|
At the 2009 E3 event, Microsoft introduced the public to its attempt at motion control for the Xbox 360. Called Project Natal at the time, the potential in the various tech demos displayed was certainly apparent. Completely forgoing a remote, a wand, or other hand held device entirely, Natal promised that gamers own bodies would be the controller. Want to race cars down the street? Simply position your hands as if you were holding a steering wheel and shift your foot for the gas and brake pedal accordingly. Want to punch some angry looking thug in the face? Ball up your fists and let 'em fly with jabs, uppercuts, and even an elbow to the nose! Even that Milo thing they showed, while completely creepy and offputting, still made for an intriguing demo, if only for the possibilities of true real-time interaction.
At the end of that presentation, I came away with a couple strong feelings. First, Microsoft (much like Sony) was conceeding that Nintendo was winning this round of the console wars by putting emphasis on innovative control. Second however was that unlike Sony, Microsoft was not trying to reinvent the Wii-mote. They knew they needed motion control to innovate like Nintendo had done several years ago, but they introduced their solution in a completely different way. Nintendo knew that a remote control is fairly intuitive. Microsoft realized that hand gestures, body motions, and speech are ultimately so. The latter had seemingly taken the concept of motion control and cranked it up quite a few notches past the Wii. We were even promised a mass-market consumer price point and an emphasis on hardcore gamer-style games to go along with the new peripheral.
My my, what a difference a year makes. Now formally called Kinect, Microsoft has succeeded in taking something that really piqued my interest and got me legitimately excited, to introducing a "me too" peripheral full of "me too" titles, along with a "me too" price point. Let me explain...
While I still think that Kinect is a fairly big step up from Wii-motes and magic wands from a technological standpoint, the way it's being implemented screams "Microsoft Wii60." I mean, I challenge anyone to view the Nintendo press conferences of circa 2006 and not see the striking similarities (and in some cases, outright duplicates) from the Microsoft conference at E3 2010 where Kinect is concerned. At times, one could've simply removed the Microsoft logos, slapped Nintendo ones in their places and few would've realized the difference. Most of what was shown consisted of mini-game compilations, dancing games, and interactive exercise routines. I thought these were bad for the business. I thought these were blatantly against the core audience Microsoft targets with the Xbox 360... the hardcore gamer?
Oh sure, Kinect still has all the promise in the world with its motion tracking cameras and built-in microphones with speech recognition. I still find these parts fascinating and hope that someone (anyone!) makes good use of them in a game that isn't a blatant rip-off of what Nintendo and their licensees have been putting out on the Wii for the last 4 years. The problem is, that's not the case at all and at E3 we were treated to a collection of copycat titles that attempt to merely steal "family" market share away from Nintendo, rather than provide a truly interactive experience for the Xbox 360's established consumer base.
Strike three is the recently announced selling point for the new peripheral. Microsoft promised us a mass-market price tag for Kinect. What we got was $150 USD for something that amounts to two web cams, a microphone, and a bit of software to drive it all. To put things in perspective, for the added cost of a game (which I'm fairly certain the Kinect will NOT ship with) I can buy an entire Wii system. Not only will it come in hardcore gamer black, but it'll include two games in the package along with the Motion Plus peripheral for added accuracy and control. With the Wii, I'd also have a complete library of games to choose from including 4 years worth of Party, Dance, and Sports compilations if I felt so inclined to buy them. What kind of selection am I getting with the Kinect on Day 1? A dozen or so "me too" titles? All at a $60 price point I imagine.
On the subject of total cost, also keep in mind that the $150 entry fee assumes the potential buyer already has an Xbox 360 console. If not, tack on another $200 for the hard drive-less Arcade model (also with no game included) or $300 for the Elite system. If you're keeping a running total at home that's between $350 and $450 for the hardware, plus another $60 for a Kinect-enabled title. Didn't Microsoft learn anything from the fiasco that was the Playstation 3's initial price point? Amidst an economic recession, what family is going to opt for a game-less gaming platform that rings up at over double the price point as the competition? This is nothing short of madness. Is Microsoft trying to do the same thing Sega did with the Genesis, Sega CD, and 32X building block scheme? They're no longer in the console selling business by the way.
So for all the hoopla surrounding the Kinect and what it could do for gaming, the official unveiling has thus far been dismal, the launch line-up disappointing, and the price point prohibitive. I still think the technology is sound and could provide the types of experiences that quite frankly, Nintendon't or Wii can't. However, Microsofts blatant disregard for their core audience completely overshadows any "good" that might be tucked away or hidden inside of the Kinect peripheral. Much like Sony with the PS3 before them, Microsoft needs to pay attention to history, realize that they're making some critical mistakes here and set the ship aright. Otherwise, the Kinect will surely take its place in the gaming hall of shame, likely situated somewhere between the Virtual Boy and the Sega Activator.
|