Support NeoGAF

[killer rin]

If in the next 2 years Sony sells 15 million PS4 and Microsoft sells 15 million Xbone Ones, why should a developer make a game that won't work on the PS4? Or a game that has a severely downgraded experience on the PS4 due to lack of motion and voice support? They would be cutting their potential audience in half.

The story of the Wii is pretty instructive here. 3rd party developers didn't bother much with the WiiMote, even when the console was utterly dominating the industry. So why will they bother with meaningful Kinect integration, if the Xbox One will in all likelihood NOT dominate the industry?

This argument goes both ways. Why would a developer make a game that utilizes the full hardware power of the PS4 if it won't run on the X1 (the same question worked on 360/ps3). This also works with the DS4s touchscreen too, why would developers use that if the X1 doesn't have it. All consoles have their own unique control schemes, this in itself will force the developers to code things that use those controls.

Third party developers also sort of stopped caring about the Wii for most games fairly early on as well. It was a mixture of non-nintendo games not selling well and the nonavailability of a traditional controller which they could map the controls to.

In the end, it all comes down to how easy the X1s Kinect SDK is. If its anything like the 360s, then you'll see plenty of developers adding in support for it because its easy.

 

[madmackem]

On the other hand, Kinect2 is vastly more sensitive and unobtrusive or easier to deal with, than Kinect1 was. All this means that Kinec2 offer bigger possibilities to deliver what Kinect1 promised and then more..

We are dealing with possibilities here and yes, it is up to MS to lead with Kinect and show what can be done and show ways how Kinect2 can improve games/make games more immersive. Not all games benefits from Kinect either..

The price argument will be interesting, MS has ways of stimulating sales. Worst case scenario is that they lower the price, MS can take the hit more than Sony can (if push comes to shove)..

We´ll see but it is waaaay early to dismiss the possibilities of kinect2/motion controls..

We have just had half a gen where they were pretty much dismissed, kinect sold but kinect software not so much, same goes for move and we all saw how little wii was supported. The people spoke motion is a gimmick for fitness and dance games not something you build your whole system around.

 

[TGO]

Even with the camera if it is £50 which Amazon has listed it its still £30 cheaper then the Xbox One.
Not as big of a Price difference, but still cheaper by nearly a game
It was a good decision though as some will never use it as intended.

 

[Ashler]

A winning option for me, as I tend not to enjoy motion/camera/AR games.

 

[killer rin]

We have just had half a gen where they were pretty much dismissed, kinect sold but kinect software not so much, same goes for move and we all saw how little wii was supported. The people spoke motion is a gimmick for fitness and dance games not something you build your whole system around.

People keep on forgetting that Kinect isnt just motion controls. It does Voice Recognition, determines Heartrate, detects separate controllers and does motion controls (whilst being much more sensitive and accurate). Motion Controls will continue to be the gimmick which are good for the fitness games and the occasional small gesture for controls, but Kinect as a whole is much more than that. I'd honestly be content if all developers added in was Voice Controls, that alone justifies the Kinect on all my 360s. If developers used the heart rate detector, that would be pure gold.

 

[satam55]

That sounds like a strategy that is okay at best, assuming that motion games never really break out of their dance/fitness/minigame heritage. Which at this point does seem like a pretty fair assumption. They can offer the PSEye for people that want Just Dance, and nobody else has to deal with it. Guitar Hero and Rock Band were pretty big sensations, even though their requisite peripherals were not bundled with any consoles.

Driveclub is already included (most of it anyway) with a PS+ subscription. The PS+ edition may not have all cars, or all the tracks. All the gameplay is there with quite a few tracks (apparently).

It couldn't hurt to give folks the option of the full version of "DriveClub", especially since they're still gonna sell the full version of the game at retail for $60.

Look like I might have speculated correctly:

Picture of a PS4 Bundle with PlayStation Camera and Knack Leaked

Following our post about the content of the PS4 box, one of our commenters posted a mysterious picture that portrays very similar elements, but seems to add to the bundle a copy of Knack and the PlayStation 4 Camera. The picture was apparently found on Sony’s own servers. You can see it above.



more info at:
http://www.dualshockers.com/2013/06/26/picture-of-a-ps4-bundle-with-playstation-camera-and-knack-leaked/

 

[CurlySaysX]

I assume if 3rd party games use hand gestures to trigger events on the Xbox they could probably be easily implemented by using the touch pad on the PS4 instead, and I won't have to take my hands out from under the blankets on a cold night.

 

[border]

On the other hand, Kinect2 is vastly more sensitive and unobtrusive or easier to deal with, than Kinect1 was. All this means that Kinec2 offer bigger possibilities to deliver what Kinect1 promised and then more..

I'm sure many people thought the same thing about WiiMotion Plus or the WiiU. But neither of them really panned out.

Kinect 2.0 is undoubtedly better than its predecessor, but it still doesn't solve many problems with the interface. Namely there's the issue that it's just cumbersome if not impossible to control a player-character in 3D space using motion alone. Or the issue that motion has an inherent lag simply due to the fact that it takes longer to make a gesture than in does to press a button. People point out that Kinect 2.0 is faster and more accurate, but was speed and precision really the reason that Kinect 1.0 games weren't that fun or engaging? Those titles were not really held back by lag or inaccuracy, and more due to the fact that you can't use the interface to create much more than dance/fitness games and minigame compiliations.

This argument goes both ways. Why would a developer make a game that utilizes the full hardware power of the PS4 if it won't run on the X1 (the same question worked on 360/ps3). This also works with the DS4s touchscreen too, why would developers use that if the X1 doesn't have it.

Because hardware power is scalable and portable. PS4 can have a 1080P/60FPS version of a game that runs at 720P/30FPS on Xbox One. A game that requires motion controls on Xbox One simply will not run on PS4.

I don't expect the touchscreen to receive heavy developer support, but that isn't a feature that adds $100 to the cost of the console. And nobody is claiming that we should sit around waiting for some killer app that requires the touchscreen and uses it in revolutionary ways. Whereas people are still imagining a revolutionary killer app for Kinect.

 

[Burai]

As I've already written though, the first Kinect sold 24-27 million units. If developers won't support a userbase that large, then where does that leave the Xbox One, which won't sell that many units in the first 2-3 years of its life? Sure, they will be able to offer Kinect features for 100% of the userbase, but if the userbase is only 5-10 million people that doesn't really matter. And it gets even worse if you consider that to significantly support Kinect, they will have to make a game that cannot easily be ported to PS4 (which in all likelihood will have a userbase that is as large or larger than the Xbox One). It's going to largely be the duty of Microsoft-published games to use and justify Kinect, and what we've seen so far doesn't really do that. They've seemingly even yanked Kinect support from Ryse and Crimson Dragon.

If the tech is used in a simplistic way, then it doesn't really translate into an advantage for Microsoft. Voice commands or tiny occasional gestures won't make that much of a difference. The Wii packed in its motion controller, but 3rd party support for it was mostly perfunctory or unimaginative.

It doesn't matter how big the install base is if those people don't buy enough games.

It's the same problem publishers had with the Wii. You've got an audience who have bought the console solely to play Wii Sports and Mario Kart. They might as well not exist if you aren't making the sort of games they want to play. Same with the fitness/dance/kid crowd who bought Kinect.

The real issue developers have is the negativity surrounding Kinect this time. There's so much ill will toward it that even having one in every home isn't going to help if your target audience are turned off the very mention of Kinect.

 

[Splint]

Next gen gaming

 

[Alx]

Whereas people are still imagining a revolutionary killer app for Kinect.

"Xbox On"
That will be the first killer app. I'd bet some money on it.

 

[TGO]

This argument goes both ways. Why would a developer make a game that utilizes the full hardware power of the PS4 if it won't run on the X1 (the same question worked on 360/ps3). This also works with the DS4s touchscreen too, why would developers use that if the X1 doesn't have it. All consoles have their own unique control schemes, this in itself will force the developers to code things that use those controls.

Third party developers also sort of stopped caring about the Wii for most games fairly early on as well. It was a mixture of non-nintendo games not selling well and the nonavailability of a traditional controller which they could map the controls to.

In the end, it all comes down to how easy the X1s Kinect SDK is. If its anything like the 360s, then you'll see plenty of developers adding in support for it because its easy.

That was understandable with PS3 because of Cell
Extra work was needed, with PS4 they'll port it as close to the PC version as possible thanks to the added power, Xbox One will be the one that'll require more work downporting and working around the limitations if any, also PC doesn't have Kinect as standard so the Xbox One will be the odd one out
You can see the situation where devs will be porting happily to the PS4 the game they made on PC and have the attitude of "now lets get this running on Xbox equally and think of uses for the damn camera"
PS4 is no effort for them, Xbox One is the same but with a little more attention needed
So why alter something that runs fine on one platform because it don't on the other?
Its more work, especially it lead is PC, now it its a console only game that maybe different, but still that depends on lead platform.

 

[TTP]

People praising this decision becasue their PSEye/Move/Kinect are collecting dust apparently fail to realize its because of decisions like this their PSEye/Move/Kinect are collecting dust.

 

[border]

"Xbox On"
That will be the first killer app. I'd bet some money on it.

You still have to pick up a remote to turn on your TV, and your cable box, and your stereo system. At that moment there isn't much purpose to turning on a console with a voice command because you're still using an old input method to really activate and start your experience.

That's kind of the problem with the All-in-ONE marketing approach -- if you need a remote to access necessary components of your home theater setup, then what's the point? Why not just pick up a remote and press one more button to turn your system on? The advantage that Kinect provides is pretty minimal, and probably not enough to offset a $100 price difference.

 

[Minions]

People praising this decision becasue their PSEye/Move/Kinect are collecting dust apparently fail to realize its because of decisions like this their PSEye/Move/Kinect are collecting dust.

Yeah the 23 million install base for the kinect is not enough for games to be developed for it.

Not.

 

[madmackem]

You still have to pick up a remote to turn on your TV, and your cable box, and your stereo system. At that moment there isn't much purpose to turning on a console with a voice command because you're still using an old input method to really activate and start your experience.

That's kind of the problem with the All-in-ONE marketing approach -- if you need a remote to access necessary components of your home theater setup, then what's the point? Why not just pick up a remote and press one more button to turn your system on? The advantage that Kinect provides is pretty minimal, and probably not enough to offset a $100 price difference.

Not to mention one button turns on my ps3 and tv right now, on button.

 

[J-Rzez]

Good move on their part. Not to mention with the camera it's still cheaper than the xbone for those who want that stuff. It's good to have options, especially when it comes to hardware like this in which many couldn't possibly care less about.

 

[Zaptruder]

Why would I ever want to do this when the screen that I'm viewing the game on isn't moving with me? That isn't immersive, that isn't realistic... it's just an alternate control method that doesn't work as well as a simple analog stick or mouse.

Because it extends functionality.

e.g. Driving or Cockpit game; your hands are too preoccupied with the rest of the controls to be able to adequately control a secondary camera function.

But it would be nice to be able to track head position to allow you to look into corners.

Or, FPS - providing you with head tilt/lean functionality that isn't otherwise easily accessible on a standard gamepad.

Maybe have it incorporated as part of the cover mechanic - approach cover crouched - lean body/head forward, character peers forward out of cover in an amount relative to how much you've leaned forward as a player.

Another mechanic might be in an adventure game/RPG... minigame featuring rock paper scissor - where it uses your actual hand to determine the rock/paper/scissor.

Ultimately, if you want to be really obtuse about it, you could say that all the interaction functionalities you'd want can be replicated in some manner with traditional controls - while been dismissive of the added functionality, immersiveness and immediacy that camera/microphone input schemes can bring to some forms of interactions (head track, hand track, voice command, etc).

 

[Android18a]

I'm fine with this. I never bought an Eyetoy, nor a Kinect. I have no desire to play games with my body, or use a camera to record myself playing. I'd have hated the price to be higher and the box include stuff I never wanted to use.

 

[redcrayon]

I'm OK with this. I'd rather have the option to use the camera later on, seeing that I'm pretty much jaded with motion controls.

The Wii worked packing revolutionary ways of playing into the box as
A) it was cheap
B) all games used the remote, from WiiSports to Mario Galaxy and Zelda.

Xbox One has the problem in that Kinect isn't the best control method for the games it's early adopters are interested in- its a complete disconnect. Even if they made a 'gamers edition' that didn't include Kinect, that would still mean games couldn't count on the whole audience having it, so they are saddled with a highly expensive accessory that adds 33% to the cost, gives a shitload of bad PR, is mandatory but also isn't particularly useful for the games they want to sell the system on the back of.

The Kinect games aren't as likely to sell as many as traditional games, so why is more effort and more cost based around it rather than developing things like controllers without AA batteries and putting headsets in the box, or at least making it possible to use the headset you already own without buying an adapter, which are things it's launch audience are actually interested in? It just feels like the AAA games for MS are a lure, they really don't give a crap, they think gamers will buy it on the brand name alone.

If everyone goes wild for whichever party games Kinect 2 is actually required for in November, and they actually turn out to be good, I'll happily eat crow and hail MS as geniuses for sticking to their guns on the bloody thing.

 

[mrklaw]

On the other hand, Kinect2 is vastly more sensitive and unobtrusive or easier to deal with, than Kinect1 was. All this means that Kinec2 offer bigger possibilities to deliver what Kinect1 promised and then more..

We are dealing with possibilities here and yes, it is up to MS to lead with Kinect and show what can be done and show ways how Kinect2 can improve games/make games more immersive. Not all games benefits from Kinect either..

The price argument will be interesting, MS has ways of stimulating sales. Worst case scenario is that they lower the price, MS can take the hit more than Sony can (if push comes to shove)..

We´ll see but it is waaaay early to dismiss the possibilities of kinect2/motion controls..

Tomorrow, tomorrow, there's always tomorrow, its only a daay awaaay

How long do people continue to give MS and developers the benefit of the doubt? Kinect was the future,has a huge installed base, nothing much came of it (loved border's points). Now the *new* kinect is coming, oh this time it'll be different, all those great ideas and promise we imagined? Finally it'll come true.

It just feels like 'wait for space world'

Personally I'd rather someone shows me the value rather than increases the cost to me regardless of whether I want it or not.

 

[dino1980]

Have MS solved the problem with kinect that you have to have alot of free space in your living room?

 

[sleeping_dragon]

"Success come with great sacrifices" sleeping_dragon

 

[Alx]

You still have to pick up a remote to turn on your TV, and your cable box, and your stereo system.

TVs can start up automatically when they detect a signal, nowadays. I'm quite sure some stereo systems can also turn on automatically. And as far as I know, cable boxes are always on (at least the IP boxes we have here are).

 

[B-Dubs]

Jesus, the camera would have cost them $100 or more to add in? The hell kind of camera were they thinking of using?

 

[killer rin]

Have MS solved the problem with kinect that you have to have alot of free space in your living room?

I believe its 3-4ft instead of the 6-8ft of Kinect 1

 

[TTP]

Yeah the 23 million install base for the kinect is not enough for games to be developed for it.

Not.

Indeed it's not when you factor out casual / family games.

 

[Alx]

Jesus, the camera would have cost them $100 or more to add in? The hell kind of camera were they thinking of using?

According to the picture in that other thread, there was also Knack packed-in. So camera + game = $100.
Sounds fair when each one is sold $60 separately.

 

[aronmayo2]

Kind of obvious. Smart move. Why FORCE people to buy one.

That's like saying "why force someone to buy a Wii gamepad, when you could just include a classic controller and the console would be much cheaper for it"...it robs the console of one of it's defining features and robs that resource/accessory from developers. Whether you like it or not the Xbox's voice control features have become fairly popular and it's really part of the identity of the Xbox these days, Skype is a huge deal for lots of (most?) people too. If the PS4 had the camera included and was still $100 cheaper then that would be very impressive. Not sure why Sony don't just include the PSEye considering it's components are much, much cheaper to produce than Kinect's.

 

[border]

TVs can start up automatically when they detect a signal, nowadays. I'm quite sure some stereo systems can also turn on automatically. And as far as I know, cable boxes are always on (at least the IP boxes we have here are).

If your TV always turns on when it detects a signal and your cable box is always on, then why isn't your TV constantly on? The cable box is constantly sending your TV a signal, isn't it?

I'm always pretty far behind the curve when it comes to A/V tech, but my TV doesn't power on when I turn on my 360. It's exactly the opposite, actually. The 360 only boots when it detects my television receiving a signal. I can hit the "On" button on the 360, but the swirly bootscreen doesn't happen until I manually turn on my TV and manually switch to the HDMI-2 input. Conversely, if my cable box is off the TV doesn't automatically turn on when I turn on my the cable box.

 

[border]

Tomorrow, tomorrow, there's always tomorrow, its only a daay awaaay

How long do people continue to give MS and developers the benefit of the doubt? Kinect was the future,has a huge installed base, nothing much came of it (loved border's points).

There's just a never ending cycle of excuses to explain why the Kinect 1.0 was so ill-supported. Userbase, add-on, etc, etc. If and when the Kinect 2.0 receives similarly tepid support the excuses will all be the same. It seems pretty rare that people have been so willing and eager to explain away awful support for a peripheral or controller. No matter how many years of laughable support we endure, someone always insists on the technology's "potential".

The truth of the matter is that either developers aren't interested in what Kinect has to offer, or the size of the userbase required by developers is so high that we won't see expertly developed Kinect titles for years to come. Either way, it doesn't translate to much of an advantage for Xbox One in the near future.

 

[mrklaw]

There's just a never ending cycle of excuses to explain why the Kinect 1.0 was so ill-supported. Userbase, add-on, etc, etc. If and when the Kinect 2.0 receives similarly tepid support the excuses will all be the same. It seems pretty rare that people have been so willing and eager to explain away awful support for a peripheral or controller. No matter how many years of laughable support we endure, someone always insists on the technology's "potential".

The truth of the matter is that either developers aren't interested in what Kinect has to offer, or the size of the userbase required by developers is so high that we won't see expertly developed Kinect titles for years to come. Either way, it doesn't translate to much of an advantage for Xbox One in the near future.

honestly I just think it is partly people wanting something that sounds cool to actually work like it sounds, plus a bit of buyers remorse - that thing was expensive.

mystifying really

 

[redcrayon]

That's like saying "why force someone to buy a Wii gamepad, when you could just include a classic controller and the console would be much cheaper for it"...it robs the console of one of it's defining features and robs that resource/accessory from developers. Whether you like it or not the Xbox's voice control features have become fairly popular and it's really part of the identity of the Xbox these days, Skype is a huge deal for lots of (most?) people too. If the PS4 had the camera included and was still $100 cheaper then that would be very impressive. Not sure why Sony don't just include the PSEye considering it's components are much, much cheaper to produce than Kinect's.

The difference is that the Wiimote was actually used as the primary mechanic for 'core' Wii software like Zelda TP, the Resident Evil 4 port and Red Steel, whereas Kinect 2 doesn't seem particularly integral to any of the more traditional Xbox One launch lineup games like Titanfall or Ryse. It looks like it's going to be reserved for party games and tech demos again. Voice controls are cool but not worth £100.

Could you explain how Skype is a huge deal for most people? It's already available on every device going, why do I need it on an Xbox when I already have it on a tablet I can prop up in the kitchen while making dinner? I'm not sure I want to be talking to people while I'm concentrating on playing a game, it defeats the point, surely. I remember when everyone though having a web browser and Facebook on a console was a big deal too, but ultimately all that social media stuff is better done by devices that are more intuitive and on you when you need to use them, having to sit in front of the TV loses their immediacy, not to mention the privacy you would otherwise have using a PC/laptop/pad in a private space rather than a living room etc. That still matters for some people, and not everyone lives alone.

Marketing shots of Sony bundles with and without the camera are floating around, maybe they will, maybe they won't, but I'm happy it's not mandatory.

 

[Bigmac1910]

Wow, some people in this thread really believe in the "Power of Kinect" etc. But it seems like they believe in the potential again, like with Kinect 1.0, and have grandiose fantasies of how immersive it could be. All I can say to those people, don't be disappointed when that won't happen. It's still just a controller interface that can upload sound/pictures/video of you while erm...

 

[cantona222]

Kinect with every XBone = Developers will design with Kinect in mind = more innovation.
Kineckt sold seperately= Developers will not bother "as much" adding Kinect features since not everybody buying their game will have Kinect.

So microsoft gambled a little bit for the sake of making Kinect successful.

Didn't we complain when Wii sold Wiimote plus and claimed that it should be in the box?

 

[Arthea]

Wise decision. I don't like forced Kinect either.

 

[TTP]

Kinect with every XBone = Developers will design with Kinect in mind = more innovation.
Kineckt sold seperately= Developers will not bother "as much" adding Kinect features since not everybody buying their game will have Kinect.

So microsoft gambled a little bit for the sake of making Kinect successful.

I wouldn't be so sure. Third party devs will develop with the lowest common denominator* in mind regardless.

* Camera-less PS4

Unless PS4 fails badly, to the point of becoming irrilevant, I don't see Kinect getting that much meaningful support from the dev community.

 

[JetSetRadio]

Good call sony.
I would have paid for something that never had left the box.

 

[NemesisPrime]

Will probably cost them a few million casual sales.

 

[Manmademan]

People praising this decision becasue their PSEye/Move/Kinect are collecting dust apparently fail to realize its because of decisions like this their PSEye/Move/Kinect are collecting dust.

or maybe it's because we bought the pseye/move/kinect, realized it was fun for all of 30 seconds, and went back to using a controller?

 

[Raide]

Next gen gaming

I had more fun with this with my family and connecting to other family friends than I had with most other core 360 games. Some like Kinect, some hate it with a passion. Sony are making the right choice for them, MS is making a right choice to push their improved tech.

 

[herod]

Move, Kinect and every other console camera is crap, the implementation in games is crap, the killer apps we were meant to choke down were crap. At best Move married an OK pointer thing to clunky digital controls, but ultimately it's just not as good as a mouse. Crap. I won't miss it at all. Hopefully there will be a cheaper DS4 without the stupid Move lights eventually. The reason there are no good Move out Kinect games is obvious; Occam's razor defeats all 'in/out of the box' arguments.

 

[Jørdan]

It's a no brainer and the right move. It is an accessory and should be optional rather than a mandatory cost to those that have no interest. Neat that if you don't have one connected to the PS4 it will still switch on.

 

[Alx]

If your TV always turns on when it detects a signal and your cable box is always on, then why isn't your TV constantly on? The cable box is constantly sending your TV a signal, isn't it?

I suppose it depends on the input, or it can be customized... I'm pretty sure my old TV could start up on its own when detecting a signal on SCART or VGA. I recently changed it and haven't tried HDMI yet, but I suppose it should work too.
Not too sure about cable boxes since I don't have one. I suppose that those that will be supported by the X1 will communicate with it to select channels, so I don't think getting out of standby would be out of the question.

 

[RadarScope1]

I'm sorry, but all I can think of when I hear people going on about Kinect is Peter Molyneux. Pies in skies and all that.

 

[Garrett 2U]

You still have to pick up a remote to turn on your TV, and your cable box, and your stereo system. At that moment there isn't much purpose to turning on a console with a voice command because you're still using an old input method to really activate and start your experience.

That's kind of the problem with the All-in-ONE marketing approach -- if you need a remote to access necessary components of your home theater setup, then what's the point? Why not just pick up a remote and press one more button to turn your system on? The advantage that Kinect provides is pretty minimal, and probably not enough to offset a $100 price difference.

IDK about you, but I don't turn any of my TVs off, they sleep when they have no input.
And I don't turn off my cable box either.

Same goes for millions of others.

If you plug your cable in through your XboxOne, and then tell your Xbox to sleep, you should have no reason to turn off your TV, it should shut off itself, or rather, current TVs will.

 

[Guevara]

All Sony has to do is make a $100 camera + dance central game bundle and they win. Still the same as buying a Xbox One but comes with a game. People who play these games won't care if Kinect 2 is somehow more advanced.

 

[Guevara]

IDK about you, but I don't turn any of my TVs off, they sleep when they have no input.
And I don't turn off my cable box either.

Same goes for millions of others.

If you plug your cable in through your XboxOne, and then tell your Xbox to sleep, you should have no reason to turn off your TV, it should shut off itself, or rather, current TVs will.

You seriously don't turn your tv off? Why do you hate the environment (and your electric bill)?

 

[Slurmer]

IDK about you, but I don't turn any of my TVs off, they sleep when they have no input.
And I don't turn off my cable box either.

Same goes for millions of others.

If you plug your cable in through your XboxOne, and then tell your Xbox to sleep, you should have no reason to turn off your TV, it should shut off itself, or rather, current TVs will.

Turn your stuff off man, damn. Do you not have an electric bill?

 

[Nafai1123]

Look like I might have speculated correctly:

$499 bundle not yet revealed?

...or they scrapped the idea to lower the price.