DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
35 USC § 101
See at least paragraph [0033] regarding a practical application related to the field of computers. Specifically it allows for greater visibility depending on the state of the game.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 6-10, and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by "Unity - Make Objects Between Camera and Player Transparent (No Shader Manipulation)" by FumetsuHito https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xMFx9HfRknU (hereinafter referred to as FumetsuHito).
As per claims 1 and 18-20, FumetsuHito teaches a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having stored therein an information processing program, apparatus, system, and method that, when executed, causes one or more processors of an information processing apparatus to execute information processing (see video evidenced by Figs. 2-4 of attached document. Shows a computer generated image and therefore it would be clear the process is performed on a computer including processor and memory as would be known to one of ordinary skill in the art) comprising: rendering a portion of a surface of a terrain object that faces front with respect to a virtual camera (Fig. 2 shows three objects including a first smaller object with a larger object behind and the ground); determining whether or not the virtual camera is located inside the terrain object (Fig. 3, see object is within the ground or below and Fig. 4 within a terrain object); executing a display changing process of changing an image for displaying based on an image obtained by rendering a virtual space including the terrain object when determining that the virtual camera is located inside the terrain object (Figs. 2-4 shows evidence in the video that once the virtual camera is determined to have moved within the ground that the ground is made transparent); and executing a process of displaying the image for displaying on a display device (Figs. 2-3 displays virtual objects).
As per claim 2, FumetsuHito teaches a medium wherein as the display changing process, a post-process is executed on the image obtained by rendering the virtual space including the terrain object (Fig. 3).
As per claim 3, FumetsuHito teaches a medium wherein as the display changing process, an object for changing is placed in the virtual space (Fig. 3, see the ground).
As per claim 6, FumetsuHito teaches a medium wherein as the display changing process, a display form of at least a portion of a non-front portion that is a portion of the surface of the terrain object which faces front and is not rendered, is changed (Fig. 4 see sides of the box which were not shown in Fig. 2).
As per claim 7, FumetsuHito teaches a medium wherein as the display changing process, the display form of at least a portion of the non-front portion is changed by making a color of a background of the virtual space darker (Fig. 3 image is darker than previous version when not below ground).
As per claim 8, FumetsuHito teaches a medium wherein a display form of an effect in the virtual space is changed by the display changing process such that the effect is not displayed in the non-front portion (Figs. 2-3, shadows are not displayed when underground).
As per claim 9, FumetsuHito teaches a medium wherein as the display changing process, a contour of a cavity inside the terrain object is highlighted (Fig. 4 sides are highlighted showing the hollow interior or a cavity within the object).
As per claim 10, FumetsuHito teaches a medium wherein as the display changing process, visibility of an edge portion of the image for displaying is reduced (Fig. 3, rest of the scene viewed from under the ground has visibility reduced which would include edges).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 4-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over "Unity - Make Objects Between Camera and Player Transparent (No Shader Manipulation)" by FumetsuHito https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xMFx9HfRknU (2/26/2021) in view of Hara (US Pub. No. 2004/0021680 A1).
As per claim 4, FumetsuHito does not teach a medium wherein as the display changing process, visibility of an object located far away from the virtual camera is reduced. However, Hara teaches wherein when it is determined an object is in a distant place in a displayed virtual environment a fog effect is used (paragraph [0006]). Hence, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified FumetsuHito with Hara, since it is known that a distant object is harder to see and therefore by including a fogging effect this can be achieved and a more realistic environment created (Hara paragraph [0006]).
As per claim 5, FumetsuHito does not teach a medium wherein as the display changing process, the object further away from the virtual camera is fogged such that the visibility thereof is reduced to a greater extent. However, Hara teaches wherein when it is determined an object is in a distant place in a displayed virtual environment a fog effect is used (paragraph [0006]). Hence, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified FumetsuHito with Hara, since it is known that a distant object is harder to see and therefore by including a fogging effect this can be achieved and a more realistic environment created (Hara paragraph [0006]).
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over "Unity - Make Objects Between Camera and Player Transparent (No Shader Manipulation)" by FumetsuHito https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xMFx9HfRknU (2/26/2021) in view of Kiuchi et al. (US Pub. No. 2014/0354687 A1 hereinafter referred to as Kiuchi).
As per claim 11, FumetsuHito does not specifically teach wherein it is determined whether or not the virtual camera is located inside the terrain object, based on whether or not four corners of a near clip plane of the virtual camera are located inside the terrain object. However, Kiuchi teaches a virtual camera control which detects obscuring objects (abstracts) wherein a determination is made if a virtual camera is located within an object based on intersecting with the corners (Figs. 5-8 see camera which would include corners and when those corners overlap an object it is determined to be within). Hence, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have combined the teachings of FumetsuHito with Kiuchi, since Kiuchi specifically teaches how to represent the location of the camera to determine if it is within thereby allowing for a precise process to determine when to transition to making the object transparent for FumetsuHito.
Claim(s) 12-13 and 15-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over "Unity - Make Objects Between Camera and Player Transparent (No Shader Manipulation)" by FumetsuHito https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xMFx9HfRknU (2/26/2021) in view of Stebbins (US Pub. No. 2021/0038985 A1).
As per claim 12, FumetsuHito does not teach wherein the information processing further comprises: determining whether or not a positional relationship between a player character and the terrain object around the player character in the virtual space satisfies a permission condition; and if the positional relationship does not satisfy the permission condition, then when the virtual camera approaches the terrain object, executing avoidance control to prevent the virtual camera from being located inside the terrain object, and if the positional relationship satisfies the permission condition, controlling the virtual camera without executing the avoidance control, wherein when the positional relationship satisfies the permission condition, the virtual camera is automatically moved such that the virtual camera is located inside the terrain object. However, FumetsuHito teaches a determination when a virtual camera is located within an object to change the displayed object (Figs. 2-4) and Stebbins teaches a display method comprising determining when an object would obscure a player character (claim 2, avatar is a player character) by moving the camera to avoid the object (abstract and Fig. 5) wherein a determination is made based on object type (Fig. 5, item 506 and paragraph [0078]) with no avoidance if below a threshold (Fig. 5, item 507 and paragraph [0080]) and avoidance if above a threshold (Fig. 5, item 508 and paragraph [0081]). Hence, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have combined the teachings of FumetsuHito with Stebbins, since FumetsuHito is modifiable to include additional logic, such as found in Stebbins, to determine the amount of obscuring by type, such as if moving within would obscure too much or still allow for easy viewing of a player character, and to use avoidance logic for a virtual camera if the obscuring is too much or transparency as found in Figs. 3-4 of FumetsuHito. Specifically this allows for greater adaption wherein certain objects can be made transparent and viewed from within if it meets a desired visual quality by the developer or a camera can be made to avoid in other cases thereby preventing a downgrade in visual quality which allows for an adaptable game.
As per claim 13, FumetsuHito teaches a medium wherein the information processing further comprises: when an object in the virtual space is masked by a surface that faces front when viewed from the virtual camera, displaying the object in a manner that allows the object to be seen through the surface (Figs. 3-4). FumetsuHito does not specifically teach a player character. However, Stebbins teaches a player character in the form of an avatar (claim 2) displayed in the game (Figs. 1A-2B) wherein logic is present to deal with obscuring (abstract). Hence, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have combined the teachings of FumetsuHito with Stebbins, since FumetsuHito is modifiable to include specific game logic have to a player character since this will allow the visual effects of FumetsuHito to be applied to games thereby increasing the ability of players to be viewed when obscuring objects are present or to allow different visual effects for a theme of the game to maintain player interest.
As per claim 15, FumetsuHito does not teach wherein the information processing further comprises: determining whether or not a positional relationship between a player character and the terrain object around the player character in the virtual space satisfies a permission condition; and if the positional relationship does not satisfy the permission condition, then when the virtual camera approaches the terrain object, executing avoidance control to prevent the virtual camera from being located inside the terrain object, and if the positional relationship satisfies the permission condition, controlling the virtual camera without executing the avoidance control, wherein it is determined that the positional relationship satisfies the permission condition when the proportion of a surrounding of a location based on the player character that is masked by the terrain object is greater than or equal to a threshold. However, FumetsuHito teaches a determination when a virtual camera is located within an object to change the displayed object (Figs. 2-4) and Stebbins teaches a display method comprising determining when an object would obscure a player character (claim 2, avatar is a player character) by moving the camera to avoid the object (abstract and Fig. 5) wherein a determination is made based on object type (Fig. 5, item 506 and paragraph [0078]) with no avoidance if below a threshold (Fig. 5, item 507 and paragraph [0080]) and avoidance if above a threshold (Fig. 5, item 508 and paragraph [0081]). Hence, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have combined the teachings of FumetsuHito with Stebbins, since FumetsuHito is modifiable to include additional logic, such as found in Stebbins, to determine the amount of obscuring by type, such as if moving within would obscure too much or still allow for easy viewing of a player character, and to use avoidance logic for a virtual camera if the obscuring is too much or transparency as found in Figs. 3-4 of FumetsuHito. Specifically this allows for greater adaption wherein certain objects can be made transparent and viewed from within if it meets a desired visual quality by the developer or a camera can be made to avoid in other cases thereby preventing a downgrade in visual quality which allows for an adaptable game.
As per claim 16, FumetsuHito does not teach wherein the information processing further comprises: determining whether or not a positional relationship between a player character and the terrain object around the player character in the virtual space satisfies a permission condition; and if the positional relationship does not satisfy the permission condition, the virtual camera approaches the terrain object, executing avoidance control to prevent at the virtual camera from being located inside the terrain object, and if the positional relationship satisfies the permission condition, controlling the virtual camera without executing the avoidance control, wherein it is determined whether or not the positional relationship satisfies the permission condition, based on a distance between the player character and the terrain object. However, FumetsuHito teaches a determination when a virtual camera is located within an object to change the displayed object which comprises an element of distance such as within or not within an object (Figs. 2-4) and Stebbins teaches a display method comprising determining when an object would obscure a player character (claim 2, avatar is a player character) by moving the camera to avoid the object (abstract and Fig. 5) wherein a determination is made based on object type (Fig. 5, item 506 and paragraph [0078]) with no avoidance if below a threshold (Fig. 5, item 507 and paragraph [0080]) and avoidance if above a threshold (Fig. 5, item 508 and paragraph [0081]). Hence, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have combined the teachings of FumetsuHito with Stebbins, since FumetsuHito is modifiable to include additional logic, such as found in Stebbins, to determine the amount of obscuring by type, such as if moving within would obscure too much or still allow for easy viewing of a player character, and to use avoidance logic for a virtual camera if the obscuring is too much or transparency as found in Figs. 3-4 of FumetsuHito. Specifically this allows for greater adaption wherein certain objects can be made transparent and viewed from within if it meets a desired visual quality by the developer or a camera can be made to avoid in other cases thereby preventing a downgrade in visual quality which allows for an adaptable game.
As per claim 17, FumetsuHito does not teach wherein the information processing further comprises: determining whether or not a positional relationship between a player character and the terrain object around the player character in the virtual space satisfies a permission condition; and if the positional relationship does not satisfy the permission condition, then when the virtual camera approaches the terrain object, executing avoidance control to prevent the virtual camera from being located inside the terrain object, and if the positional relationship satisfies the permission condition, controlling the virtual camera without executing the avoidance control, wherein it is determined whether or not the positional relationship satisfies the permission condition with higher priority given to the positional relationship in a vertical direction of the virtual space than that given to the positional relationship in a horizontal direction of the virtual space. However, FumetsuHito teaches a determination when a virtual camera is located within an object to change the displayed object (Figs. 2-4) and Stebbins teaches a display method comprising determining when an object would obscure a player character (claim 2, avatar is a player character) by moving the camera to avoid the object (abstract and Fig. 5) wherein a determination is made based on object type (Fig. 5, item 506 and paragraph [0078]) with no avoidance if below a threshold (Fig. 5, item 507 and paragraph [0080]) and avoidance if above a threshold (Fig. 5, item 508 and paragraph [0081]). Hence, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have combined the teachings of FumetsuHito with Stebbins, since FumetsuHito is modifiable to include additional logic, such as found in Stebbins, to determine the amount of obscuring by type, such as if moving within would obscure too much or still allow for easy viewing of a player character, and to use avoidance logic for a virtual camera if the obscuring is too much or transparency as found in Figs. 3-4 of FumetsuHito. Specifically this allows for greater adaption wherein certain objects can be made transparent and viewed from within if it meets a desired visual quality by the developer or a camera can be made to avoid in other cases thereby preventing a downgrade in visual quality which allows for an adaptable game. As per the movement direction this is a design choice whether or not it is preferred to favor moving backwards or upwards depending on which would give the greater visibility.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over "Unity - Make Objects Between Camera and Player Transparent (No Shader Manipulation)" by FumetsuHito https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xMFx9HfRknU (2/26/2021) in view of Ota (US Pub. No. 2008/0096660 A1).
As per claim 14, FumetsuHito does not teach a medium wherein the information processing further comprises: causing a player character in the virtual space to perform an action of breaking and/or deforming at least a portion of the terrain object, based on a user's operation input. However, Ota teaches a game wherein players can break objects (Figs. 5-6 and paragraph [0083]). Hence, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have combined the teachings of FumetsuHito with Stebbins, since FumetsuHito is modifiable to include game logic commonly found in the gaming art such as destroying objects in order to better mimic the real world and to allow for greater gameplay such as destruction of terrain or other features that would interest a player.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Dohta et al. (US Pat. No. 10,719,978 B2) teaches a computer rendering process wherein an object is made transparent when a virtual camera approaches close to the object.
Kitazono (US Pub. No. 2018/0197334 A1) teaches a game comprising a virtual camera wherein the virtual camera determines when a shielding object is present in order to move around it or a shielding object is rendered transparent in another embodiment.
Kando (US Pat. No. 8,753,205 B2) teaches a game comprising determining when an obstacle is between a character and a virtual cameras and then causes the virtual camera to move upwards.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUSTIN L MYHR whose telephone number is (571)270-7847. The examiner can normally be reached 10AM-6PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Dmitry Suhol can be reached at (571) 272-4430. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JUSTIN L MYHR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715 10/7/2026
Prosecution Insights