In a bid to fight obesity, a number of researchers have been tasked with making a 'boxing' game that helps folks shed those very excess pounds.
"kinect too slow to work" gd 2 no
you need to bullet time to play a game.
could not even detect the twin karate chopping in harry porter kinect demo let along boxing
But a gamepad is also too slow to replicate fast movements in games anyway....soooo what is the point of this complaint. Besides that...console games run at 30 frames...again yet another hurdle in reflecting any realistic movements. If anything this flaw is only on par with other console limitations. @RedDragan I don't know how fast pseye is, nor do I care, I am not picking a 'team'. I just think something as pathetic as this is not worth debating. I would be more concerned with the fact that 99.99999999% of all console games dip into the 20 frame region during gameplay rather than the input lag... Like I said, controllers lag, having lagging controls are something console owners are used to, no big deal.
Even so, I thought the Playstation Eye was 120FPS, perhaps 60FPS? I know it is over 30FPS because this came from people who got it working on PCs and noted how fast the capture was.
that the PS eye for the PS3 was designed to capture at minimum 60 fps.
Too slow to replicate? What?!? When you hit a button, the action is performed on-screen 22 milliseconds later. The "fast movement" depends on what the developers make the character do. I'd say Ryu Habusa would disagree with you. I don't understand what you're getting it. Kinect can't track movements that are too fast. A controller doesn't track movements. It's directly fed into the game.
You realise controllers have input lag too, and they are also not very responsive in general. eg: you need to hold the joystick all the way to the side for an entire second to turn around, something that could be done in 5ms an 5mm movement with a mouse. Kinect is laggy, gamepads are laggy= no big deal.
You're confusing Kinect's lag with Kinect's inability to capture high speed movements. They're different. Controller and Kinect both have lag. However, controller can capture gamer inputs at very high speed while Kinect can not capture gamer movements at very high speed (because Kinect is too slow, the motion becomes a blurr at very high speed and Kinect have a hard time deciphering that). You can press a button as fast as humanly possible many times in a row and the controller will be able to register them all. Try punching as fast as humanly possible and Kinect will not be able to see it anymore.
The human eye sees at 22 milliseconds. Controller LAG looks like 1:1 to the human eye. Do you understand that? If the developers wanted to give you to ability to turn around in 22 milliseconds...they could. That intentional LAG is there for realism. A human being takes a second to turn around.
This is not about input lag, that's been talked about to death, we already know kinect will have some lag, as does every control method available. What they are talking about here is that Kinect can completely miss quick movements. Since the only way for Kinect to detect movement is via the camera then if you move too quickly for the 30fps capture rate then that movement will be missed or interpreted incorrectly. For Kinect to work well they really needed 60 or even 120fps. But doubling or quadrupling the data flow into the console would probably be too much to process without greatly impacting the compute resources available for the game.
People people. It's dchalfont. Give it a rest already. He is too far above us to hear you. Your sound is like a bug screeming at him. There is NO WAY to get him to listen no matter what you say and what you back your claims up with.
Which takes us back to the original problem of Microsoft removing the processor from the Kinect device itself. Kinect went from the oh-so-close-to-Minority Report awesome motion controlling device in games to a cheap Datel-like USB peripheral. But bots will still buy it like the 2nd coming, at least their mothers will.
@kneon I agree with you... and maybe they could have gone with a faster capture rate if they had left the CPU in Kinect????
the problem is that if you swing a punch at the air it may be too quick for the camera to pick up so you would have to throw deliberately slow punches
"The human eye sees at 22 milliseconds" That is the dumbest thing i've ever read. A game that is 60 frames has 1 frame every 16.6666 ms. The human eye can detect frames well in excess of 200frames per second. Meaning the human eye can detect 1-2ms variants. You pseudo scientific fanboys are an embarrasment.
MS is appealing to the new and casual crowd, who dont care about quality games or performance.... they will do fine... just many of us core gamers know this is not the year for Kin.. and wait and see if it can be made to work with REAL games and a price drop
It's a horrible mistake to think casual gamers don't care about quality games and performance. Say what you will about wii hardware, but Nintendo's software releases have been nothing but well thought out quality. Okay, except Wii Music.
I agree with the Wii... We got one at launch and its typical Big N... high quality gaming I never hear the stuff about our Wii as I hear about Kinetic... Wii got great press out of the gate, Kin. totally different...
I am sure move too.
i got debubbed for wrighting pew pew pew, omfg get a life you xbumboys, yeah i know it was you lot, sensitive little xgirls
While Kinect will probably be successful sales wise due to the power of marketing (Beiber) it totally fails in the functionality department and playing good games.
does microsoft care?
OHHH really, What Dr? This is fkcing stupid! A number of researchers, WOW.......WHO exactly did that research? Was it the team behind a cereal brand OR an actual team that is looking for ways to fight obesity. This article seems like something someone whipped up at the spur of the moment.
Yeah its not like researchers wouldn't have found a way to interpolate the speed between 2 frames something like that framerate interpolation article on digital foundry.
First of all I am beginning to get sick of debating the Kinect and Move when the vast majority of us haven't even tried either one yet. Having said that I have to agree with WetNOOdle69. I have never read an article that claims such specific data and results and yet fails to mention a single name of anyone involved in the "research" For the record I think the Kinect will fail horribly for now, I think it has potential, just not for gaming to much. I think this was an absolute attempt ( a very poor one ) at some MS/Kinect bashing. I think we as a community are becoming entirely to cynical, it's not a good look really people. Let's try to get back to debating things that matter like gameplay, graphics, game mechanics, etc.it's why we as a community have such a hard time getting the respect we deserve from the mainstream. Remember our gaming community gross's more then music and movies combined.
It's quite ironic really. When I think 360, I think uber nerds playing shooters for long session with a team and mics. Not stroking little pets:)
MS biggest mistake was taking the Processors out of Kinect. So what if the price would be higher. It could have been F*cking awesome.
I just wanted to say....I have played both. Kinetic & Move. If you are interested in a casual non-serious experience....Kinetic will do. It's very laggy and the graphics due to the 360 processor being used to crunch Kinetic data, their very Wii...I thought I was playing on a SD TV with massive jaggies. That being said...it delivers albeit delayed and not even close to 1:1. It really feels like Wii. I played Forza...total fail, even forgetting the fact that a racer NEEDS feedback! I also played some ping pong game...all animations are animated and canned to your movements. Essentially the same as if you simply pushed a button to swing the racket. Move was a different story....and I still don't like it! LOL But boy does it deliver! Graphics in Mag were exactly the same...no lag or slow down. Movement is dead on 1:1 to the point of looking kinda stupid....we gamers aren't used to seeing so much arm show while moving in a FPS...but it is what would show approximately. If I'm making any sense. LOL Accuracy is grea! Perfect as if you used a controller, but its really easy to over shoot because of the new controls. This isn't Wii where you point and the console auto-locks you to your intended target! Over all...I still prefer a controller. But I see MOVE as a plausible alternative if you take the time to adjust. Kinetics is epic fail for anyone other than casuals. Honestly, I own both systems...and I'm at a loss why this tech was greenlit while acquiring new IP's and new devs wasn't.
30fps 640x480 Too low resolution, too low framerate PS Eye has higher framerate - so PS Eye will be able to do games that require faster reactions that Kinect. PS Eye can do 120fps at lower resolution and 60fps at 640x480. Overpriced under spec PS eye
I have done my fair share of ripping on kinect, but I would consider the source of this article. You have to use some critical thinking before reacting to someone saying "a bunch of researchers said..." What researchers? What study? Anyone can make up stuff like this and post it on the Internet. Real information please.
Working on fairy dust? Kinect boxing(omg it cant exist) http://www.youtube.com/watc... And of course Fighters uncaged http://www.gametrailers.com... inbe4 how can players do the combo think people who are asking it. Just link in every other fighting game combo are just initiated when the player does a certain sequence of punches and kicks when the player does the right one play combo animation. something like low punch,low punch and kick start combo animation.
Maybe the can have a simulator where you talk to a make believe weird looking kid......oh wait
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.