Was Sony right to pull the plug on the Camera?

  • 51 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for kuu2
kuu2

12067

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#51  Edited By kuu2
Member since 2005 • 12067 Posts

@M8ingSeezun said:

@kuu2 said:

@M8ingSeezun said:

Yes.

I like simplicity and gaming. PS4 provides with what I need and want from a gaming machine so far. It's good as an Optional Peripheral for those that want it.

And no games. it is a great console if you are willing to overlook that point.

It will have games, numb nuts. Stop gargling Bill Gates' semen.

Yeah but it doesn't so why buy it now????

You seem to know Gates in a way that I am unaware of.

Avatar image for Netherscourge
Netherscourge

16364

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#52 Netherscourge
Member since 2003 • 16364 Posts

@DrRockso87 said:

Honest question. I know the usual response will be: "Yes, because motion gaming sucks" but seriously, do you think Sony should have included ("forced") the camera with every PS4 purchase? Or was Sony right to remove it in order to drop the price down to $400?

I ask because, I have the camera and honestly, it's not bad. Probably not as responsive as Xbox One's (I can't compare since there are no demos for it in stores I've seen) but it works pretty well. Plus, Sony's The Playroom is surprisingly entertaining (my little cousins and family went ape over it).

But Sony removed it from the package to lower the price and not "force" it on consumers that don't want it, unlike Microsoft that bundled it with each system sold. Basically, now the Kinect base will be every Xbox owner so developers will have more incentive to utilize the Kinect whereas developers will most likely neglect using the PlayStation camera due to the low install base (which, again, somewhat upsets me because it's a cool piece of tech).

So, I ask, was Sony right to remove the camera, thus decreasing the camera's potential capabilities in order to combat Microsoft's price? Or were they smart to because not every consumer is interested nor should be forced to have one?

TL:DR - Sony removes the camera, less people buy or care about it. Good or bad for PS4's future?

Yes, making the camera optional was a good idea:

1. Lowers the price of the base unit.

2. Motion technology is a gimmick. Nonetheless, if people want it, it's optional accessory.

3. The Kinect offers nothing to gaming that the PS Camera can't do also. (Leaning, swinging at objects, etc...)

4. Very, very few games will REQUIRE a Kinect/PS Camera to function, except games built SPECIFICALLY for those devices, in which case you can just buy the camera separately IF you even care about those games.

5. Big-named games will never REQUIRE a Kinect/PS Camera to function. Whatever features they add will be optional.

6. Any multiplats that have Kinect features will also have similar PS Camera features, for people who choose to buy one.

So, in the end, Kinect is an overpriced gimmick that will never make an unmatched gaming experience. It's a waste of money for those who never intend to use it.