, the researchers accounted for solar tides (small changes in gravitational force caused by the Sun that slightly distort planetary motion and timing, especially in systems involving Earth and the Moon). These combined effects are described as relativistic proper-time offsets (small but measurable differences in elapsed time between locations caused by gravity and motion), which must be included when comparing clocks across planets. “But for Mars, that’s not the case. Its distance from the Sun and its eccentric orbit make the variations in time larger. A three-body problem is extremely complicated. Now we’re dealing with four: the Sun, Earth, the Moon and Mars,” Patla explained. “The heavy lifting was more challenging than I initially thought.” Although the differences are extremely small, they matter for navigation and communication systems that depend on precise timing. Even modern networks on Earth, such as mobile systems, rely on timing accuracy at very small fractions of a second. Communication between Earth and Mars currently takes about four to 24 minutes or more depending on planetary positions, meaning signals are not real-time. A shared and accurate time system could help future missions reduce confusion in navigation and data exchange. “If you get synchronization, it will be almost like real-time communication without any loss of information. You don’t have to wait to see what happens,” Patla said. Researchers note that fully developed interplanetary communication networks are still far in the future. However, understanding how time behaves across planets helps prepare for those systems. “It may be decades before the surface of Mars is covered by the tracks of wandering rovers, but it is useful now to study the issues involved in establishing navigation systems on other planets and moons,” said Neil Ashby. “Like current global navigation systems like GPS, these systems will depend on accurate clocks, and the effects on clock rates can be analyzed with the help of Einstein’s general theory of relativity.” Patla added that the results also help improve understanding of time itself under relativity. “It's good to know for the first time what is happening on Mars timewise. Nobody knew that before. It improves our knowledge of the theory itself, the theory of how clocks tick and relativity,” he said. Source: NIST, IOPscience This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Grand Master
      Jaybonaut went up a rank
      Grand Master
    • One Year In
      Philsl earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Dedicated
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      Tom Schmidt earned a badge
      First Post
    • One Month Later
      D0nn13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      443
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      177
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      124
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      78
    5. 5
      Xenon
      76
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!