I agree with Revvin. The only people discouraged by DRM are the casual pirates and the legitimate customers.
Let's face it, DRM is a different piece of software running on top of your favorite gaming title. In many cases it wasn't integrated during development and even if it was (in the case of in-house developmebt by big studios), it's still not a custom made solution for a specific game.
It's either a case of a big company like Ubi or EA following a "one size fits all" approach for all their in-house developed titles, or in the worst case scenario a developer studio hooks up with a certain publisher who, a few months before release, demands that the DRM be tacked on in a hurry so that they don't miss the deadlines.
Of course it's going to cause all sorts of technical problems when it's done like that
The only prevention lies in the demographic of casual pirates and people who are somewhat "computer illiterate", they can't make an illegal copy work or they want participation in online ranking systems, so they fork over the cash for a legit copy, but these guys are the minority of the piracy problem.
So, since DRM is not any better at preventing piracy than the old copy protection systems (they get cracked pretty much immediately in any case), why do the companies waste money on researching, implementing and supporting (in some rare cases) it? Simply because it's not the hardcore pirates they're after, they know they can't force them to buy their titles. The return of investment they're betting on is not by means of forcing the pirates to buy but by stopping you, the legitimate user, from reselling or giving away your legacy purchased copy as a gift.
