Microsoft has a standing annual legal bill, we're told, of ~$100 million dollars to defend itself from patent related litigation. Unless the licensing revenue stream easily eclipses that amount, why is the current system worth defending? Why does Microsoft insist on speaking out in defense of a mechanism that appears, if anything, to negatively impact its shareholders? It seems like a flawed equation.
Jack writes: "Our guide to the best GPUs for Homeworld 3 talks you through some of today's best options from Nvidia, AMD, and Intel - for various budgets."
opinion piece? it's an advertisement and these articles shouldn't be here.
Advertisement on top of advertisements
Xbox and EA have recently made baffling moves that define how bleak the future of the gaming industry is with major companies at the helm. Ryan Bates from "Last Word on Gaming" posits in this op-ed that maybe it's not ineptitude, but intention.
Name someone that isn't trying to look us these days maybe cdpr.
Take two, ubi and yes even PlayStation are pushing us to own nothing and be happy with our live service ad injected games on a sub so they can raise prices at will and take access away when they see fit.
If it keeps up I'll be a full time retro gamer and this industry will be crashing hard
As rediculas as it sounds we need government reforms to defend consumer rights
XCOM and Marvel's Midnight Suns director Jake Solomon has founded a new studio to make a life sim game. Here's a new interview with him.
Defending patents is not about making a profit it is about protecting your space in the market, if you do not enforce patents you lose them