New Star Wars Kinect Footage

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gldall2838

Embarrassing, even by the low standards set by kinect. It's sad that Microsoft is making bantha poo-doo like this when they could be making, you know, good games. Or any games at all, for that matter.

vader would buy this.

Looks pretty good.(not sarcasm)

I actually thought it looked okay until it got to the dancing.

Oh dear lord the dancing...

I actually thought it looked okay until it got to the dancing.

Oh dear lord the dancing...

travisstaggs

I knew this game was truly a disaster after I saw that.

[QUOTE="travisstaggs"]

I actually thought it looked okay until it got to the dancing.

Oh dear lord the dancing...

c_rake

I knew this game was truly a disaster after I saw that.

It is what it is. It seems like they are going for the social game crowd--not a bad idea, because really, the lightsaber segments look terrible.

Are we sure george lucas wasn't behind this? Looks like his idea of quality as of late.

Did I just die and go to hell? Cause 0:50 in the video is just the way I picture hell.

That clip incapsulates why I got sick to death of Star Wars. I swear, if a Star Wars fan was hybernated in the 1990s (when SW had a dignity) and woke up today and saw this... he would explode.

I love Star Wars and I love Lucas and what I can't fathom is why one of the most valuable IP's is tethered to garbage like this.

How about taking that brilliant Force Unleashed II engine and using it to make longer, more compelling games? How about a proper Indiana Jones game instead of Wii shovelware?

How about Battlefront III?

How about an entire game devoted to playing as Darth Vader?

Or a lightsaber dueling game?

Or a game that lets you play through some of the most famous sequences from the six films?

Pod racing, lightsaber battles, and dancing. One of these things just doesn't belong. I mean come on, that last bit CAN'T be real. MS and Terminal Reality has to be trolling the world with that dancing minigame, and they are trolling HARD.

Why? The Kinect has potential (Play Child Of Eden and if you tell me that it's horrible with a straight face and I won't believe you) so why did they reduce Star Wars into a collection of minigames? Also, I'd rather dance playing Dance Central or Just Dance 3, at least I can learn some moves for parties and clubs.

BTW Terminal Reality is making this, what the hell?!

vader would buy this.

S0lidSnake

Vader would be all over that s***. But the Vita... NAAAHHHHHHHHH. :P

Seriously though, that s*** looks horrible.

Really, a dance along game with stormtroopers... what the hell?

Why? The Kinect has potential (Play Child Of Eden and if you tell me that it's horrible with a straight face and I won't believe you) so why did they reduce Star Wars into a collection of minigames? Also, I'd rather dance playing Dance Central or Just Dance 3, at least I can learn some moves for parties and clubs.

BTW Terminal Reality is making this, what the hell?!

KillerJuan77

Child of Eden sold only 34K its first month of release (back when it was X360 exclusive, though its Christmas debut on the PS3 was probably worse). No one wants those numbers.

http://www.destructoid.com/child-of-eden-and-shadows-of-the-damned-need-more-sales-206308.phtml

Moving on the the main topic, the video is hilariously terrible (though still better than the last three Star Wars movies), but that sort of game is what sells, so I don't blame Lucasarts. People who respect Star Wars can play the MMO and the original KOTOR.

Another Kinect Video with extremely bad acting and no real 1:1 gameplay. Kinect is a joke

"it's great to be in the eeeeeempire today"

I love Star Wars and I love Lucas and what I can't fathom is why one of the most valuable IP's is tethered to garbage like this.

How about taking that brilliant Force Unleashed II engine and using it to make longer, more compelling games? How about a proper Indiana Jones game instead of Wii shovelware?

How about Battlefront III?

How about an entire game devoted to playing as Darth Vader?

Or a lightsaber dueling game?

Or a game that lets you play through some of the most famous sequences from the six films?

Grammaton-Cleric

Agreed. All those ideas would make good concepts and actually make sense.

It's bad enough that they're doing this to the Star Wars franchise, which is like ruining a part of everyone's childhood. But it's also sad to see this kind of swill attached to the 360. This... I just feel like I'm dealing with a completely different company than the one that made the 360. It would be one thing if I had bought the system knowing that a good deal of first-party money was going to be spent emulating Wii-quality software, but when I bought it at launch it was a machine that was, literally, all about games and was built on the Playstation model of quality software and a lot of it, of which the kinect has neither. Something about the Wii scarred Microsoft and screwed them in the head somehow, and I just can't stand seeing such a great system tainted with sewage softwareand a deluded Microsoft chasing Nintendo down the rabbit hole to nowhere. I don't know this company anymore. I just know that the company is spending good money making bad games, and that is immensely saddening.

I don't blame Lucas either. It's an ugly truth that for Star Wars games to be financially successful they have to sell directly to the more casual customer base. Looking at the video I know my son and daughter would love playing that game. They will most likely be playing that game when it comes out but not from me purchasing it for them, oh no sir. Their aunts and uncles will buy it for their birthday, much to my chagrin. I'm not going to lie. It's just how it is.

That demographic, the 5 - 10 year old boys, are not going to complain about the game not having 1:1 gameplay or that there are silly dancing storm troopers. In their head, they get to drive a fricken Star Wars pod racer and storm troop dance with their cousins. It's painful to watch from my end but then I have to give myself a swift kick in the ass and a reality check because I am acting as an elitist.

I have to remember what playing video games was all about. Fun.

I asked myself if this was taking away any enjoyment from the games that I am currently playing and the answer is no. This game nor the kinect is aimed at the passionate enthusiats so I am not going to get worked up because I have accepted this will continue to be around. It was in the past on a smaller scale and will be in the future but I know the games I enjoy playing will not disappear and I will still be catered to. It's just this industry got much bigger and I have to deal with it.

*sigh* I'll never understand kinect with games.
I mean, watching a movie and things like that (the menu integration) is cool.

I don't blame Lucas either. It's an ugly truth that for Star Wars games to be financially successful they have to sell directly to the more casual customer base. Looking at the video I know my son and daughter would love playing that game. They will most likely be playing that game when it comes out but not from me purchasing it for them, oh no sir. Their aunts and uncles will buy it for their birthday, much to my chagrin. I'm not going to lie. It's just how it is.

That demographic, the 5 - 10 year old boys, are not going to complain about the game not having 1:1 gameplay or that there are silly dancing storm troopers. In their head, they get to drive a fricken Star Wars pod racer and storm troop dance with their cousins. It's painful to watch from my end but then I have to give myself a swift kick in the ass and a reality check because I am acting as an elitist.

I have to remember what playing video games was all about. Fun.

I asked myself if this was taking away any enjoyment from the games that I am currently playing and the answer is no. This game nor the kinect is aimed at the passionate enthusiats so I am not going to get worked up because I have accepted this will continue to be around. It was in the past on a smaller scale and will be in the future but I know the games I enjoy playing will not disappear and I will still be catered to. It's just this industry got much bigger and I have to deal with it.

juradai

I don't think I'd feelcomfortable assuming exactly who the game is catered to. Sure, in this latest video, we have young kids playing it, but each time it was shown previously, it was being played by guys our age. Plus, you and I were once kids you forget -- would you have wanted to play this kind of simplified manure when you were young? I mean, I played some hardcore shi* when I was young and I know you did too. It's the Warner Brothers argument all over again, really. Cartoons suck these days by comparison and people always say their kids are fine with what's coming out, but that's because they don't know any different if they're introduced to trash at a young enough age. I mean, if you feed a kid dog food from the time he's born, he's not going to have filet mignon to compare it against, thus it is pretty damn okay in his eyes. Anyway, a bit tangential, but I think it's dangerous to just arbitrarily decree this kind of stuff as okay because of some perceived age bracket being marketed to. The bottom line as I see it is that the game looks like shi*, and I don't want anyone playing shi*, whether they're 5, 25, or 75.

I also disagree about the assertion that the games you are playing aren't disappearing... have you seen Microsoft's first party stable these days? If that isn't disappearing, I don't know what is. I mean, Microsoft has a small handful of studios left, and they're pumping money into... this? How does that not strike you as an increasingly divergent ratio? I'm not asking this sarcastically or angrily, btw, I genuinely want to know, because one thing I know about business is that money spent in one place comes from the same place money spent in another does. Therefore, if Microsoft is spending money on... this (to put it kindly), it stands to reason that that money could've been spent on something you and I would like to play, no?

I don't think I'd feelcomfortable assuming exactly who the game is catered to. Sure, in this latest video, we have young kids playing it, but each time it was shown previously, it was being played by guys our age. Plus, you and I were once kids you forget -- would you have wanted to play this kind of simplified manure when you were young? I mean, I played some hardcore shi* when I was young and I know you did too. It's the Warner Brothers argument all over again, really. Cartoons suck these days by comparison and people always say their kids are fine with what's coming out, but that's because they don't know any different if they're introduced to trash at a young enough age. I mean, if you feed a kid dog food from the time he's born, he's not going to have filet mignon to compare it against, thus it is pretty damn okay in his eyes. Anyway, a bit tangential, but I think it's dangerous to just arbitrarily decree this kind of stuff as okay because of some perceived age bracket being marketed to. The bottom line as I see it is that the game looks like shi*, and I don't want anyone playing shi*, whether they're 5, 25, or 75.

Shame-usBlackley

I'm just giving it the way I am experiencing it. Based on how both you and I feel and the thoughts you have expressed on the matter it is safe to assume we are not the target audience. You can have guys our age in an advertisement playing the Kinect and it still reach kids. Why? Because kids want to be grown-ups and they like Star Wars and things that are different such as hands free interactivity. We are talking about the touch screen generation after all.

I'm not going to go the rose-colored lens approach with what you said because I think what you are saying holds some merit. However, deciding what is sh*t is always going to be subjective, but is increasingly more so when you consider generational groups.Sure, we played some hardcore games but that's because there was nothing else available and, moreover, it was marketed to us exactly as all this is being marketed to them.

Humor me if you will, but throw ten kids in a room filled with what we had available and tell them they are going to have to play those games and they will hate you after five minutes of playing Robotron 2048. With that being said, I'm confident that our filet mignon is their dog food in most cases, and vice versa, needless to say.

I'm not saying I'm happy with it but I am saying I'm not concerned with it being an issue for my future gaming experiences. Regardless of how I feel companies are always going to try and expand the reach of their audience to increase the bottom-line because they know people like us are locked in as passionate about our hobby. In other words, they don't really have to convince us to play video games they just have to show us what is coming out and we come to our own decisions. Not usually so with the non-habitual player.

I also disagree about the assertion that the games you are playing aren't disappearing... have you seen Microsoft's first party stable these days? If that isn't disappearing, I don't know what is. I mean, Microsoft has a small handful of studios left, and they're pumping money into... this?

Shame-usBlackley

I do see Microsoft shrinking with 1st party studios. I am basing my "foresight" on 3rd party developers. I always have. The substantial growth in 3rd party developers is a good indicator of industry growth. There are more 3rd party developers out there than ever before. Fortunately, it's our generation that is creating most of the games and for the time being I can take solace in that.

How does that not strike you as an increasingly divergent ratio? I'm not asking this sarcastically or angrily, btw, I genuinely want to know, because one thing I know about business is that money spent in one place comes from the same place money spent in another does. Therefore, if Microsoft is spending money on... this (to put it kindly), it stands to reason that that money could've been spent on something you and I would like to play, no?

Shame-usBlackley

Yes.

[QUOTE="Shame-usBlackley"]

I'm just giving it the way I am experiencing it. Based on how both you and I feel and the thoughts you have expressed on the matter it is safe to assume we are not the target audience. You can have guys our age in an advertisement playing the Kinect and it still reach kids. Why? Because kids want to be grown-ups and they like Star Wars and things that are different such as hands free interactivity. We are talking about the touch screen generation after all.

I'm not going to go the rose-colored lens approach with what you said because I think what you are saying holds some merit. However, deciding what is sh*t is always going to be subjective, but is increasingly more so when you consider generational groups.Sure, we played some hardcore games but that's because there was nothing else available and, moreover, it was marketed to us exactly as all this is being marketed to them.

Humor me if you will, but throw ten kids in a room filled with what we had available and tell them they are going to have to play those games and they will hate you after five minutes of playing Robotron 2048. With that being said, I'm confident that our filet mignon is their dog food in most cases, and vice versa, needless to say.

I'm not saying I'm happy with it but I am saying I'm not concerned with it being an issue for my future gaming experiences. Regardless of how I feel companies are always going to try and expand the reach of their audience to increase the bottom-line because they know people like us are locked in as passionate about our hobby. In other words, they don't really have to convince us to play video games they just have to show us what is coming out and we come to our own decisions. Not usually so with the non-habitual player.

[QUOTE="Shame-usBlackley"]

I also disagree about the assertion that the games you are playing aren't disappearing... have you seen Microsoft's first party stable these days? If that isn't disappearing, I don't know what is. I mean, Microsoft has a small handful of studios left, and they're pumping money into... this?

juradai

I do see Microsoft shrinking with 1st party studios. I am basing my "foresight" on 3rd party developers. I always have. The substantial growth in 3rd party developers is a good indicator of industry growth. There are more 3rd party developers out there than ever before. Fortunately, it's our generation that is creating most of the games and for the time being I can take solace in that.

How does that not strike you as an increasingly divergent ratio? I'm not asking this sarcastically or angrily, btw, I genuinely want to know, because one thing I know about business is that money spent in one place comes from the same place money spent in another does. Therefore, if Microsoft is spending money on... this (to put it kindly), it stands to reason that that money could've been spent on something you and I would like to play, no?

Shame-usBlackley

Yes.

But see, I don't think shi* is subjective in this case. There has been evidence in previous kinect titles (as well as in this video itself) of significant lag. Note how during the dance section that the kids are still getting "perfects" even though they aren't doing the moves correctly? Say what you want about Robotron, but at least the controls worked, you know what I mean? I don't think there's a better case to be made for something being shi* other than it not working when the user intends for it to. Whether that involves pressing a button, or pulling a trigger, or flailing your hands around... it's all really moot if it doesn't work at the end of the day. I don't really think anyone should be subjected to shi* controls, but especially not kids, who are going to be playing games in the future, allegedly at least. There's a mindset that seems to be settling in that shi* games are acceptable BECAUSE they're intended for kids, and that's just backward-thinking as far as I'm concerned. It's not an age issue. Shi* is shi*, no matter how wrinkled the user is experiencing it. The dog food to steak analogy still holds because that's not a subjective observation, but an objective one based on mechanics.

It would also be another thing if these types of games were paying off for Microsoft, but kinect has been out for over a year and a half, and has not had one title that really set the world on fire, despite a captive audience of 18 million kinect users according to MS' numbers. By the time the 360 had 18 million users playing conventional games, they were consistently selling million-unit software titles. That has not been the case with kinect, which developers seem to have issues even coming to terms with conceptual uses for (that's likely why this Star Wars title has a dance mini-game in it -- because it's one of the few cookie cutter bits of design that actually does work with the device).

3rd parties are great -- they drive the industry, in fact. However, should we really make excuses for lack of first-party support by using ample third-party titles as a crutch? I've never heard the argument that someone feels they have way too many good games to play and doesn't really want any more, but I don't think I'd buy it if I did.

Further, look at what the competition is offering. Sony is consistently seeking out, grooming, and producing teams that produce high-quality in-house content. Why should we look the other way for Microsoft, especially in a competitive market? Sony is spending (investing) in their future, which bodes well for people who buy Playstation products. If all things are equal, and third-parties release comparable titles on both platforms, why would anyone want the platform without first-party content to go along with it? It's easy to lose sight of this as a good number of games come out from third-parties to really spotlight the deficiency in first-party support, but it's there... and will have a significant impact on how the 360 (and its successor) fares. What incentive does Microsoft have to become more productive with titles if their own audience is going to justify the lack of for them? That's really what I don't get here... I hear people justifying an inferior experience (diminished first party output) because of superior ancillary experiences (high third-party output), and to me that makes no sense whatsoever. Why not get the best of everything and pick and choose what to play? It would drive me nuts if I only had an Xbox and people with Playstations were getting everything I was AND a bunch of rad first-party games, and Microsoft's response was to make a bunch of kinect titles, but maybe that's just me.

But see, I don't think shi* is subjective in this case. There has been evidence in previous kinect titles (as well as in this video itself) of significant lag. Note how during the dance section that the kids are still getting "perfects" even though they aren't doing the moves correctly? Say what you want about Robotron, but at least the controls worked, you know what I mean? I don't think there's a better case to be made for something being shi* other than it not working when the user intends for it to. Whether that involves pressing a button, or pulling a trigger, or flailing your hands around... it's all really moot if it doesn't work at the end of the day. I don't really think anyone should be subjected to shi* controls, but especially not kids, who are going to be playing games in the future, allegedly at least. There's a mindset that seems to be settling in that shi* games are acceptable BECAUSE they're intended for kids, and that's just backward-thinking as far as I'm concerned. It's not an age issue. Shi* is shi*, no matter how wrinkled the user is experiencing it. The dog food to steak analogy still holds because that's not a subjective observation, but an objective one based on mechanics.

It would also be another thing if these types of games were paying off for Microsoft, but kinect has been out for over a year and a half, and has not had one title that really set the world on fire, despite a captive audience of 18 million kinect users according to MS' numbers. By the time the 360 had 18 million users playing conventional games, they were consistently selling million-unit software titles. That has not been the case with kinect, which developers seem to have issues even coming to terms with conceptual uses for (that's likely why this Star Wars title has a dance mini-game in it -- because it's one of the few cookie cutter bits of design that actually does work with the device).

3rd parties are great -- they drive the industry, in fact. However, should we really make excuses for lack of first-party support by using ample third-party titles as a crutch? I've never heard the argument that someone feels they have way too many good games to play and doesn't really want any more, but I don't think I'd buy it if I did.

Further, look at what the competition is offering. Sony is consistently seeking out, grooming, and producing teams that produce high-quality in-house content. Why should we look the other way for Microsoft, especially in a competitive market? Sony is spending (investing) in their future, which bodes well for people who buy Playstation products. If all things are equal, and third-parties release comparable titles on both platforms, why would anyone want the platform without first-party content to go along with it? It's easy to lose sight of this as a good number of games come out from third-parties to really spotlight the deficiency in first-party support, but it's there... and will have a significant impact on how the 360 (and its successor) fares. What incentive does Microsoft have to become more productive with titles if their own audience is going to justify the lack of for them? That's really what I don't get here... I hear people justifying an inferior experience (diminished first party output) because of superior ancillary experiences (high third-party output), and to me that makes no sense whatsoever. Why not get the best of everything and pick and choose what to play? It would drive me nuts if I only had an Xbox and people with Playstations were getting everything I was AND a bunch of rad first-party games, and Microsoft's response was to make a bunch of kinect titles, but maybe that's just me.

Shame-usBlackley

But…

The key difference between what I had experienced and what he is/will experience is that I AM there to be able to enlighten him on expectations and standards. Sure, he will have his cheap thrill with the Kinect but he will also enjoy the open world and richness of Skyrim, the depth and intensity of Alan Wake and the detailed environments and communication tree of Mass Effect and much more.

I don't see our target demographic getting shorted and I don't see the big three doing anything any different than the companies before them did. To me, it's business as always, just refined.

Let's get this very clear. I am not condoning the direction. I am merely stating that this is what is happening and this has been the effect. However, it is cyclical if not temporary.

From my perspective, this is the younger generation's version of the Atari 7800/Vetrex Console/Virtual Boy (take your pick) eras we had experienced with the difference being that the market can actually support these developments without causing a collapse ('77 and '83) because there is a much bigger pool to draw from.

I think it will all pass. Look no further than our very own first generation of video game consoles and the Magnovox Odyssey playing Pong. How many other dedicated consoles with copycat Pong games came out to oversaturate the market after the initial success of it? For the present, Microsoft won the copycat motion control war.Not Sony. If Sony would have taken the mantle instead of Microsoft do you think they would be grooming and cultivating these in-house teams you speak of?

It's the nature of the beast and unfortunately we love what it offers on one side as much as we despise it on the other.

loosingENDS approves this game.

Another Kinect Video with extremely bad acting and no real 1:1 gameplay. Kinect is a joke

"it's great to be in the eeeeeempire today"

seanmcloughlin

Why does it say awesome on the storm troopers crotch when they hit a move. Why is there dancing in this game.

What is this...

Just when I thought Stormtroopers couldn't become any less threatening...

Why does it say awesome on the storm troopers crotch when they hit a move. Why is there dancing in this game.

What is this...

Haziqonfire

Just what I was going to comment on.

This video is so bad I figure it has to be real, only Kinect itself could produce garbage like this.

Seriously, what the hell is LucasArts up to? Where is Battlefront 3?!?!?

Another better with Kinect game.

Another better with Kinect game.TheFallenDemon

More like, "better" with Kinect. Can't forget the quote marks!

When I state this as being subjective I am applying it to the end result. Fun for the end user. Like I said, my son and his 9 year old friends aren't going to b*tch about latency. They are having fun. Period.

But…

The key difference between what I had experienced and what he is/will experience is that I AM there to be able to enlighten him on expectations and standards. Sure, he will have his cheap thrill with the Kinect but he will also enjoy the open world and richness of Skyrim, the depth and intensity of Alan Wake and the detailed environments and communication tree of Mass Effect and much more.

I don't see our target demographic getting shorted and I don't see the big three doing anything any different than the companies before them did. To me, it's business as always, just refined.

Let's get this very clear. I am not condoning the direction. I am merely stating that this is what is happening and this has been the effect. However, it is cyclical if not temporary.

From my perspective, this is the younger generation's version of the Atari 7800/Vetrex Console/Virtual Boy (take your pick) eras we had experienced with the difference being that the market can actually support these developments without causing a collapse ('77 and '83) because there is a much bigger pool to draw from.

I think it will all pass. Look no further than our very own first generation of video game consoles and the Magnovox Odyssey playing Pong. How many other dedicated consoles with copycat Pong games came out to oversaturate the market after the initial success of it? For the present, Microsoft won the copycat motion control war.Not Sony. If Sony would have taken the mantle instead of Microsoft do you think they would be grooming and cultivating these in-house teams you speak of?

It's the nature of the beast and unfortunately we love what it offers on one side as much as we despise it on the other.

juradai

I don't know man, maybe it's a generational thing, but it sounds like you're really selling kids short. I say this because at 9 years-old, I'd fuc*ing lose my mind in an arcade if a button didn't register and it cost me a life or my game to end. Believe me, I got kicked out of the corner liquor store more than once for beating on a machine that had a sticky button or a stick that didn't register all the time. It wasn't much different at home, to be honest. I was having fun too, of course. But that doesn't go hand in hand with being okay with shi* not working. I don't see how those two emotions are correlated. At all. Even at that young age I realized that I was paying for a product, whether it was by dropping a quarter in a slot or walking into KB Toys and talking my mom out of thirty or forty bills for a game (this was, of course, AFTER I had convinced her to spend a few hundred on the hardware). As such, I expected my games to respond when I pressed the button. Consistently. Each time. Every time. Perhaps I just have uncompomising standards when it comes to my skill and success in a game not being hindered or handicapped by the game itself or any outside influences other than my own reflexes, I don't know.

Bottom line: I think you can have fun and still expect your shi* to work. That's pretty far from being unreasonable if you ask me.

As for business as usual, I just don't agree. Mainly because Microsoft chasing Nintendo leads them to nowhere. Nintendo built an enormous castle made of nothing but sand. It was a paper tiger. Their numbers looked fantastic on paper but they never produced much fruit. A bunch of noise but little substance. Why Microsoft wants to chase that buyer, and further, expects that buyer to act any differently with them than they did with Nintendo is beyond me. I know a lot of people with Wiis who haven't bought software on them in a year. That's no joke. Even when the system had some games coming out, they weren't interested. They bought the system to play Wii Sports and that was it. What good does it do Microsoft to sell someone a kinect for Kinect Sports only to have them play that and only that and never turn it on again when they get tired of it? Previous generations didn't spawn leaders that were also failures... that is distinctly unique to this generation. And further, the guys in second place never followed a failed experiment off the cliff. I didn't see Nintendo copying the Sega CD or Sega busting out ROB THE ROBOT knockoffs. There seemed to be much more sensibility to the market back then, mostly because when an idea failed or whose time had not yet arrived came out everyone pretty much realized it and bailed the fuc* out on the idea of copying it. Not so with these jerkoffs.

The Odyssey and Atari days may not be good examples -- after all, they DID crash the market. Who is to say the industry is strong enough to not crash again, especially when the market keeps pushing so hard in so many wrong directions (bleeding people for DLC, high game prices, high system prices, pricey add-ons, high failure rates, etc.)? And yes, I do believe Sony would be cultivating developers, because they've done that whether they are leading the industry or whether they're trailing. It's just how they roll, and there's a consistency there -- a focus -- that Microsoft USED to have; a sense of confidence that no matter what, you were gonna get some awesome stuff to play that you couldn't get anywhere else. Now we get flail games and parlor tricks for people who don't like games on Microsoft's machine, and that irks people who were there and saw what the company was capable of back when they were really trying a few years ago.

[QUOTE="TheFallenDemon"]Another better with Kinect game.c_rake

More like, "better" with Kinect. Can't forget the quote marks!

I still think "Doesn't get worse with Kinect" would be a far more honest slogan.Black_Knight_00

Indeed. But honestly doesn't sell Kinect's. Unless they somehow successfully spin that as a positive. Now that I'd like to see.

[QUOTE="Black_Knight_00"]I still think "Doesn't get worse with Kinect" would be a far more honest slogan.c_rake

Indeed. But honestly doesn't sell Kinect's. Unless they somehow successfully spin that as a positive. Now that I'd like to see.

I think the problem here is that Kinect doesn't sell Kinect :PBlack_Knight_00

Haha! Good point.