You can add up the total sales of Wii/PS3/360 and you get enough consoles for less than 4% of the world population. That means 96% of the world population either can't use consoles or DGAF about them.

You are doing it wrong... 4% of the population (if everyone only bought one) home console... how many of those 4% are among the 66%? Again, logic but this time is those circle graphs If all A's are B's and some C's are D's

Did you read the OP.  Pretty much everything you just stated is solved by MS system.  Do you think in 7 years MS will not be here.  If your games is stored on the cloud, you and your family members will always have access to it.  No pulling out the old console, finding the disk and playing it.  You just download your game to you system and thats it.  Since you can share with 10 family members, you can just set them up and they can play anytime (well only one I believe at a time).  If you lost a game disk, you do not have to purchase another one because you can download it to your system.  If MS stays with X86 hardware, then by the end of this Gen, you might be able to keep your library and move to the next console or whatever it might be and your collection moves with you.  The thing is, if your collection is always with you, in the cloud then you possible will always have the ability to get to it.  I can see 7 years from now, you will be able to access your games from any device that you carry.

Did you read the statement?

I don't know if MS will be here in 7 years, in 10 years, in 20 years, or in 30 years, whether MS will still be in the games business, or whether their servers will still be up, or if the infrastructure will still be up to check my online status or go through whatever hoops they want me to go through. The point is that I know with 100% certainty that I will be able to play Super Mario Bros now or 100 years from now.  The XBox One, not so much.  I can't use the software without Microsoft's permission and if they one day 20 years in the future say "we're taking down the XBox One servers because it's been 20 years and we don't even make games anymore..." than I won't be able to use my software.  I need 100% assurance that I can use the stuff I buy.  No if, ands, buts, or asterisks.

The family member thing extends to people using the same console as far as I could tell.  If I have a family member who doesn't live with me, then as far as I could tell I'd have to go through their one time trade thing they have in place.  And they can't trade it back, so if I want to play it again, sucks to be me.

And what if I want to sell or lend a game to a friend or an acquaintance, not necessarily because I have an extra copy, but for whatever reason?  I want to sell it to someone who is not on my friends list.  I have to undergo a 30 day waiting period to sell something I own?  And forget about lending.  It's not like I should be able to let people use my stuff if I choose.

And you've completely failed to address more than half of the things I've mentioned.  If I want to play in my basement where I don't have internet access?  If I travel a lot and I'm staying in hotels?  At a relatives house with no internet access?  At a college with weird restrictions?  If I travel a lot and I'm in a hotel? 

We're not haters.  We're just people who want complete and total ownership of the games that we pay $60 for.  I don't think that's unreasonable.

Being critical of what MS is doing is not being a hater.

I'm still not happy. Not happy at all, specially if this clusterfuck of a shitty business forces Sony to do the same.

It's a bunch of RESTRICTIONS and you guys are defending them as if they were ok. They are not.

Btw, cloud processing is the new 'blast processing': IOW, bullshit.

Anyone who is not a lackey of a corporation putting out a gaming platform, and won't defend every single move they do to no end, OBVIOUSLY is a hater.  That is how the game works.  Individuals develop religious devotion to entities which are only interested in maximizing profits, and then will defend them to no end, out of their love.

It goes like this:

*pic*

Machiavellian said:

First and foremost, I do agree that the OP using the term hater is silly.  There are legitimate issues with MS X1 and having problems with the restrictions does not make a person a hater.  I have plenty of issues with the X1 but I also take a look at everything instead of just my needs and wants.  This is the crux with most consumers.  They only factor their needs and wants, even to the detriment of the basic thing they want to acquire.

From MS site, Family members do not have to be on the same console.  You would not have to set a limit if they were all on the same console just like you do not have to do so on the 360.

I'll kind of have to see exactly how they do this or how they verify that people are member of your family.

You can gift a game to a friend as MS has stated.  MS games studio will do this by default.  Publishers can restrict this ability if they so choose.

First off, the fact that publishers can restrict this option is ridiculous in and of itself.  Also, this means I can't lend a game, and I can't give a game to someone who is not on my friends list for less than 30 days.  Personally, I don't add people on XBL/Miiverse/PSN unless I know there is a particular game I want to play with them.

Play in your basement, relative house with no internet, hotel with no internet use your Smartphone to check in.  With most wifi systems you can have your console setup to automatically connect to your cell phone when you set it as a wifi hotspot.

If I don't own a Smartphone?

 If you do not have confident in MS being here another 7 years, why would you purchase anything from them ever again. That goes for Sony and any other digital content provider like Apple Itunes, android market etc.  The fact of the matter is that the market is changing.  Whether consumers want it or not, you have already told content owners you are willing to give up your physical accouterments in digital content for virtual content.  The Billions of money spent on Itunes, Amazon and other content providers show that consumers are comfortable in an online connected and digital provided world where there are restrictions on the selling of that content.

Well first of all, I don't want to, which was kind of the point.  As for iTunes there are some differences.  Right now, I have my iTunes library on my iPod.  No matter what happens, those songs are on my iPod, and I could play them.  Nothing short of the destruction of my iPod will prevent me from playing them.  I am free to back up my songs on a hard drive, put them on another device, or so on, and I do not have check in with Apple to use them.  There is no question as to whether or not I will be able to play my songs in another ten, twenty, or thirty years.

And those services are all digital.  When you're dealing with digital copies, it's a different thing.  I understand that it's not feasible for every iOS game to be put on a disc.  The limitation on content in the iOS marketplace is a natural function of the environment.  It's something that really HAS to be that way (as of now at least).  In contrast, Microsoft is perfectly capable of producing a machine without such limitations, and they are CHOOSING to add more restrictions to the user.  Microsoft is taking an inherent limitation of digital distribution and forcing it upon people who are buying physical media.

So if the world is going this route and you are concerned that 10 years down the line, your digital content will always be available then you have to make a decision to go with a corporation that has the ability to be there.  Thats when you take a look at the health of a company and their future plans for this global connected world and content.  Right now I would put MS in a huge lead over Sony and Nintendo.  The money, infrastructure, design that MS has put into their cloud base technology is way beyond the other 2. 

Uhhhh, but that's not the case.  I can, and will, choose to buy content in a way that ensures me full access to it.  If I want to play New Super Mario Bros U in 50 years, or give it to a friend, or lend it to someone for the weekend, or do whatever I please with it, I can.  Hopefully, Sony will offer something similar.  The rest of the world can do what they like.

Personally I believe MS hedge their bets to early but time will tell if they did.  Making it mandatory for games to be installed on the console like they did definitely made MS have to go down this course of action but the questions is what benefit did it have on MS to make this decision.  Either that or they feel that they will get enough game support for people to go along with being dragged into the future about 3 years ahead of time.

The question is not how this will benefit Microsoft.  We know how this benefits Microsoft.  It gives them a great degree of control over the second hand market and makes them more money when people have to buy games new.  It improves their relationship with publishers who don't have to worry about secondhand sales and things like that.  The question is, what benefit does this have for the consumer?

If Microsoft introduced these policies and added an equivelent or greater amount of value for the customer, then the backlash would be less.  However, Microsoft is adding a lot of restrictions, and as far as I could tell, they're adding very little in return.