Originally Posted by metallicaband
Yeah sure, because we've never seen Kinect 1.0 before so of course everyone can't stop looking to the "FUTURE" and the Kinect 2.0 *facepalm*
I feel sorry for anyone who can't see the main use of the forced Kinect is ads, it's a shame they didn't even at least eat the Camera's cost considering how much money they'll be making out of it.
Sure, you've seen Kinect 1. You know how much of the original Kinect tech is used in the new one? ZERO. Are some of the motion tracking features similar in nature? Absolutely... But the amount of precision they're showing with the new one goes far beyond what the original could do. The original might as well have been a beta test by comparison. The new one provides vastly more data, so much so that one CPU core is partially dedicated to the task (with the audio processing having its own dedicated part of the SHADE chipset).
Are they going to monetize it? Of course. They're a business. Is that its primary raison d'etre? Of course not... No more than the original Kinect with many of the alternate uses it had over its time (including uses in the pharmaceutical industry, public advertising, robotics, etc.). Any business worth its salt is going to find ways to make money off their tech in other ways. But first and foremost, the purpose of this device is to provide more inputs beyond just the controller that developers have access to on the system, whether that be voice commands, your facial expression, tracking the position of the controller, tracking who is holding the controller by biometrics, using the location of the controller in the playspace to beamtrace the audio so that the rest of the room noise can be cancelled, etc. And these are just the things they're using on a system level, not the things developers will ultimately come up with on their own using the data Kinect 2 provides. And all of that happens with you seated... not having to wave your arms like a goon.
One of the advantages of PC gaming is that you have a keyboard for input. You have like a hundred buttons you can use for input, plus several on the mouse. Contrast that to the console, where you basically have 8 buttons, two analog sticks and a D-pad - so essentially 12 total actions programmable to single presses. Now look at a game like Skyrim, where you have a large number of things you can do, or perhaps a MMO where you can set up hotkeys. The only way to translate some of what we see on PC is to have the game action pause, have you scroll through menus, etc. But then take a look at what Kinect 1 did for Skyrim and Mass Effect 3. No more pausing the action... Just speak what you need. Want Liara to move to a cover point? Aim at it and say, "Liara, move." Want to switch to incendiary ammo? Say, "incendiary ammo." And that was the divisor between those two methods... One made you freeze the gameplay for a moment while you dealt with the limitations you have for input due to the controller, whereas the other just let you DO IT without the game ever stopping.
Now imagine a game like Deus Ex or really any game where you have keypad entries into doors. Know the code to get in the door? The old way would have you moving the cursor around the keypad to poke in numbers, taking longer than it would in real life. Kinect gives you a new way to input things... perhaps by just speaking the code, or even by taking one hand off the controller and poking the numbers into the air using an on-screen cursor as quickly as you would if it were a real keypad in front of you.
Look at how godawful RTS games are on console right now. Why? Because the RTS paradigm is that you have a mouse on a PC for unit selection, etc. and a keyboard for large numbers of inputs. Now, you have had console games that have pulled it off decently using nested commands, held button presses to open submenus, etc. - all things that slow the flow of the game. Compare that to pro players of Starcraft who are doing a ridiculous number of inputs per minute to control their units... because they have the inputs available to do so. Then look at Tom Clancy's Endwar. It used very basic voice commands via headset to handle basic functions like unit selection, grouping, commands, etc. and it actually worked fairly well, without slowing the flow of the game. Now look beyond that to a console RTS where you can still do all of those voice commands... but also use your hand to reach up and select groups of units or pan the camera across the map, all while still using the controller. Things like that could very well be doable with what Microsoft is pushing for... whereas not having it is like buying a PC without a mouse. Sure, you could play games on the keyboard... but since devs know the mouse is ubiquitous, they're able to take advantage of it being a known input method. For Xbox One, the new Kinect is another known input method.
As I've said here before, people see futuristic methods of input in media and find it impressive, whether it be the voice commands in Blade Runner or the sweeping hand gestures of Minority Report or Tony Stark flinging files into a virtual recycle bin with his hands. And yet, when we take a step toward such fantastic things, people sternly react with, "I just wanna push buttons." So basically... same old same old. I want those things to become reality. I want something beyond just a controller in my hand. And I want it to be a ubiquitous input device for the system so that developers won't just let it languish into another EyeToy or Live Vision Cam. That's worth my $100 over the other option... and it's a small amount to pay for something I'll see evolve over the next 10 years of this console cycle. If you don't see $10 a year to open up console gaming to new experiences as a worthy investment, then there are other systems that aren't trying to do this. They'll be giving you exactly what you want - more of the same but prettier. And I don't begrudge you for wanting that familiarity... but that's not next-gen to me. That's bumping against the wall of diminishing returns without doing anything to innovate. I'm spending my extra $100 over what Sony offers gladly, because I believe in the console that isn't giving you the thing you want now, but the thing you're going to come to expect as the norm later.