Microsoft's dependence on data trends and telemetry lacks human intuition

Source: Windows Central

This article is unscientific. I don't have any data to support my claims. And indeed, the opposite of my claims could very well exist truthful. I'yard also in a very piece of cake position. My choices don't impact hundreds, perhaps thousands of employees, their families, and shareholder investments. Information technology's with this in mind that I very much understand why Microsoft is so obsessed with data. Yet, their decisions are often inexplainable, and produce cascading unintended effects that atomic number 82 to partial, and sometimes, total, retraction.

Case in point: Last week, Microsoft announced that new customers on Xbox Live Gold would need to pay twice to access online multiplayer what its closest competitor charges. A year of Xbox Live Gold was going up to $120 dollars, while Sony's PlayStation Plus costs but $60. The backlash was rapid and intense across social media, with Reddit communities incensed, YouTube rendering queues enflamed, and blogs in rapid-fire. And hey, I even wrote my own article on the affair.

While I was comatose (and aye, I practise sleep sometimes!), Microsoft not only did a total 180, reverting the price increase, they also lifted Xbox Live Gold's subscription requirement on costless-to-play online games, similar Fortnite and Rocket League. Then, in some crazy way, nosotros're actually meliorate off now than earlier the backlash, although it stands to reason the gratis-to-play restriction was probably already in the works.

Regardless, this isn't the first time Microsoft has had to revert an unpopular change. And, wholly unscientifically, I feel information technology in my gut that information technology has something to practice with Microsoft's over-reliance on "data."

Patently, information is extremely important

Xfest Data Slide Source: Windows Primal XFest is an event where Microsoft shares data and insights with game developers.

Microsoft is a massive company with massive audiences. Using the Xbox Alive Gilt event as an example, Microsoft says there are roughly 65 meg or more than Xbox Live users on a monthly basis, and while all of those aren't necessarily Gold subscribers, a large chunk of them undoubtedly are.

Millions and millions of customers all have different motivations and values, and understanding these motivations and values is of disquisitional importance when building platforms and products. It'south user research that probably allow to Microsoft splitting the next-gen Xbox offering two SKUs, with a more than affordable Xbox Series S targeting users who take no intention to upgrade to a 4K UHD Tv, and the Xbox Serial X for the cutting-edge hardcore gamer.

Microsoft often merely doesn't seem to get humans.

Microsoft is on the record saying that they expect the Xbox Serial S to sell more than over the span of the generation, and historical trends and data would advise that they're right. Some things are a trivial more measurable than others, though.

When it comes to things like chemical science and physics, we tin can measure out things more than accurately using tools and mathematics. The problem with user-driven information is that information technology assumes a homo existence is a reliable source of data. Information technology assumes that a human knows what they want, and what they value when asked to recall it for a survey. Social and psychological studies tell us that this is often not the case, and when you merge this data with an agenda, biases tin emerge.

Purely hypothetically, someone at Microsoft might've idea that data suggesting most new users go straight to Xbox Game Pass Ultimate was evidence enough that Xbox Live Aureate could be essentially "phased out" past pricing itself out of the market. Hypothetically once again, if this was the case, did Microsoft account for the empathy its customers felt despite the fact about of them weren't going to exist affected past this change?

What near the human element?

Xbox Live Gold People Source: Microsoft

Microsoft made some effort in this whole debacle to avoid a backlash by grandfathering existing subscribers at the aforementioned cost they pay now. If you are a current subscriber in the Xbox Live Gold ecosystem, yous wouldn't have been affected by this change at all. In fact, Microsoft even offers long-term Xbox Live Gold members the opportunity to catechumen their subscription to Xbox Game Pass Ultimate at no additional toll, which is a huge saving.

I practice wonder if Microsoft thought that nigh people wouldn't have cared about all of this, because the vast, vast majority of users weren't going to be affected in whatsoever fashion.

When I read the news, the first thing I idea wasn't "heh, this isn't going to affect me because I have Xbox Game Pass Ultimate until 2023 anyway," information technology was "well, that really fucking sucks for parents of modest kids who may be struggling in the midst of this unprecedented global pandemic." I have memories of my parents fighting over money. We used to get all games second paw. There's a huge argue in the Uk over making sure kids from poor families are still able to admission free meals while schools are closed.

Xbox Series X, Xbox Series S Retail Boxes Source: Matt Brown | Windows Central

I've seen draconian comments from people that run along the lines of "well if they tin can beget a console they tin afford Xbox Live Golden at $120," but information technology'due south nowhere nigh that unproblematic. Kids at my schoolhouse would become picked on over the make of their shoes. Parents bend over backward to make sure their kids tin have the same tools and toys and "fit in" with the richer kids. When you lot factor in that Microsoft gloated about tape engagement a couple of months ago, thanks to the pandemic, this whole concern just came across as aggravatingly tone-deaf.

This is anecdotal evidence and just a single case. This isn't a research paper, it'southward some thoughts I wrote down in a blog post. Merely really, if you lot'd have asked me in a user inquiry survey about how things affect me, and my financial situation, I would've answered very differently to if you'd asked me how I felt if prices were being increased for others.

Ironically, the backlash is also user data, and Microsoft reacted swiftly to that new data, reversing course. But seriously, how did they not run into this coming? For a few hours, the curtain was peeled dorsum, reminding us the "socially progressive vivid cheerful fun Xbox brand" can nonetheless trip into a corporatist void if customers aren't paying attention.

Human intuition vs. trending information

Azure Data Center Source: Microsoft

I genuinely believe that the people at Xbox aren't trying to brand decisions that spiral people over, having met many of the people that piece of work at that place. As an entity, and certainly amongst the other tech companies, Microsoft is the i that unremarkably seems well-intentioned. But clearly, somewhere along the line, some form of user research and information trends were used to push through these changes. If the data had included figures on the YouTube videos, weblog posts, and social media comments expressing acrimony for the change — despite the fact most people weren't going to be affected by it — they probably wouldn't have done information technology.

Microsoft should at least consider factoring in some adept old homo intuition a bit more.

Hindsight is 20/20 of grade, and Microsoft, like many corporations, demands perpetual growth. Many tech companies saw a boom as the piece of work-from-home culture fleck down last year, and despite that, shareholders volition still want to see growth on top of that boom, even when it subsides. It falls on Xbox leadership to find where to excerpt growth from for Microsoft'southward insatiable shareholders, and falls on u.s.a. to phone call them out on whatsoever bullshit equally and when the demand arises.

This whole Xbox Live debacle merely reminds me of a long list of scenarios where Microsoft just ... did stuff, without thinking most how it would touch users, or the perception of the company as a whole. The way Windows Phone was just left to die without any explanation, despite having tens of millions of users. The OneDrive backfire from 2022. The boring, painful demise of the Skype brand. Microsoft oft just doesn't seem to go humans.

And sure, I'yard non naive. The only data trend that matters really is revenue, and in that, Microsoft is clearly doing something — many things — correctly. Microsoft doesn't take the same loyalty capital that Apple and another companies enjoy, where their customers volition simply shut up and endure stupid decisions, every bit evidenced by how rapidly people reacted to this whole matter.

Apologies for all the malaise and emotion this caused today for our customers. Every bit ever, we appreciate the feedback. This is a good learning opportunity for united states of america and we will learn from it.
— Phil Spencer (@XboxP3) January 23, 2022

I'grand certain there were people at Xbox telling Microsoft'south finance section that this was a bad thought and that people wouldn't stand for it. It's also easy to imagine that there was someone at Microsoft armed with "data" to "show" otherwise. How can you argue confronting data?

I'yard certainly no data scientist, and I would hope that Microsoft does account for some of those human elements and data bias. I certainly don't expect Microsoft to accept policy inspiration from a random blogger either. I besides know that all of this is easy for me to say without responsibleness. Simply, after post-obit them for so long, and seeing the same patterns emerge time and time again, I feel information technology in my heart that Microsoft should at least consider factoring in some good one-time human intuition a bit more. Telemetry, trends, and user surveying never pigment a complete picture.