Elon is literally everything Cyberpunk warns is about. He's the biggest corpocunt the world has ever seen. Arasaka is exactly what Elon wants X Corp to be. He's actually trying to make chips that get implanted into your brain. He wants his own Relic. He wants to be the immortal Saburo Arasaka.
B1 is a bit slow, but quite fun, B2 is brilliant, BTPS is similar to B2, but the crafting stuff is annoying, B3 was too chaotic with a too cluttred UI and a damn annoying story, B4, I have no idea
I liked that one but weirdly there’s no NG+ and the DLC kind of sucked. I finished it with a friend and we were like, “that’s it?”. It’s not very long, and it ends shortly after your end of skill tree powers become available.
I think it was a really good game originally. The writing has gotten really fucking bad though, and the gameplay hasn’t really evolved with the times. (I can’t speak on the new game.)
The new one feels like progress so far. I’m not very deep in, but the story and dialogue are not nearly as annoying as 3 was. The biggest difference has to be the movement. In previous games it often felt like you were trudging forward until you found an enemy and then running backwards so they didn’t catch you before they die. Grappling hooks, double jumps, and gliding add a TON of movement and gives you those John Wick moments where you’re bouncing around the area and blasting people from every direction.
I really don’t understand the open world though. I don’t think that’s the direction they needed to go. I think the best looter-shooter I’ve played recently is Roboquest. It has all the movement you said (and more), but it’s in tight rooms, so the devs have more control of the design. Open worlds means the devs have essentially zero control of encounters and it becomes too easy. The only thing they can do is crank up health of enemies so they don’t die as quickly.
I’m not far enough to have settled on an opinion on the open world yet. I did find it tedious in other BL games that I had to walk through the same areas in the same order over and over again to access the end game or start a new character.
That being said, I often don’t know where to go or what to do in BL4. Thank Torgue they added the Echo objective finder, that’s pretty much the only way I’ve been able to stay on track at all.
Yeah, I just have a bias against open world games at this point. Damn near every game thinks they need to be open world, and most of the time it just makes things more tedious and boring. It takes a ton of dev time to make just for players to run past 99% of it. There are some games it really works for, but most would be better off with a tighter design (and it’d also save time and money).
I understand your worries. I was was also concerned about the openworld first, but so far they have nailed the open world part pretty well. Travelling has been fun. There has been always fast travel near when i have wanted to use it. There is enough hidden jokes and easter eggs that i feel rewarded to look around.
I dont really understand your point. Devs still curate where you meet the enemies. Its not like its procedurally generated map where everything is random.
I cant remember single time in my 20 hours of gameplay where i have tought that i hate fighting here, or that these enemies dont fit here.
I dont really understand your point. Devs still curate where you meet the enemies. Its not like its procedurally generated map where everything is random.
I haven’t played it, so maybe they’ve done something to control it. I doubt it though. If you can come from any direction, that makes encounters much harder to design. Think about older Borderlands games when entering a compound. You’d come through one main gate and enemies would be set up with cover and you’d have to fight your way through. With open world you could do something like fly into the middle of the compound, and that’s has to be accounted for.
Check out Roboquest, for example. It has some really impressive movement options, but it’s choice of rooms let’s them restrict how much you can abuse them. You’ll always be fighting through the enemies from an expected direction.
I cant remember single time in my 20 hours of gameplay where i have tought that i hate fighting here, or that these enemies dont fit here.
This isn’t what I meant. There’s nuance between liking something and it being the best possible thing. It can be good and still be possible to be better. My biggest issue with open worlds is, like you mentioned at the beginning, fast travel. It takes so much time and resources to make an open world, just for players to fast travel past most of it. Is it really worth the that? Did it add that much to the experience? We could have more cheaper games with tighter designed experiences instead of games that cost hundreds of millions of dollars to make. (BL3 cost $140m, and for cost “more than twice” that, so minimum $280m.)
I don’t think people understand that everything is an opportunity cost. If you make an open world game, that’s at the expensive of so much more. At minimum, it’s going to be less game to play (or longer between games and more expensive). Is getting a lot of space that you hardly interact with worth it?
The thing about open world is, you can make those smaller contained spaces you keep mentioning with Roboquest inside of some structure with a single entrance and boom, we have your preferred formula.
Sure. You can make those, but you have to spend a lot of money and time making the open world just to make places for the rooms to live. Is that worth it? Everything is opportunity cost. Did doubling the cost improve the game that much?
It depends on the game. Could a Sonic game be fun in open world? Yes, and it was. Would The Hunt? Or Supermeat Boy? Probably not. I’m just pointing out you can still design for your movement abilities in an open world.
For sure, you can. However, every modern game is trying to be an open world game. It’s stupid. We get ballooning budgets and dev cycles for games that don’t really get anything from being open world. I’d rather get three great less open games than one open world game that is sacrificing things to make the open world work.
I will agree theres a lot more. Theres just a lot more games in general. Pick up the Solium Infernum remake, or Windblown, or Wizard of Legend, or even Helldivers 2 isnt open world. Plenty to choose from. But I do emplore you to play Sonic Frontiers. Shit was dope. Also Sword of the Sea just came out, another fine addition to the atmospheric collection. Theres just a lot more now. So you’re gonna see a lot more and you’re gonna see a lot more terrible games.
It’s not even just about the games being terrible. The ballooning costs is just unsustainable. It’s the reason we’ve seen so many layoffs, and it sucks. It’s just mismanagement. The executives are the ones telling the developers to make open world games, for the most part. They don’t understand how that effects the rest of the design, or how much it ends up costing. They just see a trend and tell the studios they need to follow it.
If it was just that we got some shitty games I wouldn’t care. However, it’s effecting people’s lives. We need a more sustainable industry of smaller budget games that know what they are and plays to its strengths. We’ve got too many games trying to be everything games. It’s the reason studios ramped up the price to $70, and then, quickly after, $80. Soon they’ll be Charing $90-$100 because they let costs get too high to maintain.
Or, what if their healthcare continued to be free so they wouldn’t have an incentive to find a way to live on $700 month?
I know one of those young men playing video games, and he REALLY wants a job, but no matter how he works the math, the medication that keeps him alive costs more than what he’d make. So, his only choice is to budget around permanent poverty or die.
Same reason I’ve been unemployed for a long while, my disability and medicare covers so much of my costs that working would likely result in less money in my pocket.
What are you going to do after all this is over, and it’s either even harder to get or just completely gone? Im sorry you have to go through any of this…
No idea, I have a good support structure, so I’m probably not completely fucked if/when it comes down to it. Also my doctor has implied he has some way of helping, should the shit hit the fan, not sure what that could possibly entail though.
You know someone is gonna make a mod that generates random and unique bases from hab complex assets.
And thats exactly why Bethesda doesnt put the effort in. cause they make the game, then the modders make it good for free… Or it used to be that, now they want to charge for mods and take a cut of the profits for shit they didnt make.
At a scale of 1k planets you're going to have to rely on reused assets and procedural generation. At which point people not into procedural generation say that it's "repetitive". Especially if you only gen once for everyone and not each run lol.
AI generation of assets and code will theoretically eventually resolve this, but that's quite a ways off. They're not even usable for such with human assistance yet. And if you have ai generating the content, it's not really a human team making that stuff lol.
They could at least make the random PoI’s interesting if there was some…randomness to them.
Like, I walk into a PoI, I already know where the chests are, the locked doors, are, where the stupid fucking corpse in the shower is, etc etc. cause I’ve ran through this PoI 20 times.
I dont know why at least the locations of chests and locked doors cant be randomized. Make things at least marginally interesting, instead of cookie cuttered to extreme.
You can, but randomizing chests+locked doors is kinda complicated, and the more "interesting" your generations the harder it is to code and the more dev time it takes. And for a AAA game release you can't really do that.
Key+Lock randomization is something that has been solved, and has been used most notably in procedurally generated zeldalikes. But that's still niche indie territory, and not used for major game releases.
Hasn’t this game been in development for like 5 years? And they built it on an existing engine that they have tons of experience with. You could have said “they were limited on how much they could randomize POIs because of the old engine” and I would have believed you because that sounds way more plausible than “it’s hard to code, so AAA games can’t do it”. Like what?
The issue with procedural generation is the game has to be built for it from the ground up and in a modular way. AAAs try to make themselves appealing by using novel new high quality assets that aren't modular.
I haven't played starfield so idk what they ended up doing, but from the sound of it they have pre-made assets/areas that they then place onto pre-generated worlds in a randomized way.
To make one of these "areas" procedural in itself, they'd then have to code a whole system for that. With AAA/3D the hard part is making modular environments without it looking repetitive or ugly.
My point isn't so much that it can't be done in a AAA game. But rather that it's risky to do (not all players like it), and you have to structure your development around it. Lots can go wrong, there's stuff you gotta sacrifice to make it work, etc.
If starfield is on the old bethesda engine then that's even more of a reason. You can't just plug and play an entire procedural generation thing in there without some fairly large overhauls or just gluing on an unrelated system.
In practice, bethesda probably took the lazy route: using their existing engine without major changes, then just making new assets for it, throwing stuff about a bit randomly, and calling it a day.
That's the thing about procedural generation is: it's a lot of effort and sucks up a huge part of the game's development and comes at some pretty strict costs (repetitive looking environments/gameplay, reduced novelty, larger programming dev time to make it work). It can be done, but for a cost-cutting AAA studio they're not gonna bother.
They already have once though. Many of Morrowind’s dungeons were procedurally generated in development then edited a bit after, that was the same engine. Same with Daggerfall altho that was a diff engine.
Very different game but Amnesia: the Bunker has plenty of procedural generation as well.
It’s not at all impossible for one of the largest game development studios to have some procedurally generated, essentially dungeon content. Doing a bit more than the exact same place copied and pasted would be a huge undertaking yes, but if they wanted to they could have. There are plenty of 3D rogue-likes out now as well. Returnal is AAA and haa procedurally generated levels, far more complicated than neccesary for Bethesda to do in order to populate planets in their game about planet exploration.
I didn't say it's impossible. Just that it's harder, takes deliberate effort, etc. For AAA games they don't bother with that kind of thing because it's larger expense and larger risk.
I was never asking for fully procedurally generated dungeons.
I just said randomize chest locations and door locks. It cant be that hard for a company that has been using the same game engine for almost 22 years to implement a node system to roll a spawn chance for a chest, or a door to be locked or not (with a higher chance of node spawns behind locked doors).
Hell, they could have even gone the lazy way and just copy and pasted the PoI a few times and manually changed the cosmetics/appearances.
With space and prefab buildings, they have the ultimate excuse for why every dungeon is identical (at least until you get into the underground caves…), but not every one of them should have the same dead body inthe same location in the same shower, the same succulent on the same shelf. move the body to a different location! Have a chance for a cluster of books to spawn instead of the succulent! Its a prefabricated hab structure, but that doesnt mean they come with such strict instructions as “Only succulent A on this shelf”
yes. I haven't played the game so idk the details of what's up. but at 1k+ planet-sized spaces it's hard to have a team go over that by hand. Planets are large. But I have no doubt that bethesda team was probably super lazy as well.
Cancelling a pre-loaded pride event because you’re scared of right wing nutcases being mean to your playerbase is the very definition of letting the terrorists win.
7.1% of the total hours spent were on Counter-Strike: Global Offensive / Counter-Strike 2
6.4% were in League of Legends
6.2% were in Roblox
5.8% were in Dota 2
5.4% were in Fortnite
That is a lot of people playing free-to-play competitive multiplayer games.
Free is an important reason why. Also, these games run very well on old machines. If you mostly play that and get a new rig, you don’t have to spend a lot. Pc parts have gotten ridiculously expensive.
I get free reducing the barrier-to-entry, but I kinda look at games in terms of “how much is the ratio of the cost to how many hours of fun gameplay that I get?”
I mean, I have some games that I briefly try, dislike, and never play again. Those are pretty expensive, almost regardless of the purchase price.
But the thing is, if it’s a game that you play a lot, the purchase price becomes almost irrelevant in cost-per-hour of gameplay. I’ve played Cataclysm: Dark Days Ahead — well, okay, you can download that for free, but I also bought it on Steam to throw the developers some money — and Caves of Qud a ton. The price on them is basically a rounding error. And the same is probably true for the top few games in my game library.
You could charge me probably $2000 for Cataclysm: Dark Days Ahead, and it’d still be cheaper per hour of gameplay than nearly all games that I’ve played, because I’ve spent so many hours in the thing.
If people are playing these like crazy, you’d think that the same would hold for them. That the cost for a game that you play like crazy for many years just…doesn’t matter all that much, because the difference in hours played between games is so huge that it overwhelms the difference in price.
That and Dwarf Fortress; learning curve is steep but they’re rogue-likes. Death is an opportunity to have a whole other adventure and learn from your mistakes and see what RNG has in store for you this time. And there’s infinitely repeatable!
Yeah, Dwarf Fortress too, but at least Dwarf Fortress has an extensive, well-documented wiki. Cataclysm: Dark Days Ahead had a not-very-up-to-date wiki at one point, but then whoever maintained it had it go down at some point in the past year, and I’d say that the game has also been constantly updated and more-dramatically-rebalanced than Dwarf Fortress, so learning to how to play involves scouring Reddit, YouTube, and Discord to try to figure out what information is current. I think that the current recommended route on the subreddit to learn how to play is to watch recent YouTube videos of some streamers playing, which is…kinda nuts. It’s not uncommon that a question on the subreddit as to an authoritative answer on game mechanics is “go check the code”…
There are also some military sims I’ve played that are probably reasonably approachable to players who are familiar with the military hardware involved from prior to the game, but for players who aren’t, they’re probably in for a lot of reading and understanding mechanics, and some milsims don’t bother to document that, so you really need to do outside reading beyond whatever the game documentation has.
NetHack takes me waaaay back. Blows my mind DevTeam are still working on it. I haven’t played in a few years. NetHack, Angband, C:DDA, etc are all games I play on long haul flights since they use the least battery and I’ve not been on a long haul since the pandemic.
Much as I like C:DDA, it does not perform terribly well battery-wise relative to what it should and looks like it should use. The game re-renders frames even without keypresses, and on top of that, each frame displayed recomputes the world state.
CS was paid, Dota and Fortnite had “early access” packs before being released. Yeah fortnite is the odd one out here with keeping early access stuff to seperate gamemode and still costing money, but was originally planned to transition to f2p.
Dota was always going to be f2p, and maybe you could buy the beta access, but I, like many others, never paid and just got invited. So I would not consider it to be a paid game going f2p
Love seeing another person with lots of hours in Caves of Qud. It’s rapidly climbing up my hours played list since 1.0 release. Bought it at 17.99, played for 220 hours so far. Math says that’s 9 cents an hour, and I’m still not done playing. Live and drink, friend!
Its the replayability. I mean, look how many people are still playing chess. Stick a human intelligence on the other end of the stick and you’ve pretty much got it figured out.
Further down in the thread, I ran into someone talking about an older RPG, Realmz. I dug up a subreddit on Reddit related to the game, and the stickied post had this gem:
These are codes that were reissued by Skip (Aka. SpoonLard). He and my grandfather were the original two collaborators when Skip attempted to carbonize Realmz in 2005.
Nothing like a comment about someone’s grandfather having tried twenty years ago to modernize a game you’ve played in its original form.
I’m going to be honest I just looked up the game for the first time and had no clue it came out in 2009. I hadn’t ever heard of it until a few years ago so I just figured it was some new game. The whole warcraft/dota thing was crazy to me.
@tacofox@AwesomeLowlander wasnt LoL made by some of the original DotA modders? But somehow valve ended up with the rights for the name so they made DotA 2 as a standalone game? It's been ages since iv'e seen an article about the origins of those games :D
There were many people who worked on dota back then. There was no official version to begin with, you could find a dozen variants in bnet on any given day. Slowly it got centralised. Some of the modders ended up at LoL, others ended up at Valve. The name wasn’t copyrighted, nobody really owned it. Valve kinda inherited it by virtue of hiring the guy running the mod team at the end.
Nope. I know about DOTA and how it has a bunch of spin offs. One of my best friends plays some weird betting game that is a mod of DOTA and he tried to explain the whole thing to me a long time ago.
So looking it up my guess is I played AoE over Warcraft, never understood DOTA, don’t really like battle area games, and have only ever watched AoE in e-Sports.
The amount of times I “finally sit down and watch that new Netflix show I’ve been putting off” and it’s 7 years old. My kid is into “newer Disney stories” I don’t know from my day… that are 25 year old films!
besides the lower bar of entry due to being free, Midias research has shown that the younger generation prefers online multiplayer, and as you grow older, you start to favor single player games more.
My personal hypothesis is that everyone likes online multiplayer initially because it’s pretty cool, then you get bored it when you realise playing with angry randos is no fun. It’s not that a younger generation prefers online multiplayer, it’s that they haven’t got sick of it yet!
Yes because stocks are a straight up scam. It should be able to swing up and down as the market demands, but it doesn’t because every time there’s a potentially life changing movement up or down they halt it. They’ve done it many, many times before.
Well, to be fair, you don’t know you’re getting it for that. As far as I’ve seen, they haven’t announced the release price yet. And a lot of studios are hoping that Rockstar will take the fall for being the first $100 game so publishers can start charging used console prices for AAA games from then on.
Either way though, I won’t be paying anything for it.
Based on what? You don’t actually know until it gets released. Sure, past history and reputation are certainly things to factor in, but we’ve seen plenty of major gaming companies shit the bed, despite their reputations.
I’m responding to a comment assuming it’ll be nothing but a “pay to win” game, despite any real evidence of that - I’m pointing out the expectations of GTA VI.
This sub is like Reddit on steroids. Just a bunch of contrarian kids trying to start arguments on the internet. Bizarre.
You hope you’ll get those things. It’s Rockstar though so who really knows. I mean we do know we’re going to get a single player that’s been confirmed by Rockstar but everything else is just a guess. The map leak people seem to suggest that the map will include NASA and Disneyland which will be cool I guess, but we don’t know that that’s just a prediction and I don’t quite understand how they can predict that.
I just don’t trust Rockstar not to screw it up with GTA online 2, now with more irritating flying bikes
Because I don’t want to play full price for a 1080 upscaled experience at 30fps. If it’s a good experience then it will be worth the wait and that much better when it runs smoother, looks better, and loads faster. Plus it will have most of the bugs worked by then.
This will probably be the last time it ever happens. They’re trying to get people to double dip, and plenty will, but the console install base isn’t what it was when GTA V came out at the end of a generation. Plus we all know full well that the PC version will happen, whereas in yesteryear, we weren’t sure.
If we were just talking PlayStation I would say 97% is near enough to make no difference but if we compare both platforms together its only 67% and that is enough to influence strategy. A console only release in 2025 is unlikely to eclipse GTA5’s position as “fastest-selling entertainment product in history”.
But also don’t forget that the amount of gamers is larger today than in 2013. Gaming is much more mainstream, and so even 97% of the install base is still disappointing considering steam grew by, what, 3x or something in terms of average monthly users?
Another source I found is that the amount of total gamers grew by roughly 50% from 2013 to 2025. But yeah, I just did a quick skin numbers are not precise
But still, 97% is disappointing considering the general demographic was supposed to grow. And then, in reality, it’s just 67% too
I actually have that in my library because I bought the Index but haven’t played it yet because I wanted to play the first 2 games first. I didn’t play the first game for very long tho because I got stuck at some point early into the game and haven’t felt like continuing yet. You can also really feel the age of that game, controls and that kinda stuff. Not sure if I should just punch through that game or just say fuck it and play Alyx.
Well you’re in luck because there are VR mods available free for the older Half Life games. Just get the Orange Box or something with all the half life backlog and VR mod them for free.
If by “first game” you mean HL1, you could try playing “Black Mesa” which is a fan remake of the game, in the same engine that powers HL2. It’s not a 1:1 recreation, but it’s close enough (and I feel it improves on some things).
HL2 is also 3 seperate games (HL2, HL2 Episode 1, HL2 Episode 2), so make sure you have all of those in your library.
At the very least, I’d suggest playing HL2/EP1/EP2 before Alyx, since those would provide the expected background for Alyx, despite it technically being a prequel-ish thing.
Half life 1 just got a new big update that makes it much better to play this day and age and fixed a bunch of bugs. Either way you could skip 1. As a kid I never played 1 and went straight into 2, then 2 episodes 1 and 2 with the orange box. I still haven’t finished 1 but with this new update I think I’ll go back to it some point soon now.
Am not sure there’s a way for them to release HL3 and don’t disappoint huge number of people. Not because they suck at making games but because expectations have grown so so so much they are downright unachievable now.
It serves nicely as an opportunity to remind onlookers that Trump avoided military service using his supposed ‘bone spurs’ as a reason he was unfit, though. Nothing like reminding these idiots that their tough guy is that tough
I had heard of it but I don’t really watch YouTube. I watched that whole video and what a shitshow. I went straight to my wife and said we have to watch out that the kids don’t get caught up in this.
We give an allowance to our young niece and nephew, who both game on PC sometimes, and it seems like this is exactly the kind of shit that would entice our nephew. He has my old PC and it’s really showing its age.
I guess that must be why I can’t buy the Black & White games or Fable 2. Because Microsoft cares so much about preserving the awkward legal Loop some of their Lionhead Games are in.
I love how this continues to crank out articles with 0 information and everyone speculating what it might be about.
Don’t get me wrong, Nintendo are dickheads, but you can clearly see how everyone greedily clicks on these articles considering how often they get rehashed.
I am just curious, do you have a take on how Nintendo’s lawsuit could be legitimate? Even a high-level theory, surely if you are so concerned about speculation and “greedy clickbait”, you have some logical ideas to back this up?
I would argue we do have enough information to have a take on it. What legitimate patent infringement case do you see in context of Palworld and Nintendo’s products? Be clear and specific.
If you’re going to call for a ban on commentary, you need to have some of argument.
From my perspective, it is crazy to defend some random corporation in this way when you can’t even come up with a basic explanation of why critical commentary is not justified at this stage.
Without going through all of their patent filings no one can. So again, that is the point. Lack of info
We are both gamers (I am assuming this is true for you since you’re commenting here). I am not talking about legal understanding of Japanese patent law. Just a practical evaluation of Palworld vis-a-vis Nintendo products. What genuine technical innovation (I am not talking about bullshit patents for stuff that was implemented many decades ago) do you see in Nintendo’s products that was copied by Palworld?
This is not difficult.
Never said a ban on commentary, just hate bullshit articles.
The implication of thread OP was that articles critical of Nintendo (in the context of this case) should not be published as of today, no? Why is any commentary immediately categorized as “greedy clickbait” or “rehashed content”?
Something I agree with you on. Let them fight. This discussion is in the context of bullshit articles with zero information.
I would argue it’s not a bullshit article as I have yet to hear a single example of what legitimate (in the real sense, not related to Japanese patent law) case Nintendo has. What is this magical innovation that we see in Nintendo products that was copied by Palworld?
I am not talking about legal understanding of Japanese patent law.
But that's what the case is about.
I would argue it's not a bullshit article as I have yet to hear a single example of what legitimate (in the real sense, not related to Japanese patent law) case Nintendo has.
Well then the fact that we still don't know what the case is really about is exactly why these articles are useless. No information in there.
What is your argument here? Your support the Japanese patent law irrespective of whether it reflects reality? You would be OK with Japanese patent that is de facto non-valid (i.e. the approach was already used in games 10+ years ago) just to support a random company?
I am going off memory, but one example would be one of the Japanese gaming companies patenting cross-game saves (release to sequel); an approach that was implemented by the Ultima games 10+ years before the patent was filled? Do you support this?
We have access to Palworld, we have access to Nintendo products. If commentary criticizing Nintendo is “greedy clickbait”, then what innovation has been abused by Palworld? Can you provide an example in context of gaming experiences?
Sure, I mean this is a forum discussion (in a relatively underground platform no less).
I don’t see what this has to do with what I am talking about. If the article sucks, what is this innovation in Nintendo’s products/services that was copied by Palworld? This is a very simple and straightforward question, no?
What’s wrong or “too deep” about a question like that?
Let's go back to the start of this comment thread:
I love how this continues to crank out articles with 0 information and everyone speculating what it might be about.
Don't get me wrong, Nintendo are dickheads, but you can clearly see how everyone greedily clicks on these articles considering how often they get rehashed.
That's the argument: these articles add nothing to the discussion. And you responding to that with "but can you prove Nintendo is right?" isn't the point and also isn't adding anything to the discussion.
So nintendo and palworld are based in Japan which has no fair use on copyright.
If this became a copyright case in Japan and palworld won it could change the law on copyright fair use in, which Nintendo and other corps don’t want as it would open up new games based on their products under fair use.
The only way Nintendo can attack palworld is via patent infringement.
If this became a copyright case in Japan and palworld won it could change the law on copyright fair use
not every country has case law. most of Europe is eg using “code law”, which means a precedent doesn’t change the law, but only applies to the one specific case with all its specific context and circumstances taken into account. under slightly different circumstances, a judge may rule differently
Yes, there are going to be opinion pieces like this one filling the space for a major news story like this one, but there’s still room for proper journalism right now. I recommend folks check out PC Gamer’s interview with an IP attorney that worked in Tokyo (which was also the second link in this posted article).
Software patents are a thorny topic, and it’s worthwhile for enthusiasts of the industry or those interested in IP law to read up on the concept in general. There’s risk for Nintendo here, and I found Sigmon’s offhand comment about how Nintendo’s ramped up legal hiring to be particularly interesting.
pcgamer.com
Ważne