Thoughts about "Kinect" for the 360.

[Adm. Empoleon]

Yesterday, Microsoft unveiled its latest revolution for the gaming industry: Kinect. Formerly known as "Project Natal", this peripheral has a camera to "read" body movement, and a microphone to recognize your voice. It's like the Wii without the remotes.

Titles at launch include: A game based around "The Biggest Loser" show, Dance Central, Kinect Sports, Kinectimals, and other games based around getting your ass off the couch and moving around.

Nothing new was introduced, but if you count sequels, then there was. Gears of War 3, the 5th installment in the Halo franchise, but that's about it. No new, ground-breaking games for us. We've been reduced to games that make you flail in front of a camera and you think you're dancing for points. Not to mention that you could be hacked at any moment and that person could record your flailing and post it on YouTube.

Back to topic...

Smogon, what do you think about this "Kinect"? Good? Bad? ZOMG SKYNET IS TAKING OVER? And do you think that Microsoft changing Project Natal's name was a good idea?

 

[Kurai]

Despite its name, Natal or Kinect, I think it sounds stupid. Natal, iirc, is the name of some virtual boy, and Kinect sounds stupid, imo.

A lot of Microsoft-fanboys said that the Wii was simply a gimmick console, and now they have to pay the price. This "Kinect" thing seems even more of a gimmick. Sure, it redefines video games as the Wii did (with motion control), but not necessarily in a good way.

It sounds interesting, and if any of my friends get it I'm willing to give it a go, but honestly it looks stupid. The speculated costs are pretty high (high 100s, low 200s), and Microsoft has not yet shown how this system add-on is compatible with shooter games, which usually attract the bulk of Microsoft gamers.

 

[Outlaw]

At least I used to be able to sit down with the Wii, (Bloody motion plus..) If I wanted to get up and interact I would go outside. I think it's an overall stupid idea.

 

[vonFiedler]

Joke about looking stupid, at least people playing the Wii look like they are doing something and not just flailing around like children at a wedding dance. I for one loved the Wii simply because I could stretch my arms out while holding the controller. I didn't need alot of motion features to put the remote to good use.

 

[monkfish]

I think it is a great demonstration of what modern technology is capable of, and extends far beyond gaming - you can imagine this kind of technology being used in many common devices.

I also think it's a good idea to get people enthusiastic about being active. Saying "I would go outside" is a similar analogy to "if I wanted to play an RPG I would go and live my actual life" - ie, complete bullshit. Laziness and gaming enthusiasm don't HAVE to go hand-in-hand, and I'd very much enjoy an opportunity to completely separate the two.

 

[Zystral]

It doesn't look bad. Some people are slating it since it won't have proper video games (Jumprope tiger + little asian girl wtf), but there will be some interesting things. Definitely racing games will feel more real, and I can't wait for Metal Gear Solid Rising.

As well as this, nobody is forcing you Xbox owners to buy Kinect, so you can still sit on your asses and use controller gaming. Things like FPS might be better that way.

 

[Darkvirus]

it just sounds like Xbox wants to give the old PS2 eye toy a update

 

[Arch]

I think it's a really cool idea.
But, it's nothing new.

Unfortunately, Microsoft turned off alot of people because of the poor emonstration of Kinect at their press conference. Pretty much ruined its reputation among core fans. I don't think it'll be grabbing people from the Wii anytime soon.

 

[Veedrock]

Not to mention that you could be hacked at any moment and that person could record your flailing and post it on YouTube.

What in the living hell is this?

 

[Veedrock]

I'm going to double post because I feel that needed its own recognition. I'm surprised this topic is still open because the OP literally has absolutely no clue what he's talking about, yet he feels the need to impose negative implications right away.

I agree with monkfish completely. Saying you'd rather go outside is stupid, because frankly you don't want to. I certainly don't get kicks off of going for walks, it's rather boring for me. I can't fool around on a playground because it's awkward. I do sports on occasion but its not enough; more often than not I can't coordinate with my friends for a get together. And with video gaming being the funnest thing to do, it makes it even harder to be active. As such I'm extermely pleased with what Kinect is trying to accomplish. I seriously don't know what the huge conniption is about getting up to play games, especially when it's not even being imposed on you like the Wii's control system.

First generation Wii games had that "flailing" aspect the OP suggests this will have, just registering a movement rather than an action. Kinect is nothing like that, so if you're flailing in front of a game asking you to dance or jog in place...you genuinely need help. The Wii and Playstation move are more associated with coordination nowadays but they still don't address complete interaction (as Outlaw pointed out, most games would be played sitting down), so I do consider Kinect to be a huge revolution in gaming. Blah blah eye toy, that was a camera first and foremost with a gimmick game included. Controllers aren't going anywhere (they shouldn't) but a change in pace and perspective is great.

People are judging this way too harshly based on the launch games. There are actions that are a lot easier to register with Kinect and design inputs for than, say, a fantasy game. It helps that most actions these launch games are looking for are preconceived; we all know what a jumping jack is, and as such developers know what they want Kinect to recognize. Kinect wants you to do jumping jacks, you do them and it's pretty easy to register that and give you the ok. Now ask somebody to swing a sword and you'll get a multitude of actions. Now if a game asks you to swing a sword, not only does it have to recognize the input (which is a lot less obvious than a jumping jack), but it has to replicate that within the game. Actual games that take advantage of this technology will come with time, expecting something like that at launch is no more than wishful thinking. When developers have a better understanding of Kinect's workings and capabilities, its library will expand.

 

[makiri]

I think it is a great demonstration of what modern technology is capable of, and extends far beyond gaming - you can imagine this kind of technology being used in many common devices.

I also think it's a good idea to get people enthusiastic about being active. Saying "I would go outside" is a similar analogy to "if I wanted to play an RPG I would go and live my actual life" - ie, complete bullshit. Laziness and gaming enthusiasm don't HAVE to go hand-in-hand, and I'd very much enjoy an opportunity to completely separate the two.

This. Great demonstration of technology, but beyond that too gimmicky, it will sell huge because of that gimmick just like the Wii. Eventually it will get shelved, and people will go back to playing games with a controller, because honestly, standing and pointing a fake gun at your tv is too much work and really not as fun. If there was full virtual immersion, it could be interesting, but as it stands you're standing in front of your tv and most people play games to relax, not jump around and act like an idiot.

 

[assassinfred]

This. Great demonstration of technology, but beyond that too gimmicky, it will sell huge because of that gimmick just like the Wii. Eventually it will get shelved, and people will go back to playing games with a controller, because honestly, standing and pointing a fake gun at your tv is too much work and really not as fun. If there was full virtual immersion, it could be interesting, but as it stands you're standing in front of your tv and most people play games to relax, not jump around and act like an idiot.

I agree with this. Kinect is a very good piece of technology, but that doesn't make it a good console. People in general play games to relax and have fun with their friends, Kinect does not let you do that. As someone else said, Microsoft's main market is shooters, and I just don't see how they could make that work with Kinect. Sure, you could look like you are holding a gun, but the game has no idea what kind of gun it is you're pretending to hold, and has no way of telling if your looking through the sights or changing weapons. On top of that, you can't walk around with Kinect.

In theory, it is a good concept, but that doesn't make it a good system. It discourages Microsoft's main gaming market IMO, and a lot of people play games to relax anyway. If anything, I think the Kinect will become what the Wii partially is: a system for senior citizens to play sports games on. The only difference is, the Wii can be used by a lot of Nintendo's core gamers and core genres.

 

[Arch]

Again, Kinect is a nice idea, and it's certainly a very cool product.

But the fact remains, it isn't going to do particulalry well.
Microsoft displayed some poor uses for it, like yoga and excercises and whatnot.
They were trying to pass it off too much as the Wii killer.
Not to mention the fact the beggining launch titles, AREN'T interesting to core gamers and most casual gamers who already have the essential capabilities with the Wii.

And, Veedrock, I definitely agree with you for the most part. But, Kinect is nothing revolutionary or new. They call it a "scanner" if you will. It's essentially what you'd get if you mix the PS3's EyeToy and the Wii's Motion Scanner. This is fairly obvious, and again is why it turned off alot of consumers, as Microsoft was trying to pass it off as something revolutionary.

It's not the that Kinect is stupid, it's a very cool product actually. But it got way too overhyped and overated by Microsoft, and way too soon.

 

[mingot]

It's not the that Kinect is stupid, it's a very cool product actually. But it got way too overhyped and overated by Microsoft, and way too soon.

Slightly off topic, but fuck, do I hate shit like this.

"Oh, it was too overhyped, so since it can't live up to it that it is not as good as it would have been."

No. It is as good as it is. No more and no less.

And to at least try to keep this somewhat on topic -- I doubt I'll buy this. I do have a 360 and like the console and the games a lot. What I don't like (and my Wii, which generally collects dust will back me up) is having to use anything other than my thumbs and brain to play a video game. Lots of people don't feel the same (and Wii sales figures back this one up) and enjoy it. I don't though. I like to sit back and relax on the couch. So, I think it's good for some people. Probably just not me.

 

[cantab]

My thinking is it's the kind of thing that's easy to cock up. I will admit, I've never played the Wii, or even the PS3's Sixaxis. But can any kind of motion sensing system ever compare to the dependability of a physical controller? It only takes one mismeasured motion to make the difference between victory and defeat. Controls that do what you expect are the most important thing for a game. You can have top-notch graphics, a story to rival LOTR, the most realistic AI behaviour ever, a perfectly tuned learning curve - if the controls suck the game sucks.

 

[Firestorm]

So far, you are unable to use Kinect while sitting down. This destroyed any use in interfacing with non-gaming functions (which I was most interested in Kinect for) and is absolutely useless as a supplement to the controller (which is what I was interested in for gaming uses). I am not paying $149.99 + tax for a product that can only be used while standing up in front of a TV.

 

[qwert1807]

well, i think the name is pretty weird
what is "kinect"? how do you eat kinects, how do you do kinects? sounds like a fail name to me (at least the wii has the two people moving and sounds like "we" while the ds's name is not that bad, i mean, its a freaking acronym)

other than that, i mean, the concept is pretty cool, but this better be optional, cause moving and shit aint no good unless its optional ;)

EDIT: at least kinect doesnt look like a colorful ice cream cone :o

 

[Firestorm]

Kinect is based off "Connect" and "Kinetic" I assume.

 

[IggyBot]

Personally, I hate motion controls in video games, at least at the moment. If I want to game, I want to sit down and use my controller to game. This is what turns me off about the Wii the most, and why I definitely won't be getting Kinect. I appreciate that game designers are developing this sort of technology, I just don't want to use it for gaming at its current stage.

 

[Veedrock]

So far, you are unable to use Kinect while sitting down. This destroyed any use in interfacing with non-gaming functions (which I was most interested in Kinect for) and is absolutely useless as a supplement to the controller (which is what I was interested in for gaming uses). I am not paying $149.99 + tax for a product that can only be used while standing up in front of a TV.

Ok this has me legitimately worried and frustrated but after a bit of digging around, I found at least one source where Microsoft states that you'll be able to sit down. I'm trying to find more sources though since every other site is saying what you're saying, while users are convinced it will work while seated (I have a feeling more sites will pop up with confirmation over the next few days). I can't image they would disable interface options while you're sitting though, and there are even some game scenarios where sitting is ideal (like racing), so I really hope that's not the case in the final product.

 

[ivar]

the one thing i am massively skeptical about is how "core" games (with adventure and deliberate navigation in a game world) would be playable without being on-rails. shooters are fun but i hate on-rails shooters in general. i need a joystick to move my guy. if kinect can somehow solve this problem i think it could be an amazing device (maybe hand signals, like pointing your finger forward to move forward or something).

imagine being able to customize your weapons but literally putting them together using your hands? or doing some awesome minority report style menu shifting. totally sweet.

oh, and could this mean the revival of point and click mystery adventures? myst VI?

that sounds too good though he will probably get stupid dance games. basically everything the wii has but with better graphics. :(

 

[Killah]

back in E3 2009, I think I remember someone saying that kinect will be able to distinguish when someone else moves in front of the camera (like, walking in front of the TV) and it wouldn't interfere with your gameplay. As far as I could tell, microsoft didn't address this as all during their conference or anything, which makes me wonder if it was even true to begin with.

Also, I recall that there was some discrepancy with the distance away from the camera you were during gameplay. The same demo was shown in the microsoft conference as the ubisoft (?) conference of the workout game, and according to the game the person that was demoing it was a different height in the two conferences. I'm not sure how much this would affect any normal gameplay, but it seems like it would be a problem with some games.


Anyway, I don't mean to be the pessimist here but I don't think Microsoft will be able to take as much business from Nintendo as they believe they will. For starters, the Xbox 360 is more expensive than the Wii at the moment even without Kinect, even with the cheapest version. Once it comes out, it's rumored that a bundle set of an Xbox 360 Arcade + Kinect will cost $300, $100 than a Wii that comes with Wii Sports (though, I assume Kinect will come with some sort of game(s) in the bundle). Even if the gameplay is slightly better, I assume most "casual" gamers wouldn't be willing to spend the extra money on something like Kinect, but we'll have to wait and see.

 

[Broth3r]

Both Kinect and Move are nothing but attempts to profit from the market that Wii created. It's an average (just average, as the market is nearly satuated) decision on the finantial side, and a horrible one on the gaming side.

 

[Wichu]

It's been revealed that it doesn't support more than 2 players. I'm sure this is going to disappoint many, many people.

I don't own an XBox 360, so I didn't plan on getting it anyway. But if MS is going to attempt to make a 'Wii killer', the lack of crazy 4-people-at-once gameplay similar to Smash Bros, Mario Kart or NSMBWii doesn't help them in the slightest.

 

[Adm. Empoleon]

the one thing i am massively skeptical about is how "core" games (with adventure and deliberate navigation in a game world) would be playable without being on-rails. shooters are fun but i hate on-rails shooters in general. i need a joystick to move my guy. if kinect can somehow solve this problem i think it could be an amazing device (maybe hand signals, like pointing your finger forward to move forward or something).

imagine being able to customize your weapons but literally putting them together using your hands? or doing some awesome minority report style menu shifting. totally sweet.

oh, and could this mean the revival of point and click mystery adventures? myst VI?

that sounds too good though he will probably get stupid dance games. basically everything the wii has but with better graphics. :(

Awesome points in bold.