Okay, after reading Ubi's responses to questions about the DRM in This Article, I really have to say WTF???
Honestly, I think the people that are saying these guys are on some kind of medication may be right. Check out this gem. When asked how people will know what they'll lose in any particular game if their connection happens to drop, Ubi says:
Seriously? SERIOUSLY? You won't be able to get that info from Ubisoft? You'll have to wait for reviews and hear what your peers are saying? Seriously? The mind boggles.
And the advantages for gamers:
1) No disc required in the drive.
Okay, I'll give them that. Although it's easy enough to get around that problem currently (but I personally don't have a problem with needing the disc in the drive anyway).
2) You can install the game on any PC you like.
Uh, before the advent of these asinine DRM schemes, you could also do that anyway. I can still do that with all the games I currently own. And the disc check meant you could only play it on one machine at a time anyway... So no, you don't get that one Ubi.
3) Automatic uploading of save games to Ubi's servers.
I'm sorry, but what's the advantage there? When I can have my save games on my own hard drive(s) and back them up as I see fit so I can play my games later from any point I choose whenever I choose.? Not going to give you that one either, Ubi. Sorry.
I'm actually quite disappointed that I showed my support for Ubisoft''s supposed 'enlightened' step they took with no DRM on Prince of Persia by buying the game. Not going to buy any more. Not going to pirate them either. Just not going to be playing any Ubisoft titles from here on out. If they happen to patch out this ridiculous DRM in the future, then THAT"S when I'll buy their game - if I'm still interested. Of course, by then it will probably be on GOG and I'll just get it here.
Oh, one last point: If anyone decides to read the entire article, take note of how Ubisoft carefully avoids answering the question of what will happen if the servers go down. They make sure they don't actually come out and say they'll patch the DRM out to make sure you can still play your game.

I get that, and for people with certain internet setups perhaps this is a true concern and maybe they will listen. As it is now they say the game will pause, not close, when there is an interruption, so if it is a quick blip like you describe it really is no big deal.
For me personally I have no problems with my internet. I have a steady connection that goes out like 1 time a month, if that. I play some MMOs and have never had issues with maintaining a connection throughout the game. I know Assassin's Creed saved every 5 seconds so even if something happens I won't lose much progress if any.
I choose my battles, is my end point. There is a battle going on for PC gaming's very survival, which is probably the most important battle I have because it is my main hobby. Asking me to be online all the time when playing, which I am anyway, is so far down the list of my concerns compared to PC gaming itself I can't even describe it as anything but irrelevant, really.

Problem is it's an annoyance that will push more people away from pc gaming.
It may be down your list as a direct irritant, but it's high on others - so even if you may enjoy the game, the scheme they use does hurt the pc gaming which you value.

It will vary vastly between games. Because of the console focus many of Ubisoft's releases only have checkpoint-based saving, and while a game like Assassin's Creed II saves all the time (meaning you'd only go back a few minutes at most) others only save after a level/mission/etc. (meaning you might need to replay a 10-20 minute segment or even more).
The "advantages" are laughable; the first two are readily available on services like Steam and Impulse--but without the constant connection requirement--and those few users that care about transporting saves have already been doing so with a flash drive or SkyDrive or whatever.

More so than rampant piracy?
When the majority of people obviously accept online systems such as this?
I doubt it.

Yes, the fact Assassin's Creed constantly saves your progress is integral to this working, honestly. I am much more wary of it for Splinter Cell 5, the next Ubi game on my list. Longer periods between saves leaves the door open for "yay I finally passed that grueling part OH MY GOD DISCONNECTED??"
One hopes they have quicksave back in the series to counter this.

From the inital CVG article, I thought "game shuts down when connection is dropped. EPIC FAIL." So, excuse me while I don't believe that.

Read the PC Gamer article which is all over the place, likely in this thread. If it loses connection it pauses and asks you to reconnect, and it will sit there until you do.

that's great... if you want to sit around and wait to reconnect.
I'm usually with you Velvet, and i've been defending steam on half the ranty threads around here, but in this particular case i think it's going way too far.
Listening to the radio. No radio reception = no music. Fair enough.
Listening to my ipod. No radio reception = your ipod music won't play = stupid.
Watching TV. No tv reception = no tv shows. Fair enough.
Watching a DVD. No internet connection to WB = dvd won't play = stupid.
that said, I think this'll be an interesting experiment. If it's truly uncrackable (at least for a while) then we'll see if sales of AC2 are significantly higher than AC1. I'd suspect not. At which point they prove that piracy has very little connection to buyers, and we can all give up on the whole DRM thing.
Or maybe at that point Ubisoft declares the PC industry dead and concentrates on consoles, at which point we lose a few console ports, shrug, and keep playing all the PC games that others are making.

Hah! I suspected as much. The much touted 85-90% piracy rate is a global figure... which includes all the poorer countries where very few people are likely to buy your game at full price anyway. The rate in the UK and US is more like 20-25%, and the highest western nation is italy with about 49%. (not counting greece because they are contrary).
So this might stop lots of people in china, russia and armenia from playing this game, but are ubisoft going to make a lot of money from them? Maybe, but maybe not...

Keep in mind.... the world's population.... 6.8 BILLION people, and it wont stop them... How many people live in areas with huge piracy rates, IE China, India
It might slow people down from piracy for a few weeks/months... but there has only been a FEW games that kept pirates at bay for more then 6 months.
The fact is people are curious, some people do not like to be treated like a criminal, (im one of those, if you accuse me of doing something with NO REASON for doing so then to hell with it I might as well do it)
We are being punished before given a chance to prove ourselves deserving of this. The US is 107 on that list...... Odd the US has the most crime yet the least piracy.....

That's fine, I can see I am in the minority (on here anyway).
I just don't have an issue with being online all the time because I am anyway. That is pretty much the crux of my arguement, they are not asking me for anything I wouldn't be doing anyway.
So the only thing to be mad about is the principle, and as I said if the DRM-free principle got me to boycott a game I would be doing it for Steamworks, GFWL, SecuROM and TAGES as well, which I am not, because then I would have nothing to play! And I would not be supporting PC gaming either.
The main reason I dislike DRM is one simple one: I want to play these games in 20 years, preferably without rebuying them. That is my main thing. Steam worries me because who knows what will happen to it, my account, or whatever else. SecuROM worries me because activation servers may go down without patching out the process. This Ubisoft thing worries me because the servers might go down without a patch to remove the process, but at least here we have a promise they will remove it from a company that has removed DRM before from games like Farcry 2 and Dawn of Discovery.
So I'm good. As good as I get with DRM period, anyway. I would still of course prefer none at all.

You evidently have a different lifestyle than some of us. I currently work in a different town than I live in, and in the next year I'm going to be in Denver, Cheyenne, Columbus, Chicago, Nashville, Tucson, Maui and Kona at the very least. My primary game machine is a laptop, and there's no guarantee of whether I'll have wireless at any particular stop, or what kind of firewall will be present.
I am actually boycotting all of those, and have been for about 5 years. There's still plenty to play. I have a backlog of about 20 GOG's, as well as about a half dozen DRM free disk releases. That's not counting console games and things on my wishlist from both sources. And I feel that by supporting GOG and buying lots of DRM free disk releases, I'm supporting PC gaming just fine.
I have a simple requirement for software: Can I install to a fresh hard drive anytime forever into the future without getting permission (from a server or otherwise)? And can I do it anywhere in the world, without regards to whether I'm connected or not?
The preinstalled Windows on my laptop fits that requirement, because you can store Windows activations on a USB key. I'm considering buying ProTools, and it fits the requirement because the activation is stored on a USB dongle that is usable on as many computers as you like and even on new computers. I'm OK with disk checks as long as they don't install a driver on the machine, though I have no moral qualms with cracking the disc check to get rid of it.
I don't have any pirated software on any of my computers. Everything is either purchased or Open Source. I even buy my music. I have occasionally stored a Netflix DVD on my hard drive so I could mail it back. But there was no semblance of a lost sale for anyone.
It's not a big emotional thrashing. It's just a simple "does this fit the requirements I have for buying software?". DRM, in most cases, simply doesn't fit the requirements, so I don't participate.

Oh, I understand it will vary, but Ubi's basically saying they won't be able to tell you how it works for each individual game they're publishing. You'll have to 'wait for reviews' or wait to see what other gamers are saying. Sorry, that's not acceptable. This is information they should be able to provide to the consumer themselves.

Would anyone believe them? The model is basically doing what they said it would and people are still acting surprised.
They already gave the basics of it: You lose connection, you can't progress until you reconnect. If you choose to not reconnect, you reload later. Beyond that, it is up to each individual game as to how this will affect things. An RTS will probably end up booting you back to the start of the mission/checkpoint, an open-world game to the last quicksave, etc.
Nah, to know "how it works" you need to wait for reviews and release. Same with every other DRM model, and even every other gameplay model.