Those who read my articles regularly know that I have always had a bit of a sweet-spot for the Xbox 360; this is not undeserved. I had no prior loyalty to Microsoft prior to purchasing the 360 and weighed my options very carefully at the time that I purchased it. In fact, for an entire week, I had convinced myself that the PS3 was the way to go - that is - until the 360 Elite was unveiled. Almost four years later, my Elite soldiers ever onward tolerating a never-ending list of fantastic third-party titles that always seem to edge out their respective PS3 versions. Like many others, I have reaped the rewards of 360 ownership and have suffered the curses. I have 1 RROD to my credit that was repaired 2 years ago and is still going strong (fingers crossed) - so bar 3 weeks at a German repair depot *wipes tear* (god bless that German efficiency), 360 ownership on the whole has been good and I have no regrets.
However, many 360 owners such as myself found 2010 the 'year of discontent' after the vacuum that followed the announcement of 'Natal/Kinect' - it had seemed as though Microsoft had pulled its Ace card and had decided to leave the country for an extended sabbatical in some non-extradition nation in the Southern Hemisphere; there were many questions but few answers. You see - most 360 owners, at the time and today, are hardcore gamers to some extent - and Natal was looking decidedly NOT hardcore. There was a worry (still is to some extent) that Microsoft was focusing too much on a casual future for the 360 at the expense of a decent hardcore experience. To add further insult, for a period it seemed as though a raft of PS3 titles were being announced without much counter by the 360 camp apart from a lack-luster debut of PrimeTime (1v100) that was going to 'Change the World' until it was cancelled a couple months ago. (So much for that one then)
Since E3, my opinions of where the 360 is headed have varied wildly. On the surface, Kinect looks like a dead duck, but the more I read into it, the more excited I get. EDGE magazine has spent a lot of time writing about Kinect and there's no doubt why: it suggests an exciting future! Not just for gaming but for home entertainment interaction as a whole. Sure, for every camp that raises up the hype over Kinect, there's an equal number playing it down (usually in favour of the 'other' console) and there's no doubt that the device will have its shortcomings - the question is: Even if it does have them (shortcomings), will it make Kinect any less successful?? Only the future knows for certain, but handled properly, there's no reason why Kinect can't be the most significant event in recent gaming (and console) history.
What gives me hope is that developers are acknowledging Kinect's shortcomings and working around them, focusing on the strengths. Devs know better than anyone that gamers want a smooth experience - and many have indicated that Kinect still shows immense promise provided you employ it with realistic expectations. This means that most are acknowledging that Kinect isn't going to replace FPS movement control anytime soon - but then, it would be awfully handy if you reach up to a computer terminal and 'punch in' a code using your finger. It may not allow you to swing a sword with precision in a fantasy RPG - but then, it would provide a very handy option for engaging in conversation with an NPC by speaking the dialogue options rather than selecting them. It might not be preferred for controlling a baseball play, but wouldn't it be neat if you could signal your pitch to the pitcher or give a sign to your base runner to steal? Add to all of that the in-built functionality to control every aspect of your console and you have a potentially out-of-the-park game winner.
What makes Kinect so powerfully intriguing is the fact that it works as an intrinsic control for the console regardless of what you are doing or using. It's 'always on', always there ready to serve - even if you're holding a controller. For those who suggest that Kinect can't survive because it is unable to replace a conventional controller or lacks the responsiveness of its rivals, I recommend that they have a seat and start thinking outside the box before they draw their conclusions. Whereas the other consoles force you to choose between conventional or motion control, Microsoft demands nothing but your interest and willingness to engage the console on a level that could well prove to be the most intuitive human interface ever conceived.
What makes Kinect potent is not whether hardcore gamers decide to adopt motion control for gaming - its the potential that a 3-year-old child can speak to this nondescript device and launch an interactive (and controlled) experience with an animated pet without having pressed a single button or held a controller, or the ability to command movie playback in the dark without fishing for your remote, or the opportunity to play a trivia game with your grandmother without having to explain anything other than 'just do this' and making a buzzer-push motion in the air. Ultimately, if delivered as promised, it will be the chance to control a fully-featured fighting mech by actually interacting with its cockpit controls using your own hands.
Kinect is a huge risk - yes...but if even 50% of it is true as advertised - it WILL change the world....and what a world it will be.
Lovingly Yours,
The Angry Rabbit.
