Often time we'll see fashions go full circle where something is popular for a few years, and then decades later becomes fashionable anew. This seem to be the case with technology in many cases as well.
3D television is a good example, it's come and gone over the years; although better in each iteration. I was somewhat joking, but I observed the other day that "phone will probably have a feature soon which will audibly speak the text messages you receive. As audibly spoken text messages become more popular, it's only a matter of time before someone creates a device where one person can speak to another in the own voice, in real time."
I would guess most often the choice to include DRM in games comes from the executives who are out of touch with what is really going on. The general buzz in the industry is that DRM stops piracy, but from my perspective that doesn't appear to be the case. It's interesting to note that many indie developers - you know, those small business where the guy who does the work is also the guy making the important decisions? - indie developers often do not include DRM of any kind. I applaud their pro-customer stance.
I would love to see an, obviously satirical, buzz begin touting these "pro-customer." The executives of the world hear "we hate DRM" as idle complaints from consumers. Talk of the most basic features such as the ability to install a game on a computer with an internet connection, or install the game to multiple computers as a "new and exciting technology" might influence these executives a little more; and the satire would be great. Basically, focus on the positive rather than complain of the negatives.
Or maybe I'm just anxious to once hear an interviewer ask a Ubisoft executive in an interview: "Many successful games companies are now offering the ability to install games on multiple computers, and even on computers without internet connections. Can we expect to see these exciting new features in upcoming Ubisoft games?"
