If this is what future gaming is then I say NO THANKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Demon · 20 Jun 2010 at 10:15

Joebob said:
WTF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Is that supposed to be fun? Gaming is my private time to relax and unwind - the last thing I want to do is move all the furniture out of my lounge and be jumping around with the family like a bunch of morons...!!!

Yeah, apparantly all the Kinect games force you to spaz out continually, it's built into the software, if you don't you don't score any points,

it videos the whole event and auto uploads to Youtube in HD, and puts links up on facebook to all your friends..

starfighter · 20 Jun 2010 at 19:15

While some kind of VR would be cool, this is just poor, it is more imaginative than the Wii and Sony Move but I don't think it is mature enough, Shame it's gonna delay the next consoles. :mad:

Insanties_birth · 20 Jun 2010 at 19:36

wannabedamned said:
Why do people use a point of reference for interaction with motion sensors and video?? Because its accurate.

Natal use skeletal tracking. Which is in-accurate, and add to that the lag that's been shown. We have inaccurate skeletal tracking with lag.

With move, We have a point of focus, Something to track, something which allows the sensor to be accurate. Whether its like wii or not. The point stands. This is all going to be down to Accuracy+lag vs inaccuracy+lag

Honestly, Im not interested in either product. But you add all the good points and bad points of each. And the truth shows through, keepin in mind price is subjective, where as accuracy really is not

Did you not see the tiger woods golf game on Move? It had lag too so while I respect the argument thant Kinect has lag I just don't see it as a big factor when Move does too and that attempts to integrate it with more hardcore games too. Maybe Kinect does have more lag and I hope they fix it but I too am inyerested in neither at the moment because they both cost over £100 in the end and have no good exclusives for the moment.
If by truth you mean that Sony move is better then I won't agree, they're only as good as the games that come to them and that will take time to judge ofcourse.

wannabedamned · 20 Jun 2010 at 20:17

I said both have lag. Which leaves accurate vs inaccurate methods of motion tracking.

Agreed that games are going to be made that work best with what's available. I'd just prefer it if what was available was accurate. You've seen the game where you're pointing a gun with your finger? It look hideous

chris_uk333 · 20 Jun 2010 at 20:50

It isn't the future, it's just an alternative for casuals.

Demon · 20 Jun 2010 at 21:40

wannabedamned said:
I said both have lag. Which leaves accurate vs inaccurate methods of motion tracking.

Agreed that games are going to be made that work best with what's available. I'd just prefer it if what was available was accurate. You've seen the game where you're pointing a gun with your finger? It look hideous

The term accuracy is quite confined in your appraisal of the systems.

Skeletal tracking does indeed offer poor accuracy compared to something like move if 1:1 spacial 'single point' tracking is required, and if that's all you compare on (and to be honest, it's all most of us probably would), Kinetic doesn't stack up,

However, I am assuming Kinetic is about using your body as a controller, and in the 'limited' ways skeletal tracking can do this, nothing compares. Take 'dancing', where mimicking another human is required, Kinetic offers great accuracy for this. Silly adventure games using your body posture/articulation to control the raft, Kinetic (and the wii-fit board

) are much more accurate..

I'm not disagreeing that Kinetic is odd for gaming, I'm not sold on it either, but I can see how it is different, and with some good ideas could be very unique an desirable, just not at the moment..