First let's not kid ourselves, it's not game developers who want the restrictions on Xbox One, it's publishers. The used game restrictions are about giving publishers a way to change how they make there money, from a per-disc-bought model to a per-player model). The rules as detailed so far seem far less onerous than other online publishing systems, for example iTunes, Xbox Music, virtually any OS application store, Steam, Origin, etc., all of which do not allow you to transfer or on-sell your purchases or have far more restrictive terms. Everyone I personally know who has complained about the Xbox One's restrictions are big customers of at least one of the services listed, and I bet that applies to a wider audience.
Publishers already limit what you can do with with just the game disc on both the Xbox 360 and PS3 by making some part of the game content only available when a unlock code is attached to your account. I can barely remember a AAA title that I've bought in the last couple of years that hasn't come with at least one code. Even though EA has stated they intend to end this practice, I would predict other publishers on the PS4 will continue this practice, and possibly increase the amount of content only available with unlock codes. I suspect many publishers won't bother on the Xbox One, and will simply make use of the built-in restrictions, and the options Microsoft gives them.
As for Kinect privacy, where's the outrage for the existing Kinect and PS Eye, cameras in your smartphone/laptop/tablet. These aren't any more or less 'hackable'. Arguably, because of the locked down nature of the Xbox operating environment, it's likely to be far more secure than your average PC webcam.
I've owned video game systems from Nintendo, Sega, Sony and Microsoft, and have yet to make a decision about what console I'll get at the end of this year (other than it won't be a Nintendo Wii U). However, the rhetoric around Xbox One is ridiculous, and the nature of the restrictions blown way out of proportion.
