Bhav Posted August 11, 2010 Share Posted August 11, 2010 I think there was rumor earlier this year (and now this sign language patent thing) suggesting that MS had gimped some hardware specs to keep the cost in control and moved processing to Xbox 360 (in software). Yup exactly that - it's now in software which means less processing power available to the actual game itself, but cheaper Kinect camera. Devs have varied in the responses for how much CPU it actually takes up, but I think the DF article mentioned 12-15%? Kinect is fundamentally based on tech from some Israeli company, but their original has a higher resolution (640x480), whilst Kinect's has been lowered to 320x240. So if many of Kinect's limitations are software in nature and can be engineered, or "evolved" around, what of the hardware itself? Perhaps the biggest surprise - and disappointment - in viewing the final Kinect spec up against the PrimeSense reference camera is that the resolution of the all-important depth map has been reduced to just 25 per cent of its original size: 320x240 up against 640x480. This makes the idea of tracking fingers, or any kind of fine detail, in a reliable fashion a complete non-starter, and so what you might call "higher level" interactions with games are going to be challenging to implement: there won't be any virtual keyboards to type on, for example: the precision simply isn't there. This leads on to another very simple question: if seated gameplay is implemented, just how are we expected to interact with the game if you can't use your fingers? Waving your arms about just won't cut it in many cases in terms of a full-fledged control system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BajiRav Posted August 11, 2010 Share Posted August 11, 2010 Yup exactly that - it's now in software which means less processing power available to the actual game itself, but cheaper Kinect camera. Devs have varied in the responses for how much CPU it actually takes up, but I think the DF article mentioned 12-15%? Kinect is fundamentally based on tech from some Israeli company, but their original has a higher resolution (640x480), whilst Kinect's has been lowered to 320x240. There is another thread split from here for discussing this further https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/928708-kinect-cant-read-sign-language-after-all/page__pid__593019368__st__0entry593019368 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hedon Posted August 11, 2010 Share Posted August 11, 2010 Yup, the processer was dumped in the Kinect hardware in favor of using the processor in the Xbox 360 (1% used) for the same performance. Ubisoft said there is no performance issues, and it will fully support AAA titles as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bhav Posted August 12, 2010 Share Posted August 12, 2010 Yup, the processer was dumped in the Kinect hardware in favor of using the processor in the Xbox 360 (1% used) for the same performance. Ubisoft said there is no performance issues, and it will fully support AAA titles as well. It's not 1%. It's 10-15%. Seriously go read that DF article that I've posted and referred to at least 5 times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1337ish Posted August 12, 2010 Share Posted August 12, 2010 It's not 1%. It's 10-15%. Seriously go read that DF article that I've posted and referred to at least 5 times. The level of customisation available to developers also means that the various CPU usage figures being bandied about can't be taken as gospel either. They will vary on a game-by-game basis, so it comes as no surprise to learn that we have a range of very different statements coming from very reliable sources. This week, CVG quoted Ubisoft's Frederic Blais refuting comments made that Kinect soaks up an entire core's worth of CPU power: "That's not true at all. I don't really know how much I can talk about it but it's less than one per cent [of the CPU's power], or something like that."On the other hand, we have one of the key technical architects from Microsoft, Alex Kipman, telling New Scientist magazine that Kinect uses 10-15 per cent of the system's power. It varies is the conclusion...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AbandonedTrolley Posted August 12, 2010 Share Posted August 12, 2010 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sethos Posted August 12, 2010 Share Posted August 12, 2010 Now, 2 years of OMG KINECT SUXX!!!11 and OMG MOVE SUXXX!!11 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hedon Posted August 12, 2010 Share Posted August 12, 2010 It's not 1%. It's 10-15%. Seriously go read that DF article that I've posted and referred to at least 5 times. Have a good read: http://www.computera...e.php?id=258340 Maybe you should really research before posting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bhav Posted August 12, 2010 Share Posted August 12, 2010 Have a good read: http://www.computera...e.php?id=258340 Maybe you should really research before posting. You should too... This week, CVG quoted Ubisoft's Frederic Blais refuting comments made that Kinect soaks up an entire core's worth of CPU power: "That's not true at all. I don't really know how much I can talk about it but it's less than one per cent [of the CPU's power], or something like that." On the other hand, we have one of the key technical architects from Microsoft, Alex Kipman, telling New Scientist magazine that Kinect uses 10-15 per cent of the system's power. The truth is that for most Kinect titles, Kipman's figures are closer to the money. Two threads of a single Xbox 360 core are used, but only a relatively small percentage of that processor's available CPU time is consumed, and the actual amount of system resources both in terms of processor cycles and RAM used depends entirely on the type of game being made and the capabilities of Kinect the developer is using (in point of fact, a small percentage of GPU resources are also being used). http://www.eurogamer...-article?page=2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hedon Posted August 12, 2010 Share Posted August 12, 2010 Apparently you don't get it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bhav Posted August 12, 2010 Share Posted August 12, 2010 Ok, I'll take that lol...let's either get back on topic (unlikely) or just agree to be friends and let this be :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hedon Posted August 12, 2010 Share Posted August 12, 2010 i love you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Audioboxer Subscriber² Posted August 14, 2010 Author Subscriber² Share Posted August 14, 2010 No more crying about Kinect please, back on topic Cheapest Move Controller - £27.85 Cheapest Sub Controller - £17.85 Cheapest Move Starter Pack - £42.85 No delivery charges on any Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bhav Posted August 14, 2010 Share Posted August 14, 2010 No more crying about Kinect please, back on topic Cheapest Move Controller - ?27.85 Cheapest Sub Controller - ?17.85 Cheapest Move Starter Pack - ?42.85 No delivery charges on any Thanks for that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Audioboxer Subscriber² Posted August 15, 2010 Author Subscriber² Share Posted August 15, 2010 Sub controller - ?16.99 Move controller - ?27.89 (use code send2) Move starter pack - ?40 (use code send4) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Audioboxer Subscriber² Posted August 29, 2010 Author Subscriber² Share Posted August 29, 2010 Starter pack £38.49 Quidco 5% makes it £36.57 Move controller £26.74 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts