D
Deleted member 13524
Guest
Legend says you need a club coated with the shells of Nokia 3310s to be able to scratch a N64.
- Status
I believe it, this is how this photo was taken. Legend says the person holding the club broke his arm.
and it wasn't anybody.
D
Deleted member 13524
Guest
Oh how I wish that was true. I actually took that quote as comparing to the XBone/PS4 and not the Wiis.
Wow. Mario Kart 8 and 3D World are even more incredible than I thought.
According to a patent found over at Gaf, the NX will be multiple devices, one stationary and others that can attach to that stationary device. So basically the console will be a docking station for the portable unit, and the processing units in both can work in tandem when connected. This makes me think its likely that both the console and portable will likely use the same APU, and can work in crossfire when connected.
Hmmmm, I don't remember Nintendo paying me for use of my idea... 
Megadrive1988
Veteran
http://appft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=/netahtml/PTO/search-adv.html&r=3&f=G&l=50&d=PG01&S1=("Nintendo".AS.)&OS=AN/"Nintendo"&RS=AN/"Nintendo"
Looks like Nintendo bought into the Sony's early PR of CBE and MS's cloud.
A bunch Nintendo users buy a supplemental computing device which provides additional performance for their console as well as other nintendo gamers through remote processing.
Yay...The Wii U, 3DS and whatever else Nintendo has plan gets an universal expansion pak like the n64 but instead of just memory, its memory, additional processor and remote rendering capabilities too.
...More like "booooo" if true.
NX must stand for "next gen expansion". LOL.
Looks like Nintendo bought into the Sony's early PR of CBE and MS's cloud.
A bunch Nintendo users buy a supplemental computing device which provides additional performance for their console as well as other nintendo gamers through remote processing.
Yay...The Wii U, 3DS and whatever else Nintendo has plan gets an universal expansion pak like the n64 but instead of just memory, its memory, additional processor and remote rendering capabilities too.
...More like "booooo" if true.
NX must stand for "next gen expansion". LOL.
Last edited:
I don't think crossfire is a good idea, but an APU with integrated graphics and an interface for an external pci-e bus to a beefier discreet gpu in the docking station could be practical. Plus they could up clock the portable CPUs when docked beyond what is possible on battery power.
Here is my expectation of what Nintendo NX will be:
A modified LCD Picture Frame. It will have a pad that can read AmiiBo figurines placed on it. It will then play a video of the figurines in the picture frame. None of this will be interactive by the user, except for the replacing of the figurines with other figurines.
A modified LCD Picture Frame. It will have a pad that can read AmiiBo figurines placed on it. It will then play a video of the figurines in the picture frame. None of this will be interactive by the user, except for the replacing of the figurines with other figurines.
They just can't not have four face buttons tho, and arguably, not four shoulder buttons either, as those things are expected standard features on controllers today and you'll gimp gameplay and portability to your platform by not having them. Are we then to assume they're again going to pick deliberately shit and obsolete hardware and not give a damn about third parties just like with the wuu? Because doing that's what got them into the situation they're in now, with a dead home console, years of consecutive losses where previously they hadn't had any for decades, and no future prospects.
Talk about not being able to learn from your mistakes - if this is indeed the case, that is!
A patent wouldn't necessarily give you an accurate image of the design of a the physical piece of hardware unless that's what the patent is referring to (it isn't in this patent). The sketch of the controller isn't meant to show what a final product will look like in this case so I wouldn't read too much into it's layout.
The patent is just for an idea or concept for a physical product; It will never explicitly state the complete function of a product, just key principles behind any potential functionality, should it actually ever be used.
This may not be something they plan on using right now; it could be a concept that has come out of a separate development process and they are patenting it because they think it might have value one day. You really never know. People patent some weird and wonderful sh*t every day so I wouldn't assume it is categorically anything to do with NX (although it may well be)
Silent_Buddha
Legend
The thing about patents though is that the thing you patented - that's the thing you patented. If you then go and build something different to what you previously patented, then it isn't covered by said patent anymore.
But I'll assume the patent in question here is about just the clickwheel shoulder buttons, and not the entire controller. Because if it is the actual controller and they have one design in the patent and another on store shelves in a year or two, then it could be problematic enforcing it.
The patent is defined by the claims, chiefly claim 1. All examples in a decently worded patent are just representations for illustration and not limiting (one specific embodiment).
Yes. The specific patent written in glorious Patent Double Dutch
Translated, a game controller with front, thumb operated direction control and a different rotating control operated by index finger when held in conventional controller position. This claim is actually limited in covering a specific placement. If you have a scrollwheel above the face buttons, this claim shouldn't cover it. Claim 8 covers two handed implementations of the patent, the major claim being applicable to single handed controls.
Why patent and law have such confusing language?
It's not confusing if you speak it.
The idea is to be non-committal so that your patent covers as wide an area as possible. So the wordage is generally broad and vague while still being specific enough to constitute a valid patent claim. You can't patent 'A thing for doing stuff'. However, if you patent 'game controller with scroll wheels as shoulder buttons' and someone produces a radio controller with scroll wheel shoulder buttons, your patent wouldn't cover them. Likewise if someone adds a mini trackball in the shoulder position, your patent wouldn't cover it as you patented only a scroll wheel. So you patent "an input apparatus for conveying instructions to a target device wherein there exists a rotatable component such that yada yada", and go on with the subsequent claims to give many examples of possible implementations just to be clear that you're trying to cover every application of rotatable somethings accessed via index finger while the thumb works something else on some form of controller.
- Status
Similar threads
