Top
80°

Why Yielding to Gamer Demands May Be Bad for Microsoft

TG writes, "Ever since Microsoft detailed the Xbox One's restrictive online policies and potentially intrusive Kinect sensor at the E3 2013 conference, fans have been clamoring for change. Slowly but surely, Microsoft has been acquiescing, first by eliminating mandatory online check-ins, and more recently, by making the Kinect an optional piece of hardware (even though users must buy the peripheral along with the system)."

Read Full Story >>
tomsguide.com
The story is too old to be commented.
jmc88881868d ago (Edited 1868d ago )

This article makes no sense.

The only things removed by Microsoft are asinine things that didn't benefit the buyer.

How does that make the system far different at its core?

None of their requirements were based on necessity. They were all out of desire for power and control by MS.

How is their vision, as piss poor 20/2000 as it was, changed? All the features are still there, and the game sharing one was always complete bs. Anything they took away can still be done.

People keep conflating the two...they needed THIS...to do THIS.

All of that was completely wrong. They DIDN'T need ANYTHING...to do THIS.

So how is this bad for Microsoft? What was bad...is that they ATTEMPTED it.

Now for the first time, people who don't want to be exploited, don't want to be spied on, and want control over their games and console now have the option to purchase an Xbox One. People weren't going to budge. Halo is a fun game, but it cannot serve as a basis for a Faustian bargain.

Millions if not tens of millions of people will now buy one when they wouldn't have otherwise. (of course not all by day 1)

Sticking to their asinine decisions would not have netted them anything, and simply would have lost them more.

jimbobwahey1868d ago

Microsoft weren't listening to gamer demands anyway. They were freaking out at how pathetically low preorders for Xbox One are and trying to do anything they can to get people to consider their console again.

theWB271868d ago

I try to convey this same message. Money speaks, and if any company continues to sell despite people complaining, then much won't change. When that bottom line is affected, we see change and they cater more.

Case in point- COD. A ton of people complain about how rehashed it is but it sells like hotcakes. So why change much...

dark-hollow1868d ago

Nothing speaks louder than money.

Majority of companies won't listen to some gaming forums demands, but not buying the product is the best way to get your voice heard loud and clear.

jmc88881868d ago

You guys read the above and didn't clearly get that MONEY was the issue?

Millions if not tens of millions of people will now be open to buying one.

How can people not infer that as $$$ being the primary factor?

theWB271868d ago

Because you talked about being spied on, how bad their vision was, the system at its core.

None of that other stuff matters. The only reason their vision wasn't up to snuff is because of sells. If they were dominating preorders then their same vision would have been looked at differently because consumer demand was there.

That "millions if not tens of millions of people will no be open to buying one statement" doesn't tell us it was about the money. Coupled with everything else you wrote it means they listened to consumers and now they're open to more sells. When it wasn't about that...only money.

Nocando1868d ago

Otherwise, why bother to invest in the XB1? Is Sony now a charitable foundation? And please, no "lesser of two evils" speech.

1868d ago
andreasx1868d ago

Seeing as MSFT is having trouble fullfilling demands, ps4 is gonna trample the xbone in every continent.

New world order LoL

Transporter471868d ago

MS wasn't ready, but Sony was

dark-hollow1868d ago

Not reversing the original restrictions have permanent damage to xbone sales, while bad pr and the 180s will be forgotten in the upcoming years.

They did the right thing.

ziggurcat1868d ago

i don't see how any of it is bad.

Show all comments (14)