You're still paying for PSN/XBL

Not on PS3. Bungie didn't decide on psn or xbl

There will always be cheaters and hackers (some more malicious than others) that will try to get unfair advantages in all types of games: call of duty, pokemon, etc. From modding to hacking to cheats to bots to glitches, there are many ways to gain unfair advantages. Having an always online server regulated by the developer company will be a way more effective means of catching these players , which is very very critical for competitive games and MMO's (money is a huge factor). Most Nintendo games aren't really competitive, and the ones that are (pokemon) do get hacked. If you cheat in a mario kart game, oh well. If you create an MMO account, hack to gain items, and then sell that account, there is a huge problem.

The examples I brought up include blizzard's games (World of warcraft, starcraft, hearthstone, heroes of the storm,...) those are not all free 2 play....... Even then, why should it matter if a game is free to play or not, league of legends has one of the largest player bases of all time, alongside being one of the most competitive and pro gamer games currently.

I did not address each and every example you gave, because most of them fall under the "if you don't like the dlc, don't buy them." The only one that was annoying was the diablo 3 dlc to make the game easier, but that has always been a problem that has been persistent for a long time and dlc should not take the blame for it (this phenomenon is known as power creep). How does a game like league of legends take care of it: nerfs. Any game that produces an intolerable power creep ends up a bad game, but that is not because they released dlc, but because they disturbed the balance of the game.

I don't buy a game on blind trust, I buy a game to see if it's fun. If it is, then it is a good game. You seem to be judging games without having played them, more content to spread a message than to actually see if you like how it plays. I hate this kind of judgemental thought since it falls in line with "violent video games instill violence in people so we should ban all violent video games." You are simply generalizing too many games into the "has dlc and always online, therefore it is a bad game" 

Imagine being in two rooms, one room has an item in it that you need to progress, and you are in the other. Instead of being able to walk into the other room, someone puts up a wooden barrier and gives you an axe, and tells you to start chopping. It will take you two days to make it through that barrier or you could just pay $4.99 to have that item you want and need to progress further in the game. Yes, you are given the choice, of chopping away for 2 days, or having it right there and then. 

This is happening more and more in our games this gen where the balance of the game is affected. No it's not a paywall, but it seems like semi-impermeable paywall designed to exhaust the player in the hopes that he gives up.

And as a general principle, microtransactions do not belong in full retail priced games, the cosmetic ones I can tolerate as long as they are not in my face about it, the ones that affect the gameplay, I will generally stay away from because I have seen too many examples of the free2play model infecting console/ pc quality games

Again, just another way that publishers are trying having another bite at the apple after that initial $60 purchase.

You bring up some good points about MMOs. I have played a few, I'm not a big fan of them because I'm not a big fan of grinding and being online with a bunch of other people. Sometimes I go online, but generally I just like sitting down with myself and the controller and play a video game particularly those games with massive open worlds and large solo campaigns in games such as maybe a zelda, witcher 3, dark souls.

I'm not saying the game that requires online is going to be a bad game, I view it from a consumer rights point of view which is adopting the model of ownership over what I have purchased or at the very least being able to play it when I want, how I want, or for as long as I want. Perhaps, if I were into competitive shooters, I would have a different point of view, but even if you are, you should be aware the game has a time limit based on reasons I have already mentioned. If you are the type of person who only buys a few games a year and that one you plan on playing for 100s of hours over a 6 month period, then it might be worth your $60 dollars, however if you are someone who treasures the  games that you buy, revisiting them every so often, even coming back to them years later, you may be of a different mind set.

And I agree with the majority of the posts in this thread, I've noticed the trend that gaming has gone with every single aspect of it being monetized, and No I don't like it.

I anticipated this the second I heard there were plans to bring Massive multiplayer to consoles. Activsion and Bungie accomplished what Bethesda couldn't. They made an FPS WOW.