Submitted by xxxF0XD1Exxx 678d ago | opinion piece

Xbox One : Kinect Included - Wise Marketing or Costly Mistake?

As announced at E3, Microsoft will be bundling a Kinect sensor with every Xbox One. Did Microsoft do this just to raise console prices or was there method to their madness? (Kinect, Microsoft, Xbox One)

« 1 2 »
JokesOnYou  +   680d ago | Well said
Wise...actually the original Kinect was $150 at launch, Kinect v2 is selling for $400 on pc by itself so I believe the extra $100 is a bargain price. Now more importantly this means that kinect will be fully supported over th X1 life cycle with cool options that will not only improve dedicated kinect games but also truly add to the experience of X1 core games which will benefit from more immersion. Its already being used in subtle ways for many of the announced games and if you read about what devs are doing I think there is some cool implementation can be done in core games. Finally Kinect makes the X1 X1 functionality for the UI freakin sweet, the intergration is hands down the best I've ever seen for a home console.
#1 (Edited 680d ago ) | Agree(44) | Disagree(41) | Report | Reply
PirateThom  +   680d ago
That's one way of looking at it, the other way is that is adds $100 to the base price of the system for a peripheral not everyone wants.
JokesOnYou  +   680d ago
True but thats like saying nintendo should cut the new wii u gamepad because they could sell the console cheaper...NO, its a part of their vision, if you don't want it then you don't want a wii-u.

Also in reference to your theory about there being 78mil 360 sold vs 24 mil kinect(as of feb) #1 kinect hasn't been available nearly as long #2 and more importantly you really are making my point for me, aside for a few core games the 1st kinect catered only to a very casual crowd who bought it specifically for kinect only games= it was barely used in core games, the devs making AAA popular titles like Dice/Battlefield didn't take it serious because it WAS a add-on peripheral not everybody had now they can be confident if they use it properly ALL gamers will notice and they might do well in the future because gamers want the added options/experience.= proofs in the pudding already many devs are talking about using kinect in core games including Dice of course.
#1.1.1 (Edited 680d ago ) | Agree(31) | Disagree(15) | Report
4Sh0w  +   680d ago
Agreed Jokes but you should try more kinect games they are really fun especially if you have some kids or young relatives, also Dance Central is a blast for a small get together like a Bar BQ, I just cut it on and people naturally gravitate to it and start messing around. Yeah but I'd love to see big games like COD, Battlefield, take advantage of Kinect but really for me I think somebody like Remedy could truly show it off in a game like Quantum Break because of the type of action I imagine makes up that game: you know things like a quick hand off the controller out in front of you to stop time, a swipe to move those glass fragments etc.
#1.1.2 (Edited 680d ago ) | Agree(17) | Disagree(6) | Report
JokesOnYou  +   679d ago
Yeah I've tried a few, not my thing but it was OK for about 2 min, lol, no seriously I actually just got it to mess around with the UI/Skype/menu navigation stuff. Its cool tech no doubt.
Kanzes  +   678d ago
It's really cool to utilize the machine with voice commands or sign in with facial recognition
maniacmayhem  +   678d ago
Not everyone will want it now, but if the games or features for the Kinect 2 prove to be very good and adds more engaging elements and design then everyone will be glad it was included.
edonus  +   678d ago
This whole something nobody wants stuff is non sense. Its part of the system, this is electronics not Burger King. This is not building your own PC this is a full product meant to function and be fully used a specific way. They dont want to water down what have to offer or jeopardize their vision.

We already see the devs using kinect in cool little way and some big ways too. This makes the ONE the most complete and versatile system of the bunch. If MS markets their console like that they will clean house.

And I have played lots of kinect games and they are good some are rough around the edges but with a few tweaks here and there they could be perfect. People forget the difference between the first FPS they played and what they are now.

Look at something like Rise Of Nightmares, the combat in that game was awesome, it had some great ideas like the gesture that auto moved you if wanted. The sound and movement interactions it was really neat. That was the first time a game like that was ever made imagine the next one or the third one.

This time around the expanded interaction will be standard so we can expect more from from it and that is a very promising thing.
#1.1.6 (Edited 678d ago ) | Agree(13) | Disagree(11) | Report
user5575708  +   678d ago

actually it added more than $100. recent articles are saying it cost as much as the rest of the xbox one which would mean xbox one without it could have probably costed around $300-$350
ziggurcat  +   678d ago
@ jokes:

"True but thats like saying nintendo should cut the new wii u gamepad because they could sell the console cheaper...NO, its a part of their vision, if you don't want it then you don't want a wii-u."

terrible analogy.

there's a difference between a controller that you need to play the games, and a camera peripheral that is not even required to navigate the system menu or even required to play any of the non-kinect games.
tuglu_pati  +   678d ago
I think its a costly Mistake.
edonus  +   678d ago

Actually your interpretation is completely wrong and Jokes original point hold true.

The WiiU comes with the WiiU controller as part of Nintendos vision. But Nintenedo also has the Pro controller so if someone wasnt interested in using a the tablet controller they could use the pro. If The Tablet controller wasnt part of their vision they could just offer a sku that comes with the pro controller and not the tablet one.

Thius means you are in the same predicament as buying a ONE kinect is part of their vision if you like their services games and products you will have to accept kinect as part of their vision and weigh things out. Kinect is unobtrusive its not like now COD will have to be played stand on your head its just an expansion of the system.
GrandTheftZamboni  +   678d ago

If I'm not mistaken, you should be able to play games on Nintendo pad itself, while you can't do that on Kinect alone.
JokesOnYou  +   678d ago
GrandTheftZamboni, what difference does that make? Nowhere did the comparison say that the wii game pad and kinect both work the same way. So that doesn't negate the point here which is that both while yes using different methods are still part of a vision of how each company wants you to interact with games other than a standard controller.
#1.1.12 (Edited 678d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(0) | Report
GrandTheftZamboni  +   677d ago

I replied to edonus because he defended your analogy:

"True but thats like saying nintendo should cut the new wii u gamepad because they could sell the console cheaper"

I disagree that's the same because in case of Wii U cutting the gamepad you'd lose ability to play on a handheld, while in case of X1 cutting the Kinect you wouldn't.

But I see what you're trying to say. Actually to be honest you used "like" which is not the same as "the same".
tubers  +   678d ago
Yes. I am very interested on how devs will make use of the high end sensory camera from UI manipulation to actual gameplay elements.

Damn it. Would have been so much cooler without the weird strings attached like those NSA stuff and MS targeted adds via cam.
Kanzes  +   678d ago
Kinect spying is just ridiculous.. If you got a cell phone, it also has a camera and microphone, and it follows you around everywhere and anytime
Colzer01  +   678d ago
MS is already trying to clarify that NSA thing now, so it won't be a matter again soon
YNWA96  +   678d ago
This is very civilized here... Unusual.... As for NSA, they know everything they need to know about us anyway.... If you own a smartphone or a cell connected tablet, you have no secrets.
ShwankyShpanky  +   678d ago
@Kanzes/Gman: "False equivalency." Look it up.
RM-TatoTiburon  +   678d ago
Kojima said that he is looking forward to work with kinect this generation, DICE also and kinect is getting a better support than the 360 generation. Now KI is confirmed to use kinect for players detection, i'm looking forward for this newgen for kinect
Colzer01  +   678d ago
If the cloud thing is a real deal, and Kinect got more support, I'm sure MS gonna win the next-gen on a the long-run.

It's much better than just an X360 with steroids though, if you know what I mean.
#1.3.1 (Edited 678d ago ) | Agree(5) | Disagree(8) | Report
QuickdrawMcgraw  +   678d ago
Joke I hope your faith in MS supporting the Xbox1 and Kinect though it's life cycle is rewarded.Myself I'm not so sure,I feel they drop their support of the Xbox when the 360 came on to the scene.And I feel MS exclusive games dried up a few years into the 360's run.For those reasons I don't even trust them to release all the exclusive titles they say they will in the 1st year.
kingdip90  +   680d ago
This will be up to developer utilization of the device in games to decide. If devs can coax gamers into wanting to use this instead of/in conjunction with a controller to the degree that its marketable then yes its genius. Likely not though otherwise we would have seen it on kinect one last gen :/
PirateThom  +   680d ago
Costly mistake due to the fact it's made the console more costly.

The fact there's 77m XBox 360s out there and 24m Kinects should pretty much tell you that not everyone wants or needs it and, yet, if you want to play Halo you have to pay a Kinect fee.
moparful99  +   680d ago
I don't agree with it. They are forcing a feature on us that most of us don't want. But From a business standpoint Microsoft knows that unless they force it on us the market penetration will never be significant.
Insomnia_84  +   680d ago
Exactly! It's good for them to not give us a choice.

+1 for intelligent.
moparful99  +   680d ago
It remains to be seen whether this was actually a good decision. Seeing as there is a larger majority of the 360 audience that do not have a Kinect it's safe to say they don't want it..

Will these people be willing to pay the extra $100 to have Kinect 2 or will they jump ship? I am personally not getting a One at launch..

I might do like I did with the 360 and wait for a while to see how everything shakes out...
Thepharaoh  +   680d ago
More like complete and total blunder
#5 (Edited 680d ago ) | Agree(7) | Disagree(13) | Report | Reply
MichaelLito79  +   679d ago
The kinect is already being intergrated in meaningful ways for Xbox One for example being able to use it for Xbox live(UI), able to upload the barcode off an xbox live card, reading your heart rate, ability to use in the dark, being able to adapt to the player control configurations, voice commands and ability to make movements in games like DeadRising 3.
#6 (Edited 679d ago ) | Agree(11) | Disagree(5) | Report | Reply
ceedubya9  +   678d ago
They are making Kinect matter more by including in every box. What remains to be seen is if the standard inclusion with the console will make a meaningful impact on games and experiences in the future.

Even though every One will come with Kinect, I wonder if Microsoft will make it so that it doesn't need to be hooked up to the console in order to play games? Obviously, it would be needed for some of the extra stuff that the console can do, but I'm sure that some will appreciate the ability to stash it away somewhere if the feel that they have no use for it.
M-M  +   678d ago
All I'm going to say is, is that people like options. Honestly, if they gave us an option to buy an Xbox One version that doesn't require Kinect, more people would buy the Xbox One.
ceedubya9  +   678d ago
They really can't do that though, if they want it to matter. They could make the Xbox One not require Kinect but still have it in the box for those that want to use it. They could drop the price down some more if they want, but its obvious that they are trying to make as much profit as they can.
edonus  +   678d ago
When you give people options you give them the ability to choose the wrong things.
Look at how many Ps3 owners passed on supporting MOVE. A nice piece of innovation and they treated it like a red headed step child.

And then Sony just set up their console to do the same thing again.
ala_767  +   678d ago
Its a costly Mistake!
AllroundGamer  +   678d ago
Forced gadget, that not everybody wants, therefor more of a mistake not making it optional...
IraqCombatVet  +   678d ago
A little of column A and a little of column B. From a developer's point of view, it's wise because they'll know that when they make a game, every console will have the ability to have Kinect implementation. But will developers utilize the Kinect? Who knows. If the majority of devs don't, then it's just an unnecessary cost passed on to consumers. Not too many people wanted a Kinect 2.0 forced on them in the next generation so that wasn't a wise decision. Let's see what happens because I remember not long ago when Sony put Blu-rays in every PS3, making the console more expensive, people complained. I remember when Microsoft made broadband a requirement in every Xbox console and people complained. The Kinect requirement can either backfire or turn out to be something really beneficial. We'll see.
SilentGuard  +   678d ago
Even if developers utilize Kinect features it doesn't matter if not everyone uses the Kinect features. The danger lies in developers requiring Kinect functionality because every console will have a Kinect, turning off those that have no interest in using it.
IraqCombatVet  +   678d ago
Very true. And the key word you used there is "requiring". Seems like every generation gamers are "required" to do more and more. Freedom of choice seems more and more limited these days.
_LarZen_  +   678d ago
It's 100$ or even lower as stores will press it down. It's pocket change for most people that are buying this at the launch window.

Here in Norway Microsoft has priced the XBO 83$ higher then the PS4.

And with these new consoles being more social with pictures of yourself on gamercards and in games. Live streaming of gameplay and yourself I bet most people are going to buy a Playstation Eye sooner then later.

And no one know's what that will cost yet...
BlackTar187  +   678d ago
i doubt that many people care to share themselves over a gaming device.

I know some do and im okay if im the minority but gaming devices are not somewhere i see alot of people bragging about social interaction wise.

A huge chunk of the market is still 25yr old + gamers.

Alot of people still clamor towards anonymity on the video game devices.
#11.1 (Edited 678d ago ) | Agree(4) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
_LarZen_  +   678d ago
If PC gaming is a indication then I personally think it will explode when console gamers gets gamecapture equipment build in the console as it is in XBO and PS4.

Live streaming from PC games is HUGE as is Let's Play videos. Usually when doing this one also has the players face on screen in a little part of the screen.

As demonstrated at E3 I think it was, this is possible with the XBO. And probably with the PS4.

I perfectly understand some people don't want the consoles to be more social then it is. But as I understand the XBO and especially the PS4 will have this. It's a option to use it but as I see it's what opens up the potential of how fun social gaming can bee.

If im not mistaken the avrage gamer is 35 years old, latest survey was in the UK I think. A quick search online verifies this age.
#11.1.1 (Edited 678d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(3) | Report
BlackTar187  +   678d ago
Im not saying a screen shot of your monitor is the same thing.

Also if you think about it less then probably .0001% actually provide channels into their video games and even less actually advertise themselves personally in the videos.
Pascalini  +   678d ago
I'm sick of reading these same recycled articles

Boring- bring us something different to discuss
Colzer01  +   678d ago
Better than reposting cerny interview over and over
sly-Famous  +   678d ago
Its a mistake. Its not about price as much as it is not having a choice, basically MS is just saying "deal with it" instead of giving people a choice if they want to get spied on or not.
McScroggz  +   678d ago
Kinect2.0 isn't bundled with the Xbox One, it's a part of the system.
_LarZen_  +   678d ago
Well written! This is a part most people don't understand.

It's not a peripheral it's a part of the console.
ylwzx3  +   678d ago
It is an unnecessary part of the console that in the end drives up the cost of it.
ziggurcat  +   678d ago
no, it's still a peripheral. why? because it's a separate thing that you have to plug into the console, and it's not integrated into the hardware design.
ziggurcat  +   678d ago
which it shouldn't be.
McScroggz  +   678d ago
I'm not saying it should be either. Personally I've never been interested in Kinect, although I will say I think the best environment for gamers is one with consoles that do things their counterparts don't. Having three consoles that are slight variations of the same thing is just redundant, and I don't want that.
ylwzx3  +   678d ago
My problem with it is you are forced to use it..

lol @ the disagrees.. well if it isn't fanboys.
#15 (Edited 678d ago ) | Agree(7) | Disagree(5) | Report | Reply
Supermax  +   678d ago
No body forces you do do anything your not a child.i think it's great and every game on Xbox one uses some form of kinect.
Pascalini  +   678d ago
Laptops have cameras

Phones have cameras

Just deal with it and stop moaning- it's really isn't a big deal- if you don't like it then buy a ps4 simple
ziggurcat  +   678d ago
adam orth? is that you?
famoussasjohn  +   678d ago
You aren't necessarily forced to use it. It'll need to be plugged in, but then that's it. Some games will use the Kinect functionality, it'll just depend on how they utilize it to see if it's actually worthy of utilizing while playing and if it helps with immersion of playing the game.

But by no means do you have to use the Kinect. You can power it on via the power button or the controller.
blacktiger  +   678d ago
Those of you who don't know i am going to explain why kinect doesn't work for certain things.
Look guys ,kinect can work, for games like dance. It can even works if you point your finger like gun and start using. Kinect 2.0 is powerful in technology but it isn't gamers interest for lot of reason. That's why kinect 1.0 didn't attract. Because no one wants to use their hands I the air for while. Also video games are really great with ,kinect just yet, with how fast it sync to use it as controller. It's like mouse wired vs mouse wireless. Believe it or not wireless has a huge difference against wired. Hardcore gamers will want to use it only wireless. Also if touchscreen were to be available for starcraft 2 would it work yes, but no one will use it because two reason, fast function and sync can not compete with physical buttons.

Kinect 2.0 is going to be great for lot of things but I wouldn't want it for games though, but for something else maybe.
fenome  +   678d ago
To each their own really, I'm not personally interested in it myself. If you like it cool, that's your thing. If I was getting it I'd be scrutinizing the Terms and Conditions with a fine-toothed comb though. I usually just see those conditions as jargon and scroll to the bottom, hit agree, and go on with things, but in this instance it just seems like they they're a little too loose with your personal data.

I can see this as being a great tool for corporate marketing data. Everything in big business nowadays is Mindshare. You can't even go to Taco Bell anymore without them asking you to take a survey on the receipt. Do you have any idea how much better than a survey this can be for them to find out about consumer data? They can tell how many people are in a household, what they're eating drinking, age brackets, reactions to commercials and what-not. They can see it all happen in real-time without the loose bits of information that people put down in surveys.

I used to do surveys for companies for some extra bucks on the side, and I even had a scanner at home that I could scan products and tell them what store I bought them at for companies trying to get consumer data. It became too much of a hassle though, and I stopped because it was annoying. But it's obvious that data mining and finding about how many people and what ages in households is actually a very big deals to companies. A lot more than the average person actually realizes I think.

You can go on about "tin hats" and what-not all you like, but it is a real thing. Companies strive for this data, they love their surveys and evaluations
SilentGuard  +   678d ago
Including it in every console and requiring it to be hooked up only benefits those that like Kinect and want to use it. MS must assume the rest of us will convert and become lovers in their Kinect fetish. If Kinect 2.0 turns out to be great than people would buy it seperately and enjoy the optional Kinect features. MS themselves say you can turn off Kinect and not use it (pause in MS speak).

Developers may count on a 100% adaption rate but how does this matter if the Kinect features aren't a selling point for those that don't want Kinect? Developers aren't going to be any more inclined to make Kinect only games if people don't buy them, even with 100% adaption rate. If this were the case than why remake Ryse to be Kinect optional? Making it Kinect only would be a selling point for people that like Kinect games, which would be the same small fraction with the One that it is with the 360.
headblackman  +   678d ago
its not a costly mistake. we can't say that yet because the system isn't even out yet. people will let it be known after a full year of the systems release with their dollars. its more so a wise but costly gamble. we can sit here and go back and forward all day about hate for a system and a peripheral that we've never experienced to properly judge, but the truth is that its not out so we can't say until we play it for ourselves
SaveFerris  +   678d ago
Is Microsoft requiring all games for Xbox One to have Kinect features similar to Sony requiring remote play on the Vita? If they are then it would go a long way to justify its inclusion as part of the system, rather than an extra that is forced upon the consumer.
aiBreeze  +   678d ago
A mix of mandatory kinect and the fact kinect has to always be connected to the Xbox One has completely put me off buying the console and unless Halo 5 turns out to be a radical improvement over 4, can't see any reason to ever buy an Xbox One at this point.
ATWILL  +   678d ago
I think it was smart to add Kinect. The console offers something for everyone and can add something unique to games. Since it's part of the system, developers will work with it; especially if it works as advertised. The problem with making it optional is optional support. Just look at PS Move; no games, no support. I agree that the price could come down some, a $50 cut would be amazing.
Master-H  +   678d ago
Hmmm can't really comment on this until we see & try some actual games for the Kinect 2.0, maybe they deliver this time, maybe they suck like current Kinect games, you never know, nevertheless it is a risky move on MS part but i guess they can take it since they got deep pockets.
chamber  +   678d ago
I won't even trust the Kinect tech till its out and actual people using it , the gaming media were all praises and hyping it before release of the first one so i bought my niece and nephew one. It was just a mess, arms twisting everywhere, having to move sofas and block out too much sunlight. All that effort and from my experience they kinda like it for about 20 minutes when it works, then it gets old. The kids seriously have played more hours of minecraft then all the kinect games combined.
#27 (Edited 678d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(1) | Report | Reply
ALLWRONG  +   678d ago
Mistake. It's the reason I went PC instead.
SilentGuard  +   678d ago
Many developers will probobly work with Kinect in some form since its included, but at the same time make the Kinect features optional. If they don't then they risk making the game appeal to only those that like Kinect, which is a small percentage of gamers. I would gamble that many other developers won't bother with Kinect because the cost of including its functionality in development won't be offset by any increase interest in the game having Kinect functionality.

Kinect only games won't sell more due to Kinect being included than they would if it was sold seperately. If I bought a One I wouldn't suddenly like Kinect and go buy Kinect games. Assuming I and every other 360 owner bought a One how many would go out and buy Kinectimals 2? Probobly the same amount that bought a Kinect 1.0. How many would look at a game and say "I'm sold" becuase it has some Kinect functionality?

Ms is basically subsidizing the minority of its fans that like Kinect by making everyone have one. My greatest concern is developers, or MS, requiring some Kinect functionality in games due to the 100% install base. Bottom line is MS risks losing a lot of customers, particularly Xbox fans, due to either the price increase or privacy concerns over the included mandatory Kinect.
edonus  +   677d ago
You guys just dont get it. What is true is devs will use more kinect features to get players use to it. They no longer have to try and sell you a kinect they just have to make you want to use it and that is a thousand times easier task.

Kinect games actually sold really well the core market games are the ones that suffered but that is because the core market didnt go out and buy kinects. Kinect standard you can expect kinect core games to sell 3-5 times more in general just by saturation. Again they dont have to sell you kinect they just have to sell you a game.

Success comes from position and MS has positioned the ONE with kinect to be strong on many fronts. Including Kinect in the package makes the system a fuller more advanced product. Dev are describing things that are super cool with Kinect that I never even thought of like how its used in KI. When you pass the controller to some one else it auto configures to their setting and starts loads their favorite character. Dead Rising has it were you can thrash the controller around and throw a zombie off of you, even Battlefield 4 is suppose to get kinect support of some kind.

What fanboys forget about devs is these are creative people. They dont care about peoples hate and aversion to innovation. As long as its cost effective for their project, and MS has made it cost effective. These devs cant wait to see what they can do with kinect and I being a gamer cant wait to see what they do with it. The same way I would like to see what Naughty Dog or Sony Santa Monica would have or may do with the Pseye4 functions for the Ps4 but with it not being standard I wont hold my breath for support.

MS has set it up so that if Kinect functions take off it will make their versions the of all 3rd party games the definitive ones and offer something very robust that Sony is too far behind too catch up. So as Sony supporters you better keep your kinect hate going and pray it doesnt catch on.
SilentGuard  +   677d ago
I'm affraid we aren't the ones that don't get it. The core market didn't buy Kinects because the core market isn't interested in Kinects. You'll get 100% Kinect saturation buy including one with every console but so what, the core gamers that wouldn't buy a Kinect seperately aren't going to suddenly start buying Kinect games. Including one in every box doen't translate into interest for those that don't want it.

If Kinect is great for core games than why didn't they keep Ryse a Kinect game? Why was it remade into a game designed to use a controller? It could have been the definitive game to showcase the new Kinect. They know if it was a Kinect only game it wouldn't have as much appeal. I myself have yet to see anything making me glad they include Kinect. Thrash my controller around...no thanks.

Point is selling the console without Kinect for $350 would be a lot smarter and would sell more consoles. The console install base would be bigger meaning more people to sell Kinects to as an accessary. If Kinect turns out to be as great as you think, then people like me that don't get it can go buy one later if we choose. Inlcuding an accessary that must be hooked up at a selling point greater than the primary competition which more than half your fan base doen't want is not smart.
Dee_Cazo  +   678d ago
Very important they did this. Knowing each Xbox One gamer has a Kinect makes developers use the technology and will advance the uses of it in games and how it is used in-general.

I await the first developer who will track you sitting on your couch playing a shooter and allowing you to lean and turn your head to see more.
« 1 2 »

Add comment

You need to be registered to add comments. Register here or login
New stories

ZQGames will be releasing a spin-off game to Soul Guardians: Age of Midgard called Captain Heroes

16m ago - ZQGame announces launch of arcade shooter Captain Heroes, a spin-off to action-RPG Soul Guardians... | iPhone

Death Moto 3 Cheats: The Strategy Guide and Tips

22m ago - Death Moto 3 Guide Cheats - Strategy Tips and Tricks for Android iPhone Game Upgrade your defaul... | iPhone

Filmwatch Contest Details

Now - Come celebrate the upcoming Avengers: Age of Ultron with us on Filmwatch and win cool prizes. | Promoted post

Doorways: Holy Mountains of Flesh announced

39m ago - The fourth episode of the Doorways series has been announced by Saibot Studios. Doorways: Holy... | PC

E3 Line Up for Frictional Games, Focus Home Entertainment plus more

41m ago - PR Company EVOLVE have today revealed the game studios they will be representing at this years E3... | PC

Survival Horror game Sleepers gets debut trailer and screenshots

41m ago - Sleepers is a survival horror game set in the future, where the player controls a character who w... | PC