I was just wondering what RPS's views on DRM are (I can already imagine, but eh), and I - personally - wonder why they even bother with intrusive DRM.
I can understand "minor" DRM, like CD keys and the like. It's a mild protection of investment that, whilst easily cracked, pushes away lighthearted non-bothersome pirates that would rather pay than mess about with it.
I can also understand the usage of multiplayer as a form of DRM. Additional content in order to force the player into buying the game is perfectly understandable and pretty much acceptable. It's fair to both the company and the player to use this method.
But then we get into the harsher DRM. Stuff like Securom or Ubisoft's DRM system (lol Assassin Creed 2) which are far harder to deal with as a regular customer. Forced registration or being online when trying to play a singleplayer game are just terrible things, especially when you realise that pirates do not have to deal with these issues.
The companies claim that it's to prevent piracy (which it never does, maybe casual pirates, but usually not even them) but most people suspect that it's to prevent resale. You can't sell something properly if the other person doesn't get a real product.
I'm fairly certain, however, that this level of intrusive DRM forces more people into piracy than it prevents resale. It's like burning the bushes behind you to get someone out of cover and then blanketing the world in thick smoke. It's just plain stupid.
What do you all think? Is this just braindead retardation on the part of the companies, or is there some genius sinister force at work here?