Still waiting for your evidence.  There is one person in this discussion acting like a fanboy and it certainly isn't genome.  We already have an industry standard set with the limitations that Sony has imposed on them.  I could buy a similar arrangement or something in the same ballpark, a 10:1 sharing ratio not only sounds outlandish and false, it doesn't match any other industry standard.  If they had all of the publishers good graces and backing on this approach, then they never would have dropped it because it easily would have won this generation for them.

Except it required DRM, which you all bitched about, so no.

You seem to be new here, so fair warning: you might want to watch it with the f-word. It has become a bannable offense in these parts.

There is no evidence that points to it being anything other than glorified demos, and not everyone who is skeptical (read: realistic) is a fanboy or a Microsoft hater. Chill the hell out. Of course Microsoft's messaging has never changed when they never bothered to detail this amazing feature in the first place and remained intentionally vague about it ever since they announced it. I wonder why that is? Hmmm!

Sony can never do wrong according to the internet. 

Yes Microsoft made a bad choice overall but more so due to the world not really being ready for an online centric console yet. Seemed one generation too soon really.

You mean this?:

Give your family access to your entire games library anytime, anywhere: Xbox One will enable new forms of access for families. Up to ten members of your family can log in and play from your shared games library on any Xbox One. Just like today, a family member can play your copy of Forza Motorsport at a friend’s house. Only now, they will see not just Forza, but all of your shared games.  You can always play your games, and any one of your family members can be playing from your shared library at a given time.

That may be true as far as it goes, but it's hardly detailed. And nowhere does it say it's unlimited access. Just "access". That gives them a lot of wiggle room, as long as they are giving you some access (as in, a timed trial version). As opposed to here:

Share access to your games with everyone inside your home: Your friends and family, your guests and acquaintances get unlimited access to all of your games.  Anyone can play your games on your console--regardless of whether you are logged in or their relationship to you.

Which is... duh. Of course everyone at your house can play all your games on YOUR console without limitation. If family sharing would have just been a digital version of this, you can bet your sweet bippy they'd have been yelling from the mountain tops that it was unlimited, too.

But it looks like Smeags has discovered a use for the Wii U at long last, and so our time together is at an end. It wasn't very enlightening, but I will cherish it always.

Well since the perception is they have bad PR they could have spoke honestly and said they don't give two fucks about you or your problems like every company thinks or they could just spint he same PR bull crap all companies do and say they did it for you.

But hey people on the internet need to feel better about themselves and continue to call out PR BS when we have been hearing the same shit from Sony, Nintendo, and Microsoft since they have been in the industry.

Everyone knows they removed it because of money, but do you think they are not going to lie and tell us otherwise?

They wouldn't have been yelling anything since it was barely brought up due to the fact it was added after the blow back from their May 21st show.

All these ideas showed up after Phil Spencer let it slip about the always online. Then we herd about the family sharing a few days before E3 through Major Nelsons clarification.

They say one thing then another... They seriously need to stop being so god damn confusing. This is beyond pathetic. For gods sake clarify your stance and stop with the mixed messages.

Actually, I believe that most people question this because it's giving away 9 copies of a video game for free. That's 9 copies that nobody would be making any money off of (except for the Internet circle that gets together to get cheap games). I've never trusted a company to give away their product without their being some way where they make up for it. People on this site were already discussing how they were planning on spending much much less on gaming next generation than the last. That would be horrible for a business to do and would make them lose millions. That's why most people question this, not because it's Microsoft. There's a saying, if it's too good to be true, it probably is. 

Now one thing I could have seen it being is a ps+ type deal where they put older games that already made some money into the program and you could pass along those games for free. That would have definitely have been possible and actually makes a lot of sense. But not full priced retail games.