Kinect is killing the Xbox One.

[quote user="x0x CAMARO x0x"]

You all are pathetic. Everyone agreeing with the OP in this thread is
simply afraid of change. You are too afraid to do something differently than you already know and don't want to give a new piece of tech a try. Many who have hated it, finally tried it and love it. I bet over half the people in this thread bashing
it have never actually used it either. So sick of you guys being negative towards this console.

[/quote] When something is good it clicks. The Kinect has been around for a while and it hasn't clicked with gamers. It's not the future no matter how much they improve it, because it has too many limitations and too many errors occur while using it.

 

[quote user="USMC BEEF PATTY"]

Yes, it does. Who wants to play videogames and move at the same time? Tell me that you think this is the future of gaming; it's not. It's a cool accessory and nothing else.

[/quote]I hardly ever use my kinect. It doesn't appeal to me. But what I think doesn't matter. Money talks. And Xbox One with kinect is raking it in right now. So until that fact changes, the kinect isn't going anywhere. Plain and simple.

 

[quote user="Taka x Illusion"]

[quote user=""]

you're no more forced into having a Kinect, than i was forced into having a headset and a sticker, it comes in the box, if you don't like it then sell it.

---

this is also the beauty competition, you have a choice. and as stated, games will sell a console.

[/quote]I don't know where you got the impression that I dislike the Kinect. But technically you are forced into having the Kinect. There's some people who are paying an extra $100 for something they don't want. The point I was trying to make in this thread
was the X1 would sell better if it didn't come with the Kinect.

[/quote]

my bad, bit of an oversight singling you out. i do see your point and agree that the X1 would sell more units if there was a Kinect-less SKU, but when it comes down to the brass tax, the X1 is selling really well, and removing the Kinect would only remove the
main feature that makes the X1 stand out, and if you are to believe it what has been said so many times, knowing that everyone has one gives the developers the chance to innovate.

 

[quote user="Taka x Illusion"]

[quote user="Sword StyIe"]

PS4 released in more countries than the X1 did. Of course it has more sales. But the fact that there is not much of a gap means the X1 is doing pretty damn well.

[/quote]I agree. Like I said in the OP the X1 is selling well for a $500 console. But the point I was trying to make in this thread was the X1 would sell
better if it didn't come with Kinect.

[/quote]

So let me get this straight.... remove the Kinect from the XB1 and have it a controller ~ console only like the PS4... then lower it down to the same price as the PS4? what would be the incentive to purchase an XB1 then?? It is 50% slower (according to
everyone) has the worst graphics of the 2 (Again, according to everyone) and can barely reach 1080P @ 60FPS..so marking it down and removing the kinect will increase sales???

So please ohhh great one.. tell us again how the XB1 will sell better like this?

 

[quote user="tohellnbak"]

So let me get this straight.... remove the Kinect from the XB1 and have it a controller ~ console only like the PS4... then lower it down to the same price as the PS4? what would be the incentive to purchase an XB1 then?? It is 50% slower (according to
everyone) has the worst graphics of the 2 (Again, according to everyone) and can barely reach 1080P @ 60FPS..so marking it down and removing the kinect will increase sales???

So please ohhh great one.. tell us again how the XB1 will sell better like this?

[/quote]

Simple. People wouldn't be forced into paying an extra $100. It becomes more affordable for the consumer. And remember. No Kinect = more GPU power for games.

 

So has everyone bought the XBOne for Kinect ? is this the i luv my Kinect club ?

 

[quote user="IceStorm III"]

[quote user="Taka x Illusion"]I said it would sell more if it didn't come with the Kinect.[/quote]It would be "just another console" without Kinect.

I doubt MS decided to build a console that will remain higher priced than its competition for the lifespan of the console. The price point will come down as both the main console body and Kinect components are reduced in quantity and size.

[/quote]

Units sold between the two consoles would suggest that's all people want.

 

[quote user="Taka x Illusion"]Me saying the Kinect is $100 isn't an assumption. It's fact.[/quote]No, it's not. You have no statement from MS making that connection.

Really? When I read
VentureBeat's article, I didn't think that at all.

It's not underpowered.

That's pretty twisted
logic.

Assuming the competition lasts that long. Sony has had five straight years of losses.

No you cannot.

This is not just about # of consoles sold (hardware makes very little money), it's about profitability of the ecosystem.

 

@WildChameleon Lol if there's actually people who bought the Xbox One solely for Kinect. Then something isn't right here.

 

So gamers are now in love with gadget gaming ? or gadget tech has infiltrated the X Box brand ?

 

@IceStrom III

So tell me then. If the X1 isn't $500 because of the Kinect please tell me what is. Skype? Youtube? Snap? I would really like to know. Yes, the X1 is underpowered compared to it's competition. You would have to be delusional to think otherwise.

Since you didn't read the OP it's obvious you don't get the point I was trying to make in the OP. I'm not talking about how much profit Microsoft makes from the X1. I'm talking about sales in general.

I've seen a lot of people say they aren't going to buy the X1 because they're going to be paying for something they don't want(Kinect). In the OP I gave clear reasons as to why the X1 would be better if Kinect wasn't forced down people's throats.

 

The X1 reserves around 10% of the GPU for Kinect. With the new updates coming out in the near future that number will drop to around 2%(Devs can use what they want). It's really not a big deal, even with the Kinect gone it still doesn't compare to the
power of the PS4. The 100 bucks wasn't a big deal for me... it's worth it for all the laughs and good times that it brings with games like fruit ninja and Kinect sports (xbox360).

 

[quote user="Taka x Illusion"]So tell me then.[/quote]No. I am not going to guess and then try to pass it off as fact.

I read the OP.

The goal of a console made by a for-profit company is to drive sales of games, applications, and services. Consoles, in and of themselves, make little profit. While you may be banging the drum of higher Xbox One sales, you're
missing the point of the console's existence in the first place.

No anecdotes.

And I've said
why making an accessory optional does not work if a company's goal is to drive development for that accessory. Microsoft is going down that path. They apparently feel it's a better way to make the division more money over the long haul.

Tilting at windmills in a discussion forum won't change anything. If you want to leave MS feedback, there's a whole suite of

Feedback Forums for you to do so.

 

I do love how those of us who actually understand why Microsoft included the Kinect 2 with every Xbox One are called fanboys or part of some '"I love my Kinect" club'.

.

Taka, there are been dozens of these threads in the last few weeks alone. All of them the same, upset people who don't understand marketing or the entire purpose of a business, complaining about being forced fed the Kinect 2. Frankly, I'm getting tired of
people trying to turn my Kinect into nothing but a paper weight, down my throat. I invested $500 for the future of gaming on the Xbox One WITH the Kinect 2.

.

IF you don't want to use the Kinect, that is fine. Don't plug it in but if you want to buy a console without a camera, please go to the competition because it's obvious you don't actually care about the Xbox brand!!!

 

[quote user="IceStorm III"]

[quote user="Taka x Illusion"]Until you can give me a valid argument as to why forcing the Kinect down people's throats is better than giving them an option whether they would like to buy it or not.[/quote]Optional accessories do not gain enough market share
to make development for those accessories a rule, not an exception.

It is a chicken and egg problem. MS has decided to ensure everyone has a Kinect so that no dev can say, "but we didn't want to waste time adding support for something only a few people have."

If the Xbox One was $500 and didn't come with Kinect you think it would sell more units?

Your supposition is tied directly to an assumption that Kinect raised the price of the console kit by $100. Maybe it did, maybe it didn't, maybe MS didn't want to take a loss on the hardware this time around. The fact is you don't know so stop assuming.

Your assertion is also short sighted. Component prices and sizes come down over time. Eventually, a Kinect-enabled console will cost the same as the competition. At that point having Kinect will be a definite advantage, as will having a developer base that
has had time to work with the sensor.

[/quote]So, basically MS decided to cater to devs rather than their consumer?

The competition won't ever lower prices...huh??? I've actually read that the components in the competition's product are more likely to decrease in price.