Well, ARM looks like is hoping to leapfrog over x86 (Intel/AMD) in desktop computing. Once the “RISC” technology (Box86,FEX and alike) head in the PC gaming… we may begin to see options to companies who fed on the PC gaming industry (mostly AMD/Nvidia) and now are turning their back after various things coming along (crypto currency, AI…)

Clever idea would be to give to option to sell it without RAM and SSD (as option, you can still buy the whole package).

They need an open platform to soar, who cares if RAM and SSD comes from second hand market? Steam is a store, they could even lead the second hand market for the (key) accessory components!

Epic can take “some money” by selling third party indie and AAA games… or take “all the money” when people spend in Fortnite. It’s a conflict of interest: Epic don’t want a good store that do the job for other companies, Epic want advertisement for their single product. They give free games with the same logic you get free merchandise to gather people around place that cost money… they don’t give the customer free stuff to make them happy, they don’t give “free money” to publisher/developers because wants them happy (well, aside for the purpose to have happy business).

They want as much as people possible, regardless of their role as customer or publisher, to bring their business in their pocket.

It’s not 0, its “AAA piracy gaming” in China that’s basically 100% Windows.

Linux (kernel) is present in China in all other environment (Android, Supercomputers, servers, IoT… etc) but Windows desktop (office&home) platform.

Please, be aware that in the DENUVO version Leon wear Nekomimi ears and may had caused some FPS trouble with aerodynamics as he runs.

🎺"The upgrade argument for desktops doesn’t stand up anymore" 🎺

of course, you can still…

hum… well, you can also…

yeah, yeah, you can do that also… but…

…and so going on.

Valve has a price parity policy.

It’s not about the “cut” you’re thinking; it refer to in-app purchases.

Once you bought a game, Valve keep demand a 30% cuts on anything you sell once the customer launch your executable (.exe, binary file/game engine).

hypothetical scenario to help visualize (it won’t go like that most of the time, but useful to understand the concept):

• customer Install and Launch Steam
• customer buy (Valve earn 30% cutshare) and install game on Steam
• customer uninstall Steam, keep installed game
• customer launch game (if is made in a way don’t need Steam dependencies).
• Anything sold while game engine is running must give 30%,of further earning, to Valve.

On Steam you can pick your version of choice among the various update.

If it’s some sort of forced update in which the game is made to not work with previous versions (it require special DRM or online activation by the third party): that’s more another issue (planned obsolescence) that’s being addressed with the Stop Killing Games campaign.

mis-linked (now fixed)

It’s worh noting that the OLD version still remain “free” if you purchased the old one: that’s less about Square but Valve.

It’s worh noting that the old version still remain “free” if you purchased the old one: that’s less about Square but Valve policy in which purchased items can be withdrawn… Well, actually it more about laws in most countries that if you buy something is yours to keep (or even resell) without the previous owner policing on what/whatnot

A Commission may do “nothing” while nobody watches… or when everybody is watching.

Difference is subtle, but it is there.

…but how many cases left to win?

It’s an open source platform: if an american company makes and arm device, they need to pay tax to a British company. RiscV require not to pay IP tax to any foreign country.

Also, it’s not like “they move”: stuck there in the US, they would simply shut it down. So I don’t see how your tax money went in better use.

That’s the general idea: they don’t shutdown games because “you can’t support/keep server up forever”… they shutdown games for the otherwise illegal planned obsolescence.

You shut down a game people is playing, people that were playing that game are out looking for new game to (buy) play.

Anthem may have different interest from EA because nobody was playing; but they may still be out there to normalize planned obsolescence (and thus “protect” Anthem from being repaired

“don’t use our tools to sell mods”.

I think there are still misconception: CDProject was smart, albeit dishonest, into presenting the whole thing as “Cyberpunk’s Mod”; so, you (as general and misguided reader) inclined to think the modder took something from CDProject and generate something from thin air… added games are just icying on the cake.

The framework was already setup and working for several games even before Cyberpunk addition.

What is CDProject doing here is just some PR magic to blameshift their actual responsibility: they didn’t ask the modder to remove support for Cyberpunk, they went on and sink down is whole business by addressing directly another company (Patron) which are more “sensitive” to business and discuss less.

It doesn’t need to be legal: Patreon, like Valve and any other big company, deem request from other companies as top priority over any commoner.

Patreon think “we may have extra business with CDProjeck, but mod authors are nobody that need to work for free at best”.

So they know who need to be sacrificed.

(Had to look for AI on this, sorry: I am not an accountant)

for the US: Yearly franchise tax( California: 800$ min per LLC).

Annual report fees (50-300$ per state (Delaware 300$ // New York 9$).

…and also there’s a percentage of the income (if it’s not exactly zero, I guess)

…then, if you’re not an accountant, and don’t want to mess with taxes, you may want to pay someone (an accountant) that make sure your reports are correct (even if they are 0)

A small check for moral consistency: what about Loseless Scaling and 3DSen?