Sounds really interesting to me. And it could solve the split screen thing, maybe. I kinda get confused with it (and it kinda annoys me). So, what do you think? Discuss.
Source (and the rest of the patent):
http://www.nintendow....com/news/31288
Hardware Nintendo patents Wiimote+Gamepad vs Wiimote+TV
- Thread starter beta4attack
- Start date
- Views 1,565
- Replies 5
Source (and the rest of the patent):
http://www.nintendow....com/news/31288
I will have to find and read the patent but I am struggling to see how such a patent could be granted and as I do not imagine the Wii U pad communication will be a pure audio video only protocol (otherwise known as a custom network protocol if it carries non AV data). Forza demonstrated a multi screen on a console some years ago and Sony amped up their 3d splitscreen (to say nothing of the satnav stuff in cars years before) so I would argue that it the logical conclusion of such technology but again I will have to read the patent. Furthermore I would argue they probably prior arted themseleves back in the GC Crystal Chronicles with the multiplayer/hidden screens stuff there.
Still nice to see them thinking of ideas- I certainly do not disapprove of pursuing such routes as it might make something interesting.
Still nice to see them thinking of ideas- I certainly do not disapprove of pursuing such routes as it might make something interesting.
Seems a little awkward having one person play on a 42" TV and the other on a 6" gamepad they hung on the wall.
Even assuming you only play on a monitor sized TV, nowadays your screen is going to be at bare minimum 18 inches, so 4 player splitscreen on that would be like 4 9" screens. On my TV it'd be 21" per player.
I think it'd work a lot better with the Zelda Four Swords format, where the controller is being used as both the screen and the controller, which can handle what happens when you go off screen.
Even assuming you only play on a monitor sized TV, nowadays your screen is going to be at bare minimum 18 inches, so 4 player splitscreen on that would be like 4 9" screens. On my TV it'd be 21" per player.
I think it'd work a lot better with the Zelda Four Swords format, where the controller is being used as both the screen and the controller, which can handle what happens when you go off screen.
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/y2012/0202593.html seems to be the patent. Over the course of my search though I dragged up http://www.freepatentsonline.com/7491124.html and http://www.freepatentsonline.com/7794328.html the former of which was filed in 2004, both are also Nintendo's but given timeframes it might be kind of hard (I forget the exact timeframes for US patents but after a few years I believe you can be stung by your own patent as prior art).
Some 22 claims to attempt to shoot down. The big ones seem to be 1, 11, 21 and 22 but I am told I should probably treat them all equally rather than house of cards when it comes to US patents so I will attempt it.
1) 1 screamed Crystal Chronicles at me- GBA multiboot but still driven by the GC would appear to be where each has a measure of individual processing* able to contribute to the game as a whole. Both the main game operation and the racing minigame being good examples here. Whether the cable renders it non portable I am not sure but I would love to see a lawyer argue the GBA is not a portable device even in this context.
*GBA link protocol is nowhere near enough to stream full video so processing has to happen.
2) Splitscreen by any other name but that is OK as it does seem to be wrapped in individual processing. I will have to check how Forza actually works (it not being portable might sink it) and will return to the caravans racing minigame. I do not consider it defeated but a bit of research should drag something up and certainly quite shaky.
3) "[physical sensor for] calculating the attitude of an operating device".... Granted I have not read the whole thing to see if attitude is afforded a definition and I am quite prepared to be slapped for not doing as such but I have to take that to mean controls and position. Motion controls in the device in claim 1).... I can not think of actual prior art used in the exact context but my argument if I had to try would point at something warioware twisted which was a primitive but unmistakeable motion control for the GBA. That it was not built in might not work but I am trying for an obvious argument here.
4) Seems to be another motion controls inbuilt claim.
5) I am struggling to comprehend this one. If it refers to a physical space (wiimote= light gun/laser quest) that might be novel but otherwise it seems to be a rephrasing of 2) and another splitscreen by another name.
6) If the wii tablet was not already said to have a sensor bar in it then this would appear to confirm it. They claim itself is that the devices described in 1) have sensor bars each for themselves. Unless they accept my old laptop having IR serial or that ipad game spewing light for a little car to be put on top. To further tie it into 1 and they might have something here, I probably would try for obvious though.
7) and 8) are tied together as the system has three input devices (two wii tablets and a remote?, wii tablet, a remote for the TV and a remote for it?*) could have splitscreen for the second and third players? Will have to return to this although I will look at some of the "two people on a single DS" and see if there is something that allows that and wireless at the same time or a server somewhere (I have a memory of some homebrew that might do it). 8) itself appears to describe the Call of duty style "T split" on a screen but that means should probably reevaluate 7)
*I really do need to study the preferred embodiment a bit more.
9)... hmm. The system is able to gather data from any device in the game which I have no other remark for other than "sign in profiles" and "insert coin to start" with the rest of the paragraphs being "waiting for minimum number of players". It seems to be a thinly veiled lobby system and another that I can probably point at crystal chronicles for and more interestingly for the possibly deviation there (it required so many GBAs to work) I will point to that as a criticism and thus an obvious tweak even to a layman let alone one versed in the field. Perhaps more curiously they are tied to numbers as a sole characteristic as opposed to balanced teams and "needs to select a map/weapons/condition/....." option.
10) Seems to be another lobby although with the added bonus of the poor bastards stuck on splitscreen get a different lobby screen if necessary.
11) Although the others were fairly standalone this is the second to not reference a previous claim. They appear to either be describing a slightly less than thin client process (the folks at onlive might take exception to this one) for a multiplayer game. Do I even have to try?
12) Didn't we already do this stuff with the splitscreen but over a few screens thing? This said there is a line about having the actions of one player be able to effect another which I hold to be totally novel.
13) Wait we seem to be going over the first 10 but with 11's claim/embodiment as a basis..... in this case miss a few and my favourite example of crystal chronicles seems to be just as pertinent for this.
21) Rephrasing so nobody does an end run around the first 20 for a puzzle game (I was entirely thinking 3d FPS or racing game for those)? "You sank my battleship"?
22) Another new claim but if that is not multiboot, thin client, download play and such I do not know what is.
Some 22 claims to attempt to shoot down. The big ones seem to be 1, 11, 21 and 22 but I am told I should probably treat them all equally rather than house of cards when it comes to US patents so I will attempt it.
1) 1 screamed Crystal Chronicles at me- GBA multiboot but still driven by the GC would appear to be where each has a measure of individual processing* able to contribute to the game as a whole. Both the main game operation and the racing minigame being good examples here. Whether the cable renders it non portable I am not sure but I would love to see a lawyer argue the GBA is not a portable device even in this context.
*GBA link protocol is nowhere near enough to stream full video so processing has to happen.
2) Splitscreen by any other name but that is OK as it does seem to be wrapped in individual processing. I will have to check how Forza actually works (it not being portable might sink it) and will return to the caravans racing minigame. I do not consider it defeated but a bit of research should drag something up and certainly quite shaky.
3) "[physical sensor for] calculating the attitude of an operating device".... Granted I have not read the whole thing to see if attitude is afforded a definition and I am quite prepared to be slapped for not doing as such but I have to take that to mean controls and position. Motion controls in the device in claim 1).... I can not think of actual prior art used in the exact context but my argument if I had to try would point at something warioware twisted which was a primitive but unmistakeable motion control for the GBA. That it was not built in might not work but I am trying for an obvious argument here.
4) Seems to be another motion controls inbuilt claim.
5) I am struggling to comprehend this one. If it refers to a physical space (wiimote= light gun/laser quest) that might be novel but otherwise it seems to be a rephrasing of 2) and another splitscreen by another name.
6) If the wii tablet was not already said to have a sensor bar in it then this would appear to confirm it. They claim itself is that the devices described in 1) have sensor bars each for themselves. Unless they accept my old laptop having IR serial or that ipad game spewing light for a little car to be put on top. To further tie it into 1 and they might have something here, I probably would try for obvious though.
7) and 8) are tied together as the system has three input devices (two wii tablets and a remote?, wii tablet, a remote for the TV and a remote for it?*) could have splitscreen for the second and third players? Will have to return to this although I will look at some of the "two people on a single DS" and see if there is something that allows that and wireless at the same time or a server somewhere (I have a memory of some homebrew that might do it). 8) itself appears to describe the Call of duty style "T split" on a screen but that means should probably reevaluate 7)
*I really do need to study the preferred embodiment a bit more.
9)... hmm. The system is able to gather data from any device in the game which I have no other remark for other than "sign in profiles" and "insert coin to start" with the rest of the paragraphs being "waiting for minimum number of players". It seems to be a thinly veiled lobby system and another that I can probably point at crystal chronicles for and more interestingly for the possibly deviation there (it required so many GBAs to work) I will point to that as a criticism and thus an obvious tweak even to a layman let alone one versed in the field. Perhaps more curiously they are tied to numbers as a sole characteristic as opposed to balanced teams and "needs to select a map/weapons/condition/....." option.
10) Seems to be another lobby although with the added bonus of the poor bastards stuck on splitscreen get a different lobby screen if necessary.
11) Although the others were fairly standalone this is the second to not reference a previous claim. They appear to either be describing a slightly less than thin client process (the folks at onlive might take exception to this one) for a multiplayer game. Do I even have to try?
12) Didn't we already do this stuff with the splitscreen but over a few screens thing? This said there is a line about having the actions of one player be able to effect another which I hold to be totally novel.
13) Wait we seem to be going over the first 10 but with 11's claim/embodiment as a basis..... in this case miss a few and my favourite example of crystal chronicles seems to be just as pertinent for this.
21) Rephrasing so nobody does an end run around the first 20 for a puzzle game (I was entirely thinking 3d FPS or racing game for those)? "You sank my battleship"?
22) Another new claim but if that is not multiboot, thin client, download play and such I do not know what is.
It's possible they're sticking with Bluetooth for the whole thing, if v4.0 was adopted for the console. 25mbps should be enough to transfer 854x480 pixels with low latency, whilst still having room for all the additional stuff like audio and NFC/IR communication and whatnot. That would save them licensing further patents on whatever technology they chose to adopt, since they have to implement Bluetooth anyway.
As for the patent, there aren't enough pictures for people who can't be arsed reading "patent speak" (like me).
my brain said:
- No one is chatting at the moment.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
@
Xdqwerty:
@Purple_Heart, then I will be actually older than him for a bit (ik thats not how ages work btw) -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
