Can't say for DRM, but there's much bigger demand to play a multiplayer action game without experiencing cheating than demand for a similar game that's not a rootkit. Cheaters are nasty. Devs make rootkit anti-cheats simply because there's no better alternative, not because they're evil.
We need to define nebulous terms like 'better'... to a company that's synonymous with what is 'cheapest' to their bottom line. To a player, that's a more effective anti-cheat.
To my understanding, the latter is much more effectively solved server-side, but is more costly for the company to run.
I'd rather play a game with server-side anti-cheat than player-side-anti-cheat.
All games are different, and for some game, this may be true, but what I, personally, have in my mind in a discussion about intrusive anti-cheats is a fast shooter with lag compensation like CS or CoD, and for them, this problem is not solvable only server-side.
CS:GO actually have heuristics and ML to flag cheaters server-side, but that's only another line of defense - the majority of defense is on the client-side anti-cheat. It's called VACnet, and its bans are temporary - most likely because of false positives.
