Move seems to be Sony going "Eh, we'll try it and see what happens. Maybe we'll nab some Wii market" whereas Kinect seems tobe Microsoft going "WE MUST MAKE THIS SUCCESSFUL FOR THE FUTURE OF MANKIND!!!"
I would pretty much guarantee kinect won't be a failure. It may not be a big success when it launches but it's coming from a company that basically bought their way into the console market with a console that was a commercial failure for years; the xbox was a small black hole for money. They have the money to throw at a problem until it works out in their favour, and they will be willing to play the long game and keep backing it until it's profitable and accepted as a standard piece of gaming hardware.
This is a different situation, though.
A gaming console was a time-tested and instantly popular/recognizable idea, and their controller was about the same as the others. They were trying to get you to spend $300(?) same as the other guys. With this, they need to get people to buy the base console and then spend another wad on top of that, something the other guys are only lazily pursuing with stuff like Wii Fit.
The XBox 360 4GB Kinect bundle is $300. That's only $50 more expensive than what the Wii cost when it was released and the gap is even less when you take into account inflation.
Well that's good. Now all they have to do is convince people that they need a second Wii at an inflated price.
No, that's what Sony needs to do. All Microsoft needs to do is convince people that Kinect isn't a second Wii, but is in fact some cool new technology that has never been seen before.
I guess it takes $500 million to spin a convincing enough lie.
Ninja Snarl PMy helmet is my burden.Ninja Snarl: Gone, but not forgotten.Registered Userregular
edited October 2010
I'm not even particularly happy with the Wii and there's practically no way I would buy Kinect over an actual Wii. At least I know the Wii has a number of good games right now instead of a selection of tech demos.
As for Microsoft's attitude towards Kinect, they seem to be approaching it the same way as they did with the original Xbox: regardless of it being self-sustaining or not, they're going to dump a bunch of money into it in the hopes of getting their foot in the door for the next generation. The problem is that the Kinect is far, far more gimmick than substance, unlike the original Xbox which was actually a pretty good first attempt for a newcomer to the console market. It also would imply that Microsoft will make motion controls a priority for their next system and I would absolutely hate that.
Overall, Microsoft would've been better off just ignoring this whole motion control business and saving the money for developing their next system. Not only does Microsoft not have the right mindset to actually compete with the Wii, they're wasting resources by not simply focusing on the good things they can already do.
Move seems to be Sony going "Eh, we'll try it and see what happens. Maybe we'll nab some Wii market" whereas Kinect seems tobe Microsoft going "WE MUST MAKE THIS SUCCESSFUL FOR THE FUTURE OF MANKIND!!!"
Better passionate failure than apathetic success. Creatively speaking.
I'm not even particularly happy with the Wii and there's practically no way I would buy Kinect over an actual Wii. At least I know the Wii has a number of good games right now instead of a selection of tech demos.
A Kinect 360 bundle has a ton of great games already, just the vast majority of them have nothing to do with Kinect.
If you're buying Kinect w/a system, you're basically buying Kinect for $100 putting it squarely in Guitar Hero/Wii Fit board territory. People spent $100-$200 just to play stuff like Wii Fit & Rock Band and that's just one game. Surely, there will be at least one awesome game released on Kinect eventually that is worth the extra money? Right? Maybe?
Move seems to be Sony going "Eh, we'll try it and see what happens. Maybe we'll nab some Wii market" whereas Kinect seems tobe Microsoft going "WE MUST MAKE THIS SUCCESSFUL FOR THE FUTURE OF MANKIND!!!"
Better passionate failure than apathetic success. Creatively speaking.
i don't think great financial investment is the same thing as 'passion'. i see no passion in kinect, just desperate, uninspired thrusting for a lucrative market.
bsjezz on
0
Ninja Snarl PMy helmet is my burden.Ninja Snarl: Gone, but not forgotten.Registered Userregular
Move seems to be Sony going "Eh, we'll try it and see what happens. Maybe we'll nab some Wii market" whereas Kinect seems tobe Microsoft going "WE MUST MAKE THIS SUCCESSFUL FOR THE FUTURE OF MANKIND!!!"
Better passionate failure than apathetic success. Creatively speaking.
i don't think great financial investment is the same thing as 'passion'. i see no passion in kinect, just desperate, uninspired thrusting for a lucrative market.
That's all I'm seeing as well. I'd say the Wii has some passion involved in it, but definitely not the Kinect. If the Kinect was really a product of passionate design and effort, it wouldn't need a massive advertising budget behind it to convince people it isn't just some second-rate Wii attempt.
Move seems to be Sony going "Eh, we'll try it and see what happens. Maybe we'll nab some Wii market" whereas Kinect seems tobe Microsoft going "WE MUST MAKE THIS SUCCESSFUL FOR THE FUTURE OF MANKIND!!!"
Better passionate failure than apathetic success. Creatively speaking.
i don't think great financial investment is the same thing as 'passion'. i see no passion in kinect, just desperate, uninspired thrusting for a lucrative market.
I wonder if it's possible for criticism of Kinect to ever be more than 'Don't want to like it!'
That's all I'm seeing as well. I'd say the Wii has some passion involved in it, but definitely not the Kinect. If the Kinect was really a product of passionate design and effort, it wouldn't need a massive advertising budget behind it to convince people it isn't just some second-rate Wii attempt.
Move seems to be Sony going "Eh, we'll try it and see what happens. Maybe we'll nab some Wii market" whereas Kinect seems tobe Microsoft going "WE MUST MAKE THIS SUCCESSFUL FOR THE FUTURE OF MANKIND!!!"
Better passionate failure than apathetic success. Creatively speaking.
i don't think great financial investment is the same thing as 'passion'. i see no passion in kinect, just desperate, uninspired thrusting for a lucrative market.
That's all I'm seeing as well. I'd say the Wii has some passion involved in it, but definitely not the Kinect. If the Kinect was really a product of passionate design and effort, it wouldn't need a massive advertising budget behind it to convince people it isn't just some second-rate Wii attempt.
People like to think that the Wii succeeded purely by word of mouth, but the fact is that the Wii had an absolutely massive advertising budget behind it.
Move seems a product of passionate designers and engineers without the support from the rest of the company it needs.
You need a great product and great games, and the rest will fall into place. Neither Move nor Kinect has great games. Kinect would've done better to work on a couple "hardcore" titles with that $500 mil instead. Halo sold the XBox, it could've sold Kinect as well.
Move seems to be Sony going "Eh, we'll try it and see what happens. Maybe we'll nab some Wii market" whereas Kinect seems tobe Microsoft going "WE MUST MAKE THIS SUCCESSFUL FOR THE FUTURE OF MANKIND!!!"
Better passionate failure than apathetic success. Creatively speaking.
i don't think great financial investment is the same thing as 'passion'. i see no passion in kinect, just desperate, uninspired thrusting for a lucrative market.
That's all I'm seeing as well. I'd say the Wii has some passion involved in it, but definitely not the Kinect. If the Kinect was really a product of passionate design and effort, it wouldn't need a massive advertising budget behind it to convince people it isn't just some second-rate Wii attempt.
People like to think that the Wii succeeded purely by word of mouth, but the fact is that the Wii had an absolutely massive advertising budget behind it.
Move seems a product of passionate designers and engineers without the support from the rest of the company it needs.
You need a great product and great games, and the rest will fall into place. Neither Move nor Kinect has great games. Kinect would've done better to work on a couple "hardcore" titles with that $500 mil instead. Halo sold the XBox, it could've sold Kinect as well.
i disagree. i think sports champions is every bit as good as wii sports, a wonderful group of challenges which gets more rewarding with the player's technical skill
the fact that it was not part of the bundle in PAL LAND was a disastrous mistake, and considering eurozone has always been sony's launchpad in the past it's probably the one big thing that will stop it from ever taking off any more than the eyetoy did.
but no big deal, i've got one and it's already justified the expense so i'm not invested in some righteous victory for technology over showmanship
The Wii had a new control system that was potentially revolutionary but ended up having a number of problems (that could be overcome through clever programming or add-ons)
Kinect has a new control system that is potentially revolutionary, but will probably end up having a number of problems (that could be overcome through clever programming or add-ons).
The Wii had no great hardcore games at launch other than a few ports like Zelda & Trauma Center.
Kinect has no great hardcore games at launch, but it does have the huge backcatalog of regular 360 games.
The Wii had an insanely huge marketing budget of hundreds of millions of dollars.
Kinect has an even more insanely huge marketing budget of hundreds of millions of dollars.
Nintendo was not in the #1 slot for consoles when they launched the Wii.
Microsoft is not in the #1 slot for consoles when they are launching Kinect.
The Wii cost $250 for the system and a game in 2006.
The 360 + Kinect bundle costs $300 for the system and a game in 2010.
The parallels are definitely there. The big question is will lightning strike twice or was the Wii's massive success a one of deal that can't be replicated just yet?
The Wii had no great hardcore games at launch other than a few ports like Zelda & Trauma Center.
Kinect has no great hardcore games at launch, but it does have the huge backcatalog of regular 360 games.
This one doesn't count
that's like saying the Wii didn't have great hardcore games but you got the deep backcatalog of gamecube games to choose from
Say goodbye to Xbox Live "Silver," as Microsoft appears to be dropping the name of that tier of its Live service in favor of something less confusing. "Free" is the new "Silver."
It's little more than a name change for the free entry level version of the Xbox's online service, but the scrubbing of Silver from the all-new Xbox.com appears to be rather thorough. Xbox Live Gold still (obviously) exists as the premiere paid-for version of the account program, but Silver appears to have fallen out of favor.
Graeme "AceyBongos" Boyd, Xbox Community Manager for Europe, implies the change is official and clearly intentional on his Twitter feed.
The new Xbox.com now breaks down Xbox Live memberships into three columns, Free, Gold and the still forthcoming Gold Family.
Finally, a pointless change that makes no difference.
Couscous on
0
Ninja Snarl PMy helmet is my burden.Ninja Snarl: Gone, but not forgotten.Registered Userregular
edited October 2010
The Wii is also a standalone system, unlike the Kinect which is a 100% unnecessary peripheral to an actual system. When the Wii came out there was nothing like the Wii out there, unlike the Kinect which now has to compete with the highly successful Wii and the competing Move. And the supposed catalog to go with the Kinect is for the 360, not the Kinect; in other words, that back catalog provides absolutely no incentive to get the Kinect over a cheaper, better 360-only bundle.
Frankly, I think the Kinect is much more likely to parallel the Sega 32X than anything even remotely resembling the success of the Wii. The incentive for 360 owners to get a Kinect is almost non-existent and Kinect bundles are going to have to compete with other 360 bundles for new buyers.
The Wii had a new control system that was potentially revolutionary but ended up having a number of problems (that could be overcome through clever programming or add-ons)
Kinect has a new control system that is potentially revolutionary, but will probably end up having a number of problems (that could be overcome through clever programming or add-ons).
The Wii had no great hardcore games at launch other than a few ports like Zelda & Trauma Center.
Kinect has no great hardcore games at launch, but it does have the huge backcatalog of regular 360 games.
The Wii had an insanely huge marketing budget of hundreds of millions of dollars.
Kinect has an even more insanely huge marketing budget of hundreds of millions of dollars.
Nintendo was not in the #1 slot for consoles when they launched the Wii.
Microsoft is not in the #1 slot for consoles when they are launching Kinect.
The Wii cost $250 for the system and a game in 2006.
The 360 + Kinect bundle costs $300 for the system and a game in 2010.
The parallels are definitely there. The big question is will lightning strike twice or was the Wii's massive success a one of deal that can't be replicated just yet?
Nintendo has 8 letters in its name.
Microsoft has 9 letters in its name, which is pretty close to 8!
You honestly think they're in that similar of a position? How about this instead:
The Wii had no great hardcore games at launch, other than Zelda & Trauma Center and a number of promising titles on the horizon. (Obviously the Cube's excellent back category was available.)
Kinect has no great hardcore games at launch. (Obviously the 360's excellent back category is available.)
The Wii had Wii Sports which was a well designed and unique proof-of-concept.
Kinect has Kinect Adventures which is a bland and derivative proof-of-concept.
The Wii previewed extremely well, with everyone wanting to try it out to see how awesome it was.
Kinect is previewing extremely poorly, with everyone wanting to try it out to see how terrible it is.
The Wii had an appropriately large marketing budget for a new console release.
Kinect has a disproportionately large marketing budget for an addon.
The Wii priced itself far lower than all its competitors.
The Kinect + 360 bundle is still more expensive than most of its competitors.
The Wii had no great hardcore games at launch other than a few ports like Zelda & Trauma Center.
Kinect has no great hardcore games at launch, but it does have the huge backcatalog of regular 360 games.
This one doesn't count
that's like saying the Wii didn't have great hardcore games but you got the deep backcatalog of gamecube games to choose from
The 360 library is drastically better than the Gamecube library. Plus you still get the oXBox back compatibility.
I think a lot of people who are going to decide to buy a 360 in the near future are going to go with the Kinect just for futureproofing purposes even if the Kinect library at the time isn't horribly exciting in much the same way that many people who might have otherwise bought a DS will just buy a 3DS instead even if the launch titles aren't too exciting.
Yes, Kinect isn't horribly exciting to existing 360 owners at the moment. Does this really matter that much though? If Microsoft can get a lot of new owners to buy a 360 Kinect bundle, then not only have they drastically increased the overall 360 user base, but they would then have a solid Kinect base to attract developers. The existing 360 owners will come later on when the really cool Kinect games arrive.
Pogo Pete and the Mystery of the Zombie Pirates that Hover Around Your Head Far Enough From You To Grab At, But Not Too Far!?
I really want to know what people are expecting. I keep hearing stuff like, "well, just because none of us can think of anything that would be really awesome and possible with Kinect doesn't mean anything! There could be dozens of amazing games in development, in genres we've never even imagined!"
You can't even fire a gun and move at the same time with any accuracy. What could possibly be any good, without using the controller to fall back on?
And I'll definitely give you the controller + Kinect providing some great opportunities, but the problem is that every developer is ignoring it.
So why the hell would developers that shunned the Wii and Wii MotionPlus suddenly decide to support the Kinect? They are supposed to have the same demographics, same general though process behind it, etc. The increased development cost, much smaller userbase, or the cost to the processing power as a result of using the Kinect?
So why the hell would developers that shunned the Wii and Wii MotionPlus suddenly decide to support the Kinect? They are supposed to have the same demographics, same general though process behind it, etc. The increased development cost, much smaller userbase, or the cost to the processing power as a result of using the Kinect?
So why the hell would developers that shunned the Wii and Wii MotionPlus suddenly decide to support the Kinect? They are supposed to have the same demographics, same general though process behind it, etc. The increased development cost, much smaller userbase, or the cost to the processing power as a result of using the Kinect?
I love how cynical the Wii has made all of us. When the Wii was about to come out, people were imagining a million possibilities for cool games. Then the shortcomings of the controller set in and hardly anyone other than Nintendo supported the thing with anything other than shovelware. Now, the Kinect is about to come out and people just assume that everything for it now and in the future is going to be garbage.
I love how cynical the Wii has made all of us. When the Wii was about to come out, people were imagining a million possibilities for cool games. Then the shortcomings of the controller set in and hardly anyone other than Nintendo supported the thing with anything other than shovelware. Now, the Kinect is about to come out and people just assume that everything for it now and in the future is going to be garbage.
Now wait a sec, what did people imagine that never happened? We've experienced 1:1 swordfighting and gunplay. I'm...not really sure what else people were salivating over at the time, but I'm pretty sure we've got it. There's been at least one motion-controlled game in just about every genre and sub-genre, and they delivered on all promises. It's just that people didn't realize what some of this stuff would feel like when they actually got it into their hands - some people were excited for FPSs, and later decided they didn't like how it felt. Other people love the feel of pointer-based FPSs.
I think the only thing we haven't gotten specifically is a Motion Plus-quality lightsaber game.
So tell me, what do you imagine for Kinect that is just going to blow everyone's mind and going to feel totally natural, better than traditional controls? That's the key thing here. What do you expect?
If anything at all comes out of this motion craze, I wouldn't mind a world where televisions and games functioned like a touchscreen. Like, imagine how a DS functions, only the television is the screen, your hand is the stylus, but you don't have to get up and physically touch the screen, you just point.
The logistics behind that are astronomical though. You'd need a high enough camera resolution to see small finger movements, the system has to be sensitive enough to not require flailing arms, but not too sensitive that scratching your ear makes the system wig out. And then you'd need a pretty big TV with a high resolution to boot, or it's all moot.
Still though, it would be pretty neat. If we ever reach that point.
The Wolfman on
"The sausage of Green Earth explodes with flavor like the cannon of culinary delight."
Hey, at least the 3DS is getting a rockstar lineup. That's all we should really be caring about, right? :P
3DS has a pretty good launch lineup, but even so, there isn't anything I want out of it except maybe the new Layton game. Hopefully, they'll add a few more titles to the US launch like Kid Icarus.
And there's a good sword fighting game on the Wii? Tell me more.
And to be honest, I'm not particularly excited about Kinect. I make retro RPGs - I like traditional games & traditional controllers. However, I do think it'll sell well and there will be some fun games down the road, just like the Wii.
Posts
I guess it takes $500 million to spin a convincing enough lie.
As for Microsoft's attitude towards Kinect, they seem to be approaching it the same way as they did with the original Xbox: regardless of it being self-sustaining or not, they're going to dump a bunch of money into it in the hopes of getting their foot in the door for the next generation. The problem is that the Kinect is far, far more gimmick than substance, unlike the original Xbox which was actually a pretty good first attempt for a newcomer to the console market. It also would imply that Microsoft will make motion controls a priority for their next system and I would absolutely hate that.
Overall, Microsoft would've been better off just ignoring this whole motion control business and saving the money for developing their next system. Not only does Microsoft not have the right mindset to actually compete with the Wii, they're wasting resources by not simply focusing on the good things they can already do.
Better passionate failure than apathetic success. Creatively speaking.
A Kinect 360 bundle has a ton of great games already, just the vast majority of them have nothing to do with Kinect.
If you're buying Kinect w/a system, you're basically buying Kinect for $100 putting it squarely in Guitar Hero/Wii Fit board territory. People spent $100-$200 just to play stuff like Wii Fit & Rock Band and that's just one game. Surely, there will be at least one awesome game released on Kinect eventually that is worth the extra money? Right? Maybe?
Zeboyd Games Development Blog
Steam ID : rwb36, Twitter : Werezompire, Facebook : Zeboyd Games
i don't think great financial investment is the same thing as 'passion'. i see no passion in kinect, just desperate, uninspired thrusting for a lucrative market.
That's all I'm seeing as well. I'd say the Wii has some passion involved in it, but definitely not the Kinect. If the Kinect was really a product of passionate design and effort, it wouldn't need a massive advertising budget behind it to convince people it isn't just some second-rate Wii attempt.
I wonder if it's possible for criticism of Kinect to ever be more than 'Don't want to like it!'
Like Move?
http://nintendo-revolution.blogspot.com/2006/11/wii-marketing-budget-twice-as-high-as.html
People like to think that the Wii succeeded purely by word of mouth, but the fact is that the Wii had an absolutely massive advertising budget behind it.
Zeboyd Games Development Blog
Steam ID : rwb36, Twitter : Werezompire, Facebook : Zeboyd Games
You need a great product and great games, and the rest will fall into place. Neither Move nor Kinect has great games. Kinect would've done better to work on a couple "hardcore" titles with that $500 mil instead. Halo sold the XBox, it could've sold Kinect as well.
But but....It's M$...
Twitter
i disagree. i think sports champions is every bit as good as wii sports, a wonderful group of challenges which gets more rewarding with the player's technical skill
the fact that it was not part of the bundle in PAL LAND was a disastrous mistake, and considering eurozone has always been sony's launchpad in the past it's probably the one big thing that will stop it from ever taking off any more than the eyetoy did.
but no big deal, i've got one and it's already justified the expense so i'm not invested in some righteous victory for technology over showmanship
Kinect has a new control system that is potentially revolutionary, but will probably end up having a number of problems (that could be overcome through clever programming or add-ons).
The Wii had no great hardcore games at launch other than a few ports like Zelda & Trauma Center.
Kinect has no great hardcore games at launch, but it does have the huge backcatalog of regular 360 games.
The Wii had an insanely huge marketing budget of hundreds of millions of dollars.
Kinect has an even more insanely huge marketing budget of hundreds of millions of dollars.
Nintendo was not in the #1 slot for consoles when they launched the Wii.
Microsoft is not in the #1 slot for consoles when they are launching Kinect.
The Wii cost $250 for the system and a game in 2006.
The 360 + Kinect bundle costs $300 for the system and a game in 2010.
The parallels are definitely there. The big question is will lightning strike twice or was the Wii's massive success a one of deal that can't be replicated just yet?
Zeboyd Games Development Blog
Steam ID : rwb36, Twitter : Werezompire, Facebook : Zeboyd Games
This one doesn't count
that's like saying the Wii didn't have great hardcore games but you got the deep backcatalog of gamecube games to choose from
Frankly, I think the Kinect is much more likely to parallel the Sega 32X than anything even remotely resembling the success of the Wii. The incentive for 360 owners to get a Kinect is almost non-existent and Kinect bundles are going to have to compete with other 360 bundles for new buyers.
Nintendo has 8 letters in its name.
Microsoft has 9 letters in its name, which is pretty close to 8!
You honestly think they're in that similar of a position? How about this instead:
The 360 library is drastically better than the Gamecube library. Plus you still get the oXBox back compatibility.
I think a lot of people who are going to decide to buy a 360 in the near future are going to go with the Kinect just for futureproofing purposes even if the Kinect library at the time isn't horribly exciting in much the same way that many people who might have otherwise bought a DS will just buy a 3DS instead even if the launch titles aren't too exciting.
Yes, Kinect isn't horribly exciting to existing 360 owners at the moment. Does this really matter that much though? If Microsoft can get a lot of new owners to buy a 360 Kinect bundle, then not only have they drastically increased the overall 360 user base, but they would then have a solid Kinect base to attract developers. The existing 360 owners will come later on when the really cool Kinect games arrive.
Zeboyd Games Development Blog
Steam ID : rwb36, Twitter : Werezompire, Facebook : Zeboyd Games
299 USD, innit?
Doh. I was looking at the 2nd 250 GB bundle. The 299 one is the 4GB bundle.
I'm not convinced MS' marketing is effective.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2v645V3a4Y&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HrOpABFT848&feature=player_embedded
like what?
The Chicken Dance Turbo Arcade?
Let's Clap!?
Pogo Pete and the Mystery of the Zombie Pirates that Hover Around Your Head Far Enough From You To Grab At, But Not Too Far!?
Some rather promising stuff here.
http://www.wired.com/gamelife/2010/09/microsoft-tokyo-game-show/
Also add to that the Steel Batallion sequel & the Rez spiritual sequel (which admittedly doesn't require Kinect, it just supports it).
And whatever crazy stuff XBLIG devs cook up when they get around to letting us develop for it.
Zeboyd Games Development Blog
Steam ID : rwb36, Twitter : Werezompire, Facebook : Zeboyd Games
I really want to know what people are expecting. I keep hearing stuff like, "well, just because none of us can think of anything that would be really awesome and possible with Kinect doesn't mean anything! There could be dozens of amazing games in development, in genres we've never even imagined!"
You can't even fire a gun and move at the same time with any accuracy. What could possibly be any good, without using the controller to fall back on?
And I'll definitely give you the controller + Kinect providing some great opportunities, but the problem is that every developer is ignoring it.
That's pretty irrelevent. Nobody's flocking to make Wii games period.
Zeboyd Games Development Blog
Steam ID : rwb36, Twitter : Werezompire, Facebook : Zeboyd Games
This is because the industry is run by morons.
Moneyhat.
HD graphics?
Zeboyd Games Development Blog
Steam ID : rwb36, Twitter : Werezompire, Facebook : Zeboyd Games
Now wait a sec, what did people imagine that never happened? We've experienced 1:1 swordfighting and gunplay. I'm...not really sure what else people were salivating over at the time, but I'm pretty sure we've got it. There's been at least one motion-controlled game in just about every genre and sub-genre, and they delivered on all promises. It's just that people didn't realize what some of this stuff would feel like when they actually got it into their hands - some people were excited for FPSs, and later decided they didn't like how it felt. Other people love the feel of pointer-based FPSs.
I think the only thing we haven't gotten specifically is a Motion Plus-quality lightsaber game.
So tell me, what do you imagine for Kinect that is just going to blow everyone's mind and going to feel totally natural, better than traditional controls? That's the key thing here. What do you expect?
The logistics behind that are astronomical though. You'd need a high enough camera resolution to see small finger movements, the system has to be sensitive enough to not require flailing arms, but not too sensitive that scratching your ear makes the system wig out. And then you'd need a pretty big TV with a high resolution to boot, or it's all moot.
Still though, it would be pretty neat. If we ever reach that point.
Does the 3DS lineup include Kingdom Hearts 3D? Cause that'd be a good way to get people to buy the system.
3DS has a pretty good launch lineup, but even so, there isn't anything I want out of it except maybe the new Layton game. Hopefully, they'll add a few more titles to the US launch like Kid Icarus.
And there's a good sword fighting game on the Wii? Tell me more.
And to be honest, I'm not particularly excited about Kinect. I make retro RPGs - I like traditional games & traditional controllers. However, I do think it'll sell well and there will be some fun games down the road, just like the Wii.
Zeboyd Games Development Blog
Steam ID : rwb36, Twitter : Werezompire, Facebook : Zeboyd Games