Literally, read some of their patents. Its all shit like "System For Switching From Character To Vehicle In Top-Down 2D Environment". Like how tf can you actually patent a model and (software) controller swap? Shits basic AF I have done that before.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

At one point didn't a company have a patent over an interactive loading screen?

Which is why loading screens in games have been boring for years, because actually having any kind of thing to do while the game loads is apparently banned.

[–] Kelly 15 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

This wasn't as general as many people think:

It applied only to "auxiliary games" so anything using the primary engine was ok e.g. running in the fog for assassins creed or practicing moves in a combat game.
It applied only to US and Japan so anywhere else was unrestricted. The entire PAL region was unaffected.

But also:

The patent was held by Namco / Bandai Namco, they are a prolific publisher but made very limited use of their ability to use loading screen mini games freely.
The patent expired in 2015, despite this very few games have used loading screen mini games since.

https://patents.google.com/patent/US5718632

I can only conclude that the industry just wasn't that interested in the idea.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Patents are about how you achieve a goal, not the goal itself. You can have multiple parents on "switching for character to vehicle on top down 2D environment" as long as the means to do so are not the same.

[–] VindictiveJudge 7 points 1 week ago

In theory. In practice, software patents have pretty consistently been about the outcome and it's held up in court. This expired patent on sanity systems, for example.

[–] GeneralEmergency 3 points 1 week ago

Sega had a patent on the transition between camera perspectives in a 3d racing game.

Everyone got around it being making the transition instantaneous.