Xbox One Policy Reversal: Power to the people or devious marketing tactics?

Recently Microsoft made a number of changes to their Xbox One software; as of June 19^th the system is no longer always online, now allows the selling of used games and all Xbox One games will be region free. This move according to Microsoft Entertainment President Don Mattrick came as a result of player feedback; indeed very rarely has a change this substantial been brought about solely by consumers alone and it proves that we have the power to shape the product we are interested in buying. This can be applied not only to the gaming industry but possibly for any product put up for sale. Imagine if enough people complained or gave negative feedback to an article of clothing or a food product; the company would take the item back and modify it for consumer satisfaction. Not everyone would be satisfied but a strong majority would be; proving that consumer satisfaction is and should be held in top regard it order for profits to be made. Up to this point I thought that Microsoft had a primary focus on making as much money as possible be it by charging for online play or its initial restrictions for Xbox One; perhaps the community taught them a lesson in this respect by showing that we as fans and consumers matter.

But is it really all fine and dandy for Microsoft’s new system now? Does this mean that the console automatically has a chance against its competitors? Were they paying attention to the fans or the falling pre-order numbers? Questionable design points about the system continue to surround Microsoft, especially where the required Kinect 2.0 is concerned. The peripheral which will come bundled with every Xbox One console will, according to the Rolling Stone magazine is "always on." It's able to identify individuals based on face and body recognition, works in the dark, records audio and is constantly connected to the Internet and 300,000 Microsoft servers. This combined with the unearthed news of the NSA collecting US phone and email records could imply an invasion of privacy on a gargantuan scale (although this may not spread to other countries worldwide). This may not be the case at all; Microsoft have stated that the Kinect has to be connected to the system but in turn, users will have complete control over what the device can sense.

Furthermore digital rights management is usually software built into a piece of technology and Microsoft initially built the system with this in mind. If it was this simple to reverse the controversial policies the system possessed then could this mean that the software will still lurk about on the system? Once the console sells enough units over several years, what’s to stop the company from flipping the DRM switch, explaining that consumers are now ready for always online? This may be proved otherwise in the coming years but it can also be argued that the policies were dropped to better compete with its main competitor, PlayStation 4. At E3 this year Sony hammered down hard on Microsoft’s policies and as a result pre order numbers for their system increased significantly. In a desperate attempt to rise to the same level as Sony, Microsoft dropped the policies to make their system more attractive and while this has shifted some opinions about the Xbox One, others still need a great deal of convincing to believe in the company’s vision.

Of course these concerns have only been suggested rather than confirmed; Microsoft’s vague PR teams and methods of giving information have baffled many a consumer and gaming journalist. If the company were to fully debunk all the concerns of the Xbox One then consumers would likely have much more trust and may be more inclined to buy the product upon its launch at the end of this year.