What Good Does It Do Anyone To Patent Video Game Features?
from the what-a-waste dept
A bunch of folks keep submitting various versions of this story about how Microsoft has apparently received a patent on join-leave in split-screen multiplayer games. We see so many of these sorts of stories these days, it's getting a bit tiresome to talk about them, but no less disappointing. As Matt Peckham says in the article linked here:In any case, the idea that methodologies like these get tied up in patent law is unsettling. Games, like books, television shows, movies, works of visual art, etc. thrive off of (and to a considerable extent, are inexorably bound up in) a certain amount of healthy imitation. Dynamic split-screen "multi-play" in video games is a process independent of a patentable mechanism like the Wii-remote. Clapping a patent on it isn't so radically far off from claimingIf so many people in and around the industry realize how silly and stifling these sorts of patents are, why do they still exist? Why do millions get wasted every year stockpiling more of these patents? Why do we, as a society, allow it?
typing
like
THIS
or
sOmEtHiNg
...is a "process" or "procedure" or "methodology" someone ought to have "sole right to make, use, or sell."
Patent law is depressing. It's a somewhat perverse way to stockpile vaguely defined, often semantically specious technological speculation and, whatever its claims about competitively encouraging creativity, often has the contrary effect of throttling it.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: co-op, join-leave, patents, video games
Companies: microsoft
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Money. Next question.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Second, this is a patent pertaining to (a) game consoles, and (b) split screen views on the display at the console. It would be a massive stretch to apply it to any other sort of circumstance.
I suspect the patent was filed on the relative cheap, millions certainly were not spent, and in practice, I have never seen such a mechanism put into practice.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Seriously, man, have you never played Goldeneye on the N64? 4-way split screen and none of your high-def rubbish. The split-screen multiplayer was the point of Goldeneye. That was 1997.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Also - try entering and exiting the game as a single player while the others play on. Oops, doesn't happen. Next.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
One of the best and oldest examples I can think of off the top of my head is Gauntlet....when was that?.....'85, '86 maybe?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
and all they did was take real time entry (like in diablo 1 and 2) and add it to split screen games.
if this is not obvious to a "person having ordinary skill in the art", then such a person is a total fucking moron.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
/sarcasm
(Yes I know that is trademark and this is patents but I couldn't resist.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Yeah in 2002 B.C.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
BullJustin said it best. "Money...."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
We, as a society
Because “we, as a society” are just a figment the imagination of our broken implementation of democracy. We do not exist; only special interests exist, and the deeper their pockets, the more special they are.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: We, as a society
Either you're being a cynical bastard, or there's something wrong with you. Either way, welcome to the party, man!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: We, as a society
I know there’s something wrong with me.
It’s the only way to be.
Have you seen the ones that are OK?
I wouldn’t want to be that way!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: We, as a society
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It did this by automatically moving the crosshair over to wherever the bullet would hit, rather than having it static in the centre of the screen. It was pure genius and og genuine benefit to the entire genre of action shooters.
The method is now, of course, locked up behind a patent wall and nobody can use it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
On a side note, EVERYONE who has lived in Modesto, CA for any length of time absolutely despises George Lucas -- even if they do like Star Wars.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Microsoft patents stupidity
They have NO business in the gaming world IMHO. Small independent game developers have consistently delivered better products before they first dipped their toes into gaming. This scares Microsoft so much that they will invariable use intellectual property to ensure their foothold.
When a system is abused this badly there really is only one choice, elimination. It is the only logic way to proceed at this juncture. We did it for welfare, so I think we can do it for wealthfare...lol
Reform is just an excuse to keep abusing an already broken system.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Answers to Your Questions
"Industry" is actually about profit (surprise - more revenue and less expenses), not innovation or benefit to mankind. Suing for patent infringement is more profitable than spending money to lobby for the abolishment of the patent system. We, as a society, do not have political clout as we can't dedicate resources to lobbying for our interests nor can we lobby for our interests directly as most of us are trapped in a 9to5by5 nightmare. We merely get to choose the face of those who will hear what "industry" wants at our expense.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
stop the shilling!!!
Why do we as a society allow you to publish?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Old split-screeners...
Two player, split screen, and I'm pretty sure either player could jump in and out at will, with the slot filled by an AI as necessary.
Bullshit patents are here to stay though. Remember BT trying to plant their flag in the concept of hyperlinks?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I dont think those listed games automatically split the screen when a second controller was connected. All the ones I can think of require player input.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]