Maybe I should clarify, I personally can see the value to cooperations of having protections in place during the initial sales period, when these meassures have been shown to make an impact. My comment was more pointed at the fact that of the people I personally know that are very much opposed to the use of Denuvo specifically, very few wouldn't buy a game they want because of its use, yet they still very consistently complain about the presence of Denuvo. Essentially, my point was that from where I am sitting, a large contingent of gamers complain about things without adjusting their behavior accordingly. I also feel (again, purely subjective) that the less someone complains about pre-ordering, the less likely they are to actually engage in pre-ordering.
That being said, beyond the first few months, I remain convinced that overly aggressive DRM does negatively impact game preservation, which is why I like the compromise some studios started engaging in of removing certain DRM meassures a few months post release. I recently bought two racing games from my childhood on eBay as new-old-stock physical media. One of the twos aggressive and no longer maintained DRMs made my Windows VM unbootable and I cannot access the game without relying on the work of pirates in circumventing that.
Also, I will point out that defending DRM as something that protects artists as you did doesn't fully track considering one of the uncracked Denuvo games in the list you linked is Hi-Fi Rush, an exceptional game and financial success that was critically acclaimed and made by talented creatives who are now out of a job [0], not because of piracy, but because of corporate mismanagement.
Whether and by how much DRM can protect profits, we can discuss that for days, but I have yet to see evidence that it ever directly benefits the creatives you mention, not least because outside of corporate games studios, where ones job security doesn't appear linked to game quality or sales, in the indie scene, few if any can afford solutions like Denuvo, so the one place where developers could directly benefit from it, they can't either.
Circling back to preservation, artists generally want to be able to learn from eachother and games outside the current generation can have immense value for that. Even and sometimes especially those games that are unlikely to ever receive a re-release (which often do make changes from the original experience), so I very much feel it isn't optimal if future generations of artist will have a hard time accessing past media due to overly agressive DRM meassures protecting corporate profits within only the first few months past release.
[0] https://www.pcgamer.com/gaming-industry/microsoft-announces-...