They show the console off and its games and features. It seems like this is still being considered an optional part of the console for some reason. Wishful thinking perhaps?
Microsoft could reduce the price of the console by half and keep the Kinect if they wanted. Removing it doesn't mean an automatic $100 discount even if removing it were being considered by them. They have control over the price, and consoles are often sold at a loss anyways. Saying it is the sole reason the console costs 500 and not 400 dollars is, again, overly simplistic.
This doesn't mean I called you simple, no need to get defensive
The $100 more Xbone is over PS4 is because of the Kinect if you look at current pricing models. The kinect alone is $130 or something like that new off a store shelf. Bundled it's $100 because it doesn't come with apower brick and the kinect bundle is $100 more than the non-kinect bundle. So it's not really a stretch for people to consider the $100 extra the Xbone is over PS4 to be wrapped up in the Kinect.
I imagine the vast mojority of people don't want KinectBone nor do they really want to spend an extra $100 for the thing. If they know how bad current Kinect is, they know it's not any good for anything but voice commands and that's questionable even.. And anyone using 360 Kinect for a chat mic know how much it sucks at that too, I personally mute anyone doing that no questions asked.
Since the current Kinect sucks so bad, people are trying to assign value to why they need this piece of shit accessor in the first place since it's now mandatory and being shoved down everyones throats in this next generation. If they had a kinectBoneless version for $100 cheaper, that's the system that would sell.
The $100 more Xbone is over PS4 is because of the Kinect if you look at current pricing models. The kinect alone is $130 or something like that new off a store shelf. Bundled it's $100 because it doesn't come with apower brick and the kinect bundle is $100 more than the non-kinect bundle. So it's not really a stretch for people to consider the $100 extra the Xbone is over PS4 to be wrapped up in the Kinect.
I imagine the vast mojority of people don't want KinectBone nor do they really want to spend an extra $100 for the thing. If they know how bad current Kinect is, they know it's not any good for anything but voice commands and that's questionable even.. And anyone using 360 Kinect for a chat mic know how much it sucks at that too, I personally mute anyone doing that no questions asked.
Since the current Kinect sucks so bad, people are trying to assign value to why they need this piece of shit accessor in the first place since it's now mandatory and being shoved down everyones throats in this next generation. If they had a kinectBoneless version for $100 cheaper, that's the system that would sell.
Other than the Kinect 2.0 probably adds more cost to the XB1 I do not agree with your other assessments. Do you have any facts or is this just opinion? I have a Kinect-ed Slim and I do not use it at all now but I did try it and I do I want to use it it. I know it can be good. I know the voice recognition is good but not great.I've heard the Chat and it was good enough but not suited to Halo activity. I also know Kinect 2.0 is going to be much better than 1.0 and maybe even have games I (or my wife) really want to use. I am not ready to give up on the Kinect 2.0 interface. I think it has a huge potenial for success.
I imagine the vast mojority of people don't want KinectBone nor do they really want to spend an extra $100 for the thing. If they know how bad current Kinect is, they know it's not any good for anything but voice commands and that's questionable even..
A) 25 million Kinects sold (as a stand alone, not mandated) out of 75 million 360's sold. That means one in three people went out of their way to purchase a Kinect 1.0 for $150.
B) the 2.0 will be leaps and bounds better than the first and will be in every box and so utilizated in tandom with the controller on most games - and fully into the dashboard.
I imagine the vast mojority of people don't want KinectBone nor do they really want to spend an extra $100 for the thing. If they know how bad current Kinect is, they know it's not any good for anything but voice commands and that's questionable even..
A) 25 million Kinects sold (as a stand alone, not mandated) out of 75 million 360's sold. That means one in three people went out of their way to purchase a Kinect 1.0 for $150.
B) the 2.0 will be leaps and bounds better than the first and will be in every box and so utilizated in tandom with the controller on most games - and fully into the dashboard.
A) What's the usage and retention rate? I haven't used mine after the initial 2 weeks of purchasing it. It's just sitting in a closet collecting dust. I'd venture a guess that if m$ gave you the option of purchasing the xbone with and without a kinect, you wouldn't see as many kinect 2.0's sold as the 1.0.
B) Unless they find something revolutionary in terms of incorporating kinect 2.0 and movement into gameplay, the controller will continue to be the preferred method of gaming, no matter how much they improved it.
I imagine the vast mojority of people don't want KinectBone nor do they really want to spend an extra $100 for the thing. If they know how bad current Kinect is, they know it's not any good for anything but voice commands and that's questionable even..
A) 25 million Kinects sold (as a stand alone, not mandated) out of 75 million 360's sold. That means one in three people went out of their way to purchase a Kinect 1.0 for $150.
B) the 2.0 will be leaps and bounds better than the first and will be in every box and so utilizated in tandom with the controller on most games - and fully into the dashboard.
A) What's the usage and retention rate? I haven't used mine after the initial 2 weeks of purchasing it. It's just sitting in a closet collecting dust. I'd venture a guess that if m$ gave you the option of purchasing the xbone with and without a kinect, you wouldn't see as many kinect 2.0's sold as the 1.0.
B) Unless they find something revolutionary in terms of incorporating kinect 2.0 and movement into gameplay, the controller will continue to be the preferred method of gaming, no matter how much they improved it.
The same situation of purchase and retention/usage could be made for the Wii as well.
I imagine the vast mojority of people don't want KinectBone nor do they really want to spend an extra $100 for the thing. If they know how bad current Kinect is, they know it's not any good for anything but voice commands and that's questionable even..
A) 25 million Kinects sold (as a stand alone, not mandated) out of 75 million 360's sold. That means one in three people went out of their way to purchase a Kinect 1.0 for $150.
B) the 2.0 will be leaps and bounds better than the first and will be in every box and so utilizated in tandom with the controller on most games - and fully into the dashboard.
A) What's the usage and retention rate? I haven't used mine after the initial 2 weeks of purchasing it. It's just sitting in a closet collecting dust. I'd venture a guess that if m$ gave you the option of purchasing the xbone with and without a kinect, you wouldn't see as many kinect 2.0's sold as the 1.0.
B) Unless they find something revolutionary in terms of incorporating kinect 2.0 and movement into gameplay, the controller will continue to be the preferred method of gaming, no matter how much they improved it.
The same situation of purchase and retention/usage could be made for the Wii as well.
Yeah, I came in to mention the Wii at this point in the conversation as well.
kinect is an external piece of the One's internals. It's not removeable.
Like a penis?
Did you mean testicles? :)
Testicles can be removed or otherwise disabled and the penis still works ... so what you're saying is that a dick is among the things more vesatile and useful than the XB1 design. ;)
It still boils down to the actual availability of the product to determine if it will be sucessful or not. Since the Kinect and the Eye were not packaged with the console from the beginning then it's up to the consumer to see it's usefullness and buy it accordingly. Since the Kinect is being packaged with the console then it's first the developers choice whether it's potentially useful to use in the game and therefore worth the expendature to develop for it. Thus giving the customer a choice to use it in game or not, not by seeing the game then deciding whether the Kinect is useful, but by seeing how useful the option to use Kinect because the functionality is built into the game.
Take Forza for example, The head tracking was obviously optional because Kinect was optional. The devs decided to try it out, while not particularly useful and therefore not used much in the game. The realisim behind it is natural, you don't use a thumbstick to look over to your left and right mirrors or your blindspots, you use your damn head to do that! If I already have the Kinect then it's an option I'm more than likely to use as opposed to seeing that it's Kinect enabled and the buddies who already have one say they find it a cool option and worth going out to buy a Kinect that I don't already have.
I would think that in a FPS other ideas would be useful. You get notified that somone is shooting you from behind and too your right. Using Kinect I can look over my shoulder to get a better view of where I'm being shot from and whether that threat is bigger than the one I have in front of me I'm already shooting at.
I play Mechwarrior: Online, I use my mouse to point where I see and my direction at the waist. Then I'm using my keyboard keys to change direction and fire weapons, the same goes for consoles using thumbsticks. Often I'm in the middle of a firefight and using a mouse to aim and turn while I'm going in another direction and my opponent is too can be difficult. Now if I could use my eyes to control where my reticle goes and my waist follows then I might be willing to try it if the tech is already built in.
Too be honest guys you're condeming something that is going to phase 2 from 1. So progress shows the tech will be better, you may not like Kinect 1 because it wasn't useful and not used on every game. But since the K2 is sold with every console then it's potential opens up across the board. Stop dissmissing it outright, let the devs play with it (and they will knowing everyone has it) before you go saying it's not worth a damn and never will be...
Remember, before the accidental creation of vulcanized rubber tires were mostly made of wood with a metal band to prevent wear and tear. Let's wonder how far NASCAR would be today if that was still the case....
You don't force someone to pay more for an option promising them that surely someone will make something cool you can't live without simply because we forced a lot of people to buy one by including it.
You make the cool, can't live without it thing and then people fall all over themselves giving you money for it, Ask Apple.
Because as it is now, you're relying on someone in marketing's OPINION that it'll be great, if you'll just pay up front. And I've seen marketing be soooo wrong before.
Even if they had the Kinect2 on sale at $130.00 and two consoles, sole difference teh KInect, at $100.00 difference, there would be some kind of perceived value up front, for those that wanted to try it. We aren't even getting that. It's just not the right way to market something. Of course Microsoft's been screwing that up since the reveal so why stop now?
And don't get me wrong, I want the thing to be great, it does have potential, but I don't like how they went about it. Buying based on potential is called the stockmarket...
You don't force someone to pay more for an option promising them that surely someone will make something cool you can't live without simply because we forced a lot of people to buy one by including it.
You make the cool, can't live without it thing and then people fall all over themselves giving you money for it, Ask Apple.
Because as it is now, you're relying on someone in marketing's OPINION that it'll be great, if you'll just pay up front. And I've seen marketing be soooo wrong before.
Even if they had the Kinect2 on sale at $130.00 and two consoles, sole difference teh KInect, at $100.00 difference, there would be some kind of perceived value up front, for those that wanted to try it. We aren't even getting that. It's just not the right way to market something. Of course Microsoft's been screwing that up since the reveal so why stop now?
And don't get me wrong, I want the thing to be great, it does have potential, but I don't like how they went about it. Buying based on potential is called the stockmarket...
I never had an accident that required a seatbelt. My air bags have never deployed. Anti-lock brakes never helped me stop safely. My Glider had a parachute as mandatory equipment but I never used it. I still perceive the value in those costly add-on features.
It's fine with me if you don't want to believe in MS' vision for the Kinect. They do have a vision and I believe they are going about it correctly.
You don't force someone to pay more for an option promising them that surely someone will make something cool you can't live without simply because we forced a lot of people to buy one by including it.
You make the cool, can't live without it thing and then people fall all over themselves giving you money for it, Ask Apple.
Because as it is now, you're relying on someone in marketing's OPINION that it'll be great, if you'll just pay up front. And I've seen marketing be soooo wrong before.
Even if they had the Kinect2 on sale at $130.00 and two consoles, sole difference teh KInect, at $100.00 difference, there would be some kind of perceived value up front, for those that wanted to try it. We aren't even getting that. It's just not the right way to market something. Of course Microsoft's been screwing that up since the reveal so why stop now?
And don't get me wrong, I want the thing to be great, it does have potential, but I don't like how they went about it. Buying based on potential is called the stockmarket...
I never had an accident that required a seatbelt. My air bags have never deployed. Anti-lock brakes never helped me stop safely. My Glider had a parachute as mandatory equipment but I never used it. I still perceive the value in those costly add-on features.
It's fine with me if you don't want to believe in MS' vision for the Kinect. They do have a vision and I believe they are going about it correctly.
Not a valid arguement.
There are a gazillion studies, case histories and examples reported in the news on why all of that has value. And you can bet they weren't required until someone PROVED their worth.
There are a gazillion studies, case histories and examples reported in the news on why all of that has value. And you can bet they weren't required until someone PROVED their worth.
I believe they are because there were many detractors for those features too. Whether my examples are good enough or not is moot. MS has a vision for their product. We buy into it or not. I don't need/won't need the Blu-Ray player in the XB1 but I still have to pay for it. If I had a reasonable choice, I'd have MS save me money by removing it first. I understand why it is included so I just have to pay for it like all the other XB1 customers. The Kinect has potential for me but the Blue-Ray does not.
There are a gazillion studies, case histories and examples reported in the news on why all of that has value. And you can bet they weren't required until someone PROVED their worth.
I believe they are because there were many detractors for those features too. Whether my examples are good enough or not is moot. MS has a vision for their product. We buy into it or not. I don't need/won't need the Blu-Ray player in the XB1 but I still have to pay for it. If I had a reasonable choice, I'd have MS save me money by removing it first. I understand why it is included so I just have to pay for it like all the other XB1 customers. The Kinect has potential for me but the Blue-Ray does not.
The Xbone also has a Blu-Ray player, which I think is also a little funny: Microsoft has to pay Sony a royalty for every bit of the hardware they sell.
There are a gazillion studies, case histories and examples reported in the news on why all of that has value. And you can bet they weren't required until someone PROVED their worth.
I believe they are because there were many detractors for those features too. Whether my examples are good enough or not is moot. MS has a vision for their product. We buy into it or not. I don't need/won't need the Blu-Ray player in the XB1 but I still have to pay for it. If I had a reasonable choice, I'd have MS save me money by removing it first. I understand why it is included so I just have to pay for it like all the other XB1 customers. The Kinect has potential for me but the Blue-Ray does not.
The Xbone also has a Blu-Ray player, which I think is also a little funny: Microsoft has to pay Sony a royalty for every bit of the hardware they sell.
Yeah, but Sony (as a whole company) could use the money...
You don't force someone to pay more for an option promising them that surely someone will make something cool you can't live without simply because we forced a lot of people to buy one by including it.
You make the cool, can't live without it thing and then people fall all over themselves giving you money for it, Ask Apple.
Because as it is now, you're relying on someone in marketing's OPINION that it'll be great, if you'll just pay up front. And I've seen marketing be soooo wrong before.
Even if they had the Kinect2 on sale at $130.00 and two consoles, sole difference teh KInect, at $100.00 difference, there would be some kind of perceived value up front, for those that wanted to try it. We aren't even getting that. It's just not the right way to market something. Of course Microsoft's been screwing that up since the reveal so why stop now?
And don't get me wrong, I want the thing to be great, it does have potential, but I don't like how they went about it. Buying based on potential is called the stockmarket...
Yeah you're right about the Apple thing, but it took them decades to do it and before that were resigned to a niche market decades before they got lucky and build upon the empire that started with iTunes. And as you've noticed, that position as king of the hill is fading fast.
I agree this feels like a forced position instead of an option, but I do see why they're making it. Movement is the next forefront of gaming, hell look at all of the dance titles that exploded onto the scene back in the 2000's. You can't tell me that that didn't bring with it a playstyle that had never been done before.
If Harmonix can capitalize on a new wave of Rock Band titles using it? That was also groundbreaking in its playstyle. Let's just hope that they use the Kinect instead of requiring us to buy a guitar, mic, bass, and drumkit. Those were truly wasted periphrials....
Doesn't an iPhone and iPod/iPad force you to use iTunes?
I don't yet have a blue ray and both systems have a Blu Ray, so that's a meh/wash...
If you look at both systems, especially if you're joe blow and don't read a lick, there's two glaring differences, the sony is $100.00 less and it doesn't have that darn Kinect thing, and that's how the huddled masses will see it on the shelf.
As I said it's up to Microsoft to get off their ass and SELL it so it's a plus and not just $100.00 more out of the wallets of millions.
As for iTunes, it's funny, yes iTunes is required, but it's good enough I don't feel forced, ...
As for buying into Microsofts vision, they still appear to need a white cane so far...
And again, even me reading my own stuff it appears I'm just bashing, but Microsoft doesn't have an inferior product, they just don't know how to sell it.
MS needs to come out and say, this is everything we know you will be able to do with 2.0 as of right now. The greater population will need a reason to spend the extra 100 bucks, when compared to the ps4 and even if they did that I am not sure that is going to really do the trick. For us it is somewhat of an easier descission since we have a lot of people (due to communities like this) that play on the 360. But if I was not part of a community like this and did not have a full friends of people playing on XBL, it would be a coin flip for me which system I would be going with.
They need to get more telecoms/cable/satellite companies on board to take advantage of the multimedia aspect and have more then just hope of possible future cool things with 2.0
To be honest I do not even think MS knows (or has finalized) things that 2.0 CAN do yet. I mean why would they just come out now and say "oh hey you can use 2.0 for QR codes" and not say that at E3.
I would say they better have a some what extensive list of the reasons 2.0 is worth the extra 100 or have many more companies on board to use the XB 1 as a multimedia player no later then begining of Sept. and that list of companies/functionalities will be ready on launch day.
I am still not getting one until fall, but the marketing team needs to be powering down the energy drinks and pulling 18hr days to get a definitive message out.
Gotta say the Kinect is the final sticking point for me. I dont want one, simple as. The only person that uses it is the wife for her keep fit stuff, and she is not interested about going next gen as current gen does all she wants.
Get rid of the thing and I will buy an Xbox One sometime after launch, keep it and I will save the 100 quid and get a PS4.
Gotta say the Kinect is the final sticking point for me. I dont want one, simple as. The only person that uses it is the wife for her keep fit stuff, and she is not interested about going next gen as current gen does all she wants.
Get rid of the thing and I will buy an Xbox One sometime after launch, keep it and I will save the 100 quid and get a PS4.
That's it. No ifs, no buts, no maybes.
Oh and ipods work fine with WMP.
I'm with you 100%. If it's such an inmportant part of the system SHOW me. I have a short attention span so if you can't sell me in the first 60 seconds then you lost me. Show me the support for it. RYSE at one point was supposed to be a Kinect title... if this thing is so awesome then why is it using a standard contoller now and not Kinect 2.0? I just get that feeling that MS is holding back too much on it.
While advertising was "more of an afterthought" on the Xbox 360, the Xbox One "is going to have advertising in mind," according to a technical account manager StickTwiddlers talked to. "So a lot of the limitations that we have now, hopefully the release of the boundaries will be widened so the opportunities will be a lot greater.”
While advertising was "more of an afterthought" on the Xbox 360, the Xbox One "is going to have advertising in mind," according to a technical account manager StickTwiddlers talked to. "So a lot of the limitations that we have now, hopefully the release of the boundaries will be widened so the opportunities will be a lot greater.”
I'll tell you one good thing about Kinect 2.0 = 1080p Skype video calls. Nice video cams like the Logitech 1080p ones are near $100 themselves, just for that.
Maybe you will sometime. Especially if you get a One and it has it built in. That's like saying "I don't need a smart phone, because I don't check email on my phone." Well no you don't, now. But you might if you had one.
They show the console off and its games and features. It seems like this is still being considered an optional part of the console for some reason. Wishful thinking perhaps?
Microsoft could reduce the price of the console by half and keep the Kinect if they wanted. Removing it doesn't mean an automatic $100 discount even if removing it were being considered by them. They have control over the price, and consoles are often sold at a loss anyways. Saying it is the sole reason the console costs 500 and not 400 dollars is, again, overly simplistic.
This doesn't mean I called you simple, no need to get defensive
The $100 more Xbone is over PS4 is because of the Kinect if you look at current pricing models. The kinect alone is $130 or something like that new off a store shelf. Bundled it's $100 because it doesn't come with apower brick and the kinect bundle is $100 more than the non-kinect bundle. So it's not really a stretch for people to consider the $100 extra the Xbone is over PS4 to be wrapped up in the Kinect.
I imagine the vast mojority of people don't want KinectBone nor do they really want to spend an extra $100 for the thing. If they know how bad current Kinect is, they know it's not any good for anything but voice commands and that's questionable even.. And anyone using 360 Kinect for a chat mic know how much it sucks at that too, I personally mute anyone doing that no questions asked.
Since the current Kinect sucks so bad, people are trying to assign value to why they need this piece of shit accessor in the first place since it's now mandatory and being shoved down everyones throats in this next generation. If they had a kinectBoneless version for $100 cheaper, that's the system that would sell.
A) 25 million Kinects sold (as a stand alone, not mandated) out of 75 million 360's sold. That means one in three people went out of their way to purchase a Kinect 1.0 for $150.
B) the 2.0 will be leaps and bounds better than the first and will be in every box and so utilizated in tandom with the controller on most games - and fully into the dashboard.
A) What's the usage and retention rate? I haven't used mine after the initial 2 weeks of purchasing it. It's just sitting in a closet collecting dust. I'd venture a guess that if m$ gave you the option of purchasing the xbone with and without a kinect, you wouldn't see as many kinect 2.0's sold as the 1.0.
B) Unless they find something revolutionary in terms of incorporating kinect 2.0 and movement into gameplay, the controller will continue to be the preferred method of gaming, no matter how much they improved it.
The same situation of purchase and retention/usage could be made for the Wii as well.
Yeah, I came in to mention the Wii at this point in the conversation as well.
If this were a thing, I'd be on board.
Do you have any facts or is this just opinion? =P
I should of said "I have great hopes Kinect 2.0 is going to be much better than 1.0."
kinect is an external piece of the One's internals. It's not removeable.
Like a penis?
Like a penis?
Did you mean testicles? :)
Testicles can be removed or otherwise disabled and the penis still works ... so what you're saying is that a dick is among the things more vesatile and useful than the XB1 design. ;)
[tongue planted firmly in cheek]
It still boils down to the actual availability of the product to determine if it will be sucessful or not. Since the Kinect and the Eye were not packaged with the console from the beginning then it's up to the consumer to see it's usefullness and buy it accordingly. Since the Kinect is being packaged with the console then it's first the developers choice whether it's potentially useful to use in the game and therefore worth the expendature to develop for it. Thus giving the customer a choice to use it in game or not, not by seeing the game then deciding whether the Kinect is useful, but by seeing how useful the option to use Kinect because the functionality is built into the game.
Take Forza for example, The head tracking was obviously optional because Kinect was optional. The devs decided to try it out, while not particularly useful and therefore not used much in the game. The realisim behind it is natural, you don't use a thumbstick to look over to your left and right mirrors or your blindspots, you use your damn head to do that! If I already have the Kinect then it's an option I'm more than likely to use as opposed to seeing that it's Kinect enabled and the buddies who already have one say they find it a cool option and worth going out to buy a Kinect that I don't already have.
I would think that in a FPS other ideas would be useful. You get notified that somone is shooting you from behind and too your right. Using Kinect I can look over my shoulder to get a better view of where I'm being shot from and whether that threat is bigger than the one I have in front of me I'm already shooting at.
I play Mechwarrior: Online, I use my mouse to point where I see and my direction at the waist. Then I'm using my keyboard keys to change direction and fire weapons, the same goes for consoles using thumbsticks. Often I'm in the middle of a firefight and using a mouse to aim and turn while I'm going in another direction and my opponent is too can be difficult. Now if I could use my eyes to control where my reticle goes and my waist follows then I might be willing to try it if the tech is already built in.
Too be honest guys you're condeming something that is going to phase 2 from 1. So progress shows the tech will be better, you may not like Kinect 1 because it wasn't useful and not used on every game. But since the K2 is sold with every console then it's potential opens up across the board. Stop dissmissing it outright, let the devs play with it (and they will knowing everyone has it) before you go saying it's not worth a damn and never will be...
Remember, before the accidental creation of vulcanized rubber tires were mostly made of wood with a metal band to prevent wear and tear. Let's wonder how far NASCAR would be today if that was still the case....
I thumbed down as well
It's not how commercial business works guys.
You don't force someone to pay more for an option promising them that surely someone will make something cool you can't live without simply because we forced a lot of people to buy one by including it.
You make the cool, can't live without it thing and then people fall all over themselves giving you money for it, Ask Apple.
Because as it is now, you're relying on someone in marketing's OPINION that it'll be great, if you'll just pay up front. And I've seen marketing be soooo wrong before.
Even if they had the Kinect2 on sale at $130.00 and two consoles, sole difference teh KInect, at $100.00 difference, there would be some kind of perceived value up front, for those that wanted to try it. We aren't even getting that. It's just not the right way to market something. Of course Microsoft's been screwing that up since the reveal so why stop now?
And don't get me wrong, I want the thing to be great, it does have potential, but I don't like how they went about it. Buying based on potential is called the stockmarket...
It's fine with me if you don't want to believe in MS' vision for the Kinect. They do have a vision and I believe they are going about it correctly.
Not a valid arguement.
There are a gazillion studies, case histories and examples reported in the news on why all of that has value. And you can bet they weren't required until someone PROVED their worth.
The Xbone also has a Blu-Ray player, which I think is also a little funny: Microsoft has to pay Sony a royalty for every bit of the hardware they sell.
Yeah, but Sony (as a whole company) could use the money...
Yeah you're right about the Apple thing, but it took them decades to do it and before that were resigned to a niche market decades before they got lucky and build upon the empire that started with iTunes. And as you've noticed, that position as king of the hill is fading fast.
I agree this feels like a forced position instead of an option, but I do see why they're making it. Movement is the next forefront of gaming, hell look at all of the dance titles that exploded onto the scene back in the 2000's. You can't tell me that that didn't bring with it a playstyle that had never been done before.
If Harmonix can capitalize on a new wave of Rock Band titles using it? That was also groundbreaking in its playstyle. Let's just hope that they use the Kinect instead of requiring us to buy a guitar, mic, bass, and drumkit. Those were truly wasted periphrials....
Doesn't an iPhone and iPod/iPad force you to use iTunes?
I don't yet have a blue ray and both systems have a Blu Ray, so that's a meh/wash...
If you look at both systems, especially if you're joe blow and don't read a lick, there's two glaring differences, the sony is $100.00 less and it doesn't have that darn Kinect thing, and that's how the huddled masses will see it on the shelf.
As I said it's up to Microsoft to get off their ass and SELL it so it's a plus and not just $100.00 more out of the wallets of millions.
As for iTunes, it's funny, yes iTunes is required, but it's good enough I don't feel forced, ...
As for buying into Microsofts vision, they still appear to need a white cane so far...
And again, even me reading my own stuff it appears I'm just bashing, but Microsoft doesn't have an inferior product, they just don't know how to sell it.
MS needs to come out and say, this is everything we know you will be able to do with 2.0 as of right now. The greater population will need a reason to spend the extra 100 bucks, when compared to the ps4 and even if they did that I am not sure that is going to really do the trick. For us it is somewhat of an easier descission since we have a lot of people (due to communities like this) that play on the 360. But if I was not part of a community like this and did not have a full friends of people playing on XBL, it would be a coin flip for me which system I would be going with.
They need to get more telecoms/cable/satellite companies on board to take advantage of the multimedia aspect and have more then just hope of possible future cool things with 2.0
To be honest I do not even think MS knows (or has finalized) things that 2.0 CAN do yet. I mean why would they just come out now and say "oh hey you can use 2.0 for QR codes" and not say that at E3.
I would say they better have a some what extensive list of the reasons 2.0 is worth the extra 100 or have many more companies on board to use the XB 1 as a multimedia player no later then begining of Sept. and that list of companies/functionalities will be ready on launch day.
I am still not getting one until fall, but the marketing team needs to be powering down the energy drinks and pulling 18hr days to get a definitive message out.
Gotta say the Kinect is the final sticking point for me. I dont want one, simple as. The only person that uses it is the wife for her keep fit stuff, and she is not interested about going next gen as current gen does all she wants.
Get rid of the thing and I will buy an Xbox One sometime after launch, keep it and I will save the 100 quid and get a PS4.
That's it. No ifs, no buts, no maybes.
Oh and ipods work fine with WMP.
I'm with you 100%. If it's such an inmportant part of the system SHOW me. I have a short attention span so if you can't sell me in the first 60 seconds then you lost me. Show me the support for it. RYSE at one point was supposed to be a Kinect title... if this thing is so awesome then why is it using a standard contoller now and not Kinect 2.0? I just get that feeling that MS is holding back too much on it.
http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2013/07/microsoft-xbox-one-advertising-wil...
That sounds great.
I'll tell you one good thing about Kinect 2.0 = 1080p Skype video calls. Nice video cams like the Logitech 1080p ones are near $100 themselves, just for that.
Don't use skype...so that does not sway me.
Maybe you will sometime. Especially if you get a One and it has it built in. That's like saying "I don't need a smart phone, because I don't check email on my phone." Well no you don't, now. But you might if you had one.