I didn't say they were gestapo. My entire point is, you're not going to have the same frame of reference to understand why someone would even want to make modifications of any kind, therefore you're probably not going to think they should be able to do it at all.
And, legally speaking, no one can stop you from modifying something you've bought from them, and companies have tried multiple times. It seems to stem from entitlement issues on the behalf of the company. If I want to re-write the PS3 firmware without using Sony's copyrighted code, I'm more than within my rights to do so.
Committing criminal action is entirely separate ... and lumping the two together, modification and criminal behavior ... is not necessarily a given ... even though it's basically been ingrained in people's minds, at this point, that it is. In any case, it's about innovation and engineering at a hobbyist level, and the meta-issue is that you have an external entity who is now enforcing what you can and can't do with things you own.
As for games as service: the evidence is their actions and what they've said. http://playstationlifestyle.net/2009/06 ... s-ea-boss/
for example. And they want to go in this direction because, they have more control over the product (you get situations like StarCraft 2, where you can't even make alterations in the single player game, because it affects an online score and they invalidate your copy. Be prepared for more of this.)
If you advance this to where it's going, and what has already begun, you're talking about less game for more money that has a perpetual cost. Oh, you want to have coop in your game? Well, that's a $15 add-on pack. You want the end of your game? Well, you're going to have to pay for installment-x,y,z. Oh you can play our game, but you have to subscribe to the multiplayer which is $15 a month to have access to single player ...
Not a lot of that has happened, but it is moving in that direction (And chances are newer gamers would jump right on board). Games are moving away from, We make game, you play game, and while I'm fine with new types of games doing new types of things ... I am NOT okay with old types of games, just being crammed into a new model because the publisher wants to bleed more money out of their consumers. The current model is already too bloated on the consumer end, they're just going in the wrong direction. In general, regarding software, most companies are just going in the wrong direction. The age of proprietary-software is slowly coming to an end, and they're grasping straws to get people not to move on. But it's going to happen, at some point in time they simply will not be able to compete with other business models, I'd just prefer if they didn't take the entire game industry with them.
The idea that ... you purchased something and you are unable to do what you wish with it, purely because there is a flakey mandatory agreement of stipulations is absurd and, in actual law, does not usually hold up. You have the right to modify the hardware in your PS3, you have the right to hack apart it's firmware, you just can't sell it or use it. You have the right, to write your own firmware, as long as it's not based off Sony's ... these are all within your legal rights and most of all there is nothing immoral about any of it.
The criminal action taken by whomever is assaulting Sony's online businesses is not condoned. That is criminal and malicious and immoral behavior ... I am in no way saying people have the right to do that. What I'm saying, is Sony does NOT have the right to tell you you can't utilize something you bought from them to the fullest extent you can. And if you can't separate that from criminal activity ... then you should really reevaluate how you're looking at it.
I have no problems with any company making profit ... but they can't do it at the expense of consumers ... they have to do it at their benefit.