XBOX One will work without Kinect plugged in


Recommended Posts

I was kidding, relax :laugh: Just poking fun at the fact I have like 4 conversations going on at once here. Every time I finish replying to one of you, another person chimes in and I need to start all over.

 

Honestly though, if Kinect can't sell itself without being bundled, it's not even worth it. I'm repeating myself here but just because it's included in the box doesn't make it a success. The software is what matters which is why silly accessories like guitars, buzz controllers and dance mats sell. Those things are specific to one title, but they can sell millions of copies because people love the games. Kinect just needs a few titles like that and it'll be fine and it doesn't need to be in the box to achieve that.

 

 

Ok let me ask you this:

 

Does Kinect have a better chance bundled or not bundled?  I have not said once that bundling guarantees success.  My opinion is that it helps.  You combine that with better hardware and you have a chance of getting better content.

 

Kinect cannot stand on its own any more than a controller can stand on its own in my opinion.  MS has gone out of its way to integrate its functions down to the OS level, basically making it as ubiquitous as a standard controller. Kinect on its own will just repeat this gen, where you get a handful of developers creating Kinect only experiences that are either too shallow or broken, with a share of casual titles that do well.  I agree that the hardware played a part in this too, but it seems too easy to blame it all on that when so few devs made an effort.

 

Lets take your example earlier: Oculus Rift

 

Like you, I'm a fan of the concept and would love to see it come to consoles.  Would you say that bundling it with every console would be more beneficial to it in the long run vs offering it as an expensive add-on?

 

The irony is that if Oculus Rift does take off, your likely to see that happen from both MS and Sony next gen.  Then look for a combo of the headset with motion controls like Kinect. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Put it this way. I won't be taking an interest until I see it prove itself. I might not use the thing, but I'll definitely keep an eye on the latest happenings just like I do with anything else game related. I don't own nor plan to own an Ouya for example, but I still keep up to date with the PoS :p

 

lol, so you try to sound like your interested and then compare your interest to something you consider a 'PoS'?  very nicely done.

 

Regardless, its always about the proof. Why is it that being interest in a concept mean that you are saying you already know its great and works for everything?

 

 

If you remove it from the box it doesn't mean they can't offer it seperately like they do today. I bought my Kinect 1.0 without a console. Why wouldn't people do that for Kinect 2.0 if they see value in it? Hell they could even jack up the price this way. The news has already split the consumers. Let's not kid ourselves. That's why we have Neowin members creating silly topics about falling out of love with the X1. There is absolutely no assurance that every owner of an X1 is going to plug the Kinect in. Do you then plump down a huge amount of your budget to hope those who do actually plug theres in even bother to 1: buy your game and 2: use the features. Removing it from the box isn't going to make the situation any worse with so many "ifs" already.

 

Of course they can offer it separately.  Consumers wont buy the thing if there is not compelling content for it.  Developers wont create compelling content if they don't see the user base/value in taking the risk investing in such.

 

Having Kinect in every box, regardless if its plugged in or not, is still much more persuasive to developers then requiring customers to be a $150 add-on in order to play the game you made.

 

 

As for SC2, I'm not saying that it should be back ported to games like it. Just that you're never going to convince the RTS gamer to give up m+k for a Kinect. Those guys are some of the most hardcore gamers on PCs and you think they'll give up their hotkeys and timing to wave at a tv screen? Please. Let's not kid ourselves here. Even Halo Wars would be a nightmare to control with a Kinect and the interface was very simple. They are ok games, but in comparison to the leaders in their genre they're laughable. I would never give up my Civ 5 for Revolution. Microsoft couldn't even pay me to.

 

Fair enough, but that's a completely subjective point.  I'm sorry, but not only do I like SC2, C&C, and Civ on PC, but I also enjoyed Halo Wars and Civ Revolution.  Those games sold pretty well too, not to mention reviewed well, so there is definitely a market out there for those games.  Its a big enough world for both types.

 

Lets just leave this part of the discussion alone since its going into a very subjective area, with little facts to discuss.  I'll just say that you may not like such games, but plenty of people do. 

 

The PC RTS games will always be the ones that those of us that have grown up with will favor.  I also prefer the PC style, but I also happen to like the others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok let me ask you this:

 

Does Kinect have a better chance bundled or not bundled?  I have not said once that bundling guarantees success.  My opinion is that it helps.  You combine that with better hardware and you have a chance of getting better content.

 

Kinect cannot stand on its own any more than a controller can stand on its own in my opinion.  MS has gone out of its way to integrate its functions down to the OS level, basically making it as ubiquitous as a standard controller. Kinect on its own will just repeat this gen, where you get a handful of developers creating Kinect only experiences that are either too shallow or broken, with a share of casual titles that do well.  I agree that the hardware played a part in this too, but it seems too easy to blame it all on that when so few devs made an effort.

 

Lets take your example earlier: Oculus Rift

 

Like you, I'm a fan of the concept and would love to see it come to consoles.  Would you say that bundling it with every console would be more beneficial to it in the long run vs offering it as an expensive add-on?

 

The irony is that if Oculus Rift does take off, your likely to see that happen from both MS and Sony next gen.  Then look for a combo of the headset with motion controls like Kinect. 

 

I think the real concern should be does X1 have a better chance with it bundled or not. It's one thing to be concerned about support for an accessory but the real threat is the PS4. I think you guys have lost sight of that tbh.

 

But to answer your question, I honestly don't believe being bundled will make a difference. Obviosuly including it in every box gets into more homes, but it doesn't make it a success nor does it cement any assurance developers will support it. If all Microsoft/Sony aim to achieve is "better with Kinect" and "Move compatible", I already consider them failures. It's simply not enough. If I'm paying ?100 for an accessory it better make a bloody difference in a meaningful way. Not simply replicate something a button can do with less conveinance and more input time. That last part hasn't got anything to do with being "lazy" and not wanting to move when I game either. But if I have a choice to press a button to tell AI to do something rather than hand signals, yeah it's a waste of time.

 

As for Oculus Rift I think it stands the best chance being independent of any big name in gaming and being supported by many of them. Carmack's involvement is invaluable because the guy is a genius when it comes to gaming. If Bethesda were to ever try buy them over it's just another flash in the pan. You lock out other potential developers and 1st party support dries up eventually and they move onto the next fad.

 

Bundling it with either console would be a death knell. IIRC it costs $400 just for the developer model. Who knows how much the consumer version will be, but almost certainly bumping the price tag close to $1k. Having support would definitely be better than bundling it.

 

It's probably a bad example to use because it's so expensive that it'd never happen. I understand what you're trying to say, but honestly don't think it'd have a better chance being included.

 

 

 

 

lol, so you try to sound like your interested and then compare your interest to something you consider a 'PoS'?  very nicely done.

 

Regardless, its always about the proof. Why is it that being interest in a concept mean that you are saying you already know its great and works for everything?

 

 

Of course they can offer it separately.  Consumers wont buy the thing if there is not compelling content for it.  Developers wont create compelling content if they don't see the user base/value in taking the risk investing in such.

 

Having Kinect in every box, regardless if its plugged in or not, is still much more persuasive to developers then requiring customers to be a $150 add-on in order to play the game you made.

 

 

Fair enough, but that's a completely subjective point.  I'm sorry, but not only do I like SC2, C&C, and Civ on PC, but I also enjoyed Halo Wars and Civ Revolution.  Those games sold pretty well too, not to mention reviewed well, so there is definitely a market out there for those games.  Its a big enough world for both types.

 

Lets just leave this part of the discussion alone since its going into a very subjective area, with little facts to discuss.  I'll just say that you may not like such games, but plenty of people do. 

 

The PC RTS games will always be the ones that those of us that have grown up with will favor.  I also prefer the PC style, but I also happen to like the others.

 

Just because I'm interested in something, doesn't mean I have to like it. What kind of restricted life do you lead where everything has to be black and white?

 

As for developers and compelling content, "if you build it, he will come" ;) What's the compelling reason to be developing an X1 title in a studio today? The console hasn't sold a single unit but we have lots of games already on the way. For all they know the console won't sell more than 20 million units.

 

As for the RTS thing. I'm not saying they are bad games. They are definitely good by console standards. Key words: console standards. Kinect won't change that, in fact, it probably do the opposite and alienate the audience more from the genre.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the real concern should be does X1 have a better chance with it bundled or not. It's one thing to be concerned about support for an accessory but the real threat is the PS4. I think you guys have lost sight of that tbh.

 

But to answer your question, I honestly don't believe being bundled will make a difference. Obviosuly including it in every box gets into more homes, but it doesn't make it a success nor does it cement any assurance developers will support it. If all Microsoft/Sony aim to achieve is "better with Kinect" and "Move compatible", I already consider them failures. It's simply not enough. If I'm paying ?100 for an accessory it better make a bloody difference in a meaningful way. Not simply replicate something a button can do with less conveinance and more input time. That last part hasn't got anything to do with being "lazy" and not wanting to move when I game either. But if I have a choice to press a button to tell AI to do something rather than hand signals, yeah it's a waste of time.

 

As for Oculus Rift I think it stands the best chance being independent of any big name in gaming and being supported by many of them. Carmack's involvement is invaluable because the guy is a genius when it comes to gaming. If Bethesda were to ever try buy them over it's just another flash in the pan. You lock out other potential developers and 1st party support dries up eventually and they move onto the next fad.

 

Bundling it with either console would be a death knell. IIRC it costs $400 just for the developer model. Who knows how much the consumer version will be, but almost certainly bumping the price tag close to $1k. Having support would definitely be better than bundling it.

 

It's probably a bad example to use because it's so expensive that it'd never happen. I understand what you're trying to say, but honestly don't think it'd have a better chance being included.

 

 

Well there you go, you feel bundling Kinect not only damages its own chance of success, but also damages the X1 itself.  Damage that outweighs anything Kinect might provide.

 

Its a fair enough claim. 

 

I was just looking at the history of add-ons and the vast majority of them fail to gain any traction thanks to a lack of content support from developers.  You feel that developers will be interested in Kinect as an add-on just as much as if it is bundled.  I'm not as confident as you are, but maybe your right. I just cant shake the feeling that developers are more likely to give Kinect a chance when they know millions of people already own Kinect.

 

If Kinect really does hurt the X1 that much vs the PS4, then MS probably does need to unbundle it and move resources elsewhere.  Its not worth experimenting with new Kinect hardware if the console itself fails due to it being bundled. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well there you go, you feel bundling Kinect not only damages its own chance of success, but also damages the X1 itself.  Damage that outweighs anything Kinect might provide.

 

No that's not what I've said. I think wires have been crossed here or I haven't broken it down enough.

 

Either way, I'm too tired to keep going around in circles over this. I want 2 SKUs or a cheaper X1 with Kinect sold separately.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No that's not what I've said. I think wires have been crossed here or I haven't broken it down enough.

 

Either way, I'm too tired to keep going around in circles over this. I want 2 SKUs or a cheaper X1 with Kinect sold separately.

 

Sorry, I didn't mean to twist your words on it.  You just feel that the X1 could be damaged by bundling Kinect and if Kinect is any good, it will do fine being sold that way.

 

Is that more accurate?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your right about one thing, there is little use in arguing over this.  The sides are there in black and white and you either feel one way or another.

 

We will see what happens when this thing launches. 

 

Stuff like this makes me less excited about a console launch. 

 

 

 

So lets rewind all the way back to the topic of this thread:

 

Good news! MS confirmed you don't need to have Kinect connected for the console to function :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Will we require to say "xbox on" to turn on the xbox? No power button?

 

They need to understand that not everyone can talk well. Disability, genetic, sick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WOW didnt see this one coming though, ill look at the XBoxOne now, Will see what titles it comes out with and go from there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Will we require to say "xbox on" to turn on the xbox? No power button?

 

They need to understand that not everyone can talk well. Disability, genetic, sick.

No, where do you people get these crazy ideas? :p
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sou

 

Now that that's cleared up, I'm sure people will move on to complaining about it being mandatory to purchase.

 

Seems like a reasonable complaint. If you don't have to use it why do you have to buy it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you not think though that for motion control games to get better and to a place where you may think its worth it, they need to go through the early phases with its consumers such as the one we are at now? 

It is a fair point, but I feel that they've had plenty of time to think about motion control gaming. I think the level we got this-gen was acceptable for a first step, but with both of them seemingly continuing in the same sort of direction for next-gen I'm rather disappointed. To be clear, we aren't talking about technological limitations here. Kinect 2 (and probably the PS4's Eye - not seen enough about it to judge) are more than capable technology wise. It really is just a case of "vision" and bringing everything together in a package that makes motion control a viable input method for all kinds of games. Unfortunately, neither Microsoft or Sony seem capable of seeing its use beyond gimmicky add-ons (that are probably only there because the devs are forced to include them) and cheap casual titles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is a fair point, but I feel that they've had plenty of time to think about motion control gaming. I think the level we got this-gen was acceptable for a first step, but with both of them seemingly continuing in the same sort of direction for next-gen I'm rather disappointed. To be clear, we aren't talking about technological limitations here. Kinect 2 (and probably the PS4's Eye - not seen enough about it to judge) are more than capable technology wise. It really is just a case of "vision" and bringing everything together in a package that makes motion control a viable input method for all kinds of games. Unfortunately, neither Microsoft or Sony seem capable of seeing its use beyond gimmicky add-ons (that are probably only there because the devs are forced to include them) and cheap casual titles.

Agreed, to an extent. I think that's partly due to a lack of interest and development from a third party point of view. I don't know much about Sony's Eye so i'll stick to Kinect, but I think Ms were the only true people to pump out Kinect games so no-one really tried to push the technology further than it could go. I think this Gen MS are doing two things, they are trying to improve the technology in the camera itself with things like HD camera, a better depth of field etc but what they are also trying to do by bundling it with the console is say to developers, everyone has one of these now, go out and get clever with your development and use these things.

 

In all honesty I'm not a massive fan of motion controlling myself but I do think voice commands could become very useful. I do think however if developers jump on and start looking to integrate just small aspects of motion and voice control into their games then we might see a bigger leap in possibilities next time. I think this will be the generation that makes or breaks Kinect, I doubt you will see a return of a separate purpose built unit next gen if the level of integration remains the same as the current.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the real concern should be does X1 have a better chance with it bundled or not. It's one thing to be concerned about support for an accessory but the real threat is the PS4. I think you guys have lost sight of that tbh.

Are you forgetting that the original Kinect is the fastest ever selling digital device on record? 

 

If you don't bundle it in the SKU on launch, you've killed it for the whole generation. With it bundled, developers have something they know everyone has and can use, so they make stuff for it. Simple concept. If anyone takes it any deeper than that your being stupid. Its not about the X1's success or anything else, its just to get solid developer support for it.

 

Just because YOU don't like the Kinect, doesn't mean the 10 million other people don't who made it the fastest selling device in history don't. Did english never teach you anything? Base arguments on facts and source. You're just ranting based on what you think with no evidence to give weight to your ideas. 

 

Also you do understand the price of the Kinect would be phenomenal to buy not bundled right? Which would be another nail in its coffin if it wasn't. I'm personally not a fan of motion control since I've never actually used it in any good ways. That's why I'm excited to seeing what's going to happen with the new Kinect since the device is so seamless compared to the first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"It shouldn't be forced down our throats". Last I checked, there is no Microsoft staff member, with a gun to our heads forcing us to get $500 and go buy an Xbox One /Kinect. Or am I not in the loop?.

Everyone who is crying about this crap, are people are always connected, and 9 out of 10 times have a cell and are always on it.

Giving options on the physical hardware in this industry should be taken with great caution.

Options:

Xbox vision = dust collector

PS Eye= Dust collector

Xbox 360 optional HDD not being guaranteed on every console = developers wondering how their game may work on it

Kinect v1 = some collecting dust, some are not. No compelling games because 25million people own one, not all 78million 360 owners.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems like a reasonable complaint. If you don't have to use it why do you have to buy it?

If someone doesn't like Kinect, don't buy Xbox One. If you want XB1 only games, then you will have to swallow the Kinect pill.

 

To use everyone's favorite car analogy, you don't get to buy a car with a single seat because you have no use for other seats. (I know :p I know cars come with many options and models so let's assume you are buying a Tesla Model S)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you forgetting that the original Kinect is the fastest ever selling digital device on record? 

 

If you don't bundle it in the SKU on launch, you've killed it for the whole generation. With it bundled, developers have something they know everyone has and can use, so they make stuff for it. Simple concept. If anyone takes it any deeper than that your being stupid. Its not about the X1's success or anything else, its just to get solid developer support for it.

 

Just because YOU don't like the Kinect, doesn't mean the 10 million other people don't who made it the fastest selling device in history don't. Did english never teach you anything? Base arguments on facts and source. You're just ranting based on what you think with no evidence to give weight to your ideas. 

 

Also you do understand the price of the Kinect would be phenomenal to buy not bundled right? Which would be another nail in its coffin if it wasn't. I'm personally not a fan of motion control since I've never actually used it in any good ways. That's why I'm excited to seeing what's going to happen with the new Kinect since the device is so seamless compared to the first.

 

Uh....This makes no sense.

 

How can Kinect 1 be the fastest selling digital device, while if Microsoft does NOT bundle Kinect 2, it will kill it?  That makes no sense....It does not matter if it is bundled or not.  If the sales record show it has enough users, developers will utilize it.

 

 

"It shouldn't be forced down our throats". Last I checked, there is no Microsoft staff member, with a gun to our heads forcing us to get $500 and go buy an Xbox One /Kinect. Or am I not in the loop?.

Everyone who is crying about this crap, are people are always connected, and 9 out of 10 times have a cell and are always on it.

Giving options on the physical hardware in this industry should be taken with great caution.

Options:

Xbox vision = dust collector

PS Eye= Dust collector

Xbox 360 optional HDD not being guaranteed on every console = developers wondering how their game may work on it

Kinect v1 = some collecting dust, some are not. No compelling games because 25million people own one, not all 78million 360 owners.

 
Except, if you want a Xbox One, you are required to get it with Kinect.  NO OTHER OPTIONS.  Therefore, Kinect is forced on us.
 
Forced on us DOES NOT equal a guy with a gun to our head.  Why do people make that argument?  The ONLY.....ONLY way to get Xbox One is with Kinect bundled.  Therefore, it is forced.  Get it now?

 

However, have it forced on users does not guarantee developers will utilize it.  Especially when the PS4, WiiU, PC, ... do not have this.

 

Also, you guys are forgetting something here.  What if people that hate Kinect do not want to get the Xbox One because of it?  Therefore, Xbox One has lower sales and is not a major concern in the development?

 

How did SixAxis turn out even though it was on every PS3 owner's hands?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People keep implying that Kinect isn't part of the system, that it's just an add-on. That's far from the truth. What Microsoft is trying to let you guys know that it's just as much of the console as the controller. If your controller is not connected to your console, if you break it, can it still work? Yes. Will you be able to do much without it, not really, the same with Kinect. You can navigate your whole console with Kinect even if your controller is broken/off. Some games wont' need your controller at all, some will.

 

I feel that for the X1, there will be more games (not the big 3rd party games but most 1st party) that will rely on Kinect than not. You may not want to move any part or talk or anything because that's uncomfortable for you, but in all honesty, it's not really your choice. It's up to the game developers, if you buy their game that is.

 

There's something that Kinect gets us closer to that game developers keep using but really is a buzzword and that is "immersion." I don't care what game it is...unless it's a game where you are holding a game controller and pressing buttons and simulating that (or driving wheel), you aren't immersed into a game truly through a controller. I'm not saying Kinect will 100% get you there, but it can get you closer.

 

Someone stated hand signals for RB6. That's a perfect example. Yea, someone stated that they may not want to use hand signals and want their hands on the controller to be "ready", but uhm, if you're playing a video game that's trying to be a simulation...you would have to move your hands just as in real life. As a developer, you can design around these gestures and moments. Say you as a player HAS to make a gesture at a certain moment in the game, you start to raise your hand, the game notices that and triggers an event (like an explosion or something). That "shocks" you more as now you'll most likely have a knee jerk reaction to put your hands back on the controller...that moment it shocks you is what the developer wants...and Kinect + controller can make that more visceral feeling of anxiousness than just a controller as your hands are always on it.

 

This won't happen in every game, but it will over time. Also, independent devs (as myself) are going to use the Kinect in more interesting ways than traditional camps and that's what I'm really excited for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People keep implying that Kinect isn't part of the system, that it's just an add-on. That's far from the truth. What Microsoft is trying to let you guys know that it's just as much of the console as the controller. If your controller is not connected to your console, if you break it, can it still work? Yes. Will you be able to do much without it, not really, the same with Kinect. You can navigate your whole console with Kinect even if your controller is broken/off. Some games wont' need your controller at all, some will.

 

I feel that for the X1, there will be more games (not the big 3rd party games but most 1st party) that will rely on Kinect than not. You may not want to move any part or talk or anything because that's uncomfortable for you, but in all honesty, it's not really your choice. It's up to the game developers, if you buy their game that is.

 

There's something that Kinect gets us closer to that game developers keep using but really is a buzzword and that is "immersion." I don't care what game it is...unless it's a game where you are holding a game controller and pressing buttons and simulating that (or driving wheel), you aren't immersed into a game truly through a controller. I'm not saying Kinect will 100% get you there, but it can get you closer.

 

Someone stated hand signals for RB6. That's a perfect example. Yea, someone stated that they may not want to use hand signals and want their hands on the controller to be "ready", but uhm, if you're playing a video game that's trying to be a simulation...you would have to move your hands just as in real life. As a developer, you can design around these gestures and moments. Say you as a player HAS to make a gesture at a certain moment in the game, you start to raise your hand, the game notices that and triggers an event (like an explosion or something). That "shocks" you more as now you'll most likely have a knee jerk reaction to put your hands back on the controller...that moment it shocks you is what the developer wants...and Kinect + controller can make that more visceral feeling of anxiousness than just a controller as your hands are always on it.

 

This won't happen in every game, but it will over time. Also, independent devs (as myself) are going to use the Kinect in more interesting ways than traditional camps and that's what I'm really excited for.

 

Uh no it is not.  The fact that it can now be unplugged means it is not an integral part of the system.  You cannot play console games without a controller.  You CAN use the Xbox One without Kinect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Uh no it is not.  The fact that it can now be unplugged means it is not an integral part of the system.  You cannot play console games without a controller.  You CAN use the Xbox One without Kinect.

You can actually...PS3 supports KBM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Uh no it is not.  The fact that it can now be unplugged means it is not an integral part of the system.  You cannot play console games without a controller.  You CAN use the Xbox One without Kinect.

 

If the developer wants to use only Kinect for their games...yes it can be used without a controller. All up to the developer.

 

You can use the Xbox One with only controller.

You can use the Xbox One with only Kinect.

 

You can't use games that require a controller without a controller.

You can't use games that require a Kinect without Kinect.

You can't use games that require both without both.

 

You can use games that require EITHER with just one of the input mechanisms.

 

Those are the facts. Kinect is just as integral to the system as an Xbox One controller.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the developer wants to use only Kinect for their games...yes it can be used without a controller. All up to the developer.

 

You can use the Xbox One with only controller.

You can use the Xbox One with only Kinect.

 

You can't use games that require a controller without a controller.

You can't use games that require a Kinect without Kinect.

You can't use games that require both without both.

 

You can use games that require EITHER with just one of the input mechanisms.

 

Those are the facts. Kinect is just as integral to the system as an Xbox One controller.

 

This is like saying any accessory ever developed for any console is "integrated".  Is a steering wheel an integral part of the system?  You can certainly play games with one.  If the developer chooses to only allow the steering wheel.  Again it is up to the developer with this too.

 

The fact that you can unplug the Kinect means it is not integrated.  Xbox One is not going to stop working without Kinect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is like saying any accessory ever developed for any console is "integrated".  Is a steering wheel an integral part of the system?  You can certainly play games with one.  If the developer chooses to only allow the steering wheel.  Again it is up to the developer with this too.

 

The fact that you can unplug the Kinect means it is not integrated.  Xbox One is not going to stop working without Kinect.

 

So are you saying an Xbox controller is integral or no? If so, then I'll say what you said: "Xbox One is not going to stop working without the controller." If not, then I have nothing else to say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The controller is integral.  In some games if you unplug it it pauses the game.  Without some adapters and tweaking, Xbox does not support keyboard and mouse to play games.

 

What do you suggest for people with no controllers on the Xbox 360?  Keyboard and mouse has basically no support.  So what else?  Therefore, the Xbox will not function without a controller.

 

The fact that with this news, I can open the Xbox One box and immediately throw out Kinect means it is not integral.  I have no need for it.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.