LogFAQs > #983172072

LurkerFAQs, Active Database ( 12.01.2023-present ), DB1, DB2, DB3, DB4, DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	Musk:too many giant corps. own game studios, so he wants to...make a game studio
willythemailboy 12/04/24 12:00:15 AM #77:	shadowsword87 posted... There are three patents that are you trying to summarize, could you be more specific? All three of them are very similar. And an AI translated version of a patent filing is hardly a legal document, is it? https://patents.google.com/patent/JP7528390B2/en Part 1,2 bog standard player movement and mount functionality Part 3-11 mount movement and fall damage Part 12-16 additional standard player mount behavior There's nothing covered in this entire patent application that couldn't just as easily be describing World of Warcraft's mount system as of the release of Burning Crusade in 2006. At best the "novelty" of the application is combining that standard of player control to a capture system but the same type of system has been applied to so many types of games using it in one more cannot be considered novel. Nothing presented here should be eligible for a patent at all, and the only way one would be awarded is if the patent officer is completely unfamiliar with any electronic games released in the past 20+ years. https://patents.google.com/patent/JP7493117B2/en Part 1 aiming at a field character, throwing a capture device at it, and capturing that field character Part 2-4 releasing a character in the player's possession and launching it at a field character to initiate a battle Part 5-13 displaying the strength and ease of capture of the field character Part 14-24 releasing a character in the player's possession and launching it at a field character in order to weaken that field character to increase the ease of capture via a capture device The only marginally original concept in this filing is that a capture device can be used without first initiating a battle. Since I don't play this genre of game I don't know first hand how novel that mechanic may or may not be. https://patents.google.com/patent/JP7545191B1/en The translation on this one isn't clearly divided into individual claims but I'll try to hit the high points. Concepts covered are: multiple forms of capture item usable the character taking a particular stance when using a capture item or releasing an owned character standard character battle mechanics a repeat of claims of displaying and calculating capture success rates different capture items having different aiming cursors and capture success rates Again I'm not very familiar with this game genre but none of that is particularly novel, except possibly in the very specific combination of those factors. But if that is true, the patent application is written broadly enough that it would cover things outside the very specific combination of factors they're claiming. There's certainly nothing novel enough to justify locking out potential competitors for 20+ years. --- There are four lights. <cite>willythemailboy posted [p:983172072] in Musk:too m... [t:80894409]...</cite> <quote>shadowsword87 posted... </cite><quote>There are three patents that are you trying to summarize, could you be more specific?</quote>All three of them are very similar. And an AI translated version of a patent filing is hardly a legal document, is it?https://patents.google.com/patent/JP7528390B2/enPart 1,2 bog standard player movement and mount functionalityPart 3-11 mount movement and fall damagePart 12-16 additional standard player mount behaviorThere's nothing covered in this entire patent application that couldn't just as easily be describing World of Warcraft's mount system as of the release of Burning Crusade in 2006. At best the "novelty" of the application is combining that standard of player control to a capture system but the same type of system has been applied to so many types of games using it in one more cannot be considered novel. Nothing presented here should be eligible for a patent at all, and the only way one would be awarded is if the patent officer is completely unfamiliar with any electronic games released in the past 20+ years.https://patents.google.com/patent/JP7493117B2/enPart 1 aiming at a field character, throwing a capture device at it, and capturing that field characterPart 2-4 releasing a character in the player's possession and launching it at a field character to initiate a battlePart 5-13 displaying the strength and ease of capture of the field characterPart 14-24 releasing a character in the player's possession and launching it at a field character in order to weaken that field character to increase the ease of capture via a capture deviceThe only marginally original concept in this filing is that a capture device can be used without first initiating a battle. Since I don't play this genre of game I don't know first hand how novel that mechanic may or may not be.https://patents.google.com/patent/JP7545191B1/enThe translation on this one isn't clearly divided into individual claims but I'll try to hit the high points.Concepts covered are:multiple forms of capture item usablethe character taking a particular stance when using a capture item or releasing an owned characterstandard character battle mechanicsa repeat of claims of displaying and calculating capture success ratesdifferent capture items having different aiming cursors and capture success ratesAgain I'm not very familiar with this game genre but none of that is particularly novel, except possibly in the very specific combination of those factors. But if that is true, the patent application is written broadly enough that it would cover things outside the very specific combination of factors they're claiming. There's certainly nothing novel enough to justify locking out potential competitors for 20+ years. --- There are four lights.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1