Patent family
JP2017191966 and
US20170291105 (2016-04-11 to 2017-02-16):
The key invention here is a simple method for multiple gaming devices to discover one another before forming a network. It may not seem very exciting, but Nintendo built on that and filed another patent family.
Patent family
JP2022055618,
US20220103319,
EP3975599,
JP2023054828, and
US20240129084 (2020-09-29 to 2023-12-28):
First, the basics. Device 100 is “a game device with a wireless communication function”. Its display “shows an image generated [...] by processor.
An image received from another device may also be shown on display” (emphasis mine;
let’s make a mental note of this). It is the access point (AP) of the network.
Device 200s are the stations (STAs) of the network. The patent states that they can be a “personal computer, a portable telephone, a smartphone, and a tablet”, but these are mere red herrings. In the very next paragraph they admit that “typically, all [100s and 200s] may be game devices” and “identical to each other”.
At this point you may be wondering why they bother to create a direct network, since all local devices connected to the same router can play together already? Nintendo’s answer to that is, by going through a router, “the number of transfer hops may increase and efficiency in transmission of data and a data transmission rate may lower”. But
what transmissions can be so demanding that they can’t even be entrusted to a router?
Let’s make a mental note of this too.
This part of the patent describes how multiple 100s can form a new network with one another, without disconnecting from their respective child devices. It sounds nice, but what would be the scenario in which this is useful? Let’s say user 100_1 was playing a race with user 200_1, but later decides to start a new race with user 100_2; there’s no reason for 100_1 to stay connected with 200_1, rendering this invention pointless.
However, knowing that Nintendo toyed with the idea of using 3DS as a Wii U controller, it puts the patent in a different light. If 100_1 is a Switch 2 in tabletop mode and 200_1 is a Switch Lite functioning as a wireless controller, the ability to network with another Switch 2 without losing connection with the Lite is actually necessary.
But, the Joy-Cons! You are probably thinking. That is true but each console only has two. Allowing other Switches to be used as controllers will give the user more options, and support more players in a co-op game. Take the wireless play of MK8D for example, the upper limit is 8 racers (4 consoles w/ 2 users each); a direct network as illustrated above may be able to facilitate a much larger number of participants.
This part of the patent describes how an AP (100_1) and multiple STAs (200_3 and 200_4) can form a new network, while each still maintains the connection(s) with its prior network. Again, one has to question the utility of such an invention, and the Switch-as-controller hypothesis is unable to fully explain it.
Looking at device 200_4, it is connected to 100_1 (new network parent) and 100_2 (established network parent) simultaneously. If it is used solely as a controller for 100_1, maintaining connection with 100_2 is superfluous. But what if 100_2 is the compute device (Switch 2) that renders the gameplay for 200_4 (Switch Lite) similar to the PS5 and PS Portal?
As mentioned above, elsewhere in the patent it is said that the device may display graphics received from another device. The objective of “high efficiency in transmission of data” would make a lot more sense too if remote plays are to be supported. Of course, I may be reading too much into these patents, but Nintendo developed them from 2016 to 2023 (if not longer) so they are possibly significant.