Well, the position that some seem to be clinging to is that Microsoft was simply lying about the feature as they described it, and if that's truly the case, then there's really nothing to defend and, in that case, screw MS for misleading us. However, I can conclude and agree with everybody else that Microsoft's entire messaging on their new platform was fucked up, and, yea, they sometimes tried their best to soften the blow on what they thought were controversial policies, but I haven't somehow come to the conclusion that literally nothing they say can be trusted. And here's the silly part about thinking like that. They were largely being criticized for policies they themselves spelled out via their own official website, or in interviews. Yea, they tried to damage control some of the more controversial stuff, but they eventually had to come clean, no matter how slippery they tried to be.
What is more likely?
That the Xbone, a system that is supposed to rid the industry of the "scourge" that is used games, would have allowed 1 person to buy a game, and let 10 more people fully play that 1 copy entirely for free. Not just that, it makes it extremely easy for people to do this.
They made a system that blocks used games and set up a lame Demo sharing system to eventually get more people going to their marketplace to pay full price for games.
Use your heads guys. Look at History. Look at the past action of MS and their down right refusal to unequivocally declare what their plans were.
The first thing Cliffy B does after the Xbone turned in the Xbox180 was to go to Twitter and continue his crusade against used games, which he clearly has a problem with because the publishers don't receive a dime for it.
So how did the former XBone solve this problem if it is facilitating the distribution of 10 free copies of every game that a gamer puts in the system?
No logical person can conclude that the family sharing plan was what the those hopeful people thought it would be.
Why is it okay to take them at their word regarding stuff that we deem negative, but not okay to do so when the subject is something a little more on the positive side of things, such as family sharing? I know, for example, there's a lot of bs in the cloud talking points being put out there. I know that just as much as anybody else, but if it ends up meaning dedicated servers for all games, or at least all the major releases,with online play, then I say bring on the cloud! Either way, I've said my piece on this subject. I'll move on now.
Wow, new site design is hot shit (in a good way). I got nervous for a second, thinking the site looked different cause a mod dropped the hammer on me. :P