Microsoft Nukes Rumors of Kinect-Free Xbox One

[exfileme]

Nope, you're getting a Kinect whether you want it or not.

Microsoft Nukes Rumors of Kinect-Free Xbox One : Read more

 

[DRosencraft]

Yeah, anyone who saw the E3 presentation and read everything about the XBOne would have known this rumor was highly unlikely. Still, would think they'd let the rumor lag a little longer, if only to get a little more attention.

 

[greghome]

The Sony eye cost an extra 60USD?
Then, just don't buy it........It's not like most games use it anyways.....

 

[gallidorn]

Microsoft should have offered the Xbox One without Kinnect. It would have had a more competitive price point, and if people wanted Kinnect, they could buy it as an accessory. Although Kinnect may be appealing to people who enjoyed the Nintendo Wii, most serious gamers find it annoying.

 

[belardo]

higher price, slower CPU, GPU, memory and made by Microsoft... whats there to hate?

 

[belardo]

higher price, slower CPU, GPU, memory and made by Microsoft... whats there to hate?

 

[Sangeet Khatri]

And because of this behavior and strategy by the Microsoft the Xbox one is certain to sink. I mean no one likes buying things that are not that much open (open as in freedom to customers). That is the reason why everyone loves Google for the cloud, AMD for chips, and Sony for the PS4

 

[opmopadop]

"who likely already bought the gaming box within the first three months of availability"

who likely WILL BUY the gaming box within the first three months of availability?!

 

[John Bauer-1363825]

Microsoft should have offered the Xbox One without Kinnect. It would have had a more competitive price point, and if people wanted Kinnect, they could buy it as an accessory. Although Kinnect may be appealing to people who enjoyed the Nintendo Wii, most serious gamers find it annoying.

I don't know why you have negative votes, you hit the nail on the head. Microsoft NEEDS to drop the Kinect to be competitive with the PS4.

 

[dextermat]

Duke Nukem would sure say, your face, your a**, What's the difference on Kinect!

 

[Achoo22]

This is stupid. Unless the device can be disabled with a hardware switch, I don't believe it can be disabled.

 

[HyperionLight]

Microsoft should have offered the Xbox One without Kinnect. It would have had a more competitive price point, and if people wanted Kinnect, they could buy it as an accessory. Although Kinnect may be appealing to people who enjoyed the Nintendo Wii, most serious gamers find it annoying.

The first kinect had a price point of $150 and is still selling at $100…so how much do you think a considerably upgraded version would cost?

And that would have been one smart thing to do, like Sony is doing...you know the optional buy of the ps eye which 10% (or less) will buy so that the R&D resources for the ps eye/controller are really well spent...and lets sell the new ps eye at a loss while we’re at it….yep that's some smart thinking all right. /s

And are you seriously comparing one generation of the kinect to another?!

Then let’s compare the 360 to the x1 or the ps3 to the ps4…it’s all the same anyway!

Most serious gamers? Yeah because the only market is the “serious gamer” one.

 

[r3dl1n3]

Good for MS.. stick to your guns on this.. I personally like what the Kinect offers in the way of non gaming features and having every single box sold will allow developers to build a wider variety of software that utilizes Kinect.. If it was an optional thing developers wouldn't put as much effort into it because they target market is smaller. Hate on it all you like.. but even at 499 it's still a better deal than the PS4.. I'll still buy both.. but I can assure you I will not buy the PS4 camera's add-on.

 

[HyperionLight]

And because of this behavior and strategy by the Microsoft the Xbox one is certain to sink. I mean no one likes buying things that are not that much open (open as in freedom to customers). That is the reason why everyone loves Google for the cloud, AMD for chips, and Sony for the PS4

Lol what?

And what strategy is that exactly?

Do you mean the new indie polices…hmm, no it’s not that.

Than how about the “unlimited” space you get with every x1? Nope not that either. Maybe... maybe the fact that this is not the kinect 1.0, but a greatly improved one that is included with every x1 which means you can build a kinect game and you know that it will sell to more people than if sold separately?

Nah, I don’t think it’s this either!

Oh I know it’s the games, right? Yeah you’ve got only what... 60 games? Good thing there aren’t any halo/gow/forza/dead rising etc. fans out there.

Yep there’s no doubt about it the X1 is as good as dead. /s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJZDfwjY-uc

 

[bobusboy]

"Nope, you're getting a Kinect whether you want it or not."

No I'm not. Either they will release a version with out it, or I'll wait for the cracker/hackers to find a way to alleviate us of Kinect.

 

[mman74]

It seems their company policy is now to tell you what you think you want, refuse all legitimate requests otherwise, and only back down when it looks like their customers are going to desert them en masse. Example - see Xbox One DRM, Windows 8 start button. If you think the games you like to play don't require Kinect, if you think Kinect should be an add-on option rather than a must, then you should not buy Xbox One. Past history speaks for itself. Despite the tough talk, when enough people do what you do and vote with their feet, Microsoft always backs down in the end.

 

[alextheblue]

The Sony eye cost an extra 60USD?
Then, just don't buy it........It's not like most games use it anyways.....

That's exactly why every Xbox One should have a Kinect. Then developers know it's a guaranteed feature, and are going to use it. Even if they just use it to add optional/supplementary voice commands to an otherwise controller-centric game interface, that's fine by me. Being able to issue a command to friendly AI by voice, without having to pull up a menu, for example.

Plus if you really don't like it, you can disable it completely and only fire it up for games that rely on it. I don't know that I would myself, at least the voice part of it, since you could use it for TV/UI navigation too.

 

[virtualban]

@John Bauer

To answer your question about the negative votes:
Remember that article about Microsoft being caught with the hand in the cookie jar of paying for trolling comment sections and upvoting MS positive comments?

 

[Poul Wrist]

Selling it as part of the system allows developers to target development for it, specifically, instead of just having it as a maybe optional thing.

 

[back_by_demand]

Looks like the black arts are being deployed again, raise a rumour that they sell the Xbox without the Kinect (erroneously) wait for MS to deny it, then wait for rabid fanbois to bash them all over the forums.

 

[back_by_demand]

Looks like the black arts are being deployed again, raise a rumour that they sell the Xbox without the Kinect (erroneously) wait for MS to deny it, then wait for rabid fanbois to bash them all over the forums.

 

[HyperionLight]

higher price, slower CPU, GPU, memory and made by Microsoft... whats there to hate?

Higher price for a product that gives you more than the competition (As in not just games. And the kinect is absolutely worth the additional $100, imho. Btw the price point down here in Australia is $50 and the ps eye costs another $100…talk about a higher price.)

The CPU/GPU in both consoles run at the same clock frequency (although rumor says that the x1 has a custom Bonaire GPU and the PS4 has a custom Pitcairn) and the ram is obviously faster as it is gddr5 vs ddr3.

But if we want to listen to rumors than

http://www.geek.com/games/xbox-one-gpu-clock-speed-increased-ram-upgraded-to-12gb-1561634/

And before you go Sony can do it to…they could, but seeing as the ps4 has already passed the FCC it would mean considerable delays. And Sony is knee deep in financial problems

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/11/business/global/sony-revises-expected-loss-to-6-4-billion.html?_r=1&

But Microsoft already did something similar with the 360 when they upped the ram from 256MB to 512MB… and you can be sure that they haven’t got money issues

http://www.engadget.com/2012/07/19/microsoft-announces-record-q4-18-06-billion-in-revenue/

And it looks like the ps4 will not use 7 gigs for games but “only” 5 and the os will have 2 cores dedicated to it.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-ps3-system-software-memory

So yeah talk about misleading the public and the ps4 being SO much better than the x1, lol.
And hating the x1 because it was made by Microsoft? So do you hate the ps4, because it was made by those jokers/pricks at Sony?

Remember how Sony was “no we never thought about DRM when designing the ps4”, but a week after e3 ended news broke out about their new 4k players and the DRM those players were packing!?

http://www.digital-digest.com/news-63699-Sonys-4K-DRM-Plans-Online-Authentication-Digital-Watermarks-And-More.html

Here have a quote to make it more vivid

“Stephens presented a multi-layered approach to 4K content protection that will make the DRM on Blu-rays and video games seem decidedly outdated, and benign.”

Or how about the funny little video Sony made to mock Microsoft about used games?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q7HrOdkFbos

Well what would you know, Sony has a patent that blocks used games? Impossible!!!

http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/01/03/report-new-sony-patent-blocks-second-hand-games

Yep they aren’t a bunch of lying pricks, but the good guys. /s

 

[SilverWolf9000]

What is the point of bundling a worthless accessory with a decent console? That is why the XBOne costs so freaking much! If they made it an accessory that you can buy on the side, I am sure $100 or so would be knocked off the price tag and create better competition between Sony and Microsoft. Honestly, I play PC above all but I might get this and a PS4 just for some exclusives...

 

[stevejnb]

Honestly, this is a "if you don't like it, don't buy it" type situation. I've seen so many good peripheral ideas come and go because they were just that - optional peripheral. When software makers were planning on making a game, they were likely to at most pay lip service to pieces of hardware that could have seriously enhanced the games because, if the game required something that only 10% of the user base owned, no-one was going to use that item seriously.

The first XBOX was a good example of this with the built in hard drive. Great idea and one which everyone emulated and led to console OS advancement like there had never been before because it was worth it - every console could benefit, not just he few who adopted an extra peripheral.

Like it or not, voice and gesture control in games and, probably even moreso, in the way we interact with devices is going to be a good thing in the future. Taking the "buy it if you want it" approach will hamstring the advancement of voice and gesture controls in games and general console interaction because... Well, why invest in fully using a technology which only some users of the device will have?

Last gen Sony forced Blu-ray onto everyone with their console and it hugely sped up the adoption of Blu-ray as a standard as a result - and I *constantly* see Blu-ray applauded here at Tom's, among other tech sites I visit. Thing is, it cost Sony the bank as people whined and complained last gen that "Oh, we don't need Blu-ray, we don't want it - why should we pay for it?" Who knows - ten years from now, if voice and gesture controls become more common and actually pretty good, we may well have MS's move here to thank for it, at least in part. And even with that being a possibility, they are probably going to hurt their sales a fair bit for that extra $100 in the price.

 

[SilverWolf9000]

Honestly, this is a "if you don't like it, don't buy it" type situation. I've seen so many good peripheral ideas come and go because they were just that - optional peripheral. When software makers were planning on making a game, they were likely to at most pay lip service to pieces of hardware that could have seriously enhanced the games because, if the game required something that only 10% of the user base owned, no-one was going to use that item seriously.

The first XBOX was a good example of this with the built in hard drive. Great idea and one which everyone emulated and led to console OS advancement like there had never been before because it was worth it - every console could benefit, not just he few who adopted an extra peripheral.

Like it or not, voice and gesture control in games and, probably even moreso, in the way we interact with devices is going to be a good thing in the future. Taking the "buy it if you want it" approach will hamstring the advancement of voice and gesture controls in games and general console interaction because... Well, why invest in fully using a technology which only some users of the device will have?

Last gen Sony forced Blu-ray onto everyone with their console and it hugely sped up the adoption of Blu-ray as a standard as a result - and I *constantly* see Blu-ray applauded here at Tom's, among other tech sites I visit. Thing is, it cost Sony the bank as people whined and complained last gen that "Oh, we don't need Blu-ray, we don't want it - why should we pay for it?" Who knows - ten years from now, if voice and gesture controls become more common and actually pretty good, we may well have MS's move here to thank for it, at least in part. And even with that being a possibility, they are probably going to hurt their sales a fair bit for that extra $100 in the price.

Blu-Ray is absolutely amazing~!

But still, most serious gamers want to relax on the recliner or couch and have a wireless controller in hand, not wave your hand around and scream at a microphone xD. Or is that just me....?