• 110 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Avatar image for mr_a_
#101 Edited by Mr_A_ (33 posts) -

@amikron said:

It is a more advanced piece of hardware than the 150 dollar kinect unit sold in 2010, as the article states. Why is anyone surprised by this exactly?

Because the laws of market supply and demand would suggest the Kinect should be sold for a rebate of $10 (haha). Seriously, someone in sales didn't get the message that no one wants the Kinect and that because of that they have two real choices, sell at a loss and make up the cash on games or just stop making and selling Kinects.

Avatar image for mr_a_
#102 Edited by Mr_A_ (33 posts) -

sounds like a bullshit inflated number to justify their insistence on the thing in the first place and to try and push all the bundled units still sitting out there.


Avatar image for cloudyimpulse
#103 Edited by cloudyimpulse (265 posts) -
@honkalot said:

The bundle will still be sold right?

Of course it's more expensive than the bubdle! Bundles are always cheaper, that's like half the point!

I don't think you or anyone else have to worry about bundles being discontinued (even if they are eventually) when Day One editions are still being sold on Amazon. And for a whopping 99 cents off right now. Get one today!

No Caption Provided

Avatar image for critch
#104 Posted by critch (8 posts) -

it sucks for the people that made kinect only games xbox really shafted these guys bigtime

To be fair, NOBODY WANTED THE KINECT. Those games weren't going to sell in any case. Harmonix/Rare do good work, well, Harmonix does, but sticking themselves to an addon a generation after the addon craze disappeared was a bad choice.

Avatar image for tr1cky1
#105 Posted by Tr1cky1 (28 posts) -
Avatar image for druminator
#106 Posted by Druminator (1808 posts) -

Will people who buy it without Kinect really turn around and buy one for that price? Pretty crazy thought.

Avatar image for tyrrael
#107 Edited by Tyrrael (484 posts) -

Microsoft should have just gone full retard and charged $200 for it, essentially guaranteeing its demise. That way, no one would have to worry about not having one if there was ever a game that came out for it that was worth a damn. No one would be making games for it, because no one would have it...as it should be. I don't say that as a means of insulting anyone that has one and enjoys it, but all I can think about when I here about the Kinect and games being made for it, is how all the time and money devoted to it could be better used elsewhere.

Avatar image for castiel
#108 Posted by Castiel (3473 posts) -


Bwahahahahahahaha... no wait I'm sorry I didn't mean to... wahahahahahahahaha... that is a ridiculous price. They might sell more Xones now but if I were one of the developers working on a kinect game right now I would be pretty bummed out.

Avatar image for gbrading
#110 Posted by gbrading (3221 posts) -

Who the hell would spend $150 extra for a peripheral that still doesn't work as intended?

Avatar image for sergio
#112 Posted by Sergio (3625 posts) -

@wafflestomp said:

The new Kinect is neat and it is way more powerful than the PS4 camera, I don't know why anyone would be shocked by the $150 price point. I wish MS would have just dropped the price to $399 with the Kinect and try to make it up somehow. Removing it makes it irrelevant...sadly.

I'm not sure I would say it's "more powerful" than the PS4 camera, since they clearly implement motion tracking differently. It's like saying my digital alarm clock is more powerful than my quartz wall clock. Sure the former probably is "more powerful" when you consider the technology it uses compared to the latter, but they both tell time in their own way, and the latter has no problem telling me the accurate time.

I would say the original PS3's Eye handled tracking better than the Kinect because the camera knew how to track the motion controller, while the Kinect would occasionally have problems tracking your body. The new Kinect is clearly more powerful than the first Kinect, since it's supposed to be able to pick up your motions better.

The PS4 camera does voice control just fine, and where it is lacking in this area is not due to the power of the hardware, but how they've integrated it into the OS and apps (or lack of integration, as the case may be within some apps). I picked one up on sale to fiddle with it to see if it made sense for me to pick a Kinect bundle once (if) I get an Xbox One. It confirmed that I don't want a Kinect to control the console with my voice.

I know it contains more tech in it than the PS4 camera, but they've priced it too high as an add-on when there aren't any games to justify its purchase for me.

Avatar image for endosutra
#113 Edited by Endosutra (4 posts) -

What a fucking joke.