Top
70°

The Xbox One Is Worse For Everyone If Kinect's Not Mandatory

Using Kinect with your Xbox One is no longer mandatory. Yay, right? No. Wrong. Again. This is another dumb subtraction from Microsoft, presented as choice. As an optional feature, there's far less incentive for developers to take advantage of everything the new Kinect can do. It's actually a really impressive device, and maybe some of that still comes through.

The story is too old to be commented.
edonus1048d ago SpamShowReplies(3)
gamingfriend1048d ago

Kinect= who cares about that I for one dont and I know more people who dont like it than like it, that sorta gaming will take awhile to become awesome, for now console and controller does me,

Shadonic1047d ago

at this point its just game design and not the tech

rainslacker1047d ago

Most Xbox people on here didn't even like it before it became a selling point of the console. Food for thought.

VENOMACR1048d ago

I wont even use the Kinect, except for maybe Skype. I think they felt like they HAD to incorporate it to get it in people's homes. Problem is, majority of people don't want it lol. Removing the mandated Kinect connection is great. Who want to go to their friends house and lug around the kinect just so they can play a non kinect game? Good move by microsoft, but they should still remove it and make it an optional purchase, or make a version for $100 cheaper that doesn't include it. 2 SKU's, but they won't. Maybe I'll just sell mine after someone breaks there's lol.

Auron1047d ago (Edited 1047d ago )

I don't want Kinect so it wouldn't be worse for me. videogame journalists think they know what's best for everyone.. Microsoft thought the same thing with the reveal of the xb one, and it blew up in their faces.

Neixus1047d ago (Edited 1047d ago )

Kinect not being mandatory, means people who don't find kinect interesting/planning on using it would then have to pay 100$ for something they will never use and doesn't have to.

Compare it to a game, if you only want singleplayer, so 30$ is a reasonable price. You -only- want to play singleplayer,not touch multiplayer, but you're forced to pay those extra dollars for something you don't have to play, or want to.

crazyeightz1047d ago

Well then the choice is then going to be made by the consumer. Who is to tell them that if they are not buying an XBox with Kinect they will die instantly. If they don't like the Kinect concept, they can get a PS4. Nobody is forcing anything to anybody if the consumer is free to buy whatever he or she so wants.

ShwankyShpanky1047d ago

This is the compromise MS had to make to avoid hampering one of their key strategies significantly, and yes, that is the marketing data collection/sales strategy.

It simply looks like MS just wasn't expecting the negative backlash to their policies. They might have even gotten away with Kinect, but I think Edward Snowden should probably share some of the credit for the fact that it will not be mandatory to keep it plugged in. Their reversal has pretty much confirmed that their previous "requirement" that it be hooked up was based on nothing more than wanting to use it as a monitoring device, at the very *least* for advertising purposes; there was really no technical/engineering reason for it to stay connected. (I at least gave them the benefit of the doubt that *maybe* they put the WiFi hardware in it or something like that, though to be honest, I would have considered that to be a shifty method of engineering the Kinected requirement into the system, considering how much space the console has in its case)

Looks to me like MS got the new numbers from some more up-to-date "market research," and probably figured out that they'd have better luck getting Ones/Kinects into homes by removing the Kinect stigma, and that ultimately more people would end up having it Kinected anyway. "It has a camera that you can't unplug and they won't tell you why" creates a negative reaction in many people (as it should), and could dissuade them from purchasing the system altogether. By removing the talking point now, it will fade from view by the time of actual launch (as perhaps may the NSA brou-ha-ha), at which point many who haven't been following this debacle will just say "oh neat... it comes with a motion-control camera accessory," and they'll hook it up without much consideration, ultimately placing more Ones (and more Kinected Ones) in homes throughout the world...

...or at least the US and UK ;)

GryestOfBluSkies1047d ago

in my opinion, it was a good move to make kinect not mandatory. the only better move would be to have a console without it for cheaper. a lot of people dont want it at all, so why not give people the choice.

rainslacker1047d ago

Giving people the choice to buy one or not, the most likely scenario is that most people would not buy it. That isn't what they want.

By including it, they know that people are more likely to connect it, even if they will never use it. And they are right about this. Most people will. But would those same people buy it to connect it if given the choice?

That's the gamble that MS isn't willing to take. If they had real confidence in the product, they'd sell an SKU without it, and offer the camera seperate like they do with Kinect 1.0 now. They would have to work harder at that though, because that means making games that are actually compelling enough to buy the Kinect for. Something they've failed to do so far with Kinect 1.0 IMO.

Show all comments...
The story is too old to be commented.