It's not so much a question of how much, but why. Contributions range from sub-$1,000 to $10,000 individually - occasionally more. In the grand scheme of things, it's not a huge sum of money per candidate each year, but in total these donations amounted to roughly $1 million spent by IPAC in 2016.
The real risk for Intel is how its contributions, and the intention behind its contributions, are perceived.
Actually came here to post this, only game that made me consider an Xbone.
I don't have a problem with strictly cosmetic DLC. My issue is how the content is communicated to the market. Make the content absolutely clear from the initial store page rather than forcing player to consult a community guide to figure out which DLCs are the best gameplay value (especially with CK2...)
Bundles aren't a bad idea either, they would be a good way of combining the cosmetic and gameplay additions for patient gamers. People who want the newest content 'right now' can keep buying individual DLC as it becomes ready for release rather than forcing the entire market to wait for more substantial expansion-style releases.
Because Mad Max made a big splash at the box office so post apocalyptic action is an actionable property right now. Plus, Borderlands is always fairly successful, so they probably want a shot at that money.
Rage was incredibly mediocre, if anything.
That is sad indeed ...
Why? It's essentially an op-ed, which has been a part of journalism since its very inception. If you take issue with the sentence itself, then I'm not sure what to tell you.