NowGamer: At the recent Ubisoft event in London Ghost Recon Future Soldier product manager Aziz Khater told NowGamer that the publisher is looking at integrating motion control into core games
the only way a Kinect shooter would work is with an added item (gun) which the player can hold but apart from that all they could really do is have a shooter where the only added bonus with Kinect is voice and hand gestures (grenades/team orders)
Development kits for Kinect were being sent out with instructions from Microsoft not to make shooters. Has this recommendation been removed now?
Microsoft also once required games to be at least native 720p with 2xAA. That didn't last long, either. The code is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules. Welcome aboard the Black Pearl.
where did you hear that? One of the most interesting Kinect games in the launch lineup is a shooter.
If this is a full Game and is only designed for Move, it will cost $40. And for Kinect $60.
it just doesnt work
I love this site everyone is so negative, Why don't you let the Big boys decide if it will work or not, obviously we will know sooner or later. Too me I would love to see people try to think outside the box and see what they will come up with.
It may work, it'll just be a rail shooter like the old arcade Time Crisis games. Hopefully it'll turn out better than the SWs Kinect game... http://cache.gawker.com/ass...
But shooters will work great with the Move
but i dont see how kinnect will work with a shooter
It will end the same way as RUSE (unless MS pays them/forces them to put it in): Move yes, Kinect no.
You have to give voice commands like PEW PEW PEW or Shoot 'turns the camera to the next enemy' shoot shoot SHOOOOOT all this while standing up = best workout ever
I say "shoot these controls suck!" hahaha
im confused on how youre supposed to move around with kinect anyone wanna tell me how im supposed to move?
use the controller like always? they wont make a game where you have to run around your house to move a character in the game-world, I can see it so you use the control as standard and Kinect will allow for an addition of features such as; *throwing grenades *voice commands *hand gestures *maybe something to do with your head? who knows Kinect has only been in the devs hands for a year and companies haven't scratched the surface with what can be done so lets wait and see what people come up with over the years (or year if it flops, which is a possibility with the lack of support e.g. R.U.S.E)
Really don't get why the R.U.S.E devs aren't using it. Unless it can't or has issues tracking hand gestures.
So you're suggesting that we as players of a shooter on Kinect REMOVE our hands from the controller to gesture the throwing of a grenade instead of pressing a button? Does that make sense to anyone? Basically everything you suggested can be done quickly and efficiently with a controller without the need to remove my hand from said controller to initiate an in-game action. That's terrible implementation and that's why Microsoft specifically stated to not create shooters for Kinect. If anyone has tried to make a shooter work with Kinect it's Microsoft and you know they tested Halo extensively to try and implement the controller-free technology into the game. It just doesn't work because there's no manageable way to do it. It's made for party games and simple sports games. Stop hoping it will be more than that guys!
@Godmars290, they said it wasn't practical. I've heard some matches in R.U.S.E. can last several hours and for it to work, you'd have to be standing the whole time. Also, a shooter or any game requiring you to use a controller in addition to using Kinect is just making Kinect a $150 Eyetoy. The whole point of Kinect is never needing a controller to play the game. I'll be waiting to see developers use Kinect to let gamers move around in games like shooters or action games. Think of trying to run around in Halo or COD and jump around / kill people with the fast paced action.
If such a game was possible doesn't it beg the question why wasn't it shown at E3 to keep the Hardcore from complaining?
Because devs have only had about a year with the tech and are still experimenting with ideas?
I been saying that lots it takes a year or two to understand the limits and potential of a newer product, example (look at beggining PS3 and 360 games and now the newer ones huge difference)
With many 2nd and 3rd party devs having kits well before that. They were talking up shooters, yet there wasn't even mention of them at E3 much less a staged/pre-rendered demo on the same level as that Star Wars title. If they could show staged CG like that, then why not a shooter? Especially when they've taken years to release titles like Alan Wake and Too Human, and are apparently looking to fund and finish Duke Nukem Forever. Nevermind that those same devs have had Move kits for just as long and they're not only putting it in shooters, but at least in one case putting it in a game while not using Kenect.
"Only a year" ? Is that supposed to be a short amount of time ?
One year may seem like a little bit of time, but then again "It 'took just five weeks' to integrate PlayStation Move into R.U.S.E.". Hell, developers have had kits for Move for less time and they've shown a ton of sick "hardcore" games for people to enjoy. Sure you'll see better games as people get use to the tech, but MS not showing any form of hardcore games at E3 and apparently telling developers not to make Kinect shooter games seems a little iffy. That and the nice acting job they did at times, http://cache.gawker.com/ass...
In second thoughts, I wouldn't want to see the series destroyed by Motion Control Gaming.
on kinect. that i assume would work really well, or maybe silent scope. or the old pc game drug wars or something (cant remember the title) mad dog mcCree
Too me 1 year is not nearly enough time, too really know the potential, All we know is that microsoft told developers to work on casual games for now. @ Godmars290 Microsofts Goal at E3 with Kinect wasn't about the core gamer, it was about controller free gaming that anyone in the house could play, even if they never played a video game before. You think that if they showed shooters and other mature games that would grab the casuals attension I'm sure even though i'll get probably a thousand disagrees that we will see more mature games coming for kinect as the time passes. I'm sure MIcrosoft has heard that the core gamer wants something too for kinect
showed games that look like "core" games, but that anyone can pick up and play. they say that the controller intimidates some people, and that they wanted to remove that barrier, but anyone who uses kinect instead of a controller can't play the same games. kinda like "now your mom can play horde mode with you!" rather than "if youre no good with the gamepad, you're stuck with kinectimals!"
asyouburn is right on with that statement. They have talked about the barrier of entry for the general public to get involved in gaming and how the controller was the main reason people were intimidated. If Kinect's purpose is to eliminate that threat and open up gaming to everyone, then why are all the games so similar to Wii party games and simple sports titles? The truth is that in-depth gaming is only playable with a controller. Maybe in a later date when technology has evolved more will controller-free become reality, but as of this point in time a controller is absolutely necessary for the types of games we all consider "hardcore".
I can see this working for Move, simply because of how Move looks with games like Socom 4. However Kinect i would need to be shown, reshown and reshown again that it actually works w/o the lag to be sold on it.
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.