Project Natal = Kinect (Xbox 360)

[The Simpleton 2]

Project Natal, which was widely talked about when it announced, now has a name - Kinect. It was unveiled at E3 recently, and what was evident from the presentation was that Kinect can only be enjoyed in casual games or "family" type games. That means hardcore gamers will have to wait for a while before they can dream of playing their fav genre games. All we have for now are games like Tennis, Dance Master, Dance Central, etc. (List of Games using Kinect)So while it may seem exciting to play a game without actually touching any controller, we have to wait before we get any "real" games using this technology. There is also the Playstation Move to look forward to, but it looks like as for now, nothing can beat the Wii when it comes to breaking the rules of traditional console gaming.

[rvalkass 5]

I know everyone said the same thing when the Wii was announced, and that turned out fine, but this seems like a step beyond our capabilities with today's technology. They're trying to combine too much at too high a level. Something tells me that this really won't work that well at all For example, voice recognition is generally worse than useless. Considering the wide array of accents just in the UK, let alone in the world as a whole, this is hardly surprising. I find it hard to believe that Microsoft will have managed to overcome this hurdle so easily and so cheaply. The reason the Wii works so well is because it is an incredibly simple setup. Kinect is far more complex, and that just leaves more space for things to go wrong.

 

Also, there could be a practical problem with detecting up to 6 people, as Microsoft claims. To fit 6 people in the shot of the camera would require you to be quite a distance from the TV, allowing for space between people for you to move, too. There's also the problem of fitting people in vertically; most people have their TV fairly low to the ground, and the camera is fitted below the TV, meaning it should get lovely shots of your knees, but little else. According to the data, the camera can only sense you at distances of 4-11 feet, and it has an angular field of view of 43 degrees vertically. This is just enough to fit a 6 foot tall person in view if they stand at the furthest reaches the camera can detect.

 

The list of games does look rather limited and "family-friendly" at the moment. That's fine, considering Microsoft's claims that Kinect is meant to attract different players to the Xbox, rather than placate existing players. Titles such as "Forza with Kinect" also worry me slightly - a racing game controlled by a motion detecting camera just seems odd...

[rpgsearcherz 5]

I've already preordered my Kinect but I'm not sure if I'm going to end up canceling it yet.I've read many reports about the pre-E3 videos (the ones with Milo and stuff) and how it took multiple shoots to get the system to work correctly. They also said Milo, for example, was a pre-made game and wasn't really reacting to the girl -- it was all scripted.I just find it hard to believe the system can do all the detections they claim it can. Even more unbelievable is the $149.99 price tag on something like that. I just don't see how it is possible.

[rvalkass 5]

I just find it hard to believe the system can do all the detections they claim it can.

Exactly. I actually tried out a system at an exhibition in London a few years ago that claimed to do 3D tracking of players. The game was incredibly basic - throwing a ball between up to four people. It was so incredibly frustrating to get it to work, and the depth perception of the device was very limited and generally got it completely wrong. It was fun as a gimmick, but just wasn't reliable enough for use in games. Getting it to work in that situation was frustrating enough - can you imagine coming up to the last corner in a racing game, only for it to go haywire and interpret your motions as wanting to suddenly do a pirouette? The reason the Wii can get away with it is that it is reliable and accurate. Kinect just doesn't look like it will be.

Even more unbelievable is the $149.99 price tag on something like that. I just don't see how it is possible.

They could be trying another risky make-a-huge-loss-on-the-hardware-and-hope-software-sales-make-up-for-it tactic, like they did with the consoles (which have only just started to be sold at a profit). I just don't think it will have the same effect for Kinect. Most 'gamers' are happy with a controller, and would prefer it over the Kinect camera for most games.

[rpgsearcherz 5]

Exactly. I actually tried out a system at an exhibition in London a few years ago that claimed to do 3D tracking of players. The game was incredibly basic - throwing a ball between up to four people. It was so incredibly frustrating to get it to work, and the depth perception of the device was very limited and generally got it completely wrong. It was fun as a gimmick, but just wasn't reliable enough for use in games. Getting it to work in that situation was frustrating enough - can you imagine coming up to the last corner in a racing game, only for it to go haywire and interpret your motions as wanting to suddenly do a pirouette? The reason the Wii can get away with it is that it is reliable and accurate. Kinect just doesn't look like it will be.


They could be trying another risky make-a-huge-loss-on-the-hardware-and-hope-software-sales-make-up-for-it tactic, like they did with the consoles (which have only just started to be sold at a profit). I just don't think it will have the same effect for Kinect. Most 'gamers' are happy with a controller, and would prefer it over the Kinect camera for most games.

With the Kinect they had issues with understanding certain colors too. There was a demonstration on stage where they allowed a member of the audience to test out the machine. He was wearing a black shirt and the system didn't recognize it so they had to send him back to his seat and they allowed one of their own employees to play it for the people. Their claim at that point was that it was "resolved" but not with the system they were demonstrating (I find it beyond ridiculous to take a broken system to show off to potential investors/media, so I highly doubt that was the truth).

Even the Wii isn't perfectly accurate (the Motion Plus often gets out of sync) but at least with that you're messing with something you can hold. Just standing in front of a camera I doubt there's any way to fix potential problems with syncing or whatever.

Based on my reading online and speaking to people, I do not think the Kinect is going to be too popular. Too many people are doubting its capabilities and/or the games it'll come with. But of course only time will tell.

[rvalkass 5]

With the Kinect they had issues with understanding certain colors too. There was a demonstration on stage where they allowed a member of the audience to test out the machine. He was wearing a black shirt and the system didn't recognize it so they had to send him back to his seat and they allowed one of their own employees to play it for the people. Their claim at that point was that it was "resolved" but not with the system they were demonstrating (I find it beyond ridiculous to take a broken system to show off to potential investors/media, so I highly doubt that was the truth).

If they knew of the issue, they wouldn't have picked that guy from the audience This is where the Wii and the Move have an advantage. Nintendo's use of infra-red means that not much can interfere with the motion detection, and Sony have a similar system with the Move, except the colour of the light changes to ensure it can't possibly clash with anything. The Kinect seems to rely on you not owning furniture or wallpaper that's the same colour as your trousers.

[rpgsearcherz 5]

If they knew of the issue, they wouldn't have picked that guy from the audience

If they didn't know about the issue, it means they clearly didn't test their stuff before flaunting it around. You never, ever, take something out to brag to others unless you know what you're doing.

It's like bragging about having the fastest car around and showing it to potential investors/media and then finding out it can only withstand a high speed for 3 seconds before it breaks down due to parts wearing out too fast -- you just don't do it.

I'm reminded of Microsoft's mistake when the 360 was launched. They claimed it was "unhackable" and would never be circumvented due to the thousands of hours they spent fully testing every possible angle on the system. It ended up being hacked before it was even officially released (someone from "the scene" got a hold of a system early due to having a friend who worked at a retailer, and hacked it within hours).

Microsoft is the only company I can think of that has these problems -- I've yet to hear horror stories (or see them) about other companies who bring their flawed hardware/software to show off to the world.

[rvalkass 5]

I'm reminded of Microsoft's mistake when the 360 was launched.

Or when Windows 98 was launched...

http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/

Microsoft is the only company I can think of that has these problems -- I've yet to hear horror stories (or see them) about other companies who bring their flawed hardware/software to show off to the world.

Not really a technology example, but it does happen in other markets, with devastating consequences: http://www.autoblog.com/2007/10/09/jason-plato-injured-when-caparo-t1-bursts-into-flames-at-150-mph/
There was also the example of "racist" digital camera face detection software, that couldn't detect black faces against dark backgrounds or in low light. An embarrassing PR gaffe that could have been avoided with a little more testing.
Either companies rush into things and cut corners just so they can be first to get a press release out or something happens that they simply couldn't test for. It's impossible to test every eventuality, but you would have thought most of the bases would be covered.

[rpgsearcherz 5]

Or when Windows 98 was launched...

 

http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/

 

 

 

Not really a technology example, but it does happen in other markets, with devastating consequences: http://www.autoblog.com/2007/10/09/jason-plato-injured-when-caparo-t1-bursts-into-flames-at-150-mph/

There was also the example of "racist" digital camera face detection software, that couldn't detect black faces against dark backgrounds or in low light. An embarrassing PR gaffe that could have been avoided with a little more testing.

Either companies rush into things and cut corners just so they can be first to get a press release out or something happens that they simply couldn't test for. It's impossible to test every eventuality, but you would have thought most of the bases would be covered.

 

 

The Windows 98 one is funny because they said the BSOD was obliterated in Windows Vista. I've had it *many* times on both Vista *and* 7. So it's still not gone.

 

Then they claimed with the 360 that the infamous RROD was gone (red ring of death) on the new system (Xbox slim) and people were getting them on launch day already.

 

About the racist camera, that's kind of how the Kinect was (although it was the "Project Natal" at the time).

 

 

My issue isn't that things happen as freak accidents, it's that soo many things happen that are so basic and so common that there's no possible way they could have even *tried* to really test the things. For example, the cameras. Had anyone tested with a few colors it would have been an instant notice -- it shows they didn't really think it through or anything.

[The Simpleton 2]

Wow I had no idea that the opinion about Natal was so negative! Now that I think of it, all these arguments seem true - it's very likely that Kinect will get a shaky start and MS will hurriedly make some changes to it before it becomes stable and works perfectly. Also, it might get tiring and boring after a while to play without a controller. So all we have to do is wait and see what a spectacular success/failure this turns out to be! Will be waiting for a review from those who've pre-ordered it

[ProGamer2010 0]

It seems everybody just want to jump in nintendos success

[rvalkass 5]

Wow I had no idea that the opinion about Natal was so negative!

Not necessarily negative, just sceptical. Remember that most people were making similar comments before the Wii was reviewed and released, and that turned out to work just fine and dispelled many of the fears people had over these motion tracking controllers. However, the Kinect just seems to go that little bit too far with today's technology, so it doesn't seem like it will work that well. Giving people that impression from the off, before they've even tried your product, is bad. At least with the Wii the technology already existed fairly cheaply, and just needed refining to make it work.

Now that I think of it, all these arguments seem true - it's very likely that Kinect will get a shaky start and MS will hurriedly make some changes to it before it becomes stable and works perfectly. Also, it might get tiring and boring after a while to play without a controller. So all we have to do is wait and see what a spectacular success/failure this turns out to be! Will be waiting for a review from those who've pre-ordered it

Something like this shouldn't have a shaky start. As an idea, it is a big leap forwards. What matters is that it works in practise. Nintendo clearly put a lot of effort into testing the Wii and the games to make sure the technology worked in as many possible settings as it possibly could. Microsoft don't have that track record of testing things well (look at the overheating problems with original 360s for example) which makes problems with Kinect much more likely. A few bad reviews and it will never pick up steam, meaning games won't be developed for it and the price will remain high. Microsoft will need to make absolutely sure that the models they send out to reviewers are retail versions that will be in the shops and that they work flawlessly in every way. I just don't see Microsoft achieving that.

[rpgsearcherz 5]

Not necessarily negative, just sceptical. Remember that most people were making similar comments before the Wii was reviewed and released, and that turned out to work just fine and dispelled many of the fears people had over these motion tracking controllers. However, the Kinect just seems to go that little bit too far with today's technology, so it doesn't seem like it will work that well. Giving people that impression from the off, before they've even tried your product, is bad. At least with the Wii the technology already existed fairly cheaply, and just needed refining to make it work.


Something like this shouldn't have a shaky start. As an idea, it is a big leap forwards. What matters is that it works in practise. Nintendo clearly put a lot of effort into testing the Wii and the games to make sure the technology worked in as many possible settings as it possibly could. Microsoft don't have that track record of testing things well (look at the overheating problems with original 360s for example) which makes problems with Kinect much more likely. A few bad reviews and it will never pick up steam, meaning games won't be developed for it and the price will remain high. Microsoft will need to make absolutely sure that the models they send out to reviewers are retail versions that will be in the shops and that they work flawlessly in every way. I just don't see Microsoft achieving that.

Yep, I agree with most of what you said.

To add on to your last point, there are a lot of people like me who feel that even if the system *is* good, Microsoft's past of screwing people over time and time again may still cause the system to fail. To elaborate a little with a scenario:

Microsoft creates 1 million systems
They sell 300k
Even with reviews and whatnot people are still skeptical
Due to this only 50k more are sold
When it comes to games, an average of 100-150k of each are sold

Now, from a start like this, it doesn't even matter whether or not the system sells more copies in the future (and more systems) because it's already flopped and has doomed itself to failure. This can be seen with systems from the past like the VirtuaBoy, which was a 3d game long before our modern ones. Due to people's fear that the system would go nowhere (and the limited launch games) it failed as a project before even getting anywhere.

So how "good" it is isn't really relevant -- it has to do with how confident the buyers are in spending their money on it.



Edit : The DreamCast went through the same scenario as well. Also, SegaCD.
Edited July 12, 2010 by rpgsearcherz (see edit history)

[The Simpleton 2]

Not necessarily negative, just sceptical. Remember that most people were making similar comments before the Wii was reviewed and released, and that turned out to work just fine and dispelled many of the fears people had over these motion tracking controllers. However, the Kinect just seems to go that little bit too far with today's technology, so it doesn't seem like it will work that well. Giving people that impression from the off, before they've even tried your product, is bad. At least with the Wii the technology already existed fairly cheaply, and just needed refining to make it work.


Something like this shouldn't have a shaky start. As an idea, it is a big leap forwards. What matters is that it works in practise. Nintendo clearly put a lot of effort into testing the Wii and the games to make sure the technology worked in as many possible settings as it possibly could. Microsoft don't have that track record of testing things well (look at the overheating problems with original 360s for example) which makes problems with Kinect much more likely. A few bad reviews and it will never pick up steam, meaning games won't be developed for it and the price will remain high. Microsoft will need to make absolutely sure that the models they send out to reviewers are retail versions that will be in the shops and that they work flawlessly in every way. I just don't see Microsoft achieving that.

Microsoft has a good track record of being overconfident and it has shown this through its products throughout its existence. They have come up with some good products but not all of them turn out to be good, and looks like Kinect will be one of them. I'd love to see the response of the international market - if they reject Kinect, MS will learn a valuable lesson and will probably do more research and testing before coming out with something so early. That said, since the competition is heating up, MS has tried to introduce something more unique and the only problem is that it has turned out to be something which is too hot to handle.

[rvalkass 5]

Edit : The DreamCast went through the same scenario as well. Also, SegaCD.

The Dreamcast is an excellent example, actually. It was a real pioneer of online gaming, way ahead of other consoles at the time. However, at the time of its release only 42% of the country had any access to the Internet. 96% of those people were using dial-up. 99% of people only had one PC, so had no use for any kind of network. The market they were aiming at was therefore slightly limited But the technology was good, it was just released ahead of its time and before the required technology was advanced enough. Kinect looks like it could suffer from the same problem - the idea could be good, but the technology doesn't look like it has advanced enough to be a success.