Microsoft: Xbox One Won't Require Kinect To Function 216
UnknowingFool writes "Microsoft has reversed course on another aspect of the Xbox One. Though Xbox One will come bundled with a Kinect sensor, the console will work without it. Critics were had suggested that an always-on video and audio sensor could be used to spy on users. Microsoft's Marc Whitten said, 'Games use Kinect in a variety of amazing ways from adding voice to control your squad mates to adding lean and other simple controls beyond the controller to full immersive gameplay. That said, like online, the console will still function if Kinect isn't plugged in, although you won't be able to use any feature or experience that explicitly uses the sensor.' This is the latest reversal from Microsoft since they killed the phone-home DRM and made it region-free."
Ok, so it won't. At launch, that is. (Score:5, Insightful)
Will it still not require always-on and Kinect-connected after a year? I'll wait to see.
Re:Rock and a hard place (Score:5, Insightful)
I think a substantial portion of the population WILL still use it. Microsoft's stance change solely means they want to turn off the most vocal naysayers, that's all there is to it.
Re:Rock and a hard place (Score:5, Insightful)
I think developers, knowing that players will at least have the hardware, will be free to make Kinect required for their specific games. I'm imagining some kind of art on game cases to specify this, like there was for the 360.
The fact is, most games/developers weren't going to use that rubbish anyway. That kind of control simply isn't the future because people don't WANT to play games and use interfaces that way. It's FAR more of a hassle to wave your hands around than it is to just push a button or move a control stick. If it was 100% reliable like handheld controllers are it'd be one thing, but the kinect as it stands has like a 40% success rate at actually understanding what you're trying to get it to do.
Doesn't matter ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Sorry Microsoft, but it just doesn't matter any more.
You've told us where you'd like to go with this, you've as much as told us you don't give a shit about what it is that we want.
So, as much as I like my XBox 360 -- I won't be replacing it. Certainly not with this thing which is more about what Microsoft wants than what is good for consumers.
My XBox 360 got banished from a network connection when I started seeing ads in the home screen and in the games -- and as much as you keep trying to back pedal, the damage is done, and I am not interested in your shiny new toy.
Maybe if you hadn't acted like such arrogant assholes who said "this is what we're making, deal with it", consumers wouldn't be saying "well, we're not buying it, deal with it".
Instead, I can say quite heartily ... not buying it, don't care, and go pound sand.
Re:Rock and a hard place (Score:5, Insightful)
Simple answer, really...
They'll see if they can slip all that DRM and restriction back in once enough customers have bought one. They'll claim that piracy is massive, and that they had to take drastic steps, etc.
Sort of like how Sony popped in that little update on the PS3 that killed OtherOS, but this time with an excuse that the common folk will rationalize.
Re:Rock and a hard place (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Rock and a hard place (Score:5, Insightful)
Quite simply, the main feature Microsoft has been touting to advertisers is the ability to detect who is in the room and target ads accordingly. The gold mine is not in Kinect for games, its for the TV/Video/Music/Netflix/Hulu consumption and the "big data" of being to tell that there is a 30-35 white male (recognized and tracked via Bing), 30-35 white female (Not logged in but we know her profile), and another 25-30 female guest that we have an 90% confidence is person Y who has a bing account. Lets target Ad X, Y and not Z.
MS will put Nielsen to shame with all that mineable data. There will be still be people who leave the MS eye on all the time, at least now you have the option to unplug it.
Re:Rock and a hard place (Score:5, Insightful)
unwillingness to admit that they were implementing features users did not like.
That's because with MS Office or Windows they never have to! They are too used to having users suck it up and deal with whatever unwanted features happened (or whatever wanted features did not happen).
Actually having to deal with customer demands is a relatively new experience for Microsoft.
Re:Doesn't matter ... (Score:5, Insightful)
This, exactly.
Imagine you're looking to go on a cruise. You shop around for a cruise ship to go on. It'll cost a pretty penny and there are ships of various sizes and quality. And then there's this crazy captain that, while his ship is new and shiny, openly states that all passengers will be shackled, chained to an oar, and sold to the highest bidder once they reach port. Upon hearing the lament of the crowd, and hardly anyone signing up, he has a change of heart: No shackles, no chains. So come on, we're all looking for a good time here. I've turned over a new leaf. Trust me. I don't REALLY want to brutally dominate your every waking moment. It was just a silly idea I was floating out there. Hey! If you don't like chains, I don't like chains. Not that I'm saying the chains were a bad idea. I still think you'd really like them. But for now there will be no chains on my ship.
Re:Rock and a hard place (Score:4, Insightful)
BUT most games are ported between platforms. So gone is this notion of "it will always be there". It won't.
Re:We already have those, they're called PCs (Score:4, Insightful)
This makes it different from any mainstream desktop (and most laptops) with a webcam from any point in the past decade...
1) When my computer is off, the camera and microphone are off. Yelling at it or waving at it won't turn it on. Your welcome to try if you like.
2) The camera and microphone are not usually on even when the computer is on, and is certainly not a standard mandatory requirement for anything except recording/transmitting audio-video. I'm certainly not required to have the microphone and camera on to use my computer. And I am confident that when the camera light isn't on, the camera isn't on, which is most of the time. Contrast that to a camera that's on 24x7.
3) When they are off the network is off too. There is no network traffic. The DHCP leases expire. The unit does not respond over the network.
4) I have a lot more control over the software that runs on my computer in general than one does over an xbox. Sure its incomplete. But its also not designed and purpose built to be installed in my living room running 24x7.
5) My laptop is usually shut when in not in use making illicit video capture pretty worthless outside of when im using it. And when I'm using it, it tends to see me from the chest up and the back of my couch or chair, vs having a permanent unobstructed view of my entire living area.
They just aren't the same thing.
Seriously, this whole "Kinect is spying on you for the NSA!" meme is, and I will not mince words, idiotic.
I agree with you here. I don't think its happening. I'm sadly not at all confident it will remain that way. And here is why -- and its not because I think the NSA is pressuring microsoft to do it.
Lets take a look at some of the new SmartTVs. These are a security and privacy nightmare. Like the xbox one they are cameras / mics in the TV in your living room, connected to the internet, and always on.
What do we know about them:
-- They are always on.
--They are ALREADY sending all kinds of audio/video data to the internet:
-- for innocuous reasons: such as usage trends for product development, product improvement, etc
-- video calls etc which is fine
-- for other value added features (home security / monitoring in particular ) *
And in the case of Microsoft, they have already boasted that it will be also be using the data captured by camera for advertising / customer profiling features.
So do I think the NSA is in bed with microsoft recording everyone through kinect? No. I really don't.
But do I think we're a baby step away from the NSA handing Microsoft or the smarttv vendors a secret warrant to watch people through their own TV or xbox on the thinnest of pretenses? Yeah, I do. In fact I would be surprised if it isn't happening already.
*Especially with the home-security stuff. I don't think xbox one has actually advertised the ability to use it as a home security system, but i think its inevitable. I mean, its already further ahead than anything else. There's even a documented use-case where the the console will scan a room with facial recognition and ask anyone it doesn't recognize to identify themselves so it can create a user profile for them. This was in the context of gaming / user (advertising) profiles.
But anyone who doesn't see an xbox one security monitoring app coming that combines always on/always connected, facial recognition, and cloud access to audio/images/stored and live video has their head deep deep in the sand.
We already know we have no legal expectation of privacy on anything we send to a 3rd party via the internet. So we shouldn't be surprised if the NSA is watching.
To paraphrase you, Not to mince words, but only an IDIOT would think the NSA wouldn't be able to put their hands on that feed if they had the slightest desire to.
And hell, given the security record of the smart TV makers, the neighbors kids could watch you through your TV too, never mind requiring the deep pockets and boundless authority of the US government security apparatus.
The only reason I don't care much about smartTVs as the xbox, is that I personally don't have any need to attach it to the internet in the first place. Whereas an xbox all but requires it to do anything useful.
Re:Rock and a hard place (Score:4, Insightful)
You can't really apply logic to the actions of any of the console manufacturers. WiiU is a flop, Xbone is a train wreck, and the PS4 is only praised for not fucking up.
Did you miss all the updates the 360 received over it's tenure? Many added features, but most increased restrictions, closed loopholes, and offline ban-flagged consoles so that when they went back online they were instantly banned. Many updates actually removed features such as Facebook, Twitter, and Netflix Party mode. Granted they may have been sparsely used, but it comes down to the argument of who owns the right to define how the consumer uses legally purchased hardware and what rights the user has to modify said hardware if it's operating code is copyrighted by someone else.
Singling out the PS3 as if it were "exactly one time in console history" that a vendor changed the capabilities of a system is at best dishonest and at worst a feeble attempt to make the PS4 look less appealing while doing nothing to improve the standing of the Xbone. With all three consoles failing spectacularly, the clear winner for next-gen is Steam.