Polygon: MS needs to admit the XB1 Kinect is a peripheral, not a pack-in.

[-T- Member]

I'm so lazy that the ability to say "Xbox go to <game>" and it switching instantly, is good enough for me

[vcfan]

Multi-million based developers/publishers have had a whole generation to impress us with motion, and as much as I approve of indie development, glorified tech demos are going to win over no-one long term. Look at Sony's The Playroom. Cool stuff a camera can do, used for 30 mins then never played again. Tech demos and promises of potential have burned many of us, me included last generation.

 

An answer of but there is untapped potential! just doesn't cut it any more. You're going to have to convince people with tangible evidence that something still exists that isn't a fitness/dance/mini-game or a completely cool use of a camera, but something pretty pointless for the gamer in the long run - Like something in the science or security field.

 

Compelling software needs to be built for gamers, not for doctors doing operations with cameras or for us to scan in pictures of household objects to mess around with in 3D/paint for 10 minutes. People already hacked Kinect on the PC, how many PC gamers/owners have gone crazy over it since then? We see absolutely crazily cool uses for it, but it's usually something niche (like open heart surgery), not something that would mandate everyone who buys the console to have to own the device.

there is potential,because the past has shown us that people went nuts for motion controls,even if the software was a little lacking. kinect being part of the system guarantees to developers that they are targetting the whole xbox one audience,not just a fraction. in the past, a non kinect game would give them a larger audience so whats the incentive to do a kinect game? coupled with an improved product,and a larger amount of developers who'll come up with new ideas that will evolve over time, it sounds like a pretty good strategy to me. simply concluding the usefulness of something that is part of the system in the first 3 months of its life is silly and so shortsighted. lets come back to it in a few years and see how it plays out.

[trooper11]

there is potential,because the past has shown us that people went nuts for motion controls,even if the software was a little lacking. kinect being part of the system guarantees to developers that they are targetting the whole xbox one audience,not just a fraction. in the past, a non kinect game would give them a larger audience so whats the incentive to do a kinect game? coupled with an improved product,and a larger amount of developers who'll come up with new ideas that will evolve over time, it sounds like a pretty good strategy to me. simply concluding the usefulness of something that is part of the system in the first 3 months of its life is silly and so shortsighted. lets come back to it in a few years and see how it plays out.

 

 

It all boils down to how much you value Kinect.  You happen to value it much more than Audioboxer does.  You are not going to change each other's mind on it.  You guys have said your piece and laid out the points, but it still leaves us where we are today:

 

Is MS in a bad enough position that it is time to make drastic changes, or do they have time to let things continue to see how it develops?  If they do need to make changes, what do you think would have the greatest effect?  It seems like the general concensus is that the $100 price difference is what must change. 

[DrunknMunky Veteran]

It all boils down to how much you value Kinect.  You happen to value it much more than Audioboxer does.  You are not going to change each other's mind on it.  You guys have said your piece and laid out the points, but it still leaves us where we are today:

 

Is MS in a bad enough position that it is time to make drastic changes, or do they have time to let things continue to see how it develops?  If they do need to make changes, what do you think would have the greatest effect?  It seems like the general concensus is that the $100 price difference is what must change. 

 

We'll know soon enough if the Kinectless X1 box comes out. The moment it happens is enough confirmation for me that MS knows Kinect is dead weight which they can afford to lose to stay in the game.

[trooper11]

We'll know soon enough if the Kinectless X1 box comes out. The moment it happens is enough confirmation for me that MS knows Kinect is dead weight which they can afford to lose to stay in the game.

 

I just wonder if it will actually change the perception of the X1.  I have my doubts that making the choice that many say now is the right thing to do will earn them any good will.  It didnt happen with the drm stuff. 

 

Your exactly right though, if MS drop Kinect, its clearly proof that they felt it had lost whatever value they had given it.  I'm sure plenty of people will revel in that moment.

[DrunknMunky Veteran]

I just wonder if it will actually change the perception of the X1.  I have my doubts that making the choice that many say now is the right thing to do will earn them any good will.  It didnt happen with the drm stuff. 

 

Your exactly right though, if MS drop Kinect, its clearly proof that they felt it had lost whatever value they had given it.  I'm sure plenty of people will revel in that moment.

 

Well again, I can't speak for everyone, but when it came to the DRM I instantly lost interest in buying the console. I only kept my pre-order because I knew or hoped they'd reverse it. If they hadn't I'd have cancelled.

 

I think the hardcore crowd would feel the same if MS refocused and commited to hardcore gaming again. The % of the market they make up is small, but they're also the foundation of your user base. Without them, then word of mouth is impacted and the "casual" or "tag along" customers aka "I buy the console my friends are on" are gone too.

[LaP]

It all boils down to how much you value Kinect.  You happen to value it much more than Audioboxer does.  You are not going to change each other's mind on it.  You guys have said your piece and laid out the points, but it still leaves us where we are today:

 

Is MS in a bad enough position that it is time to make drastic changes, or do they have time to let things continue to see how it develops?  If they do need to make changes, what do you think would have the greatest effect?  It seems like the general concensus is that the $100 price difference is what must change. 

 

I don't think they'll ever be in a position where they absolutely need to change anything to the console itself. I expect this gen to be mostly 50-50 or at the very worst 45-55.

 

But MS might need to do something before 2015 if things don't change. I don't really see them reducing the price more tha Sony might reduce the price of the PS4 in the next year or two. MS has a little bit of pression from some investors to stop losing money with anything not Windows/Office/Ent services and losing money with the One would just put fuel on a situation that could become complicated and it would not be worth it in the grand scheme of things. I don't see them making a Kinectless bundle either. They already backtracked on digital only and backtracking again would give them a bad repuation.

 

What MS will do is use the good old money hat to secure exclusive titles and exclusive TV thingies. With the best exclusive titles the price difference wont matter as much as it is right now. While the One curently has a better lineup we can't say this is an extraordinary lineup so far.

[trooper11]

Well again, I can't speak for everyone, but when it came to the DRM I instantly lost interest in buying the console. I only kept my pre-order because I knew or hoped they'd reverse it. If they hadn't I'd have cancelled.

 

I think the hardcore crowd would feel the same if MS refocused and commited to hardcore gaming again. The % of the market they make up is small, but they're also the foundation of your user base. WIthout them, then word of mouth is impacted and the "casual" or "tag along" customers aka "I buy the console my friends are on" are gone too.

 

You can easily look around the internet and find lots of people that have no interest at all in anything MS becuase of the drm stuff. 

 

As to changing the hearts of minds of the hardcore crowd, what do you mean by refocusing and commiting to hardcore gaming?

 

Would it be enough if the gpu they chose was as powerful as the ps4 or a little more powerful?

[DrunknMunky Veteran]

You can easily look around the internet and find lots of people that have no interest at all in anything MS becuase of the drm stuff. 

 

As to changing the hearts of minds of the hardcore crowd, what do you mean by refocusing and commiting to hardcore gaming?

 

Would it be enough if the gpu they chose was as powerful as the ps4 or a little more powerful?

 

What I mean is the way they left the 360 the last 3 years. i.e hardcore games were bumped for Kinect minigame collections or exercise titles. That's when they started losing people. Long before DRM was on the radar. Go back to the way the 360 line up was in 2007 and you'll win people back.

[Houtei]

Well my thinking is they spent tons of money developing everything for it and at this point it would be a huge loss to take it off.   Also just because they are not selling as much as ps4 they are showing to be more successful than the last generation out of the gates and they are making profit this time per console sold unlike ps4 that has to bank on 2 games being sold or signing up for psn plus to turn profit.  They are doing far to well to warrant a major change like making a kinect-less version.  

 

One more thing people seem to forget is that while ps4 is being pushed as a gaming console for hardcore games  xo is being pushed as a all in one media console that plays games at an almost unnoticeable difference to the average user than the ps4 and also targets the casual gamers.

[trooper11]

What I mean is the way they left the 360 the last 3 years. i.e hardcore games were bumped for Kinect minigame collections or exercise titles. That's when they started losing people. Long before DRM was on the radar. Go back to the way the 360 line up was in 2007 and you'll win people back.

 

But wait, MS is already not bumping hardcore games for Kinect minigame collections.  In fact, that's why some people now use that fact to say Kinect is not offering enough gaming content to justify it.

 

MS intentially downplayed Kinect as far as dedicated gaming content goes.  E3 had a fairly small amount of Kinect coverage, focusing instead on the core crowd.  That is what people complained about before.

 

That 360 lineup in 2007 contains titles that many people now are no longer interested in seeing.  In fact, many people dismiss MS' current lineup of exclusive IP.  There are certainly some new IP in development, but those are also mostly dimissed. 

 

I'm just not sure what the winning formula is.  Its not just creating more exclusive IP, its not just focusing more on regular games and less on Kinect titles, its not just saying the right things pr wise, its something else that is hard to pin down. 

 

 

Well my thinking is they spent tons of money developing everything for it and at this point it would be a huge loss to take it off.   Also just because they are not selling as much as ps4 they are showing to be more successful than the last generation out of the gates and they are making profit this time per console sold unlike ps4 that has to bank on 2 games being sold or signing up for psn plus to turn profit.  They are doing far to well to warrant a major change like making a kinect-less version.  

 

One more thing people seem to forget is that while ps4 is being pushed as a gaming console for hardcore games  xo is being pushed as a all in one media console that plays games at an almost unnoticeable difference to the average user than the ps4 and also targets the casual gamers.

 

You bring up a point that is often overlooked.  The X1 has also broken all the records of previous generation consoles.  It just so happens that Sony is doing even better than that.

 

So while you can't look at MS' sales in a vacuum, you can admit that we are not talking about poor sales.  We are talking about selling less than your competitor.

 

It goes back to a point I made earlier.  Since the X1 sales are so high, are they high enough that MS is less concerned with trying to match PS4 sales and more concerned with just pushing forward on getting content out for their console while reducing costs along the way.

[DrunknMunky Veteran]

But wait, MS is already not bumping hardcore games for Kinect minigame collections.  In fact, that's why some people now use that fact to say Kinect is not offering enough gaming content to justify it.

 

MS intentially downplayed Kinect as far as dedicated gaming content goes.  E3 had a fairly small amount of Kinect coverage, focusing instead on the core crowd.  That is what people complained about before.

 

That 360 lineup in 2007 contains titles that many people now are no longer interested in seeing.  In fact, many people dismiss MS' current lineup of exclusive IP.  There are certainly some new IP in development, but those are also mostly dimissed. 

 

I'm just not sure what the winning formula is.  Its not just creating more exclusive IP, its not just focusing more on regular games and less on Kinect titles, its not just saying the right things pr wise, its something else that is hard to pin down. 

 

I'm not making myself very clear sorry, what I mean is that focusing on it at all in any capacity is what has pushed away the hardcore crowd. Just as the TV, media and app stuff did. Microsoft saw it as a positive sign people wanted Netflix because the numbers went up. Meanwhile the hardcore guys are online complaining "where are the games, I have nothing to do but watch Netflix". They completely misread the market.

 

Look at Dance Central, probably the biggest IP Kinect had which was the flagship reason for owning one. 2.5 million copies. Dance Central 2: 1.6 million. Dance Central 3: unannounced (we all know what that means when it comes to MS). The closest figure online is from VGChartz at 0.71 million (and yes I know, it's not 100% accurate). So much for the 20+ million Kinects, all they're doing is collecting dust. How do we know? Because where are the games. Nobody is utilizing it like I said pages ago. It's a fad, just like people lost interest in the Wii. I don't think anyone who buys a Wii U is doing so because of motion controls. I know I'm not and I've yet to see anyone else say they are. Sony obviously don't seem to care much if you believe the rumour they cut the camera out the box to undercut MS. Ready at Dawn aren't being forced to use it either from The Order interview on PS Access.

 

As for the 2007 lineup comment, I wasn't meaning literally the 2007 lineup, I just mean the same quality of hardcore titles.

 

And I agree with you, I don't know what the winning formula is either if they want to keep it around. I don't think there is one and it'll probably continue to lose money for as long as it's around. I think MS would be better off cutting their loses and forgetting about it, but that's just me. Give me a reason to take it out the box and maybe I'll change my mind. They have a lot of work to do before that ever happens and voice controls / mini games aren't going to do it.

[trooper11]

I'm not making myself very clear sorry, what I mean is that focusing on it at all in any capacity is what has pushed away the hardcore crowd. Just as the TV, media and app stuff did. Microsoft saw it as a positive sign people wanted Netflix because the numbers went up. Meanwhile the hardcore guys are online complaining "where are the games, I have nothing to do but watch Netflix". They completely misread the market.

But I think you exaggerting it there. You can't say that focusing on it at all or in any capacity hurts since Sony found a way to do that and not lose face among the hardcore crowd.

MS simply went too far. they marketed it in the wrong way, a way that alienated some hardcore gamers.

Sony obviously don't seem to care much if you believe the rumour they cut the camera out the box to undercut MS. Ready at Dawn aren't being forced to use it either from The Order interview on PS Access.

MS isnt forcing any developers to use it either. That was one reason they went the bundle route, so that they could just leave it up to developers to decide.

As for the 2007 lineup comment, I wasn't meaning literally the 2007 lineup, I just mean the same quality of hardcore titles.

Do you also mean the same variety? It seems to me that people are speaking out against MS' focus on shooters and that is definitely what you saw in 2007

And I agree with you, I don't know what the winning formula is either if they want to keep it around. I don't think there is one and it'll probably continue to lose money for as long as it's around. I think MS would be better off cutting their loses and forgetting about it, but that's just me. Give me a reason to take it out the box and maybe I'll change my mind. They have a lot of work to do before that ever happens and voice controls / mini games aren't going to do it.

It certainly won't be easy. When they removed the drm stuff, they had time to retool the platform and yet still ran out of time to get everything done before launch. Now, once they remove it, they will have to retool the OS again, delaying whatever plans they had otherwise.

I think its possible they just drop it, but I don't believe it will actually move the needle much in their favor in the long run.

[Houtei]

It goes back to a point I made earlier.  Since the X1 sales are so high, are they high enough that MS is less concerned with trying to match PS4 sales and more concerned with just pushing forward on getting content out for their console while reducing costs along the way.

I really believe the only people concerned about how they are doing COMPARED to sony is the people on these forums like us.  I dont think anyone else even microsoft are that concerned with it.

 

I would be more concerned with sony given that the ps4 is pretty much the only bright spot of the company right now and they are having to sell off most of their other major divisions.  And because of that will that affect how much money they have to spend on exclusives and any major updates later down the road while MS is sitting pretty money wise right now.  I really believed that sony should of bumped their price up a tad so that they are profiting off consoles alone with the rest of the company being in such a ruin right now.

 

Actually not sure on that last part cause i see conflicting info all over on whether the ps4 is sold at a 60$ loss or a 10 dollar profit lol but pretty much everything says XO is a 28$ profit

[DrunknMunky Veteran]

But I think you exaggerting it there. You can't say that focusing on it at all or in any capacity hurts since Sony found a way to do that and not lose face among the hardcore crowd.

MS simply went too far. they marketed it in the wrong way, a way that alienated some hardcore gamers.

MS isnt forcing any developers to use it either. That was one reason they went the bundle route, so that they could just leave it up to developers to decide.

Do you also mean the same variety? It seems to me that people are speaking out against MS' focus on shooters and that is definitely what you saw in 2007

It certainly won't be easy. When they removed the drm stuff, they had time to retool the platform and yet still ran out of time to get everything done before launch. Now, once they remove it, they will have to retool the OS again, delaying whatever plans they had otherwise.

I think its possible they just drop it, but I don't believe it will actually move the needle much in their favor in the long run.

 

Sony didn't lose face because they didn't halt all of their 1st party production for apps and Move. MS have cut back on exclusives more and more each year since Kinect was released.

 

I don't care about the split in genres per se, if it's all shooters then that's no good either. I think a lot of the hardcore crowd would love to see them do more of what Naughty Dog does. Quantum Break alone isn't enough. They need to cover all the different genres and price points. Less frat boy games and more adult content.

[trooper11]

I really believe the only people concerned about how they are doing COMPARED to sony is the people on these forums like us.  I dont think anyone else even microsoft are that concerned with it.

I agree to a point there, but still the people in the online gaming community have a loud voice and it can dominate the headlines as a result.

[trooper11]

Sony didn't lose face because they didn't halt all of their 1st party production for apps and Move. MS have cut back on exclusives more and more each year since Kinect was released.

 

I don't care about the split in genres per se, if it's all shooters then that's no good either. I think a lot of the hardcore crowd would love to see them do more of what Naughty Dog does. Quantum Break alone isn't enough. They need to cover all the different genres and price points. Less frat boy games and more adult content.

Wait, your saying that MS has cut back on exclusives on the X1 becuase of Kinect? That seems to fly in the face of the reality of announced titles and

MS' own claims about game content spend and new investment in developer teams.

I'm talking about this gen, not last gen. The idea that MS must drop any talk of features that are not focused on gaming in order to win everyone over is at odds with the fact that Sony has come into this generation talking about features that are not focused on gaming and are not knocked for it. The difference between the two is the Sony was much, much smarter in how they rolled those features out. MS goes too far to give media features a spotlight on its own, while Sony lays those features out a piece at a time, never making it the sole focus of an event or pr statements.

Keep in mind, I believe MS screwed things up, but not becuase of the existance of non-gaming features, but rather in their lack of public focus on gaming features being job 1.

As far as games, I'm not sure if MS has the developers neccesary to cover every genre at every price point like Sony can. I dont think MS can ever hope to match that. So they will always be a loser in that area. As far as less 'frat boy' games go, well you have walked into subjective territory, so nothing to say on that point.

[DrunknMunky Veteran]

Wait, your saying that MS has cut back on exclusives on the X1 becuase of Kinect? That seems to fly in the face of the reality of announced titles and

MS' own claims about game content spend and new investment in developer teams.

I'm talking about this gen, not last gen. The idea that MS must drop any talk of features that are not focused on gaming in order to win everyone over is at odds with the fact that Sony has come into this generation talking about features that are not focused on gaming and are not knocked for it. The difference between the two is the Sony was much, much smarter in how they rolled those features out. MS goes too far to give media features a spotlight on its own, while Sony lays those features out a piece at a time, never making it the sole focus of an event or pr statements.

Keep in mind, I believe MS screwed things up, but not becuase of the existance of non-gaming features, but rather in their lack of public focus on gaming features being job 1.

As far as games, I'm not sure if MS has the developers neccesary to cover every genre at every price point like Sony can. I dont think MS can ever hope to match that. So they will always be a loser in that area. As far as less 'frat boy' games go, well you have walked into subjective territory, so nothing to say on that point.

 

Well I'm using past examples from MS because we are only 3 months in. They certainly don't seem to be doing anything differently IMO but what's to say the money spent on Kinect 2 couldn't have been used for hardcore games instead. There's new (proper) IP coming which I commend them for, but will it keep up after the first year or however long it takes for them to release. Or will they go back to playing it safe like always and stick to XYZ recycled over and over. I've honestly never known a publisher to be so scared of new IP like MS is. I know there is legit reasons for it, but if they don't take any chances at all then it's equally damaging. Sony are hardly in a position to be throwing money around but that doesn't hold them back from the exclusives they've released the last few years. You don't need 100-200 million budgets to make AAA indies either.

 

As far as Sony and their strategy, I don't know why it's working for them. Or maybe they are just looking better as a result of Microsoft's problems. Maybe if MS wasn't tripping over stuff people would actually be saying what are Sony doing? I don't see them making a big push for media and apps, the selection is pretty sparse and they've not announced any more additions AFAIK. MS have a list of the planned apps which we saw just before launch.

[Showan]

Kinect was never an issue for me when deciding on the Xbox One.  I knew what i was getting into the moment Microsoft did the reveal. Kinect never once bothered me.  My first though was, if it's gonna coast $500 it better contain any and everything that can be thrown at it.  I'm at the point now in life, it's like this;  Once you get to $400 you have to do more than just game.  If you are a dedicated gaming machine and only that, I'm not going over $250-$300 any longer.

 

Kinect's biggest potential doesn't reside in the AAA gaming market.  But the Arcade/Indie Market, could be a jackpot for Kinect.  Get 4-6 Arcade/Indie games that show what Kinect can do between now and Christmas'2014.  And just like that all it well..

 

Or sell the One at $400.  And people will just say "I'll take the free camera"

[trooper11]

Well I'm using past examples from MS because we are only 3 months in. They certainly don't seem to be doing anything differently IMO but what's to say the money spent on Kinect 2 couldn't have been used for hardcore games instead. There's new (proper) IP coming which I commend them for, but will it keep up after the first year or however long it takes for them to release. Or will they go back to playing it safe like always and stick to XYZ recycled over and over.

Your saying that in the first 3 months of this generation, you dont see MS doing anything differently from the end of last gen? You dont see them drop the emphasis on Kinect as a platform for games on its own? You havent seen them do just about everything to not bring Kinect up on its own. heck, they even demo features without saying the name Kinect sometimes. Things just feel better then they were at the end of last gen to me.

You make a fair point that Kinect 2 cost money that could have been used to buy more exclusives. You can't argue against that fact. The only thing I will say is that right now MS seems able to grow their developer footprint (not enough to match Sony though) and invest in new IP as they did early in the 360's generation while at the same time funding Kinect 2 development (unlike last gen where you saw investment in Kinect and a decline in core exclusive titles). But that does not really matter becuase you can always come back and say that the Kinect 2 investment could have grown their gaming war chest even more.

 

As far as Sony and their strategy, I don't know why it's working for them. Or maybe they are just looking better as a result of Microsoft's problems. Maybe if MS wasn't tripping over stuff people would actually be saying what are Sony doing? I don't see them making a big push for media and apps, the selection is pretty sparse and they've not announced any more additions AFAIK. MS have a list of the planned apps which we saw just before launch.

Have you forgotten things like Sony's TV service or thier music/movie streaming services? I really dont know what to say. If you dont see Sony making any effort to offer media services outside of gaming (including social options), then Sony's marketing has been even better then I suggested.

Again, its ok for Sony in the eyes of the core gamer becuase they told the core gamer that gaming was the top priority and they built a console with the most powerful hardware. They went on to be very friendly to indie developers first and they capitolized on MS' mistakes. Sony has done so much right that someone that might otherwise be hostile to media/social features is ok with it. Sony is giving them a first class gaming experience, so who cares what else they do. They also did so much right that moving MP behind a paywall was met with fairly little resistance.

MS could have had a much smoother launch in the eyes of the online gmaing community if they had not devoted a single event to media features, never tried thier drm scheme, opened up to indie developers sooner, launched at the same price as the ps4, and just generally made the core gamer feel like the first priority. They wouldnt have had to match them on hardware, although that would have been a bonus. I would hope that most fair minded people would then say as they do about Sony now: 'well MS has all of these media features, but thats fine since they have done so much to cater to me, the core gamer'

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

While there is a perfecty viable conversation to be had about the quality of motion gaming, the real crux here is about consumer choice and the price of the XB1. Without pricing being an issue we wouldn't even really need to be having a conversation about the quality of motion gaming. It's falling into the argument due to the silly notion that without the Kinect 2 packed in devs can't be botherd to make good games for 20m+ people.

[trooper11]

While there is a perfecty viable conversation to be had about the quality of motion gaming, the real crux here is about consumer choice and the price of the XB1. Without pricing being an issue we wouldn't even really need to be having a conversation about the quality of motion gaming. It's falling into the argument due to the silly notion that without the Kinect 2 packed in devs can't be botherd to make good games for 20m+ people.

Why is that notion silly? Why do you dismiss it automatically? I see this idea brushed aside by so many, but it seems like a reasonable idea. Developers just get free access to another feature that all users will have. It seems a tiny bit less risky for the developer that way if they choose to try something.

Clearly, motion controlled gaming is never going to be core gaming and clearly many, if not most, developers could still opt out of doing anything with motion control. But then Kinect is useful for other features such as voice controls, profile switching, etc. Maybe more developers end up using those features then anything gesture based. I'm not a developer, so I really dont know how they feel in general about having access to the kinect hardware knowing its there for everyone. This one feature is just so contreversal that I really dont know if MS can push forward with it.

Your right though, this is more about price than Kinect itself. However, some people will always complain that MS should remove it to save even more money. MS could cut the price by $200 and still some would say that its a bad deal becuase it could be even cheaper with Kinect.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

Why is that notion silly? Why do you dismiss it automatically? I see this idea brushed aside by so many, but it seems like a reasonable idea. Developers just get free access to another feature that all users will have. It seems a tiny bit less risky for the developer that way if they choose to try something.

 

Because we've had motion gaming since the start of the Wii, 2010 for Kinect, and millions of pieces of hardware out there for developers to show the relevance/benefits of motion gaming. What they've come up with is mostly either adding features to existing games that still play out on a controller, or when it comes to fully motion based it's always going to be limited to dancing, fitness, mini-games, puzzles, investigations, lightgun, etc. Sorry, but that's very unlikely to change, all that more cameras/higher resolution does is allow for more accuracy, not revolutionary changes to the core gameplay. We've had high accuracy from day 1 though, while not controller free, the Move is even more accurate than the Wii. So it's not as if the motion industry was crying out for accuracy to be the next big thing that somehow caused developers to start farting out GOTY contenders.

 

The difference now to 2010/2011 is we have years under the belt between 3 motion devices, one hands free, one super accurate and one part of the current best selling console of the last generation. How much more evidence do you need about the merits and relevance of motion gaming? And you ask why people brush off the "potential", "but x is coming" arguments? We're only going on multiple years of experience, reviews and hands on with a plethora of motion based games.

 

And as I've already said VR is the next big thing, not a continuation of motion gaming, so it doesn't even have the wow or hype factor going for it any more like it did when the Wii arrived.

 

However, some people will always complain that MS should remove it to save even more money. MS could cut the price by $200 and still some would say that its a bad deal becuase it could be even cheaper with Kinect. 

 

True, but cmon, lets be reasonable here the main argument is PS4 $399, XB1 $499. MS couldn't get to $399 with Kinect, so that's why the genuinely rational people are having these arguments. Someone saying an XB1 at $299 isn't good enough with the Kinect packed in would be laughed at, that's $100 cheaper than a PS4! If MS want to eat the bullet and bundle the Kinect 2 at $399, fine, most of the arguments disappear when there is price parity. You might be left grumbling about your Kinect door stopper, but it's not like the PS4 camp is getting a better deal, they're paying the same as you are. When you're not paying the same that's when you start to look at the Sony camp and say how come they let the camera be purchased separately to allow for a cheaper console?

 

It just doesn't get any easier for MS either when the masses are going around talking about the technical power of the PS4 vs XB1. That rubs salt on the wounds of someone already asking why do I have to pay more than the Sony chumps? Hence why doing something with the price is of utmost urgency.

[Skiver Veteran]

All I will say is... there was pretty much the same, if not bigger a price difference between the PS3 and Xbox 360. We all know that in the end it all worked out fairly even, in fact I think in more recent months the PS3 actually overtook the XB360 because prices on BOTH dropped. 

We also know that both consoles are selling way more than both did at last generation. Please stop with the price rubbish because it ultimately right now.

 

I don't doubt Kinect is not everyone's cup of tea but last generation, but lets also admit that Kinect V1 incredibly well last gen so MS tried to captailise on that fact and as its been said all along, if everyone has one then it will promote Dev's to use it.

[trooper11]

And as I've already said VR is the next big thing, not a continuation of motion gaming, so it doesn't even have the wow or hype factor going for it any more like it did when the Wii arrived.

Hey, thats fine, I get where your coming from on it. I'm a little tired arguing the merits of Kinect. Even the smallest of features it adds to the experience are apparently unreasonable. You win, it must go. It really does not matter what you or I think of it, but people insist on arguing these points over and over.

It is interesting you bring up VR as the next big thing and yet miss the oppurtunity where motion controls are used in combonation with VR hardware.

But again, I'm tired of arguing the merits of motion controls or Kinect, its clear everyone is quite settled on their position and I would be fine with it just going away.

 

It just doesn't get any easier for MS either when the masses are going around talking about the technical power of the PS4 vs XB1. That rubs salt on the wounds of someone already asking why do I have to pay more than the Sony chumps? Hence why doing something with the price is of utmost urgency.

Your right. MS must drop Kinect or cut the price and eat the losses. End of story.