Would you prefer to purchase the XBone with an Optional Kinect or Mandatory Kinect

  • 70 results
  • 1
  • 2
Posted by micky2bad (1 posts) 1 year, 1 month ago

Poll: Would you prefer to purchase the XBone with an Optional Kinect or Mandatory Kinect (260 votes)

Optional Kinect - Retail Price $400 72%
Mandatory Kinect - Retail Price $500 28%

Hello

I'm in the midst of a heated argument with friends. Some friends reckon the mandatory Kinect is the right move for Microsoft , while other think that Microsoft should let the Kinect be an optional extra and the fact that Microsoft are making it mandatory is going to hurt them in the long run.

When I say Mandatory Kinect , I mean that it's bundled with the XBone and it is not an optional extra , and Microsoft have already said that the XBone will work and function as normal with it powered off , even if you never use the Kinect the XBone will work fine.

So as a consumer do you think that the Kinect should be a mandatory extra or an optional extra?

Personally I believe it should be optional and if it's as good as Microsoft say it is , then it should be able to stand on it's own merits as a sole product.

#51 Posted by Bleaker (25 posts) -

I would not like green eggs and ham Sam I am.

#52 Posted by Syed117 (387 posts) -

I'm actually going to go back to what I said earlier and say that it completely depends on if the thing works.

If its some novelty again and is as reliable as the first kinect, there is no way in hell it should be in there. However, if the tech is finally to a point where it simply works, it should be a part of the system.

Just a few more months to go.

#53 Edited by Waffles13 (610 posts) -

A laptop does not require the webcam be turned on or even be connected at all to the rest of the computer. A PC operating system is also not quite analogous to console OS setup.

In regards to the fellow who asked about cell phones, same thing with that. The camera does not have to be active in order for the phone to function.

As I understood MS' E3 press release, Kinect must be on in order for the console to function at all. I assume that includes the camera and sensor and microphone.

So is your issue that MS is somehow going be using/selling your information to corporations/governments? Because if you're that deep into the conspiracy hole, who's to say that your laptop isn't secretly recording you at all times, even though they tell you that it's not installed? How do you know that Samsung/Apple/Whoever isn't constantly monitoring your phone's microphone and GPS data at all times and forwarding it to the NSA? You know that 360 headset sitting in your entertainment center? Sure, the console's off and the mic is set to Mute, but it's totally still listening, man.

Microsoft isn't stupid. The absolutely worst case scenario is that the Kinect see's you smile during a movie trailer so it shows you more movie trailers. You know that the minute the first customers get their XBONEs, someone is going to hook it up to the internet through a computer and monitor every goddamn byte of information that goes to and from your console. The moment audio/video/movement data is being sent across the network, it would light up so many red flags that MS would be crucified within hours. Again, they are a slimy corporation who only cares about money, but they aren't stupid, and there is nothing they want or need that is worth risking their company and the (admittedly shaky) level of trust they have with customers.

If your complaint is that you think the Kinect is ugly or you don't care about motion games, then fine. I think you're shallow and supremely short-sighted, but that's still a valid opinion. But if you think Microsoft would be literally willing to put their entire company of the line in order to see you masturbate in your living room, you are the worst kind of conspiracy nut, and you should be out living in the woods rather than concerning yourself with video games.

#54 Edited by Syed117 (387 posts) -

@waffles13: what you said is exactly what I've been saying since the thing was revealed. With all the tin foil conspiracy nuts out there, the xbox one will be dissected unlike any console in history. There are going to be people analyzing every single bit of information being sent to and from the console.

With all the devices we use every single day without a second thought, I can't believe the xbox one is somehow the primary focus of everyones concern. If someone is really that worried, I'm sure a small piece of paper over the camera when not in use is an easy enough solution. Or just disconnect it from the Internet completely and then people have nothing to worry about.

If the NSA is worrying people, the xbox one is the last thing they should be concerned with. I'm sure they aren't too keen on watching people sit in front of a screen playing video games. Anyone who is doing something so shady that it warrants the NSA monitoring them probably isn't doing it in front of their console.

#55 Posted by Maddman60620 (130 posts) -

The better questions is would you rather buy it later just to play a Double Fine Happy Theater or Gun Stringer games... I think it would hurt the system to then have an add-on down the line and cut keep some of the people from playing all the games that may use the camera in some cool ways, plus not matter how cool and a must play the games maybe people in general will not go out and buy an extra item to play a hand full of games they might like......

#56 Edited by BombcastGoldthwait (250 posts) -

Optional. Do you work for Microsoft & doing market research?

#57 Posted by RenegadeSaint (1548 posts) -

Mandatory. I want to see it live up to its potential and it needs to be in every box for that to happen.

#58 Edited by ExplodeMode (852 posts) -

What potential are people imagining? Kinect came out 3 (holy shit!) years ago and they have made no case for it as a worthwhile accessory. Microsoft had 3 years to say, 'here's why you bought this dumb thing.' And it never happened.

Third parties still aren't going to care because they are making their games on PS4 and PC too.

If third parties don't care and Microsoft doesn't know what to do with it, why do you have faith in this thing?

#59 Edited by AlexGlass (688 posts) -

@explodemode said:

What potential are people imagining? Kinect came out 3 (holy shit!) years ago and they have made no case for it as a worthwhile accessory. Microsoft had 3 years to say, 'here's why you bought this dumb thing.' And it never happened.

Third parties still aren't going to care because they are making their games on PS4 and PC too.

If third parties don't care and Microsoft doesn't know what to do with it, why do you have faith in this thing?

There's a big difference between an accessory introduced at the end of the generation and a standard controller in every box.

It was a $150 accessory that sold 30+ million units, and had 2 series which went on to be million sellers in Kinect Sports and Dance Central. I'd say that's not too shabby. The fact is like it or not, neither one of those games can be played without it and a lot of people like them. I look forward to both Kinect Sports and Fantasia, but the real potential for me is in its introduction into core games, like we're seeing with voice recognition in games such as Ryse.

The original Kinect operated mainly under the mandate of it being used solely as a controller-free device, which I think limited what you can really do with it. Now that MS's attitude has finally changed on it, if properly used for things such as for example voice controlled marines in Halo, it's going to completely change the way singe player games like that will play. So yeah, the potential is huge and re-invigorate series such as that one.

Going from a keyboard to real time chat online while playing a FPS was a big deal and I remember that being poo-poo-ed as well in the beginning when there were a bunch of people that swore that KB was the only way they ever wanted to communicate in games which to me was absolute stupidity especially on a console since it required you put down the controller. The same will be the case in being able to go from a few commands on a d-pad menu, to actual voice interaction with A.I. and actual co-operation on the fly in single player games such as squad based games or FPS or any type of games that has a cast of teammates.

And that's just one important use for it. It's not about faith, it's about common sense and a bit of vision. Kinect is going to do a lot more for video games than something like a 1080p texture and higher character model up close. That won't change a thing about how your games play. Two new methods of input, speech and gesture, without having to compromise on a controller that's pretty much perfect, is a pretty big deal for gaming.

There's a lot of gameplay actions that are not suitable for Kinect, and much better with a controller, such as for example walking with an analog stick or shooting a gun using a trigger. But there's also a ton of gameplay actions that are much better and more intuitive for speech or gesture recognition than a controller too and Kinect is finally a device that can make that happen, without having to compromise on the traditional controller.

#60 Posted by Belegorm (402 posts) -

This a serious question? Seems pretty obvious to me that most consumers would prefer an optional kinect. Options=value to the consumer, lack of options=value to microsoft.

#61 Posted by danmcn12 (86 posts) -

That's a silly question. Everyone will say without because they have not used it nor have developers done anything with it. I want it in there because if it is an add on it might as well not exist. At least now developers with talent and creativity can work with it. Who knows what they are capable.

#62 Edited by _Zombie_ (1462 posts) -

Optional. I've never been interested in motion control in gaming, so the Kinect is just a hunk of useless plastic to me.

#64 Posted by Steak_Monster (22 posts) -

I can't say Kinect is the thing I'm most excited about getting my hands on (waving my hands at?), however I'm more than willing to give it a chance. Like others have said, I want something that differentiates it from PC gaming, otherwise what's the point.

I'm also interested in its functions outside of the gaming for the console.

#65 Posted by ExplodeMode (852 posts) -

"It was a $150 accessory that sold 30+ million units"


That's kind of what I mean. People did there part and weren't really rewarded for it. It seemed like a lot of people really liked Dance Central. But, one idea, that has has already been thoroughly mined, in three years isn't promising.


"Going from a keyboard to real time chat online while playing a FPS was a big deal and I remember that being poo-poo-ed as well in the beginning"

Voice communication has existed long before PC and console games. It's a proven concept and they don't really compare but:

A lot of good ideas are panned when they are first introduced, and then people try them and accept them. The same thing happens to bad ideas, and when people try them, they continue disliking them. People have tried the kinect and the results were not positive.

To everything else, I say:

Kinect already exists and all of those things can be done now and aren't. Because people don't want to do them.

People don't want to talk to the TV. People used voice commands for the xbox os or mass effect 3 for a day and then turned it off. People used Siri for a week and then stopped caring. People don't want to video chat, people want to text. The future isn't minority report, that was just a movie.

I'm cool with kinect existing and people trying to figure some kind use for it, but requiring everyone to buy it is unwanted. Why not a slightly cheaper model with no kinect? The kinect bundle still exists and if you want it you get it.

Afraid that more people will buy the cheaper one? Then take the hint.

#66 Posted by Krakn3Dfx (2490 posts) -

- MS releases Kinect for XBox 360, sells millions

- Kinect is a laggy mess for everything except Dance Central and workout games

- MS bundles Kinect with XBox One, charges more because of it, doesn't give people the option to not buy one, forces it to be hooked up 24/7, making it not only a security concern, but also a potential 2nd point of failure for the XBox One

- Remembering what a sloppy mess the original Kinect was, people would rather not be forced to have an XBox One with Kinect

Go figure.

#67 Edited by AlexGlass (688 posts) -

@explodemode said:
@alexglass said:

"It was a $150 accessory that sold 30+ million units"

That's kind of what I mean. People did there part and weren't really rewarded for it. It seemed like a lot of people really liked Dance Central. But, one idea, that has has already been thoroughly mined, in three years isn't promising.
"Going from a keyboard to real time chat online while playing a FPS was a big deal and I remember that being poo-poo-ed as well in the beginning"
Voice communication has existed long before PC and console games. It's a proven concept and they don't really compare but:
A lot of good ideas are panned when they are first introduced, and then people try them and accept them. The same thing happens to bad ideas, and when people try them, they continue disliking them. People have tried the kinect and the results were not positive.
To everything else, I say:
Kinect already exists and all of those things can be done now and aren't. Because people don't want to do them.
People don't want to talk to the TV. People used voice commands for the xbox os or mass effect 3 for a day and then turned it off. People used Siri for a week and then stopped caring. People don't want to video chat, people want to text. The future isn't minority report, that was just a movie.
I'm cool with kinect existing and people trying to figure some kind use for it, but requiring everyone to buy it is unwanted. Why not a slightly cheaper model with no kinect? The kinect bundle still exists and if you want it you get it.
Afraid that more people will buy the cheaper one? Then take the hint.

Who cares if voice recognition has existed? It's never existed as a standard control method for a game console until now and it's never been at the level it is now. That argument means nothing.

That's precisely my point. Analog controls and motion existed before the N64, but it wasn't until it become blatantly obvious it was necessary for 3D games with Nintendo attaching one to a controller as standard before it became the standard method of controlling 3D games. And that allowed for a whole bunch of games not possible before. Dual analog sticks allowed for first person shooters. Analog triggers made racers playable on a controller.

X1 standard controller and Kinect are one and the same. They're standard methods of input.

As far as I'm concerned, I don't care if the X1 sells 25 million units just like the original Xbox. Didn't bother me then, and it won't bother me now. I play games, not sales. I heard the same type of visionless comments about online gaming, online voice chat and hard drive before the original Xbox introduced it while I was too busy enjoying Xbox Live with voice chat. Some people need to wait until there's millions of people buying it before they jump in 6-7 years after the rest have already been experiencing it. Bandwagoners.

And those guys don't know what they don't know. Preconceived notions, based on arguments such as the ones you make are limiting you from seeing the forest from the trees. Kinect 1 has no bearing on the future of Kinect 2.

Fact of the matter is you just can't create or play some games without Kinect. There's a lot of game actions, that have simply never been possible or practical, therefore a lot of gameplay commands and elements that have never been possible because of the limitation of the controller. On top of that there are also game genres that extend beyond what's typically available. And if an accessory released at the tail end of a generation was able to create Dance Central and Kinect Sports megahits, then I can only imagine what's going to happen now that it's standard. Kinect's future is very, very bright.

And no it's not about being afraid of people buying the lesser version, it's simply about avoiding the same issues that plagued the initial Kinect. Core game developers not taking it seriously precisely because it's not a standard device. Which is the case with Move. The number of core games already taking advantage of Kinect vs Move is easily apparent.

#68 Posted by TheHBK (5485 posts) -

Its fucking amazing how short sighted some people are. It truly is. The kinect is a pretty cool piece of hardware and these same people are the ones who decried the first Xbox being ethernet only. They are the ones who yelled as to why the first Xbox had a hard drive and that it was too much like a PC and taking out the HDD lowered the cost. These same people think are too stupid to remember what has been true since the dawn of video games. Add Ons sold separately do not get adopted very well. As great as the kinect sold, none of those games sold exceptionally well. Sega CD, Jaguar CD, 32X, Nintendo disk drive, there is a huge list of these things. Come on, its all or nothing when it comes to add ons.

#69 Posted by TheLastGunslinger (242 posts) -

Mandatory Kinect. The only way this thing is going to make an impact and be a useful tool for developers is if MS doesn't split the market.

Online
#70 Posted by Franstone (1121 posts) -

It has to be mandatory if you want any sort of chance of doing some cool stuff with the Kinect someday.

#71 Posted by ProfessorEss (7371 posts) -

If I were going to buy an XBox One I would want Kinect so I'm pickin' mandatory. I don't really care that some people don't want it.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.