At GDC 2009, publishers and developers are anxious to discuss with you all the new games and gadgets they have in the works, but also the methods in which they wish to limit your access to their games and gadgets. Digital rights management (DRM) is a hot topic these days, especially for us bedraggled and well-worn PC gamers. Console gamers mostly don’t have to deal with any of the aggravating issues afflicted upon computer gamers–you just get the game (new or used) and throw it in your console. For computer gamers, it gets more complicated, because we’re all filthy pirates. Or hadn’t you heard?

Microsoft, Valve and Stardock, three heavyweights in computer gaming and digital content distribution are all at GDC this year, keen to appease consumer concerns that their systems are not DRM. Call it something else, but it’s not DRM, because DRM is a dirty word. Kind of like how AIG wants to change their name now, because hey, that solves the problem with consumer confidence.

It’s acronym city: CEG from Valve, GOO from Stardock and umm, Games for Windows Live from Microsoft. Okay, that last one wasn’t really an acronym at all. All three systems are keen on balancing the consumer need to be able to install their purchased software on numerous machines without restriction, while at the same time ensuring that revenue still gets generated by the developers (you actually buy the dang game).

On first glance, Valve’s solution appears especially elegant: Computer Executable Generation (CEG) creates a unique copy of the game all your own when purchased from Steam. You download it and can play/install it on as many computers as you want, because it’s your copy, generated specifically for you. Since the game connects to Steam, it will recognize your unique copy and allow you access–but only one machine at a time (so no sharing it with other people).

Stardock’s unfortunately-named GOO, or Game Object Obfuscation creates a registration entry between an email address and a serial number, intrinsically linking the two in a cross between product registration and game activation. Once validated, the game would never need to connect to the internet again (no Big Brother checking). This system also has the unique advantage of allowing users to disable their access and sell/transfer the license ownership to another user. GameStop will be thrilled!

Microsoft seems to be running catch-up, with a more old-fashioned system of game registration, but are allowing multiple system installs, which is a step in the right direction. They’re also taking steps to ensure that anyone who downloads advanced or leaked copies of games won’t be able to play them until launch day.

The distiction all three publishers (and indeed the instrusty at large) are migrating towards is that restrictions and checks put in place are IP protection, not DRM. If you buy the game, publishers don’t care if you play it on your laptop or your desktop computer–they just want you to buy it. What they don’t like is seeing one person buy a game and then copy it to five of their friends and lose out on potential revenue. They want to lock access to the game by a license, and allow you any method you’d like of distribution–rent it, buy it, download it, whatever! If you bought the license, play away!

We’ll have to see how the public at large accepts these new technologies and linguistic changes from developers and publishers. PC gamers are notoriously picky about restrictions, and get uppity when companies like EA put so much DRM into Spore that it made it it virtually unplayable. They respond by pirating the hell out of it. PC gamers don’t mess around.

So what do you all think? Will any of these proposed solutions make you more likely to get back into PC gaming? Or is any content control too much to stomach? Let us know in the comments below.

Me, I’m just happy to be hearing language from publishers that doesn’t characterize customers into a prospective criminals. That’s a nice change. I can take the eye patch off now, I guess?