Obviousness

To analyze the obviousness of US patent 8777746 under 35 U.S.C. § 103, we will consider the relevant prior art references cited within the patent document that predate its priority date of September 23, 2011.

Prior Art References:

The following prior art references are identified from the "Citations" and "Patent Citations" sections of US8777746 and have a priority date earlier than September 23, 2011:

1. US20090143141A1 (Igt): Titled "Intelligent Multiplayer Gaming System With Multi-Touch Display," with a priority date of August 6, 2002, and a publication date of June 4, 2009.
2. US8368662B2 (Argiro): Titled "Actionable-object controller and data-entry attachment for touchscreen-based electronics," with a priority date of March 18, 2010, and a publication date of February 5, 2013. This patent is related to US20120133615A1 and US20130093702A1, all sharing the same priority date and similar subject matter.
3. EP2146490A1 (Alcatel, Lucent): Titled "User device for gesture based exchange of information, methods for gesture based exchange of information between a plurality of user devices, and related devices and systems," with a priority date of July 18, 2008, and a publication date of January 20, 2010.

Obviousness Analysis of Claim 1 of US8777746:

Claim 1 of US8777746 recites:
"1. A method of enabling gameplay with a character in a game environment on a mobile device, comprising:
providing a game environment in which a player can play a game via a character;
when there is an expectation of action from the character in the game, receiving a touch gesture input on the mobile device;
calculating fidelity of the touch gesture input to an optimal gesture in a reference gesture table; and
if the fidelity is within a predefined range associated with the optimal gesture, matching the touch gesture input to the optimal gesture and calling an associated game script wherein the character would be shown as having successfully completed the expectation."

A combination of US20090143141A1 (Igt) and US8368662B2 (Argiro) would render Claim 1 obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA).

Teaching of Igt (US20090143141A1):
Igt describes an "Intelligent Multiplayer Gaming System With Multi-Touch Display" where "Each of the plurality of players interacts with a display device which is preferably a multi-touch display." The system is "capable of detecting a variety of gestures made by players and the gestures are interpreted by the intelligent gaming system." The system then "determines how these gestures are interpreted within the context of the game."

This reference clearly teaches:

• A game environment on a mobile device (implied by "multi-touch display" and "gaming system").
• A player playing a game via a character (implied by "Intelligent Multiplayer Gaming System" and player interaction).
• Receiving a touch gesture input on the mobile device.
• Interpreting gestures within the context of the game to determine game actions.

Teaching of Argiro (US8368662B2):
Argiro addresses a problem in touchscreen-based electronics for gaming, stating that its invention "enhances the user experience of games, particularly role-playing games, on touchscreen-based electronics by providing physical controls that permit multiple independent inputs simultaneously." This highlights a known deficiency with touchscreens for gaming: the difficulty in achieving accurate or complex inputs necessary for an optimal user experience.

Motivation to Combine Igt and Argiro, and Obviousness of Claim 1 Elements:

A PHOSITA in the field of touchscreen gaming interfaces would be a game developer or software engineer familiar with designing interactive systems for touch-enabled devices. Such a PHOSITA, observing the existing "Intelligent Multiplayer Gaming System" with multi-touch gesture interpretation as taught by Igt, would also be aware of the challenges associated with the "lack of accuracy" and the desire to "enhance the user experience" for games on touchscreens, as highlighted by Argiro.

The motivation to combine these teachings would be to improve the software-based gesture interpretation of Igt to address the touchscreen limitations identified by Argiro. Rather than resorting to hardware attachments, a PHOSITA would seek to enhance the software's ability to interpret user input more robustly and intuitively.

1. "calculating fidelity of the touch gesture input to an optimal gesture in a reference gesture table": When a system "interprets" gestures within a game context (as in Igt), and given the inherent imprecision of human input on touchscreens (as problematic for the "user experience" according to Argiro), it would be obvious for a PHOSITA to implement this interpretation by comparing the received touch gesture to a stored ideal or "optimal gesture." To "interpret" effectively and "give the user the benefit of the doubt" (as explicitly stated in US8777746's summary), a system must account for variations. "Calculating fidelity" (i.e., how closely the input matches the optimal) and storing these optimal gestures in a "reference gesture table" are conventional pattern recognition techniques that a PHOSITA would readily employ to make the gesture interpretation forgiving and usable.
2. "if the fidelity is within a predefined range associated with the optimal gesture, matching the touch gesture input to the optimal gesture and calling an associated game script wherein the character would be shown as having successfully completed the expectation": This is the logical consequence of implementing the "fidelity" calculation. If an input is deemed sufficiently close to the optimal (i.e., within a "predefined range"), the system should recognize it as the intended optimal action and trigger the corresponding game event ("calling an associated game script" for successful completion). This directly addresses the goal of enhancing the user experience by tolerating imperfect, yet intended, inputs.

Obviousness of Dependent Claims:

The dependent claims of US8777746 would also be rendered obvious based on the combination of Igt and Argiro, often combined with general knowledge in the art of game design and user interface development:

• Claim 2 (suboptimal gesture for failure): If a system recognizes optimal gestures within a range, it is obvious that gestures outside this range would be deemed suboptimal or failures, leading to corresponding failure game scripts.
• Claims 3, 9-12 (types of gestures): Igt teaches "detecting a variety of gestures". Arc and line components, and specific mappings like straight lines for running or arcs for jumping, are fundamental and conventional gesture types and intuitive mappings commonly used in touch-based game design.
• Claims 4-6, 16-19 (context-dependent fidelity/timing/speed): Igt's teaching of interpreting gestures "within the context of the game" inherently suggests that game context (e.g., presence of static or dynamic objects, character's path, enemies) would influence game mechanics. Making the fidelity range narrower or considering speed and timing based on critical game situations (like dodging bullets or jumping between platforms) is an obvious design choice for game developers to add challenge and realism. US8777746 itself notes that "circumstances can affect the levels of these thresholds naturally within the simulation."
• Claims 7-8 (multiple inputs/parallel processing): Igt describes an "Intelligent Multiplayer Gaming System With Multi-Touch Display". Multi-touch capabilities inherently allow for detecting multiple inputs, and processing them in parallel or aggregating them into a single logical input is a standard technique in multi-touch interface design. Argiro also highlights the desire for "multiple independent inputs simultaneously".
• Claims 13-15 (range for optimal gestures): These claims further define the "predefined range" of Claim 1, detailing that "optimal" includes slightly imperfect gestures. This is directly aligned with the motivation to "give the user the benefit of the doubt" and is an obvious implementation detail for robust gesture recognition.
• Claims 20-22 (platform game application): Applying a gesture-based control system to a platform game, where straight lines represent running and arcs represent jumping, is a straightforward and obvious application of the described method to a common game genre. US8777746 itself presents a platform game as an example in FIG. 2.
• Claims 23-24 (interaction with virtual objects/weapons): Igt discusses gestures being "used as an input to play the game". Interacting with virtual objects, such as weapons, is a fundamental aspect of many video games. Applying the gesture input and fidelity system to such interactions is an obvious application.
• Claims 25-26 (storage of reference gesture table): Storing data, such as a "reference gesture table," in persistent memory or on the mobile device is a fundamental and obvious aspect of software development and data management for any application.
• Claims 27-28 (sequential/parallel actions): While US8777746 emphasizes this as an improvement over 1-to-1 mappings, it would be obvious for a PHOSITA, aiming to "enhance the user experience" (Argiro) and interpret gestures within context (Igt), to design a system where a single, well-executed gesture could trigger more complex, multi-step, or parallel actions to provide a "richer gaming experience" and simplify control, especially when accounting for input fidelity.

In summary, a PHOSITA, motivated to improve the user experience and accuracy of gesture-based controls in multi-touch gaming environments, would have found it obvious to combine the gesture interpretation teachings of Igt with the problem statement of touchscreen limitations articulated by Argiro. This combination would lead directly to the implementation of a system that calculates the "fidelity" of a user's gesture to an "optimal gesture" within a "predefined range" to determine successful gameplay actions, as claimed in US8777746.