Microsoft has confirmed that the upcoming anniversary Xbox 360 edition of Bungie's seminal Halo: Combat Evolved, revealed earlier this month, will include Kinect motion-control support.
Microsoft Game Studios boss Phil Spencer explained to GameSpot, "As a first party we believe that Kinect will be important to all genres of games, be it racing games with Forza, combat games like Ryse -- even games like Halo Anniversary has Kinect integration."
Spencer did not state, however, how Halo will make use of Kinect's capabilities. After the Microsoft E3 conference, Spencer stated that eventually all future first-party Xbox 360 titles will include Kinect support.
Would you have bought it if it didn't have Kinect support? Why would the fact that there might be some Kinect functionality discourage you from buying this game? I'm going to assume you don't need a Kinect, since more XBOX 360 owners do not have one than do have one.
I don't really understand how you would implement Kinect in this game. I feel like someone going online would be at an incredible disadvantage if they were to use Kinect against other players using a controller. I'm still getting it :)
I watched the Forza Kinect demo at E3 for a while, and while I thought the showroom portion was excellent, the driving looked awful and the opposite of fun (and everyone I watched playing had trouble controlling the car). I wonder how they will implement things for Halo.
This kind of blanket requirement, or rather the reasoning behind a requirement like this, is exactly why Microsoft is so lame.
Kinect is a really interesting bit of technology, and it certainly provides opportunities for expanding the boundaries of how a person can experience a game. There are also bits of it (the speech recognition especially) that could improve some mainstream experiences.
But it isn't a replacement for a controller. *Requiring* that games like Forza and Halo (and all new 1st party games) support Kinect is like requiring that Microsoft Word support a game controller.
Either it's a whole lot of development time for a poorer experience, or it's the absolute minimum implementation to get a "Supports Kinect" sticker on the box. Either way, this isn't an attempt to elevate the industry. It is pure, obvious, and typical (for Microsoft) marketing jujitsu, and these games (and their developers and fans) will suffer because of it.
Now normally, I don't mind when a company pushes something, that's capitalism. But this is different. This is taking away something that works (a controller based experience) and replacing it with something that doesn't work (a Kinect based experience) simply to sell product.
Are you really that gullible?
If you don't think you've lost something, ask Microsoft which features will have to be cut to make a meaningful Kinect experience. If you don't think Kinect is a big step backward, try using the Kinect video controls while sitting on the couch.
I will now return you to your regularly scheduled opinions
This is just a way for them to justify the $40 price tag. Nevertheless, it sounds interesting, but as I am not willing to spend $100 for kinect so I can have dubious functionality in a game I already own, and can play perfectly well, if not better, with a controller, its really not a selling point for me. It also sounds like a way to justify kinect.
Kinect is a really interesting bit of technology, and it certainly provides opportunities for expanding the boundaries of how a person can experience a game. There are also bits of it (the speech recognition especially) that could improve some mainstream experiences.
But it isn't a replacement for a controller. *Requiring* that games like Forza and Halo (and all new 1st party games) support Kinect is like requiring that Microsoft Word support a game controller.
Either it's a whole lot of development time for a poorer experience, or it's the absolute minimum implementation to get a "Supports Kinect" sticker on the box. Either way, this isn't an attempt to elevate the industry. It is pure, obvious, and typical (for Microsoft) marketing jujitsu, and these games (and their developers and fans) will suffer because of it.
Now normally, I don't mind when a company pushes something, that's capitalism. But this is different. This is taking away something that works (a controller based experience) and replacing it with something that doesn't work (a Kinect based experience) simply to sell product.
Are you really that gullible?
If you don't think you've lost something, ask Microsoft which features will have to be cut to make a meaningful Kinect experience. If you don't think Kinect is a big step backward, try using the Kinect video controls while sitting on the couch.
I will now return you to your regularly scheduled opinions
They still have alot to prove with kinect so this is thier chance.
Its not like you won't have a choice of using a controller.
I'm still on the fence about this one...