I was thinking about how DLC works and came to an interesting comparison:

The rules of DLC deployment
1. Don't overcharge for basic content
2. Do create worthwhile content and features
3. Don't charge for things that should be there already
4. Do allow us the chance to earn it
5. Don't make it seem like we're missing out on something cool
6. Do tease additional DLC content and features

These are some pretty standard rules governing doing microtransactions well.
There are some free to play titles that use these rules exclusively. A good example would be League of Legends. Their model consists of FTP.
1. They charge for characters and skins. Most of these are less than 5$, and there are sales everyday.
2. The new characters are often very different, and can change gameplay dramatically given that they aren't yet fully expected.
3. Each character already has several skins for you to use, and you get virtually unlimited characters as each one eventually gets cycled into the weekly freebies.
4. In LoL, you can earn every single character through points. Money just makes it faster.
5. Nothing in the game is sealed off by a paywall.
6. The free weekly champ rotation, as well as skins used by other players gives you just a taste of what you might want to have.

So then I thought about....the xbox360
In essence, 360 was basically a console with DLC.
The buzzword was "modular". Modular is a term that implies "everything you need, nothing you don't". In theory it's great, but on paper, well it's a whole new pocket full of receipts.
1. 99$ for a wifi dongle when a 3rd party has them for 15$ is overcharging.
2. There was nothing really worthwhile about these locked off pieces of hardware. Saving games? Downloading games that I have to pay for anyway? Being able to not use a cord?
3. You're charged to watch subscription services you're already paying for. You're charged to use your controller. You're charged to store games you've already purchased. You're charged to play online, for games you already paid full price for.
4. There's no earning here, although not really possible.
5. Without live, you can't even play your friends online! That's not cool.
6. There's nothing really to tease. Every new cost (including the price increase some odd years ago for live) comes off like a nap under Edgar Allen Poe's 'Pendulum'.

Now we have the xboxone. Do you think that MS is following the rules of microtransactions properly?

Just as a few examples, we have:
No controller charger, uses batteries or separate play and charge kit
Subscription services still require xboxlive gold despite being paid for already
No DVR capability without xboxlive gold
Smartglass functionality not possible without smartglass (why isn't this also possible in game without another input device?)
Cloud services not possible without xbl gold
Old headphones/turtlebeaches require an adaptor. All non xbox branded headphones require an adaptor

Are they overcharging for basic content?
Have they created worthwhile content in that price?
Are they charging you for anything that should already be included?
Does the consumer have a chance at earning, for example, a better deal on the product?
By not buying an extra parcel of the package, are you missing out on any of the cool features of the system?
Is anything being teased as a cool upcoming feature?

I hate on disc DLC, I think it should be banned.

No worries, be don't have to have a ban. Companies are already learning this the hard way.

Updated the OP, changed title.
Thread disappeared rather quickly yesterday

You can write all of this, but really the market will decide. There is no such thing as overcharging if the market is paying for it.

If companies continue to provide poor value and disappointment with what goes into DLC, people will stop buying it.

The perfect time to get companies to listen to this is a new gen. Sales are going to be far lower than the companies hope (they all think their next-gen AAA will sell like CoD or Assassins Creed lol). It will quickly become clear who's doing DLC right.

It's exactly why I bring it up.

Coincidentally, the industry is getting steamrolled over the dlc model by consumers. Some do it right, some don't. All I did was write down what much of the userbase say is the right way, evidenced by the games that are employing them correctly.

It is a very similar situation where we now have a console that is coming from this kind of microtransactional background. I simply find it interesting to see such a similarity, and cannot wait to see what happens. My theory is that current 360 owners find themselves "too invested" to change. I believe that once the next gen hits, people will be able to start fresh and make decisions without thinking about how much money they've already invested.

I also said once that I believe Sony should match trophies with xbl achievements (eg: give xbox owners mirrored trophies for their xbl accounts), just to make the investment that much more liquid.