Another interesting Nintendo Patent, thoughts?

Praxis · Post by **Praxis** » 2005-09-09 03:37pm

Jesus Christ, dress your enormous fucking links!

United States Patent Application 20050195210
Kind Code A1
Demers, Eric ; et al. September 8, 2005
Method and apparatus for efficient generation of texture coordinate displacements for implementing emboss-style bump mapping in a graphics rendering system

Abstract

A graphics system including a custom graphics and audio processor produces exciting 2D and 3D graphics and surround sound. The system includes a graphics and audio processor including a 3D graphics pipeline and an audio digital signal processor. Emboss style effects are created using fully pipelined hardware including two distinct dot-product computation units that perform a scaled model view matrix multiply without requiring the Normal input vector and which also compute dot-products between the Binormal and Tangent vectors and a light direction vector in parallel. The resulting texture coordinate displacements are provided to texture mapping hardware that performs a texture mapping operation providing texture combining in one pass. The disclosed pipelined arrangement efficiently provides interesting embossed style image effects such as raised and lowered patterns on surfaces.
Inventors: Demers, Eric; (Palo Alto, CA) ; Leather, Mark M.; (Saratoga, CA) ; Segal, Mark G.; (Santa Cruz, CA)
Correspondence Name and Address:

NIXON & VANDERHYE, PC
901 NORTH GLEBE ROAD, 11TH FLOOR
ARLINGTON
VA
22203
US

Assignee Name and Adress: NINTENDO CO., LTD.
Kyoto
JP

Serial No.: 106673
Series Code: 11
Filed: April 15, 2005

U.S. Current Class: 345/584
U.S. Class at Publication: 345/584
Intern'l Class: G09G 005/00
Claims

---snip---

The claims are incredibly long so I'm not going to quote it.

Very interesting, but a bit confusing. Is this for nothing more than a game that is embossed in real-time, giving it unique effects, or does this have more applications like adding depth to an image? Any thoughts from those of you smarter than me?

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2005-09-09 04:01pm

Dress your link, scrote.

Anyway, regarding the content of the patent, it doesn't really sound like anything to me.

Laughing Mechanicus · Post by **Laughing Mechanicus** » 2005-09-09 04:14pm

It sounds like they have simply patented a more efficient method for doing bump mapped textures, which is not really particularly novel or interesting - could well be to do with the revolution (especially with the reference to hardware) but even so that tells us nothing beyond "revolution games will have bump mapping" which is hardly earth shattering.

Dooey Jo · Post by **Dooey Jo** » 2005-09-09 07:28pm

First of all, what is a 3D sound system doing in a patent for bumb-mapping? I really cannot see any way of using bumb-mapping and sound together that would make sense...

Secondly, this seems like a really old patent. Embossed bumb-maps? Unless, the patent is describing something strange, embossed bumb-maps like that has been in use for several years. And notice how it does not reference anything newer than 2000, and mentions DirectX 7 (ooold). It also uses the N64 as an example of 3D hardware... This should have been filed in 2001, at the most, not April 2005. That doesn't make sense. I guess it could be because of the sound thing though. I didn't check that one very much.

I wonder if people who are using this technique will have to pay money to Nintendo now... Now that I think of it, the emboss bumb-mapping was included in DirectX 8 as a texture stage effect, called DOT3. DirectX 8 was released sometime in 2001, I think. Even my old GeForce 2 can do that...

Weird. What other rendering techniques, widely in use today, are actually patented by Nintendo

Random · Post by **Random** » 2005-09-10 03:29pm

Nintendo patent everything, pretty soon they'll be copy protecting Japanese people.

Max · Post by **Max** » 2005-09-10 07:54pm

Ok I'm in a jolly mood (like Santa Claus) after reading about the Revolution for quite some time this morning. These people over at the Gamespot forums have posted some interesting information this morning and I think some of you might want to see it. Others may think it's just more. I'm not saying any of this is factual but just be glad that it's not another blogger. Intelligent discussion please.

First, here

This guy is describing the patent that was filed on September 8, 2005. (I think it was applied for in April 2005 and recently made public on the 8th) He describes it in simple English after the picture. The picture has been around for a while but it is now accompanied by this description.

Simplified Explanation

~~~~~~~~

What this means is that, there are 2 pieces of the console hardware.

The main console (system 54) does this:

Sends audio/video signals to the television set, meaning it applies what "system 50" processes to the audio. Basically it puts the calculations into the formula in the correct order.

And the second, unshown hardware, (system 50) does this:

Processes the digital models, displays some/all of the world from [viewpoint x], can "interactively change the viewpoint in response to real time inputs from handeld controllers 52a, 52b, or other input devices. This lets the player "see the world through the eyes of someone within or outside of the world". It also can display 2-d images, but is primarily used to "create very realistic and exciting game play" or other graphical interactions.

And the input devices (aka: controllers)

Will not always take this example. They can take "a variety of forms".

````` The REALLY interesting thing is that, if this is true, Nintendo hasn't even shown us the REAL "revolution" console yet. What they have shown us (the black box) is simply a communication device between the ACTUAL console (the part that does the calculations), the player (via the controller), and the television screen. We haven't seen ANYTHING yet. Literally.

The clues are adding up. Think of it what you wish. But, interestingly enough, it all sounds a lot like what this guy wrote:

http://revolutionspecs.blogspot.com/

Second, here
this guy is describing a method for creating high quality, detailed models with shadows that beats bump mapping by tenfold. Bump mapping creates fake bumps but this method, displacement mapping, creates actual bumps. Check out the picture he posted. Only 281 polygons used. Amazing huh? Displacement mapping combined with cube mapping could be revolutionary in itself. The Revolution wouldn't need a ton of power to match the graphics of the PS3 and Xbox 360.

So...after you bash me for being open minded and hungry for news, leave some comments.

Praxis · Post by **Praxis** » 2005-09-10 08:25pm

I scoff at any site that thinks the "Nintendo On" video is real.

Dooey Jo · Post by **Dooey Jo** » 2005-09-11 12:41pm

To comment about what that guy on the forum is saying: I think he is misinterpretating the image. System 54 would be the output system, and System 50 the main processing unit (for whatever, perhaps graphics). They do not need to be separate hardware, no more than you would consider your sound card separate from your graphics card (they're still part of the same computer). Besides, what sense would a two-part console make? System 50 would still need a physical link to System 54 anyway so why would you put it in a case of its own? That would really slow things down (as well as look really silly)...

BTW, that's Mario on that TV. Bet it's Mario128. Heh! New rumor: Mario128 will feature the Cape!

mplsjocc wrote:Only 281 polygons used. Amazing huh? Displacement mapping combined with cube mapping could be revolutionary in itself. The Revolution wouldn't need a ton of power to match the graphics of the PS3 and Xbox 360.

Actually, yes it would, if it's going to use Displacement Mapping to achieve the same look. Like you said, Dispacement Mapping works by creating actual bumps in the model's mesh (ie displacing it), but in order to do that, new vertices for all points in the displacement map will have to be created. It can look really nice, but it's also really slow. You might actually be better off by creating a high-res model.

The cool thing about DM is that it's easy to change the displacement map, which normally is 2D, and so you could create very interesting effects. Like, the scarab that crawls under a guy's skin in the Mummy, that was probably done with a displacement map. Creating waves in a simulated sea might be another application.

I'll also add that the picture you posted is somewhat decieving. A 281 polygon wouldn't look like that in-game, it would be smooth shaded and look much nicer (it would also probably use triangles instead of quads). You should also ask him what the rendering time of the DMed mesh compared to that of the normal mesh was. Not good at all would be my guess.

Now, if you'd want shadows that beat usual bumb-maps tenfold, but don't want it to take forever to render, you should look at Parallax Mapping. In fact, I'll make a prediction that the next Revolution rumor will be about someone who has discovered the "new, super-realistic" Parallax Mapping (but it will be called something completely different, I'm sure). Or maybe Radiosity or something... Really, I hardly think graphical techniques would be enough for Nintendo to consider it revolutionary.

Dooey Jo · Post by **Dooey Jo** » 2005-09-11 01:16pm

I read a little in the Displacement Map thread, and I must say that, that 01_5k001 person is really quite a fine specimen of a Google Student (it could of course be argued that I am nothing more than that too, but at least I've put these things to use for several years). Not only does he confuse DM with Normal Mapping, but he concluded that the patent spoke of actual DM because of the word "displace".

And really, if he knew anything about either DM or NM, he would know that there's no way in hell the effect seen in that picture could be created with NM alone (because NM does not alter the mesh itself, the edges will give it away). And what the fuck is that "Nuh-uh, I'm not talking about Normal Mapping, because I never used the word color"

Edit: He admitted that he was wrong. Only took him twelve pages...

Pezzoni · Post by **Pezzoni** » 2005-09-11 04:15pm

Praxis wrote:I scoff at any site that thinks the "Nintendo On" video is real.

The odd thing about that was the sheer quality of it... If it was a fake, it would have taken a small group of people an enourmous ammount of time: These also needing to be people with a hell of a lot of skill in graphics rendering.
It seems a little strange that someone would waste so much time, simply for a hoax video.

Archaic` · Post by **Archaic`** » 2005-09-11 05:23pm

IIRC, wasn't the guy who created it trying to get a job with Nintendo Public Relations?

Praxis · Post by **Praxis** » 2005-09-11 07:09pm

Yup.

He was also interviewed by 1up and provided screenshots of the models used within 3ds Max. Left no doubt in my mind that he was the creator.

Archaic` · Post by **Archaic`** » 2005-09-12 04:20am

Did he actually ever get that job? I remember that Reggie asked him to get in touch on G3, but I never heard what became of that.

SPOOFE · Post by **SPOOFE** » 2005-09-12 04:38am

Really, I hardly think graphical techniques would be enough for Nintendo to consider it revolutionary.

I agree. Sheer graphical power is no longer the main concern in any of the new consoles... in fact, since the Revolution won't be rendering in HD while the other two will, Nintendo can get away with significantly inferior hardware and still maintain a rough parity.

No, Nintendo has stressed that their machine won't be about pushing polygons and the latest lighting effect du jour. I'll wait until they actually unveil this "Revolution" before I give it any sort of thought, though.

Praxis · Post by **Praxis** » 2005-09-12 12:50pm

Although they also said the same thing about the GameCube.

http://www.gamestop.com/product.asp?product%5Fid=020206

Instead of going for the highest possible performance, which does not contribute to software development, Nintendo created a developer-friendly next generation TV game machine that maintained above-standard capabilities.

In order to accomplish this, Nintendo has painstakingly removed the "bottlenecks" which hinder an efficient system. They also introduced 1T-RAM technology, which has a minimum of delays, into the main memory and the Graphics LSI Mixed Memory. Also, secondary cache memory with a large capacity was implemented in the MPU. With this combination Nintendo succeeded at creating reliable functionality that can be used with actual games.

But yeah, I'll wait till they reveal the controller as well. I'm definitely buying the Revolution; it's smaller than my GameCube, has Super Smash Bros Online, is the cheapest next gen system, has WiFi, and can download all those old games. What Nintendo does with it will make me decide whether or not to get a second console immediately as well.