You realize everyone does this, not just Microsoft.  Sony, Nintendo, and Microsoft all take a cut of both digital and retail sales.  That's why they talk about tie rates.  The more software they sell, the more money they make.  Even Valve takes a 30% cut from sales on Steam.

Yes, initially they didn't include any plans to allow gamers to sell used games.  However, you could give someone a game.  I assume you meant renting, not lending games, because lending was built into the plan.  You could share your games with up to 10 people in a group, with multiple groups.  Though a game could only be in a single group, but you could have multiple games within a group.  This was discussed by Marc Whitten, if I recall.

There is a reasonable reason for it.  Unlike disc-based games on the Xbox 360, the disc-based game on the Xbox One is akin to the downloadable games available today on the Xbox 360.  The license on the disc, which exists on the Xbox 360 disc as well, became assigned to that console and user.  The disc was simply a medium for digital content.  Though there is more to it than that.  An Xbox One game isn't stored on a disc quite the same way as it is on the Xbox 360.  Every game includes a copy of the Game OS, possibly in its VM (former essentially confirmed/latter my supposition based on a patent). 

I digress.  If you take an Xbox 360 disc and copy it to the HDD, then take the HDD and move it to another console, then try to run the game (assuming you put the disc in the DVD drive) you'll see it won't run off the HDD.  It'll only run off the disc.  So, the Xbox One game has a license, just like the Xbox 360 game does today, and that disc gets tied to the console, just like it does with the Xbox 360.  The difference is, because it fully installed to your console and became perminantly tied to your account, they had to have a way to determine if you were still validly licensed for that content.  Otherwise, you could end-up with a scenario where one person buys a game and passes it around. 

Which would be fine, because every time you play a game Xbox LIVE provides that information to Microsoft, but then how do you know who actually owns the game and an easy way to circumvent that is to just unplug from the Internet. 

At some point, somewhere, the console has to be able to check in.  I'm not sure 24 hours was necessary but to be honest, TV programming information also needs to update every 24 hours.  So, with their original intention it makes sense to have one point in time when the console is grabbing data.

As someone who went through multiple DVD drives on his Xbox 360, I quickly appreciated digital games.  I started buying games via Games on Demand because I hated not being able to play a perfectly usable console when my DVD went out.  Heck, begged for Microsoft to release Halo 4 as a digital Day One release but alas that didn't happen.  I liked parts of Microsoft's initial plan for the Xbox One, though I do appreciate the challenges. 

Personally, I don't know why everything wasn't stored online and managed there.  That way if someone else tried to use a game already licensed to someone else, it could operate differently.  If they traded or sold the game to someone else, they could remove that license from their collection, then as soon as the game was installed on another console it'd be reassigned.  It'd impact retail outlets like GameStop, but wouldn't impact person to person sales.

But anyways, yes.  It was a give and take arrangement.  You give-up discs and disc-based trading for digital and game sharing.  Realisticly, if you went all digital in Gen7 you were doing that anyway.  In Gen 8 that'll even be easier to do than before.

it still is. you want proof you say? just read the OP. 

Bullcrap, 360 had huge piracy issues. Solution, calling everyone a thief and add restrictive DRM.

Way to do it is make buying digital games more appealing (better deals, multiple outlets with competing prices, extras on digital only, whatever), don't just screw people over.

Agreed. There is now way I would pay $60 for a digital release.

Only if they can bring AAA games for $10 or less like in Steam sales, then sure I'll download. Even then it's no match, my Steam library still works when I buy a new PC, no need to hold on to an old box. Plus 50gb games are simply not an option in the foreseeable future unless I want to spend $1500 a year on internet.

And I'll still be buying the games I love most on physical disks. One of the reasons why consoles have overtaken my PC as primary entertainment. Anyway nobody is stopping them doing both... Why does it have to be eiher or. The only reason I can think of is that they want to turn games into services. Release a small game up front, get the rest with season passes in DLC.

Never got a chance?

They had an entire reveal to begin that conversation.

What did they do instead?  They told us about how awesome the Xbox One was at being a cable box, then followed that up with a disjointed mess of Q&A interviews where everyone was saying something different.

Whenever I start getting a little happy with Microsoft, they go back to the same nonsense.  They imply that the consumers are idiots (which I don't actually mind that much), then they follow that with the "we were right and we'll prove it eventually but aren't we awesome for listening to the customer and changing the XO?"  I find that to be so insipid.  Just bloody pick one--either you were right and you should have stayed with your guns, or you were wrong.  When you try to make yourself look good in both situations it actually has the opposite effect.

Basically, they failed at convincing people that their way was the best way.  That goes on no one else but them.  

We did and most didnt like it. #Dealwithit

Yes MS, of course it is our fault.

It is our fault you cancelled post E3 interviews when so many people had questions.
It is our fault that when initial concerns came up you stayed quiet.
It is out fault that even now you talk about bringing thing back when we still have little clue to what your initial vision was.

Hell, we still have no clue how the family sharing was supposed to work.


Want us to understand? Try actually answering questions.

As I said in another thread, I truly feel now as if they believe we are stupid.

Why not just do a youtube sit down Q&A for the fans? 

MS wanted to screw people with there DRM thats all there is to it

Still blaming the consumer for their awful DRM policies. Sigh.

Im a gamer and I work out about 5 hours per week. So I get off my butt plenty.