1. That's just your theory. There was and is no evidence of this, especially what the cut would actually be.

Reason for my theory is there was not outcry from the industry. Face the logic, there HAD to be a cut going to the publishers. Publishers/devs bitch to no end about second hand sales. There would be a massive amount of bitching had both the end user and MS made money and not the devs. Shortly after this came to be knowledge EA dropped online passes, another sign of them believing that both Sony and MS were going to follow suit in going hybrid digital.

2. That was announced afterwards, if you recall, and again, it's one time. Still not physical ownership (which every other company offered)

Well the whole program never got announced(not that I think they would win people over with their "vision"), tbh. But this was announced at some time validating what I said

3. If you recall, Gamestop was extremely pissed off. So, that strategy didn't work so well. Gamestop even halted preorders. Again, online check didn't have to be required. An online check whenever the system went online however, would have sufficed. Sure maybe someone would be able to go a couple months before their game was deactivated from the system, but how much of a problem would it have caused, really?

I dont recall Gamestop bing that pissed off. I can only find articles about how they were concerned cause they werent given full details on how it worked and I cannot find anything about halting preorders except it "selling out" at gamestop. Onine check would be required because people would buy games register and install, go back the next day trade the game in, unplug from the internet and beat the game while getting back maximum trade value. It would have caused a major problem. I dont know if you hand around on deal websites but many people game the system as much as possible. This would leave major space for exploits.

4. Yes, I actually wrote that in the paragraph, and also addressed it. You couldn't play YOUR account with a different game on your home xb1 while your friend was borrowing and playing your game. Not very smart.

I think the family share plan was supposed to address that, but I think the whole family plan thing was an afterthought. Steam only recently added this feature after being around for like 11 years.

5. MS tried to use xb1 as a trojan horse. I've written several threads about this already, and just how many shoestrings tied this boot together. They were pushing to integrate azure into every major retailer. They were trying to get all businesses onto the azure cloud. They wanted to get into the ratings (like nielsen) business. They wanted control and profit off of the secondary market. They wanted control of imports (remember they disallowed importing based on IP addresses. This was actually in their plan until they abandoned it). They wanted tv control. They required devs to make content for windows phone if they wanted to make xb1 games until the id# program. They required games to be equal or better on xb1. They didn't allow indies to make games on xb1 if they made the ps4 one first...they both had to come out at the same time. They wanted control of the servers for every game. They bought out exclusive sports packages.

That's just your theory. There was and is no evidence of this(you might be right about the W8 phone thing). They still have the parity thing for indys, how disappointing that they didnt kill it publicly during E3. They kind of have since Sony has been using the term "console first/debut" as opposed to console exclusive for most indy games. The tin foil hat wearing parity theory of games having to be the same resoultion/framerate makes more sense than what MS is doing with release date parity.

It's really amazing everything they tried to control with this system. Making devs and businesses happy was an afterthought. They didn't sit at a table and say, "what can we do to improve the industry", they said, "How can we make more money, and keep everyone else happy enough to eat the scraps from our table".

I firmly dont believe that. I dont think they said "what can we do to improve the industry" but "what can we do to bring more money into the gaming(=our) ecosystem." The whole system was set up to give gamers/retailers a similar experience to what they were used to as well as to allow game publishers(potentially themselves) to get a cut of used sales. In the end it was really all for themselves(more happy devs=more games, more profit/retailers still give them shelf space/moves consumers towards digital future that the industry wants), but that is what every business does.  No company says "what can we do to improve the industry" it will always be "how can we get the most money into our ecosystem." Nintendo and Sony are no more noble than MS.

More of this psp foolishness.  PSP was their first handheld, highest selling non ninty one ever.  While X1 is MS 3rd console and it mannged to piss away every single market share the 360 fought and won last gen, a slight difference betwen them two.

MS gets into things to be top dog, they arent ones to settle happily into anything but 1st.  They dint become MS by being happy and content in 2nd.  

Please source your opinion that you state as a fact. Where has MS said their goal was to be first this gen? Also, why does this not apply to SONY and Nintendo?

Also, its been 6months how can you say that they lost all of their marketshare.  Didn't the PS3 lose all its momentum from the PS2 before recovering? Why can MS do the same thing?

It's not the same game that was played out last generation.  The PS3 had better build quality than the competition, more developer support, a blu-ray drive that the competition lacked, and other contributing factors that led to it's being able to catch up and eventually overtake the 360.

This generation, the console that is lagging is SIGNIFICANTLY less powerful, has less developer support, less games available to play on the console (knock "indies" all you want, but they are there, and people do buy them and play them!), and most importantly, they lost the trust of a good deal of their customers, myself included. 

Last generation, I started out with a 360 (replaced twice due to RROD...how many "sales" were replacements last gen, I wonder?) and then bought a PS3 later.  This generation, I am skipping the Xbox completely.  There just isn't enough to compell me to spend another $600 on their system (console, extra controllers, battery packs, headphone adaptors, etc).  I bought the more powerful console that has more games (and more diverse games).  I am sure many others are making the same decision...as a matter of fact, I am sure of it!  If you look at the sales numbers, the VAST majority of Xbox One consoles were purchased in Nov and Dec last year...early adopters who bought purely on faith, to the tune of 3 million consoles.  Now, here we are SIX MONTHS later, and they havent even cracked 5 million!  I would be VERY surprised if they did 7 million by the end of the year.

Halo isn't going to save them, Sunset Overhype isn't going to save them, DX12 isn't going to fix things.  They need games, NOW...but "AAA" exclusives are hard to come by these days (especially after Titanflop)...and even if they signed someone up, it would be 2-3 YEARS before a game started today is ready for launch....by that time, it will be far too late.

Dark_Feanor said:

1. Microsoft tried with the XOne revel to move the console to the next level, but they had to step back to the "status quo".

2. If Sony´s loyalists belive that the PS4 lead alone can save Sony they are delusional. After the fenomenal launch the PS4 is already trailing behind the Wii back in 2007.

1. What is this next level MS was trying to take it to? Please, enlighten us as to how what MS was doing was going to evolutionize gaming and make it better for everyone. 

2. Save sony? Are we still talking about consoles here? And you are still doing this carp. The PS4 is trailing behind the wii back in 2007? So you want to comare the PS4 to the wii now?

Dude, just stop. Sony is winning and will will this gen. The sooner you accept this the soony you stop sounding ridiculous.

Good for you.

But again, there is nothing MS can do other than release a totaly new console. Expecialy if you just refut any thing they are trying. Don´t know about your Live friends, but I know of none that would give up Halo for any indie or even Naught Dog´s master pieces.

And if you realy belive in what you wrote, so... I think Microsoft is glad in losing a client like you.