why don't we make a list of publishers who use online passes to see which ones will probably do it 

I would have felt more confident if they had come right out and made a new statement to the effect that they never intended nor do they intend to implement mandatory DRM.

Referring back to a previous statement could be taken to mean they are not in a position to make a new statement yet so what they said previously stands until they formalise the details of their DRM plan. It could also just mean that they thought the first statement was evidence enough and the didn't need to provide any further clarification.

I truly hope it is the latter, not the former.

hmm, this is not news cause they've been repeatedly saying this for so many months. Obviously 3rd parties are going to charge for used games but their exclusives can be played used. I suppose its better than nothing but won't really help me decide which console to get cause I play mostly third party games anyways.

I think your right. 

The problem with this is two fold, now what if you are a dev and NO ONE buys your game at all because of this pay wall DRM? That is certaintly a possibility. I can only speak for myself and a few others, but i would not buy that game unless I REALLY wanted it. And there are few games I would really want.

This is better than Microsoft's apparent stance but that isn't saying much. It's basically stating "Sony won't charge for used games, but we've put the infrastructure in place for our third parties to do so." This isn't something to celebrate.

I'll wait for clarification at E3, but I'd rather just get a better PC at this point. This kind of setup is a lot easier to swallow when you aren't paying $60 a game. People arguing that this tactic is good for consumers foolishly think companies will pass along the savings. Competition leads to better pricing, consoles are closed systems. So where will the incentive to reduce pricing come from? The PC has multiple digital games services. On consoles, you have to buy from the platform manufacturer.

So MS is FORCING it, Sony is ALLOWING it and Nintendo is saying, GTFO. Looks like Nintendo is standing up for the entire industry. I guess I'm going exclusively Nintendo this gen. It's time to make a stand.

Companies have to pay to keep the servers running so you can play online. Online doesn't happen for free. That being said, I was completely fine with online passes as I personally am willing to pay for something if I enjoy it. Offline single player, I don't like it if that were made pay to play but when you're online, money is needed to let you play online, hence the online pass.

funny that sounds familiar...oh wait that's what everyone was saying about the 21st.  Now I'm not saying it won't be laid to rest but I don't see how you can be confident in that at all.

I fully agree with that. I am a huge supporter of the used game market because it works much like the used car market in terms of cash flow, its good for all parties involved. On that note, good for Sony if they really are not going to impliment DRM.

@S.T.A.G.E. It's funny, I seem to recall you being very outspoken about how bad XBL is because you had to pay yearly for it...now when Sony speaks of doing something similar you are ok with paying for it? Typical.