All the biggest gaming companies on the market are being threatened with patent violation suit by a Texas-based law firm. Here's a clip:

The technique described is used by almost every game that uses 3D modelling, from the latest titles right back to the likes of Quake and possibly right back to Doom and even Wolfenstein - all products of the 1990s. It covers the use of a 3D space - the UAC HQ on Mars, say - to encompass one or more 3D objects - half a dozen Cacodeamons, say. The patent details how panning across the scene - sidestepping past a plasma bolt, say - can be realistically depicted on a 2D display, such as a computer monitor.

No one messes with Texas cowboys.

Read the whole thing (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/11/03/game_cos_3d_lawsuit/) at The Register.

[ November 04, 2004, 22:39: Message edited by: chevalier ]

I wonder where they've been for the last few years since 3D took off... But look on the bright side, if they actually win, we might get some decent 2D games again, instead of flashy but hollow 3D ones!

Woohoo! :banana:

[Yes, I finally got the chance to use that one. :D ]

[ November 05, 2004, 20:31: Message edited by: Taluntain ]

If they win this case, I'll sue *those* guys for emotional distress.
Pathetic moneygrubbers
:pope: Preach It!

:borg:

According to these more recent articles (Nov.4 (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/11/04/mckool_smith_lawsuit_update/) and Nov.5 (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/11/05/graphics_patent_suit_update/)) from The Register, the lawsuit has been extended to 18 PC hardware companies, as well as console hardware vendors Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo on top of 12 game software publishers.

According to a GameDailyBiz report, HP, Dell, IBM, Toshiba, Sony, Acer, MPC, Systemax, Fujitsu, Matsu****a, Averatec, Polywell, Sharp, Twinhead, Uniwill and JVC are all named as defendants in the lawsuit. Talk about taking on the big guys. I wonder how many laywers those 30+ companies have...

On a side note, as to why this wasn't filed years ago:

Because the current owner of the intellectual property in question only took possession on 16 June 2004.

I don't think they have much chance of winning at this point, but if they actually do win - say hello to even higher game prices.

Well, if they win the lawsuit, there is an easy solution. Game companies that lose just have to say that this marks the end of production of games, say they won't publish any more games. That would probably create a worldwide crusade by the gamers (which is a large portion of the world population) and would have for a result that the instigator of all this will have to go so deep into hiding, or even stop existing that there is no one those companies have to pay. End of story. No rise in price, and we can continue like this never happened.

Dream on. The corporations sure as hell aren't going to wait for mass protests and go bust in the meantime. They'll just pay up and raise the prices.

But will people continue to buy the games if the prices go up even more then they are now?

Even the idiots paying full prices now have to reach their limit sometime.

If they win (very unlikely) then game prices will rise. However, there has been a decrease in the average price of Internet connections and Internet will only continue to decrease in price.

So...
Price of Games UP + Price of Internet DOWN = Piracy UP

However I dobut that the Texas company will win. Mass production is a technique used in producing cars, you don't see Ford sueing every other car company.

Sure they will. Provided the games are popular enough, people will keep buying them, even at higher prices. Piracy will obviously go up too, but they'll more than cover the income lost with piracy with higher prices.