Basically what I'm trying to ask is if DRM is ALWAYS a terrible thing in the eyes of gamers
It is in my eyes.
I don't agree with the concept of having to ask someone else to use something I pay for. I am a legitimate, paying customer, and I get bit by faulty or ill conceived DRM checks all the time. There have been a few recent cases of massive DRM failures with EA and I believe UBISoft.
Half my downloaded games on PSN deny me the ability to play them every time PSN goes down for maintenance, which is a few times a week. Capcom's DRM servers rely on PSN being up. It's fun coming home from work and trying to play the game I just bought, only to be told 'I'm unautorized' because Sony needs from tuesday at 9am to thursday at noon to fix their network again.
I can't use half my android software as soon as I leave wi-fi range. Most tablets sold at retail do not have any connectivity beyond wi-fi unless you spend an extra 50$ to get a 3/4g model, or you get one from a cell phone store.
I have a star charting app that wouldn't run (online check seems to have been patched out recently) when I'm not home. Yes, you read that right. An app made to use outside on a portable device that won't run because you're outside.
It's fun paying 20$ for an a tablet game, and then being told I have an unauthorized copy because I went one step too far in my backyard. Square-Soft "allows" me to run FF3 a random number of times with failed wi-fi check. Which means when I run it on my way home I have to pray that it works, and then remember to run it once when I get home to restart my failed wifi check counter, or I'm out of luck the next day? I would have no problem with the wi-fi check if it happened once during the initial install.
Why am I being treated like this? Over the course of my life, I've spent near 1,000$ on Square-Enix products. I (and others like me) am the reason these idiots denying me the use of MY game even have a job right now. If it wasn't for the support of their paying audience, there wouldn't be a Square-Enix. Same goes for any other software company. They are privileged to have our business. They are not entitled to it.
So now when FF4 on android comes out soon, my potential purchase comes with a list of conditions in an e-mail. I politely state my support over the decades, going all the way back to their first release until now, and all the problems they have given me trying to use and enjoy the software I have have bought from them. And that if current practices continue, we will have to unfortunately end our business relationship.
This stuff has gotten out of control, and these guys have forgotten how the relationship works. These companies make products that no one needs, and they are asking us for our money and support. They are lucky when and if they get that support, and they are entirely reliant on the customer for their continued existence.
The only model I support anymore is 'I buy it. I own it.' The GOG.com model.
If you think you're going to tell me how, when, why, or on what machine I can run something on, you're not getting my money.
If you think you're going to install something else that will watch me, or 'manage' something, you're not getting my money.
If you think I'm going to ask permission to run use your product, you're not getting my money.
Thankfully, most of the e-book world now agrees with the above. I'll be happy when the gaming world catches on.
Also, I know I didn't touch on piracy, because I don't care. I know it's a real problem, but it's not MY problem to deal with. You either treat me like a proper customer, or I'll go do business with someone else that does. I don't call up Home Deport and ask them permission to sit on my own toilet just because other people are stealing toilet seats, or stealing water service. I also don't let the grocery store send an employee over to check up on the eggs I bought from them. It's no less ridiculous when a software company does it.