It's fair enough if a game has online to have online only achievements I guess.

I never worry about 100% regarding stuff like this anyway - I look at some achievements/trophy requirements and just laugh, thinking 'yeah, like I'm going to waste hours to achieve that?!'

MS, while I don't agree with some of their competitive approaches, have never made a secret of favoring those who subscribe - and to be fair both MS/Sony platforms sport plenty of subtle/not-so-subtle hooks to lead you to consider spending more, whether on accessories, online subscriptions or what have you.

i hate the fact that they do this i cant get live because of where i live so im screwed which makes me sad

I think it's perfectly fair for developers to devise whatever achievements they want. In fact, I actually get annoyed when there aren't achievements that require Gold. Like Call of Duty 4, for instance, if I dump most of my time into online in that game, I want to be earning gamerscore too.

It's a bit stupid but nothing can be as stupid as Eternal Sonata. After completing the entire game (this is a single player game), I got 14 achievements out of 22 for 130 points. The rest are if you're crazy enough to do weird collecting quests in a new game.

I really wasn't aware of this. Not that I care, I could care less about achievements/trophies (and I refuse to buy a gold membership), but it is up to the developers. If the developers/users spend a lot of time on the online component of a game, I don't see why not.