komoto: I'm guessing you didn't read the article, or don't understand the problem.
I think the underlying reasoning for this approach (instead of a boycott) is:
1) Gamers (collectively) are pretty rubbish at boycotts, so they don't work.
2) Money talks, so Ubisoft will hear.
If gamers aren't able to hold off buying products then that's their money talking, and there's not much that can be done. A small minority taking out their frustrations on retailers will simply be drowned out by the many who still buy the product. And it just makes those who oppose such DRM schemes seem petty and childish. On the other hand, the purpose of simply not buying the game is twofold. First and foremost it's for your own benefit- if you don't think that the game is worth what's being asked for it because of the DRM (or any other reason) then obviously you shouldn't be buying it. I wouldn't even call this kind of action a boycott, it's simply the free market at work. Second, if enough people feel similarly (that the product isn't worth the asking price) then the company making the product will have to take notice and respond or else they will eventually go under. Again, this is simply the market at work. If enough people speak with their money in their own self-interest then companies will take notice; and if it turns out that most people are using their money to say things contrary to what you want to say then that's just how it is. Attempts to drown out all those other voices will either prove useless or will backfire and cause some collateral damage along the way.
komoto: I want to buy Beyond Good & Evil 2 without DRM, and this is the best idea I've heard so far as an attempt to make that happen.
That's the problem with your mindset, and also why many gamers will still buy games even while complaining loudly about the DRM used. Myself, I don't want to buy any particular game. I want to buy a fun RPG, or strategy game, or adventure game, without the hassle of any particularly troublesome DRM. And I know that there are plenty of companies out there willing to sell me what I want, even if it turns out Ubisoft is not. I win regardless of what Ubisoft does.
StingingVelvet: I have a promise it will be patched out so I can play it in 20 years.
I think in legal circles that's known as an "I promise not to cum" clause. ;)
Delixe: There is literally nothing we can do to voice our concerns against Ubisoft which will result in any changes.
Money talks. If Ubisoft sees dismal sales for games that include this DRM then they'll have to take notice if they want to survive. Sure, we'll initially get the rhetoric that piracy is what's responsible for the low sales, but the conversations in Ubisoft's internal meetings will likely be of a very different tone; and if Ubisoft doesn't end up changing their ways then they'll simply eventually become irrelevant and go under, as is the case with all companies that don't respond to their market. On the other hand, if there's much gnashing of teeth among gamers but they still end up buying the game, well, as I initially said, money talks.
Wishbone: What MAY be happening to some degree, is that some of the current batch of AAA game publishers are pulling away from the PC platform. This will not kill PC gaming. The indie developers are already moving in, and more will follow. Those that are successful will themselves be making AAA titles in a few years. And so a generation change occurs, but PC gaming lives on regardless. The PC gaming market is simply too big and juicy, so someone will always seek to supply it.
Bingo. As long as a market exists where profits can be made someone will seek to cater to that market. The only thing that can "kill" PC gaming is if the market disappears, and I know I have little intention of moving away from PC gaming anytime soon (and I hardly think I'm alone).
