It's attitudes like that which allow things to get as bad as they have. If you just go to sleep and allow this, they will inch a little closer and push things a little further toward an even worse scenario. Don't think for a second that alot of these publishers aren't moving toward the ultimate goal which is absolute ownership over something you paid full price to have. 

Things like this happen in steps. Don't let them take any more.

Wow... i have no clue what made you think this post would make any kind of sense. Good job at sinking to a new low. Still waiting on that apology

You remember incorrectly because Sony has stated from the begining its up to the dev/publisher

----- Spam post -----

Nah, I remember correctly.

Gamasutra was able to speak to Scott Rohde, software product development head for Sony Worldwide Studios America to gain further clarity on the matter:

We've already come right out and said we're not going to allow online pass. And the word "allow" is key there. Specifically with online, with PS+ requiring a charge to play online, we would not want any publisher [to charge.]

In general, we're all businesses. Sony or Microsoft is never going to be able to tell EA or Activision exactly what they can do. What we like to say at PlayStation is that we set the precedent. The way we are approaching this is that we want this to be extremely consumer-friendly, extremely retailer-friendly, and extremely publisher-friendly. My personal opinion is that it's hard for me to believe that any major publisher is going to put an extra set of used DRM onto game titles because that wouldn't put them in a good spot, right?

So he began by saying that Sony was in fact "not allowing" online pass, but later admitted that they actually are allowing 3rd parties to do whatever they want. I am not trying to say this was some widespread official policy by Sony. As my post said, it was an interview. But the part that made me laugh the most was the last part, where he says publishers will see some games not having online passes and decide not to use them. That they are basically going to try and cleanse the market of online passes (by doing the same thing MS does: not utilize online passes when their online play is pay to play). It is apparently not working.

Yet another Ubisoft game I won't be buying.

Actually he did say they were not allowing it. But then said they can actually do whatever they want. It's right there in the quote. But that is irrelevant. I was referring to the speal about how 3rd party companies wouldn't dare put the passes in when Sony games don't have them. Obviously his line of thinking there was incorrect.

Come on Ubi, you really need to drop this shit, how much work must of gone in to make a small part of the offline game require online, what on earth was the point?

*looks at games involved*

Luckily, I never played/intend to play any of them, so... meh. I guess the protagonists of such systems won't change, either. Hopefully Watch Dogs doesn't get hit by shit like this hard, otherwise I am fine.

Nothing like a little account sharing cannot fix.