As a professional video game journalist, I like to keep my promise of "the hottest trends in videogames as soon as they become available to me" to my loyal readers. This time, though, I went a little out of my way to get you the scoop on the latest in video-game technology. Yes, I WENT to Best Buy and gave the Kinect on display a try. I even took a small focus group (my kids) with me.
Just in case you live under a rock (that would explain you reading this blog); the Kinect promises to abolish controllers by having a camera interpret your movements.
If I were to describe our experience with the system with one word, it would be FRUSTRATING (in all caps). The smaller kids had no idea what was going on and we had to constantly shout instructions from the sidelines. The oldest knew what was going on thanks to the system's constant nagging: "Stand back" "move left" "move forward" "clean your room" "eat your vegetables". The system constantly reminds you that it's YOU that has to adjust to IT. In the end the kids and I were frustrated because we kept "losing" regardless of how hard we tried, simply because the avatars took their sweet time before deciding to follow our commands.
To be fair we only tried one game, Kinect Adventures. However, this is the pack-in game for the device; I can judge the system based on this one game's performance alone. Pack-in games should be the standard for a piece of hardware. Much like Super Mario Bros./Duck Hunt, this software was developed together with the hardware and should fully take advantage of every feature.
I keep reading that "it takes a while to get used to the controls" on most reviews, and it's probably a good way to describe it. I mean, it would also take a while to get used to being raped by an elephant. You just have to relax and embrace the pain until your body becomes numb! So, are you going to let Microsoft shove a lascivious pachyderm into your living room and tell you to like it?
Sure, jumping around and swinging at the TV is fun, but that's because of the novelty of the whole situation, and because, DUH, you're freaking jumping around! Whee! Eventually you realize that all the fun is taking place on your side of the screen and the game is trying to keep up, and failing.
Remember buttons? What was the response time on those things, a millisecond? How did our grandparents manage? OMG I'm so glad I live in the future, where there's Kinect! The game has a one (1) second lag between what you do and what your avatar actually does. Say "one Mississippi" out loud; that's how long it takes for your "guy" to swing at that ball, and they expect you to get used to this. I read someone mention some players may have troubling adjusting to the "timing based" controls. I suppose one could eventually, subconsciously, begin moving ahead of time to anticipate for the lag, just as long as they keep making games in which things come at you… ever… so… slowly…
Just when things are starting to get interesting, a sign takes 15% of your screen to warn you that you're getting too close… or too far… or that maybe you're having too much fun. Then there's also the fact that your living room may not be large enough for it, or that it may not like the color of your walls or what you're wearing.
To add insult to injury, when you're done (more like when it's done with you) you're shown a couple pictures how much you look like a total assclown, flailing and jumping in the middle of a living room with a clueless look on your face.
Even though the Kinect is supposed to have an excellent voice recognition system, they opted to have you "reach" for on-screen buttons to navigate the menus. Again you find yourself looking like an assclown, reaching for something that doesn't exist, with no clue as of where it is in relation to you. Instead you have to rely on your "reflection" on the screen. Just when you can't stretch and tiptoe enough and kind of stumble forward, then it expects you to hold the pose for a second to interpret it as a click.
Going back to the Virtual Reality games of old; I must admit that I've always thought it'd be stupid playing videogames with absolutely NO tactile feedback. I felt it'd be awkward. At least with a controller, you feel something in your hand. You push the button and you know how far it can go. You know the pressing of the button stands for the action and its imminent consequences. You press A to jump, then you watch as the plumber goes up and eventually down into an endless abyss or onto a helpless goomba. When I heard of the Kinect I thought all my questions would finally be answered. If you played a kung fu game, and you threw a fist, what would your character do when you hit? Would the fist keep going through its foe's body, ignoring the excess force? Would it keep pushing forward in complete disregard for the laws of physics, sending the polygonal dummy into orbit? If you play a driving game, how does the game know how far have you pushed the pedal? How would you know? How high do you have to lift your leg to make sure you're not stepping on the gas still? Looks like I still have to wait for a few more decades for my answers. I'm disappointed with the "future of video games".
In conclusion, the system has great potential and I'm pretty sure it'll get better. What bothers me is that it is simply not ready for the market, and instead of fixing it, Microsoft is somehow convincing the media (hence the consumers) that they should deal with it and learn to love it. This concept is fairly new and is still evolving, and I'm sure in a few years Microsoft may iron out the wrinkles and make the experience as life-altering as they claim, right out of the box. In the meantime, treat this game like a novelty arcade machine; play it at someone else's place until the novelty wears off.
