I could see them forcing developers to make their games recognize some basic commands verbal commands for certain languages. For example, continue, pause, xbox live menu, etc. It couldn't be too costly to do that, and it would be a nice bulletpoint.
That kind of implementation could probably have reusable code too, since "pause" would be the same in every game ever for example.
So yeah, handing them a bunch of basic commands with the code already complete for the most part would probably go over fine, and 'technically' be an implementation.
Though to be frank, it would be a way of justifying a bulletpoint, as you said, for most devs and little else. But it's better than the other options certainly.
Forcing it's use would definetely be a terrible mistake.
Not forcing it means it would be used, at best, as much as it is now. I would predict even lower since people seem to be getting bored of it.
Really can't win either way.
If that was the case then I can see Microsoft dropping Kinect 2.0 being built into the next console. There would be no reason to have it built at far higher running costs to have less than 2% of games fully use the thing.
Microsoft will have to force some kinect features to justify having it built into the next console. This could be something simple as the 'features' (in as loose a sense of the word) some current AAA titles have now. It will be the same as every Xbox 360 title requiring 'some' Xbox Live features (leader boards).
Hasn't Nintendo been moving away from the whole motion control thing? Sure it's still there and all but it's not the thing they focus on now, just something you can use if you want too.
Hasn't Nintendo been moving away from the whole motion control thing? Sure it's still there and all but it's not the thing they focus on now, just something you can use if you want too.
NintendoLand and Pikmin 3 have motion equal to that of a typical Wii Sports. It's not gone, only in a different form. But the focus is just as hard.
However, that's on top of traditional controls and touchpad controls.
V Faction on
Nintendo Network ID: V-Faction | XBL: V Faction | Steam | 3DS: 3136 - 6603 - 1330 PokemonWhite Friend Code: 0046-2121-0723/White2 Friend Code: 0519-5126-2990
"Did ya hear the one about the mussel that wanted to purchase Valve? Seems like the bivalve had a juicy offer on the table but the company flat-out refused and decided to immediately clam up!"
Hasn't Nintendo been moving away from the whole motion control thing? Sure it's still there and all but it's not the thing they focus on now, just something you can use if you want too.
They moved the focus away because now its just part of their toolbox. Much how DS games used to really hype their touch controls, now games never even mention them. Because, you know, its standard.
0
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
Hasn't Nintendo been moving away from the whole motion control thing? Sure it's still there and all but it's not the thing they focus on now, just something you can use if you want too.
They moved the focus away because now its just part of their toolbox. Much how DS games used to really hype their touch controls, now games never even mention them. Because, you know, its standard.
The strategy they aim for is to encourage people to try using it (or, if you prefer, "Don't knock it until you try it" - which a lot of devs need to fucking do instead of mouth off), and after a while, just set that on the backburner.
Part of the problem with developing for shit like the kinect is it pretty much locks in at the very least a "version" for that platform only (since it will effectively have different specs than the rest of the platforms). And the big dev houses have repeatedly said that they need multiplatform releases to have any chance of making a profit on the AAA releases, so what you see is, at best, for those a release in which there is a general version, and a version with "kinect support". And even that generally spends more resources than they will see back out of doing so. Not to mention bad implementation may actually be worse than no implementation at all due to word of mouth and review scores counting it in (like how most reviewers don't knock a game for not having multiplayer, but will dock them for having bad multiplayer, depending on the genre).
If they build kinect into the xbox next or whatever, with the idea EVERYONE should use it, they're probably going to find one of two things happen:
1) It's implemented in all 'major' games. Horribly.
2) All major releases are delayed on that system to take time to make it work properly (unlikely, since delaying it means less profits overall, 1 is far more likely).
Want a good comparison? Achievements. In a few games they're interesting but for the VAST majority? "beat the game on easy mode", "talk to the merchant", "kill ten goblins". Devs look at the "you have to do this" and respond with the most half-ass way possible because they didn't want to do it. For good reason in most cases.
In other words, developers are approaching Kinect like they do Wii games.
Personally, I think that if Kinect comes with every 720, I think there's a third option:
3) Everyone ignores it.
After all, not every DS/3DS game uses the touchscreen.
Switch: 3947-4890-9293
0
ShadowfireVermont, in the middle of nowhereRegistered Userregular
You don't think Microsoft would try to force some level of Kinect support from every game? They're pretty famous for demanding games operate in a certain way.
I'm more referring to, as Shadow mentioned, Microsoft's habit of forcing a 'new' thing by actually making it a requirement in order to have it on the system. Achievements is one I know, a few others are weird stuff like 'must have a pause screen', which while I get the sentiment making it a hard rule seems weird.
If they have any worry about an integrated kinect being used, you can bet adding 'kinect support' to the list of dumb bulletpoints will start to look tempting.
Let's not act like they're the only ones. Just how many Wii games don't require the remote?
About 170. Not counting virtual console and Wiiware games.
0
AbsoluteZeroThe new film by Quentin KoopantinoRegistered Userregular
ME4 setting? Easy. Alternate universe, or just a different galaxy but with humans (relay sent someone on a one way trip and now they have to find a way home, maybe). Where's my money, EA?
I'm more referring to, as Shadow mentioned, Microsoft's habit of forcing a 'new' thing by actually making it a requirement in order to have it on the system. Achievements is one I know, a few others are weird stuff like 'must have a pause screen', which while I get the sentiment making it a hard rule seems weird.
If they have any worry about an integrated kinect being used, you can bet adding 'kinect support' to the list of dumb bulletpoints will start to look tempting.
That's not weird, that's MS smacking morons in line.
I'm more referring to, as Shadow mentioned, Microsoft's habit of forcing a 'new' thing by actually making it a requirement in order to have it on the system. Achievements is one I know, a few others are weird stuff like 'must have a pause screen', which while I get the sentiment making it a hard rule seems weird.
If they have any worry about an integrated kinect being used, you can bet adding 'kinect support' to the list of dumb bulletpoints will start to look tempting.
That's not weird, that's MS smacking morons in line.
It's more that they thought it necessary (though a few indie games have said they don't really NEED a pause screen ect ect).
Although I can imagine Molyneux walking into their offices and trying to explain how his next game would use two turtles taped to the tv for a player menu, with them hastily drawing up a bunch of rules trying to stop anything he could come up with (in vain).
I'm more referring to, as Shadow mentioned, Microsoft's habit of forcing a 'new' thing by actually making it a requirement in order to have it on the system. Achievements is one I know, a few others are weird stuff like 'must have a pause screen', which while I get the sentiment making it a hard rule seems weird.
If they have any worry about an integrated kinect being used, you can bet adding 'kinect support' to the list of dumb bulletpoints will start to look tempting.
That's not weird, that's MS smacking morons in line.
It's more that they thought it necessary (though a few indie games have said they don't really NEED a pause screen ect ect).
Although I can imagine Molyneux walking into their offices and trying to explain how his next game would use two turtles taped to the tv for a player menu, with them hastily drawing up a bunch of rules trying to stop anything he could come up with (in vain).
They thought it was necessary cause people are stupid. Never assume people will be "sensible" when drawing up design specifications.
I'm more referring to, as Shadow mentioned, Microsoft's habit of forcing a 'new' thing by actually making it a requirement in order to have it on the system. Achievements is one I know, a few others are weird stuff like 'must have a pause screen', which while I get the sentiment making it a hard rule seems weird.
If they have any worry about an integrated kinect being used, you can bet adding 'kinect support' to the list of dumb bulletpoints will start to look tempting.
That's not weird, that's MS smacking morons in line.
It's more that they thought it necessary (though a few indie games have said they don't really NEED a pause screen ect ect).
Although I can imagine Molyneux walking into their offices and trying to explain how his next game would use two turtles taped to the tv for a player menu, with them hastily drawing up a bunch of rules trying to stop anything he could come up with (in vain).
They thought it was necessary cause people are stupid. Never assume people will be "sensible" when drawing up design specifications.
Yep. At one point in the PS2/ox box generation, SONY did not require games to pause if the controller was removed.
It only takes that first time for a player to be thankful that some rules exist.
They do it for a reason. Mainly to have a more unified experience on the console. Requiring Kinect support for a console that included it would hardly be the worst thing any of us could suffer.
How's Microsoft going to get developers to make new games and specific features for the updated Kinect? Make 'em an offer they can't refuse.
Hint:
Cha-ching
Nintendo Network ID: V-Faction | XBL: V Faction | Steam | 3DS: 3136 - 6603 - 1330 PokemonWhite Friend Code: 0046-2121-0723/White2 Friend Code: 0519-5126-2990
"Did ya hear the one about the mussel that wanted to purchase Valve? Seems like the bivalve had a juicy offer on the table but the company flat-out refused and decided to immediately clam up!"
0
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
I'm more referring to, as Shadow mentioned, Microsoft's habit of forcing a 'new' thing by actually making it a requirement in order to have it on the system. Achievements is one I know, a few others are weird stuff like 'must have a pause screen', which while I get the sentiment making it a hard rule seems weird.
If they have any worry about an integrated kinect being used, you can bet adding 'kinect support' to the list of dumb bulletpoints will start to look tempting.
That's not weird, that's MS smacking morons in line.
It's more that they thought it necessary (though a few indie games have said they don't really NEED a pause screen ect ect).
Although I can imagine Molyneux walking into their offices and trying to explain how his next game would use two turtles taped to the tv for a player menu, with them hastily drawing up a bunch of rules trying to stop anything he could come up with (in vain).
They thought it was necessary cause people are stupid. Never assume people will be "sensible" when drawing up design specifications.
Yep. At one point in the PS2/ox box generation, SONY did not require games to pause if the controller was removed.
It only takes that first time for a player to be thankful that some rules exist.
They do it for a reason. Mainly to have a more unified experience on the console. Requiring Kinect support for a console that included it would hardly be the worst thing any of us could suffer.
This still sneaks in. RE6 on multiple platforms doesn't pause if you're game is configured to be online (whether or nor someone is actually playing besides you) if your controller dies, as far as I know, and a few old offline PS3 games don't pause if your controller dies.
Really, the whole "There really shouldn't be rules about this sort of thing...!" thing kind of smacks of the whole "Hey, why is support for the Xbox's own custom soundtrack option a requirement? It's kind of rude to the programmer not to force the player to listen to their music selection, even if it sucks out loud," hypothesis that gets bantered around a bit. These rules exist for a reason. They afford the player an unprecedented degree of choice and freedom (that they are under no obligation to use) that is only increases as complexity rises. They're a great force for avoiding stupid design decisions that might otherwise escape on the grounds of being "artistic" or whatever. Being a human measure, it's not perfect, but it's definitely a net good. Don't like achievements? Guess what, you can ignore them. Just like you can ignore Miis, Avatars, or Playstation Trophies. Like achievements? Not an issue then.
I don't think it's clear how that would translate to the Kinect at the moment. Personally, I don't see why people are so worried--namely since Microsoft has done very good at following Sony's example as licensing king, and getting its share of the multiplatform pie, along with the flexibility that takes. Even something like "actively encouraging Kinect voice support for menu commands" seems way farther back on the burner than "Get as many games as possible, especially if they are traditionally associated with Sony" as far as I can tell.
I don't see them implementing a sort of broad-sweeping requirement via Kinect on developers--mostly since the requirements that have been implemented are benign to good (like "You need to have a pause option, dumbass").
Of course, that could mean Kinect getting pushed even further into a simple voice-activated controller peripheral. We don't know how it's going to be treated on the next Xbox even then.
If kinect 'support' becomes required, I'm 99% sure all it's going to mean are a few basic voice commands in every game. Probably all menu or dashboard commands.
Because that would be the easiest way to meet the requirement technically if your game is multiplatform (and aside from halo all the big ones are likely going to be) and you don't want to design a whole new version just for xbox.
If kinect 'support' becomes required, I'm 99% sure all it's going to mean are a few basic voice commands in every game. Probably all menu or dashboard commands.
Because that would be the easiest way to meet the requirement technically if your game is multiplatform (and aside from halo all the big ones are likely going to be) and you don't want to design a whole new version just for xbox.
Kinect controls on a Live interface / overlay. Bingo, done. ME3 supported Kinect from the angle of voice commands right? Which was a little silly since you can headset that, or should've been able to at least.
No, afaik it's because Kinect does voice control using multiple mics to filter out background noise and such.
Reminds of me E3 where someone asked a Microsoft rep they were interviewing for a show "So why can't you do this voice stuff with a headset" and the rep had absolutely no answer for that.
No, afaik it's because Kinect does voice control using multiple mics to filter out background noise and such.
Reminds of me E3 where someone asked a Microsoft rep they were interviewing for a show "So why can't you do this voice stuff with a headset" and the rep had absolutely no answer for that.
Get on it developers. Microsoft already made a big black plastic rectangle that they're backing. What's your excuse?
No, afaik it's because Kinect does voice control using multiple mics to filter out background noise and such.
Reminds of me E3 where someone asked a Microsoft rep they were interviewing for a show "So why can't you do this voice stuff with a headset" and the rep had absolutely no answer for that.
Get on it developers. Microsoft already made a big black plastic rectangle that they're backing. What's your excuse?
Sony did voice commands via headset all the way back on the PS2 (SOCOM series). Having to use a Kinect for voice commands on 360 games is just... hilariously pathetic. It's the laziest way to have a 'Supports Kinect' bullet point that I can imagine.
Using the Kinect for its fancy mic and advanced voice processing stuff is fine, if your game actually needs that level of complexity.
Needing the Kinect for Halo Anniversary to say "Analyze"? Uh... yeah, just use the damn headset.
What doesn't need that level of complexity?
I mean, it's not like the Kinect is doing some crazy shit cause you are talking weird or something. It's just using it's hardware to do really good voice pickup afaik. So you could use the damn headset, but you wouldn't be getting the same level of recognition I believe, which is kinda the point.
Posts
So yeah, handing them a bunch of basic commands with the code already complete for the most part would probably go over fine, and 'technically' be an implementation.
Though to be frank, it would be a way of justifying a bulletpoint, as you said, for most devs and little else. But it's better than the other options certainly.
If that was the case then I can see Microsoft dropping Kinect 2.0 being built into the next console. There would be no reason to have it built at far higher running costs to have less than 2% of games fully use the thing.
Microsoft will have to force some kinect features to justify having it built into the next console. This could be something simple as the 'features' (in as loose a sense of the word) some current AAA titles have now. It will be the same as every Xbox 360 title requiring 'some' Xbox Live features (leader boards).
However, that's on top of traditional controls and touchpad controls.
Pokemon White Friend Code: 0046-2121-0723/White 2 Friend Code: 0519-5126-2990
"Did ya hear the one about the mussel that wanted to purchase Valve? Seems like the bivalve had a juicy offer on the table but the company flat-out refused and decided to immediately clam up!"
They moved the focus away because now its just part of their toolbox. Much how DS games used to really hype their touch controls, now games never even mention them. Because, you know, its standard.
The strategy they aim for is to encourage people to try using it (or, if you prefer, "Don't knock it until you try it" - which a lot of devs need to fucking do instead of mouth off), and after a while, just set that on the backburner.
That's a great way to put it.
In other words, developers are approaching Kinect like they do Wii games.
Personally, I think that if Kinect comes with every 720, I think there's a third option:
3) Everyone ignores it.
After all, not every DS/3DS game uses the touchscreen.
If they have any worry about an integrated kinect being used, you can bet adding 'kinect support' to the list of dumb bulletpoints will start to look tempting.
About 170. Not counting virtual console and Wiiware games.
That's not weird, that's MS smacking morons in line.
Examples, if you please. And what said examples do require.
It's more that they thought it necessary (though a few indie games have said they don't really NEED a pause screen ect ect).
Although I can imagine Molyneux walking into their offices and trying to explain how his next game would use two turtles taped to the tv for a player menu, with them hastily drawing up a bunch of rules trying to stop anything he could come up with (in vain).
They thought it was necessary cause people are stupid. Never assume people will be "sensible" when drawing up design specifications.
Yep. At one point in the PS2/ox box generation, SONY did not require games to pause if the controller was removed.
It only takes that first time for a player to be thankful that some rules exist.
They do it for a reason. Mainly to have a more unified experience on the console. Requiring Kinect support for a console that included it would hardly be the worst thing any of us could suffer.
Which is why I'm glad the Kinect is nothing but an avenue for shitty shovelware and dance games now.
My Let's Play Channel: https://youtube.com/channel/UC2go70QLfwGq-hW4nvUqmog
Fuck humans. Humans are boring. For that we have CoD and GoW.
This is Mass Effect. It's all about the aliens.
Hint:
Pokemon White Friend Code: 0046-2121-0723/White 2 Friend Code: 0519-5126-2990
"Did ya hear the one about the mussel that wanted to purchase Valve? Seems like the bivalve had a juicy offer on the table but the company flat-out refused and decided to immediately clam up!"
Would a proper parallel drawn be to bring up the Motion Plus? Did that change anything for third party devs?
This still sneaks in. RE6 on multiple platforms doesn't pause if you're game is configured to be online (whether or nor someone is actually playing besides you) if your controller dies, as far as I know, and a few old offline PS3 games don't pause if your controller dies.
Really, the whole "There really shouldn't be rules about this sort of thing...!" thing kind of smacks of the whole "Hey, why is support for the Xbox's own custom soundtrack option a requirement? It's kind of rude to the programmer not to force the player to listen to their music selection, even if it sucks out loud," hypothesis that gets bantered around a bit. These rules exist for a reason. They afford the player an unprecedented degree of choice and freedom (that they are under no obligation to use) that is only increases as complexity rises. They're a great force for avoiding stupid design decisions that might otherwise escape on the grounds of being "artistic" or whatever. Being a human measure, it's not perfect, but it's definitely a net good. Don't like achievements? Guess what, you can ignore them. Just like you can ignore Miis, Avatars, or Playstation Trophies. Like achievements? Not an issue then.
I don't think it's clear how that would translate to the Kinect at the moment. Personally, I don't see why people are so worried--namely since Microsoft has done very good at following Sony's example as licensing king, and getting its share of the multiplatform pie, along with the flexibility that takes. Even something like "actively encouraging Kinect voice support for menu commands" seems way farther back on the burner than "Get as many games as possible, especially if they are traditionally associated with Sony" as far as I can tell.
I don't see them implementing a sort of broad-sweeping requirement via Kinect on developers--mostly since the requirements that have been implemented are benign to good (like "You need to have a pause option, dumbass").
Of course, that could mean Kinect getting pushed even further into a simple voice-activated controller peripheral. We don't know how it's going to be treated on the next Xbox even then.
Because that would be the easiest way to meet the requirement technically if your game is multiplatform (and aside from halo all the big ones are likely going to be) and you don't want to design a whole new version just for xbox.
Kinect controls on a Live interface / overlay. Bingo, done. ME3 supported Kinect from the angle of voice commands right? Which was a little silly since you can headset that, or should've been able to at least.
My Let's Play Channel: https://youtube.com/channel/UC2go70QLfwGq-hW4nvUqmog
Reminds of me E3 where someone asked a Microsoft rep they were interviewing for a show "So why can't you do this voice stuff with a headset" and the rep had absolutely no answer for that.
Needing the Kinect for Halo Anniversary to say "Analyze"? Uh... yeah, just use the damn headset.
Are there any games that do something more complicated?
(Please do not gift. My game bank is already full.)
Get on it developers. Microsoft already made a big black plastic rectangle that they're backing. What's your excuse?
Sony did voice commands via headset all the way back on the PS2 (SOCOM series). Having to use a Kinect for voice commands on 360 games is just... hilariously pathetic. It's the laziest way to have a 'Supports Kinect' bullet point that I can imagine.
// Switch: SW-5306-0651-6424 //
What doesn't need that level of complexity?
I mean, it's not like the Kinect is doing some crazy shit cause you are talking weird or something. It's just using it's hardware to do really good voice pickup afaik. So you could use the damn headset, but you wouldn't be getting the same level of recognition I believe, which is kinda the point.