racketboy.com

I completely agree with dsheinem, if not partially because my own motives are similar. It looks incredibly disappointing. As a fan of novelty controls, I had higher than average hopes for the product, and this is disappointing in almost every capacity. "Almost" because I have young children who enjoy running and jumping around, and also happen to enjoy video games. I have all three of the modern era consoles, so if Kinect is priced right and has some enjoyable games, casual or not, it's reasonably aimed at people just like me.

I will be surpised if these motion controllers do well. If they are trying to get the "casual" audience they already have a wii! What do you think the casual audience will need 2 systems? Casual audiences probably buy 1 to 3 titles a year. I could be wrong, but i dont predict they will do as well as MS/Sony is hoping.

My money is that when NATAL is released it'll be bundled with the 360 to try get the most products out as soon possible.Plus tons of early adopters.

Pulsar_t wrote:*gif*

Awesome haha.

Anyway, I actually get the feeling that this will have a higher chance of failing than the PS3's motion controller addon.

I remember reading (or hearing on a podcast) that the way the Wii motion controls started was as an add on for the Gamecube.

Nintendo realized the tech was good, but few developers would use it since it would have to be sold as an add-on. The idea was: say 20 out of 100 GC owners would actually buy the hardware best case scenario. What developer would want to develop games that 20% of the GC market could play. Even 50% isn't good.

This is what prompted the creation of the Wii, pretty much a supped up GC with motion control technology.

Now, I can't confirm the info above, so it may be BS, but it makes sense to me so I thought I'd share.

In short, this is a bad move for Sony and MS since the install base will always be small comparatively and therefore, 3rd party devs (which are more important on these consoles ironically) will not be inclined to create games for it.

That second video is a PSA for seatbelt use that is several months old, not a Natal/kinect/whatever video. It is an awesome PSA though. That 'dance' game looked a lot like that one arcade game that had you waving your arms instead of moving around on a mat like DDR. None of this excites me in the least though.

I know this sounds bitter, but I hope this and Sony's control end up going the way of the 32x or Virtual Boy.

PhilExile wrote:I remember reading (or hearing on a podcast) that the way the Wii motion controls started was as an add on for the Gamecube.

Nintendo realized the tech was good, but few developers would use it since it would have to be sold as an add-on. The idea was: say 20 out of 100 GC owners would actually buy the hardware best case scenario. What developer would want to develop games that 20% of the GC market could play. Even 50% isn't good.

This is what prompted the creation of the Wii, pretty much a supped up GC with motion control technology.

Now, I can't confirm the info above, so it may be BS, but it makes sense to me so I thought I'd share.

In short, this is a bad move for Sony and MS since the install base will always be small comparatively and therefore, 3rd party devs (which are more important on these consoles ironically) will not be inclined to create games for it.

I've always thought this was the case. Like, nintendo was tired of stupid little addons never selling so they build an entire console around one to force it to sell.

I know this sounds bitter, but I hope this and Sony's control end up going the way of the 32x or Virtual Boy.

I think it likely will ultimately. I'm a bit more optimistic (I'm hoping we'll see at least a couple of really good ideas come out of these) but otherwise I share the same sentiment.

PhilExile wrote:I remember reading (or hearing on a podcast) that the way the Wii motion controls started was as an add on for the Gamecube.

Nintendo realized the tech was good, but few developers would use it since it would have to be sold as an add-on. The idea was: say 20 out of 100 GC owners would actually buy the hardware best case scenario. What developer would want to develop games that 20% of the GC market could play. Even 50% isn't good.

This is what prompted the creation of the Wii, pretty much a supped up GC with motion control technology.

Now, I can't confirm the info above, so it may be BS, but it makes sense to me so I thought I'd share.

In short, this is a bad move for Sony and MS since the install base will always be small comparatively and therefore, 3rd party devs (which are more important on these consoles ironically) will not be inclined to create games for it.

Makes perfect sense! Good post!