Patent Grant
10857468
The invention relates to a matchmaking system and method that facilitates optimization of player matches for multiplayer video games.
Multiplayer video games have exploded in popularity due, in part, to services such as Microsoft's Xbox LIVE® and Sony's PlayStation Network® which enable gamers all over the world to play with or against one another. Generally, a multiplayer video game is a video game in which two or more players play in a gameplay session in a cooperative or adversarial relationship. At least one of the players may comprise a human player, while one or more other players may comprise either non-player characters and/or other human players.
Typically, when a player logs in to a game system or platform to play a multiplayer video game, the player may engage in a gameplay session in which he or she is matched with other players to play together (on the same team or as opponents). A given player may engage in multiple gameplay sessions during a login session. In addition, each gameplay session may be played with either the same or a different group of matched players.
Conventionally, when interested in playing in a group with other players, an individual player may ask friends to form a player group, may ask other players who are of the same skill level to form a player group, and/or may otherwise form a group by sending invitations to other players.
Some systems may automatically group or match players based solely on a limited number of hard-coded characteristics (e.g., skill level), which are not dynamically adjusted. Such systems may create a hard set of segregated pools of players. For example, in some conventional systems, a player who is at a certain skill level may never be matched with a player at a higher skill level, which may result in one dimensional and unsatisfying gameplay.
Furthermore, conventional systems fail to assess a quality of gameplay used to tune matchmaking processes to optimize player combinations. Conventional systems also fail to reserve gameplay sessions for players in a way that minimizes the time that a player must wait to be matched. Conventional systems further fail to leverage matchmaking processes in other contexts, such as influencing game-related purchases, suggesting group formations, training/identifying non-player characters, and/or otherwise extending the use of the matchmaking process. These and other drawbacks exist with current matchmaking processes utilized in multiplayer video games.
The invention addressing these and other drawbacks relates to a matchmaking system and method that facilitates optimization of player matches for multiplayer video games. The system may provide a generalized framework for matchmaking using historical player data and analytics. The framework may facilitate automatic determinations of an optimal mix of players and styles to produce more satisfying player experiences. Additionally, the system may dynamically update analytical processes based on statistical or otherwise observed data related to gameplay at a given time. In this manner, the system may continually tune the matchmaking process based on observations of player behavior, gameplay quality, and/or other information.
While aspects of the invention may be described herein with reference to various game levels or modes, characters, roles, game items, etc. associated with a First-Person-Shooter (FPS) game, it should be appreciated that any such examples are for illustrative purposes only, and are not intended to be limiting. The matchmaking system and method described in detail herein may be used in any genre of multiplayer video game, without limitation.
In one implementation of the invention, the system may include a scoring engine that identifies a potential match. As used herein, the term “match” refers to a matching of two or more players, rather than a contest. For example, a potential match refers to a potential grouping of two or more players. The scoring engine may obtain one or more match variables used to generate a match score for the potential match. The one or more match variables may include, without limitation, a latency between players, a relative skill level, a presence of preferred players (e.g., clan mates or friends), a team composition (e.g., play style, avatar specialization), a time that a given player has been waiting to be matched (e.g., in a game lobby), a player preference, whether a given player is involved in a soft reservation (which is described herein), and/or other information used to assess a potential match.
The system may determine whether to select a potential match for gameplay based on its match score. For example, the system may compare the match score for the potential match with a threshold match score. If the match score meets or exceeds the threshold match score, the system may select the corresponding potential match for gameplay.
The threshold match score may be defined based on a player input. For instance, the system may receive an indication that a first player wishes to wait for higher quality matches and an indication that a second player wishes to be matched (e.g., play) as soon as possible. The system may set a threshold match score that is higher for the first player than for the second player, and therefore potentially match the second player sooner (albeit in a potentially lower quality match).
In one implementation of the invention, the system may adjust the threshold match score dynamically based on (e.g., as a function of) a wait time (e.g., a duration of time in which a player has been waiting to be matched, such as in game lobby). For example, the system may lower the threshold match score (assuming higher match scores are associated with higher match quality) when a given player has been waiting to be matched for a predetermined period of time. In some instances, the system may progressively lower the threshold match score as the player continues to wait to be matched until the player is eventually matched. In this manner, the system may allow a player to be matched using lower quality matches if the player has been waiting to be matched.
A given match variable may be assigned a coefficient that indicates a level of importance, or weight, of the given match variable. The scoring engine may generate a match score based on the match variables and their corresponding coefficients. In this manner, the scoring engine may consider multiple variables, each of which may be assigned with varying degrees of importance, when assessing the suitability of a potential match.
A game designer or others may assign a default value to a given coefficient based on the game designer's opinion of the relative importance of a corresponding match variable. The default value of a coefficient may be used unless it is changed.
A coefficient may be tuned by changing its default value. Coefficients may be tuned in various ways, and by various parties, to respond to preferences, changing game conditions, and/or other information. In this manner, the scoring engine may determine match scores based on dynamically changing information, and adjust the matchmaking process accordingly.
For example, a player may tune coefficients by indicating gameplay preferences, such as through a user interface associated with a game. In other words, a given coefficient may be individualized for each player. As such, generating a match score may be individualized for each player. For example, a player may prioritize being matched with friends over playing with others of comparable skill. The system may respond to such a preference by tuning a coefficient related to playing with preferred players (e.g., friends, clan members, etc.) such that playing with preferred players has more importance when generating a match score.
In some implementations, the scoring engine may automatically tune the coefficients based on changing circumstances, game history, and/or other analytical data. For example, if a player has previously shown dissatisfaction with another player (e.g., by “rage quitting” or giving the other player a “thumbs down”), the engine may place more weight on player simpatico over other preferences such as map or comparable skill.
In another example, if a player has been performing poorly (e.g., getting killed at a rate higher than the player's historical rate), the scoring engine may dynamically adjust one or more coefficients to match the player in a game that will improve the player's performance. For example, the player may be matched with easier opponents, matched with teammates that historically resulted in better match outcomes, and/or placed in a game that is more tailored to the player's preferences (e.g., players that play in games more closely aligned with their preferences tend to perform better).
To fine-tune the matchmaking process, the system may include an analytics and feedback engine that analyzes player and match data to determine whether a given match was good. A match may be deemed “good” when a player is determined to have enjoyed gameplay associated with the match based on one or more quality factors that are used as a proxy for player satisfaction. The quality factors may include, for example, a duration of a gameplay session (e.g., via analysis of player historical data), player expressed psychological state (e.g., frustration level, after-match rating), premature exit from game (i.e. “rage quitting”), and/or other information.
In one implementation, the analytics and feedback engine may analyze game data (e.g., whether a given game level or match favors play styles), historical player data (e.g., types/styles of player, strengths/weaknesses of players, etc.), and/or other information to assess a quality of player experiences.
The analytics and feedback engine may analyze game data to determine satisfying types of gameplay that should be provided through the matchmaking process. For example, the analytics and feedback engine may determine whether given combinations of role types (e.g., sniper, run-and-gunners, etc.) lead to satisfying gameplay. Such analysis may be performed for specific portions of a game (e.g., a game level) and/or generally for a game.
The analytics and feedback engine may analyze player data to determine the player style/role that is most effective for the player based on historical information associated with the player. For example, the analytics and feedback engine may determine that a player is most effective or otherwise most enjoys playing as a sniper, which may cause matchmaking to skew towards matches where the player may play in a sniper role.
The analytics and feedback engine may analyze game and player combinations to infer what makes a good match for specific players and specific games, and/or which kinds of players/play styles might be favored by a particular match. In this manner, the analytics and feedback engine may use various data and metrics to assess whether a gameplay session was a good one, and/or whether a future gameplay session will similarly be good for a given player.
According to an aspect of the invention, the system may include a pipelining engine that may generate one or more “soft reservations” for a player based on a match score, a game profile, a player profile, and/or other information. A soft reservation may comprise a match between two or more players for one or more subsequent gameplay sessions (whether in the current login session or a future login session) that are reserved for the players. The match may be generated as described herein (e.g., based on match scores exceeding a threshold match score).
The pipelining engine may, for instance, anticipate an interest by players in a subsequent gameplay session (e.g., based on a game profile and/or a player profile) and make a soft reservation for two or more players. For example, a soft reservation may be generated before the players have expressed an interest in the subsequent gameplay sessions.
For example, and without limitation, the pipelining engine may analyze a game progression of a player (e.g., which may be stored in a player profile) and predict a game mode (e.g., capture the flag) that will likely interest the player. The pipelining engine may then make a soft reservation for the player for a gameplay session that includes the game mode.
In another example, the pipelining engine may determine whether preferred players (e.g., clan members or friends) of a given player have logged on. Upon obtaining information that indicates that a player's clan members or friends have logged on, and that the player prefers to play with clan members or friends, the pipelining engine may make a soft reservation for the player to play in a subsequent gameplay session with his or her clan members or friends.
Once a soft reservation has been made, a player may be invited to join an associated gameplay session. The player may accept the invitation, in which case the player may start playing in the gameplay session. On the other hand, if the player rejects the invitation, then other players may be invited to join the gameplay session to replace the player. Such acceptances and rejections may be added to a player profile so that future soft reservations may be fine-tuned based on acceptances (which may indicate a relevant soft reservation was made) and rejections (which may indicate a non-relevant soft reservation was made).
Because a player may reject an invitation to join a gameplay session associated with a soft reservation, the pipelining engine may make soft reservations for a number of players that exceeds a maximum number allowed by a given gameplay session. For example, if a maximum number of players in a clan for a gameplay session is ten, the pipelining engine may make a soft reservation for a greater number (e.g., fifteen) of players for the gameplay session. In this manner, the pipelining engine may expect a certain number of rejections to be made (e.g., five in the foregoing example), and may therefore “overbook” the number of soft reservations (hereinafter, “overbook number”). An overbook number may be predefined or automatically determined based on a game profile, a player profile, and/or other information. For example, certain game modes, games, players, etc., may be associated with a propensity to accept soft reservations than others. The pipelining engine may monitor such tendencies over time to dynamically adjust the overbook number for a game mode, a game, a player, etc.
In one implementation, a player for which a soft reservation has been made for a gameplay session may be added to the gameplay session “in progress” (after it has started). For example, a player who has a soft reservation for a particular gameplay session may join the particular gameplay session after the player's current gameplay session is over. In this manner, the particular gameplay session may be reserved for the player even after the gameplay session has started.
A player waiting to be matched into a future gameplay session may be required to wait for the future gameplay session to start. For example, a first player who prefers to play with friends may prefer to wait to be matched with friends, instead of being placed into a gameplay session with only strangers. If the two friends of the first player are currently playing in a gameplay session, which has not yet completed, the pipelining engine may make a soft reservation for the three players to play together in a future gameplay session.
In the meantime, the first player can continue to wait until the two friends are available or may join a gameplay session that the pipelining engine determines will likely finish at approximately the same time that the two friends' gameplay session is expected to finish. In other words, the pipelining engine may help synchronize the three friends' gameplay sessions so that they may play together for the rest of the gaming session. For example, the pipelining engine may determine that the two friends will complete their gameplay session in ten minutes and may match the first player into a gameplay session that is expected to be complete in ten minutes. In this manner, all three friends may be expected to become available at approximately the same time.
The matchmaking system and method may be leveraged in various contexts as well, such as to influence game-related purchases, recommend a composition of groups of players, train or identify non-player characters (NPCs) that should be used, and/or other contexts.
For example, in one implementation, the system may include a microtransaction engine that arranges matches to influence game-related purchases. For instance, the microtransaction engine may match a more expert/marquee player with a junior player to encourage the junior player to make game-related purchases of items possessed/used by the marquee player. A junior player may wish to emulate the marquee player by obtaining weapons or other items used by the marquee player.
The microtransaction engine may analyze various items used by marquee players and, if the items are being promoted for sale, match the marquee player with another player (e.g., a junior player) that does not use or own the items. Similarly, the microtransaction engine may identify items to be promoted, identify marquee players that use those items, and match the marquee players with other players who do not use those items. In this manner, the microtransaction engine may leverage the matchmaking abilities described herein to influence purchase decisions for game-related purchases.
In one implementation, the microtransaction engine may target particular players to make game-related purchases based on their interests. For example, the microtransaction engine may identify a junior player to match with a marquee player based on a player profile of the junior player. In a particular example, the junior player may wish to become an expert sniper in a game (e.g., as determined from the player profile). The microtransaction engine may match the junior player with a player that is a highly skilled sniper in the game. In this manner, the junior player may be encouraged to make game-related purchases such as a rifle or other item used by the marquee player.
In one implementation, when a player makes a game-related purchase, the microtransaction engine may encourage future purchases by matching the player (e.g., using matchmaking described herein) in a gameplay session that will utilize the game-related purchase. Doing so may enhance a level of enjoyment by the player for the game-related purchase, which may encourage future purchases. For example, if the player purchased a particular weapon, the microtransaction engine may match the player in a gameplay session in which the particular weapon is highly effective, giving the player an impression that the particular weapon was a good purchase. This may encourage the player to make future purchases to achieve similar gameplay results.
In one implementation, the system may suggest a composition of a group of players using the matchmaking process. For example, one or more players may wish to form or join a group of players for a given game, but not know what would be an appropriate mix of player styles, player roles, skill levels, and/or other player characteristics that would make an optimal group, given the player's own characteristics.
The system may identify optimal groups based on matchmaking related information such as, without limitation, game profile, player profile (e.g., explicit preferences, purchases made, player styles, etc.), prior match scores, prior quality scores, and/or other information. Optimal groups may be those that have performed successfully (e.g., accomplished the most wins, objectives, etc.), are associated with the highest player enjoyment (e.g., based on match and/or quality scores), and/or otherwise are deemed to be desirable.
According to one aspect of the invention, the matchmaking may be used to manage NPCs. For example, the system may be used to select/generate a NPC to fill a gap in a clan or team, generate a team or clan of NPCs, analyze NPCs post-game session to identify successful NPC behavior, and/or perform other actions with respect to NPCs.
The system may identify a gap in a number of players required for a given gameplay session such as, for example, when only nine (or less) human players have joined in a game that requires ten players in a clan. In this case, the system may assign one or more NPCs to play along with the human players in the clan. The system may generate potential matches between the human players who have joined and potential NPCs to fill the gaps. The system may score each potential match and select NPCs that are associated with the highest match scores. For example, in a game in which the system has determined that five snipers and five run-and-gunners represent an optimal mix of player roles, the system may select NPCs to fill gaps such that the desired combination of five snipers and five run-and-gunners is achieved to the extent possible (because potential matches having this ratio will have higher match scores).
In some implementations, the system may identify one or more NPCs to serve as an opponent to one or more human players. The system may generate a match score for a group of NPCs and use the match score as a proxy for the group's level of difficulty. For example, a combination of NPCs having higher match scores that resulted from higher values for a match variable related to performance may represent a “more difficult” to beat opponent than those with lower match scores. The system may therefore dynamically select NPC opponents based on match scores and an appropriate level of difficulty to be provided to the player (e.g., more skilled players may be presented with NPCs having higher match scores).
In one implementation, the system may generate NPC profiles analogous to player profiles. In this manner, the system may analyze NPCs in a manner similar to player analysis. The system may therefore continually improve NPC performance and selection based on NPC profiles, which may take into account NPC logic, strategy, and/or other NPC characteristics.
These and other objects, features, and characteristics of the system and/or method disclosed herein, as well as the methods of operation and functions of the related elements of structure and the combination of parts and economies of manufacture, will become more apparent upon consideration of the following description and the appended claims with reference to the accompanying drawings, all of which form a part of this specification, wherein like reference numerals designate corresponding parts in the various figures. It is to be expressly understood, however, that the drawings are for the purpose of illustration and description only and are not intended as a definition of the limits of the invention. As used in the specification and in the claims, the singular form of “a”, “an”, and “the” include plural referents unless the context clearly dictates otherwise.
The invention described herein relates to a matchmaking system and method that facilitates optimization of player matches for multiplayer video games.
Exemplary System Architecture
The system may generate a match (e.g., interchangeably referred to herein as engaging in “matchmaking”) between two or more players (e.g., one or more human players and/or one or more non-player characters). In some instances, the match, if accepted by the matched players, may result in initiation of a gameplay session that includes the matched players. In other instances, the match may result in automatic initiation of a gameplay session without intervention or specific action taken by a matched player to accept the match.
System 100 may be used to score potential matches and determine which match will likely lead to positive gameplay outcomes for the matched players. For example, system 100 may generate matches that are predicted to result in greater performance by the matched players, result in greater satisfaction/enjoyment by the matched players, and/or otherwise will lead to positive gameplay outcomes for the matched players.
In one implementation, system 100 may include one or more computer systems 110, one or more servers 150, one or more databases 160, and/or other components.
Computer System 110
Computer system 110 may be configured as a gaming console, a handheld gaming device, a personal computer (e.g., a desktop computer, a laptop computer, etc.), a smartphone, a tablet computing device, a smart television, and/or other device that can be used to interact with an instance of a video game.
Referring to
Depending on the system configuration, matchmaking application 120 (or portions thereof) may be part of a game application, which creates a game instance to facilitate gameplay. Alternatively or additionally, matchmaking application 120 may run on a device such as a server 150 to determine matches for users in an “online” game hosted by server 150.
Matchmaking application 120 may include instructions that program computer system 110. The instructions may include, without limitation, a scoring engine 122, an analytics and feedback engine 124, a pipelining engine 126, a microtransaction engine 128, a User Interface (“UI”) engine 130, and/or other instructions that program computer system 110 to perform various operations, each of which are described in greater detail herein. As used herein, for convenience, the various instructions will be described as performing an operation, when, in fact, the various instructions program the processors 112 (and therefore computer system 110) to perform the operation.
Peripherals 140
Peripherals 140 may be used to obtain an input (e.g., direct input, measured input, etc.) from a player. Peripherals 140 may include, without limitation, a game controller, a gamepad, a keyboard, a mouse, an imaging device such as a camera, a motion sensing device, a light sensor, a biometric sensor, and/or other peripheral device that can obtain an input from and/or relating to a player. Peripherals 140 may be coupled to a corresponding computer system 110 via a wired and/or wireless connection.
Server 150
Server 150 may include one or more computing devices.
Referring to
Depending on the system configuration, matchmaking application 120 (or portions thereof) may be part of a game application, which creates a game instance to facilitate gameplay. Alternatively or additionally, portions or all of matchmaking application 120 may run on computer system 110 or server 150.
Matchmaking application 120 may include instructions that program server 150. The instructions may include, without limitation, a scoring engine 122, an analytics and feedback engine 124, a pipelining engine 126, a microtransaction engine 128, a User Interface (“UI”) engine 130, and/or other instructions that program server 150 to perform various operations, each of which are described in greater detail herein.
As used herein, for convenience, the various instructions will be described as performing an operation, when, in fact, the various instructions program the processors 152 (and therefore server 150) to perform the operation.
Although illustrated in
Furthermore, it should be appreciated that although the various instructions are illustrated in
The description of the functionality provided by the different instructions described herein is for illustrative purposes, and is not intended to be limiting, as any of instructions may provide more or less functionality than is described. For example, one or more of the instructions may be eliminated, and some or all of its functionality may be provided by other ones of the instructions. As another example, processor(s) (112, 152) may be programmed by one or more additional instructions that may perform some or all of the functionality attributed herein to one of the instructions.
The various instructions described herein may be stored in a storage device (114, 154) which may comprise random access memory (RAM), read only memory (ROM), and/or other memory. The storage device may store the computer program instructions (e.g., the aforementioned instructions) to be executed by processor (112, 152) as well as data that may be manipulated by processor (112, 152). The storage device may comprise floppy disks, hard disks, optical disks, tapes, or other storage media for storing computer-executable instructions and/or data.
The various components illustrated in
The various databases 160 described herein may be, include, or interface to, for example, an Oracle™ relational database sold commercially by Oracle Corporation. Other databases, such as Informix™, DB2 (Database 2) or other data storage, including file-based, or query formats, platforms, or resources such as OLAP (On Line Analytical Processing), SQL (Structured Query Language), a SAN (storage area network), Microsoft Access™ or others may also be used, incorporated, or accessed. The database may comprise one or more such databases that reside in one or more physical devices and in one or more physical locations. The database may store a plurality of types of data and/or files and associated data or file descriptions, administrative information, or any other data.
In some instances, a given server 150 may be associated with a proprietary gameplay network system, such as, without limitation, SONY PLAYSTATION NETWORK, MICROSOFT XBOX LIVE, and/or another type of gameplay network system. In this implementation, a given computer system 110 may be associated with a particular type of gaming console. Other types of computer systems 110 using other types of gameplay networks may be used as well.
Referring to
In an implementation, system 100 may identify players that are waiting to be matched, such as players whose characters are waiting in a virtual game lobby to join a gameplay session. System 100 may generate one or more potential matches by grouping two or more of the identified players and/or adding at least one of the identified players to an existing potential match. The number of players placed in each potential match may depend on a number of players waiting to be matched, a number of players needed for a game session (e.g., a number of players needed to form a team), a number of players that can be accommodated by a game session, and/or other information.
Generating a Match Score for Potential Matches
According to an aspect of the invention, scoring engine 122 may generate a match score for a potential match based on one or more match variables associated with each player in the potential match. A match score may be generated for each potential match and may be used to determine an optimal mix of players in a grouping to produce the most satisfying player experiences. In other words, a match score may indicate a predicted level of satisfaction of players that are placed in a potential match. A match variable may be obtained from a memory (e.g., a database), measured by scoring engine 122, and/or otherwise obtained by scoring engine 122.
The one or more match variables may relate to at least one player's characteristic that may influence whether a player enjoys gameplay while placed in a match. For example, and without limitation, a match variable may include a latency between players (e.g., a delay time for data communication between players' gaming systems or platforms such that lower latency is preferentially matched), a player skill level, a team composition (e.g., a role played by each player of a potential match), a presence or absence of preferred players (e.g., clan members, friends, etc.), a time that a player has waited to be matched (e.g., a player having a longer wait time may be preferentially matched), a location of a player (e.g., players geographically close to one another may be preferentially matched), one or more explicit user preferences received from a player, and/or other match variables.
Assigning and Tuning Coefficients to Customize the Importance of Match Variables
A given match variable may be associated with a corresponding coefficient that indicates a level of importance of the given match variable. A game designer or others may assign a default value to one or more coefficients. For example, a match variable related to a composition of a team may, by default, be more important than a match variable related to latency and may therefore be weighted more heavily when generating a match score. Other match variables may be weighted as well.
The coefficient may be expressed as a multiplier, a percentage, and/or other value that can be used to weight a match variable relative to one or more other match variables. The coefficient may be set to zero (or an equivalent metric) such that the given match variable is not considered when generating a match score. For example, if the latency variable is assigned with a coefficient of zero (or other value that indicates that latency should not be used), scoring engine 122 may ignore the latency variable when generating a match score. In this manner, a game designer or others may determine which match variables will be used to generate match scores and/or weights for the match variables. Alternatively or additionally, the game designer or others may remove match variables from consideration altogether (and/or add new match variables).
A given coefficient may be tuned by modifying the default value to generate a tuned value, which may be used instead of the default value. In an implementation, two or more coefficients may be tuned together. For example, a first match variable may be de-emphasized by adjusting a first coefficient downward while a second match variable may be emphasized by adjusting a second coefficient upward. In this manner, one match variable may be weighted more heavily and another match variable may be weighted less heavily. In some instances, the tuning of one coefficient may necessarily result in the tuning of another coefficient. For example, when the value of a coefficient is expressed as a ratio that sums to 1, increasing the value of a first coefficient may necessitate decreasing the value of a second coefficient.
A coefficient may be tuned in various ways (and responsive to various conditions) to adjust how its corresponding match variable will be weighted. A tuned coefficient may itself be iteratively tuned. In this manner, the generation of match scores, and therefore matches made, may be tuned according to particular needs, preferences, changing conditions, and/or other information. For example, a game developer, a player, scoring engine 122, and/or others may tune the coefficients.
A game designer or match administrator (e.g., a computerized or human game session moderator), for example, may tune one or more coefficients based on what the game designer or match administrator believes are more important match variables, and/or based on game requirements to suit the particular game for which matchmaking is performed. In one example, a game designer may assign relatively high coefficients (e.g., high relative to other coefficients) to a match variable related to latency for games in which a high degree of collaboration with other players is required.
In some instances, a player may tune one or more coefficients (e.g., coefficients originally assigned by a game developer or others) according to user preferences through a game User Interface, a settings interface, or other interface. For example, a player may indicate a preference to play with friends, in which case the player may tune a coefficient associated with a match variable that relates to preferred players such that the coefficient is weighted more heavily than other coefficients. The tuned coefficient may affect a matchmaking decision.
For example, a potential match that includes the player and strangers may receive a low value for the match variable related to the presence of preferred players. The tuned coefficient may cause the low value to affect the overall match score more so than other match variables. Thus, the corresponding match score may be skewed toward a value that indicates a poor match and the potential match will not be selected. In this manner, tuning of one or more coefficients by the player may impact match scores and therefore matchmaking decisions.
In another example, the player may tune a coefficient related to game roles to be high (to more heavily weight game roles when considering a match score) and set a value of a match variable related to game roles to be “sniper.” In this example, a potential match in which the player would play using a sniper role (e.g., those matches where a sniper role is possible or otherwise available) will have a higher match score than a potential match in which the player would not play as a sniper role. In this manner, the player may indicate a preference for being matched in a gameplay session in which the player plays as a sniper role.
In yet another example, a player may value a better match over shorter wait times. The player may therefore tune a coefficient related to wait times to be low (or zero) so that wait times are not weighted heavily (or at all) when generating potential matches for the player.
According to an aspect of the invention, scoring engine 122 may tune the one or more coefficients based on changing circumstances, game history, and/or other analytical data. For example, If a given player has performed poorly during previous game sessions (as determined from historical gameplay information), scoring engine 122 may adjust one or more coefficients for the player such that gameplay becomes easier for the player. For example, if a player has been getting killed at a rate higher than the player's historical rate, scoring engine 122 may dynamically tune a coefficient associated with a match variable related to skill level to match him with easier opponents, higher-skilled collaborative team members, game sessions that are more suited to the player's gameplay style (e.g., a map that favors snipers), and/or other coefficients that can affect the outcome of a match score.
Scoring engine 122 may also tune the one or more coefficients based on system requirements unrelated to user preferences or game design. For example, scoring engine 122 may determine (e.g., measure or receive an indication) that a load on a given server that offers minimal latency compared to other servers needs to be reduced and load-balanced onto another server with greater latency. In this scenario, scoring engine 122 may adjust the coefficient related to the latency match variable so that latency is disregarded or its importance in generating a match score is diminished (for potential matches that would have been hosted by the given server). In another example, scoring engine 122 may determine that a given server is associated with a higher network cost and should be avoided. Scoring engine 122 may adjust coefficients for match variables that may affect whether a potential match will play on the given server, in order to minimize or eliminate matches that will use the given server.
Table 1 (depicted below) illustrates a non-limiting example of four match variables, their corresponding coefficients, and resulting match score for a potential match between two more players. Table 1 is presented solely for illustrative purposes and should not be viewed as limiting. Any number of other match variables and coefficients may be used. Furthermore, other techniques to generate the match score may be used as well.
As illustrated in Table 1, each of three exemplary match variables (latency, team composition, and skill level) may be normalized to have a value that ranges from 0 to 10 (e.g., “0” referring to a “poor” value, and 10 referring to a “good” value—although other numerical values and/or ranges may be used). The coefficients may be expressed as a ratio that sums to one. Thus, tuning one coefficient will cause another coefficient to be tuned as well. In this manner, the match score may be have a maximum value of 10 (10 being the best match score and zero being the worst match score). In the foregoing example, the various values may be based on percentiles from a population of players. For example, the 95th to 100th percentile may be associated with a value of “10”, the 90th to 95th is “9”, 80 to 90 is 8, etc. The percentile ranges may be equal in size or different in size.
For instance, a match variable related to latency may be associated with a value of 8. In this case, latency is considered to be “good” for the group of players in the potential match. In other words, latency between devices associated with the group of players is considered to be low. The precise translation between the actual latency measurement (which may be measured in milliseconds) and a value of a match variable (in this example, 8) may be made using a predefined translation scale. Other match variables may be similarly translated from corresponding raw measurements or data. A value of the coefficient corresponding to the match variable related to latency may be set (e.g., by default or tuned) to be 0.1, indicating a relatively low importance relative to the other coefficients. The weighted value is 8×0.1, or 0.8.
The match variable related to team composition may be a relatively low 2, indicating that a good mix of players for the particular gameplay session is “poor.” However, the value of the corresponding coefficient may be a relatively high 0.5, indicating that team composition is relatively important for the gameplay session. The weighted value is 2×0.5, or 1.0.
The value of the match variable related to skill level is a relatively high 9, indicating that the level of skill of the players is a good mix for the gameplay session. The value of the corresponding coefficient is a relatively high 0.4. Thus, the weighted value is 9×0.4, or 3.6.
Summing the weighted values of all match variables, the match score for the potential match may be determined to be 5.6.
In an implementation of the invention, scoring engine 122 may score a match based on emulating match variables that are used to match players who are experiencing actual conditions similar to virtual or game conditions. For instance, an external match variable may include, without limitation, a time of day, weather conditions, trending news, and/or other environmental or contextual information.
Use of the time of day external match variable may take into account a virtual time of day with actual time of day for potential players. For example, scoring engine 122 may favor matches that include players from actual (physical) locations that correspond to nighttime (e.g., as determined based on the geographic location, current time, and sunset time) for a gameplay session involving a nighttime game (virtual) scene. Use of the weather conditions may be similarly used as well (e.g., snow scenes in a gameplay session may be used to match players having actual, physical, snow at their geographic location). In this manner, players may be matched that are experiencing similar environmental conditions as other players and an in-game environmental conditions, more fully immersing such players in a given gameplay session.
Use of trending news or other contextual information may take into account such contextual information. For instance, scoring engine 122 may be used to emulate current events at a location (e.g., a high profile police chase occurring at a particular city may be used to match players interested in racing games or match players who live in the particular city). In this manner, the emulating match variables may be used to generate match scores to emulate current events or other contextual information.
Selecting Potential Matches
Scoring engine 122 may select a potential match based on match scores. For example, scoring engine 122 may determine whether a match score exceeds a predefined threshold match score. The predefined match score may be determined as a function of a wait time. (e.g., a duration of time in which a player has been waiting to be matched, such as in game lobby). For example, scoring engine 122 may lower the threshold match score (assuming higher match scores are associated with higher match quality) when a given player has been waiting to be matched for a predetermined period of time. In some instances, the system may progressively lower the threshold match score as the player continues to wait to be matched until the player is eventually matched. In this manner, the system may allow a player to be matched using lower quality matches if the player has been waiting to be matched.
The threshold match score may further be adjusted, as described below with respect to analytics and feedback engine 124.
If the threshold match score is exceeded, scoring engine 122 may automatically select the potential match (thereby making a match) or present the potential match to a player for selection (e.g., confirmation that the player would like to join a game session with the players from the potential match).
If multiple potential matches are being considered, scoring engine 122 may automatically select the potential match having the highest match score, automatically select a potential match based on aggregate potential matches, randomly (and automatically) select a potential match that exceeds the threshold match score, present one or more potential matches that exceed the threshold match score to the player for selection, and/or present all potential matches to the player for selection.
When automatically selecting a potential match based on aggregate potential matches, scoring engine 122 may take into account other potential matches such that each player is matched into a match of at least threshold quality, but maximizing scores across more than just one match. In other words, scoring engine 122 may take into account aggregate scores for multiple matches. For example, if player A is considering matches Y (having a match score=6) and Z (having a match score=8) and player B is considering matches W (having a match score=7) and X (having a match score=8), scoring engine 122 may select match W for player B if by selecting X it forces player A into match Y. That is, the aggregate score of player A placed into match Z and player B placed into match W is 7+8=15. An aggregate score of player B placed into match X and player A placed into match Y is 8+6=14.
When presenting either a single match or multiple potential matches to the player for selection, scoring engine 122 may provide match description information that describes the match so that the player can make a selection based on the provided information. The match description information may include, without limitation, one or more match scores, one or more match variables, one or more coefficients, and/or other information to the user so that the user may make a selection based on the provided information. For example, an exemplary match description may include the following: likely two other clan members included in a gameplay session, 100 millisecond average latency, five-versus-five gameplay, average “good” skill level, spread of skill level, map, player styles, and/or other information.
In one implementation of the invention, the system may assess possible matches driven through rules or machine learning heuristics that facilitate searching various permutations of potential matches in a reasonable time. In some instances, the system may filter out certain matches using such rules or machine learning heuristics. For example, the system may filter out unfavorable matches (and matches of similar composition) and unfavorable combinations of players. In particular, if players A and B are deemed to be incompatible (as determined from one or more rules or heuristics), the system may ignore (e.g., not consider) any potential matches involving players A and B. In this manner, the search space of potential matches may be reduced.
Each potential match 310 may be assigned with a match score 320 (illustrated in
Generating a Quality Score for Gameplay Sessions
Referring back to
Analytics and feedback engine 124 may generate a quality score for a gameplay session to obtain an understanding of what constitutes “good match quality.” The quality score may indicate a level of satisfaction by one or more players involved in a gameplay session. For example, a quality score may indicate a level of satisfaction of an individual player involved in the gameplay session, all players involved in the gameplay session, all players belonging to a particular clan or team, all players belonging to a particular role (e.g., snipers, archers, point guards, etc.), and/or others involved in the gameplay session. When relating to more than one player, a quality score may include an average, a median, and/or other cumulative statistic that represents an overall level of satisfaction of multiple players. In this manner, analytics and feedback engine 124 may provide an analytical framework that uses gameplay statistics and information to assess a quality of a given gameplay session as experienced by one or more players.
In some instances, analytics and feedback engine 124 may take into account the level of satisfaction of all the players in a given gameplay session. For instance, analytics and feedback engine 124 may determine that a “good match quality” is one in which each player achieved a certain level of satisfaction. In this manner, analytics and feedback engine 124 may assign a higher quality score to a first match in which each player achieved a certain level of satisfaction than a second match in which only some of the players achieved a high level of satisfaction but other players achieved a low level of satisfaction (even if some, but not all, of the players in the second match achieved a much higher level of satisfaction than the players in the first match). Thus, analytics and feedback engine 124 may help to ensure that 100% of the players of a given match have a good experience versus ensuring that 80% of the players have a great experience and 20% of the players have a bad experience.
Analytics and feedback engine 124 may determine a quality score based on one or more quality factors that are used to gauge whether gameplay associated with a given match was satisfying. A quality factor may include an observable metric that indicates a player's level of satisfaction with gameplay.
Examples of quality factors include, without limitation, a player quitting a match or gameplay session while other players are still playing (indicating dissatisfaction), a duration of a game session (e.g., a longer duration may indicate greater satisfaction), a gameplay performance factor (e.g., a kill-to-death ratio in a shooter game, a lap time in a racing game, etc., where greater performance may indicate greater satisfaction), a player engagement factor (e.g., a speed of player input, a level of focus as determined from camera peripherals, etc., where greater engagement may indicate greater satisfaction), a competition level of a game (e.g., whether lopsided or not, where evenly matched games may indicate greater satisfaction), a biometric factor (e.g., facial expressions, pulse, body language, sweat, etc.), explicit feedback from a player (e.g., responses to a survey), and/or other observable metrics related to gameplay.
In some implementations of the invention, analytics and feedback engine 124 may determine a quality score based on one or more business factors that describe a business value derived from a given gameplay session. For example, and without limitation, a business factor may include a business concern such as an amount of revenue derived from a given gameplay session (e.g., number or amount of in-game purchases, number of impressions of an advertisement or other ad-based revenue stream, etc.), a level of customer engagement, and/or other information that can be used to assess a level of value derived from a given gameplay session. It should be noted that analytics and feedback engine 124 may generate a quality score based on a combination of one or more quality factors and one or more business or customer engagement factors may be used as well.
Training the Quality Scoring System and Adjusting the Threshold Quality Score
Analytics and feedback engine 124 may identify quality factors that correlate with an a priori (accepted as true) quality of a gameplay session. For example, and without limitation, explicit feedback from a player may serve as an a priori quality of a gameplay session. In this example, analytics and feedback engine 124 may identify quality factors that correlate with explicit feedback from a player. In a particular example, analytics and feedback engine 124 may determine that long game sessions (e.g., game sessions that exceed a predefined amount of time) strongly correlate with explicit feedback from players that indicate they enjoyed their respective gameplay sessions. On the other hand, using the same or different explicit feedback, analytics and feedback engine 124 may determine that a competition level is not correlated to the quality of the gameplay session. By analyzing various gameplay sessions over time, analytics and feedback engine 124 may identify relevant quality factors that reflect a true quality of gameplay sessions.
In a similar manner, analytics and feedback engine 124 may determine a threshold quality score that should be used to identify good quality gameplay sessions. A threshold quality score may be used as a cutoff to determine which quality scores represent “good quality” gameplay sessions (and therefore matches associated with those gameplay sessions). For example, based on a priori information regarding quality (e.g., explicit player feedback), analytics and feedback engine 124 may identify a minimum quality score that correlates with a good quality gameplay session and use the minimum quality score as a basis for the threshold quality score. By analyzing various gameplay sessions over time, analytics and feedback engine 124 may continually refine the quality threshold score.
A quality score may be used to profile games that result in satisfying gameplay, profile players to determine their interests, and/or fine tune match scores. In this sense, the quality scoring system may provide an analytical framework in which to assess information that results in satisfying gameplay and in particular to identify matches that should be made.
Generating Game and Player Profiles
Analytics and feedback engine 124 may generate a game profile for a gameplay session based on gameplay information, which may be monitored and/or otherwise obtained by analytics and feedback engine 124. Gameplay information may describe various game characteristics of a gameplay session that may influence the quality of gameplay. For example, gameplay information may include, without limitation, a number of players, types of roles (e.g., snipers), types of in-game items used or purchased (e.g., weapons, vehicles, armor, custom suits, custom paint, tires, engine modifications, etc.), composition of teams or clans (e.g., number and/or types of roles in each clan), maps or game levels played (e.g., battle zones, racetracks, sporting arenas, etc.), duration of gameplay (e.g., how duration of a given gameplay session), player skill levels, player styles (e.g., aggressive, prefers to be a sniper, etc.), and/or other information related to a gameplay session.
A game profile may be specific for a given gameplay session (e.g., different game profiles may be associated with different gameplay sessions) and/or may be used to generate a broader game profile for a particular game (e.g., different games may be associated with different game profiles). In this manner, a given game or gameplay session may be characterized using a game profile.
Analytics and feedback engine 124 may likewise generate a player profile for a player based on player information. The player information may be monitored and/or otherwise obtained by analytics and feedback engine 124. The player information may describe various characteristics of a player, which may be used to assess whether the player will enjoy a given gameplay session, a match, and/or a game.
For example, player information may include, without limitation, a style of gameplay (e.g., aggressive), a role preference (e.g., an explicit indication by the player of such preference), a role actually played, a duration of gameplay sessions, a number of gameplay sessions played in a given login session, in-game items used or purchased by the player, membership in a clan or team, preference to play with clan mates or friends, demographic information of the player (e.g., geographic location, gender, income level, etc.), win/loss records, scores, and/or other information that may be used to determine whether a player will enjoy a given gameplay session, a match, and/or a game.
Information from a player profile may be indexed by time. For example, the foregoing player information may include all player information known about a player, a subset of all information (e.g., information related to the last day, week, month, previous “N” number of game sessions, login sessions, etc.). In this manner, a player profile may relate to all-time gameplay of the player, recent gameplay of the player, time of day (e.g., a player may be associated with different player profiles at different times of the day, such as having an aggressive play style during evening hours and a more relaxed play style during morning hours), and/or other subset.
The game profiles, the player profiles, and/or other information described herein may, for example, be stored in one or more profile databases, such as a database 160.
Applying the Game Profiles, Player Profiles, and Quality Scores to Tune Match Scores
Analytics and feedback engine 124 may correlate information from a game and/or player profile with quality scores determined for a gameplay session. For example, a game profile may include certain characteristics that are correlated with a high quality gameplay session. For a given game, a particular combination of role types (e.g., four snipers, six run-and-gunners, and four resource campers) for a gameplay session may be correlated with high quality scores, indicating that the players involved in the given gameplay session enjoyed playing the game.
Using such correlations, analytics and feedback engine 124 may drive the tuning of match variables and/or coefficients. For example, analytics and feedback engine 124 may determine that types of roles are important considerations when matchmaking and therefore scoring engine 122 should use and assign a high coefficient to match variables related to types of roles. In particular, scoring engine may make matches based on a clan composition of different types of roles, as informed by the correlation of the composition of roles to quality scores.
Other information from game profiles and/or player profiles may be used as well. Furthermore, different permutations and combinations of game profile and player profile information may be correlated with quality scores so that matches align with high quality scores. For example, a combination of types of game maps and player styles may be correlated with high quality scores based on observations of gameplay sessions having different game maps and player styles. The combination may be used to identify match variables and/or tune coefficients in a manner that leads to higher match scores for matches that include the combination of game maps and player styles. In this manner, analytics and feedback engine 124 may provide an automated process to provide feedback on match score generation. In particular, analytics and feedback engine 124 may identify match variables that are important indicators of match quality and tune coefficients in a manner that more accurately predicts match quality.
In an implementation, using subsets of the player profile information, analytics and feedback engine 124 may tune matchmaking in real-time for a given player. For example, if a player is determined to be on a losing streak within the past several gaming sessions, analytics and feedback engine 124 may cause a coefficient related to player skill level to become more important. This may result in, for example, the player being pitted against lower-skilled opponents and/or teamed with higher-skilled players to increase the chance that the player will win or otherwise perform better.
Making Soft Reservations for Subsequent Gameplay Sessions
According to an aspect of the invention, pipelining engine 126 may generate one or more “soft reservations” for a player based on a match score, a game profile, a player profile, and/or other information. A soft reservation may comprise a match between two or more players for one or more subsequent gameplay sessions that are reserved for the players. The match may be generated as described herein (e.g., based on match scores exceeding a threshold match score). Pipelining engine 126 may anticipate an interest in a subsequent gameplay session (e.g., based on a game profile and/or a player profile) and make a soft reservation for two or more players. For example, a soft reservation may be generated before the players have expressed an interest in the subsequent gameplay sessions.
For example, and without limitation, pipelining engine 126 may analyze a game progression of a player (e.g., which may be stored in a player profile) and predict a game mode (e.g., capture the flag) that will likely interest the player. Pipelining engine 126 may then make a soft reservation for the player for a gameplay session that includes the game mode.
In another example, pipelining engine 126 may determine whether clan members or friends of a given player have logged on. Upon obtaining information that indicates that a player's clan members or friends have logged on and that the player prefers to play with clan members or friends, pipelining engine 126 may make a soft reservation for the player to play in a subsequent gameplay session with the clan members or friends.
In an implementation, pipelining engine 126 may continuously place players who are currently logged on and/or playing in a gameplay session into potential matches, assess the potential matches as described herein, and make soft reservations for potential matches having match scores that exceed a match threshold score. For example, pipelining engine 126 may match a player who is already playing in a current gameplay session so that the player may join a subsequent gameplay session when the current gameplay session ends (e.g., the player completes the gameplay session and then joins the future gameplay session) or is otherwise exited by the player (e.g., the player quits the current gameplay session early to join the subsequent gameplay session). In this manner, a player may be pre-matched with other players for a subsequent gameplay session while the player is still playing in a current gameplay session.
In some instances, a match score for a player may be influenced by soft reservations. For instance, a player for whom a soft reservation has been made for a gameplay session that starts in ten minutes may be preferentially placed in a match for a second gameplay session that is expected to last less than ten minutes. In this example, the system may score matches for which gameplay sessions are expected to last less than ten minutes higher than those that are expected to last more than ten minutes (or otherwise eliminate any potential matches associated with gameplay sessions expected to last greater than ten minutes).
In an implementation, pipelining engine 126 may make a soft reservation for a player who has not yet logged on based on a history of previous logins. For example, if a given player is observed to login to play in one or more gameplay sessions at a certain time, pipelining engine 126 may predict that the given player will login at the certain time and make a soft reservation for the given player. In this manner, pipelining engine 126 may predict when a given player will login and make a soft reservation for the given player before the given player logs in such that a time to wait to be matched is minimized.
Managing the Start of Gameplay Sessions Associated with Soft Reservations
Once a soft reservation has been made, a player may be invited to join an associated gameplay session. The player may accept the invitation, in which case the player may start playing in the gameplay session. On the other hand, if the player rejects the invitation, then other players may be invited to join the gameplay session to replace the player. Such acceptances and rejections may be added to a player profile so that future soft reservations may be fine-tuned based on acceptances (which may indicate a relevant soft reservation was made) and rejections (which may indicate a non-relevant soft reservation was made).
Because a player may reject an invitation to join a gameplay session associated with a soft reservation, pipelining engine 126 may make soft reservations for a number of players that exceeds a maximum number allowed by a given gameplay session. For example, if a maximum number players in a clan for a gameplay session is ten, pipelining engine 126 may make a soft reservation for a greater number of players (e.g., fifteen) for the gameplay session. In this manner, pipelining engine 126 may expect a certain number (e.g., five in the foregoing example) of rejections to be made and may therefore “overbook” the number of soft reservations (hereinafter, “overbook number”).
An overbook number may be predefined or automatically determined based on a game profile, a player profile, and/or other information. For example, certain game modes, games, players, etc., may be associated with a propensity to accept soft reservations than others. Pipelining engine 126 may monitor such tendencies over time to dynamically adjust the overbook number for a game mode, a game, a player, etc.
In one implementation, pipelining engine 126 may score players for which a soft reservation has been made (for a gameplay session) such that top-scored players are invited first to join the gameplay session. The scoring may be based on respective match scores for each player (e.g., players having the highest match scores will be scored higher).
In an implementation, a player for which a soft reservation has been made (for a gameplay session) may be added to the gameplay session “in progress” (after it has started). For example, a player who has a soft reservation for a particular gameplay session may join the particular gameplay session after the player's current gameplay session is over. In this manner, the particular gameplay session may be reserved for the player even after the gameplay session has started. In other instances, a soft reservation for a player may be cancelled if the player is unavailable (e.g., still playing in another gameplay session, is logged off, etc.) when a gameplay session for which the soft reservation relates has started or is about to start. In this manner, other players may be matched to play in the gameplay session.
Pipelining engine 126 may require a player to join the particular gameplay session within a predefined time after the particular gameplay session has started. In this manner, the particular gameplay session may be reserved for the player for only a limited time. After the expiration of the predefined time, pipelining engine 126 may remove the soft reservation for the player. To fill the opening (resulting from removal of the player), pipelining engine 126 may invite or otherwise allow another player (who may or may not have a soft reservation) to join the particular gameplay session.
In an implementation, allowing a player to join after the gameplay session has started and/or allowing other players to join the particular gameplay session to fill any openings may be subject to approval by players who have joined the gameplay session. For example, pipelining engine 126 may present a prompt to the other players (e.g., via their individual game UI), who may allow or disallow such delay and/or addition.
Scheduling Gameplay Sessions to Minimize Wait Times
A player waiting to be matched into a future gameplay session may be required to wait for the future gameplay session to start. For example, a first player who prefers to play with friends may prefer to wait to be matched with friends, instead of being placed into a gameplay session with only strangers. If the two friends of the first player are currently playing in a gameplay session, which has not yet completed, pipelining engine 126 may make a soft reservation for the three players to play together in a future gameplay session.
In the meantime, the first player can continue to wait until the two friends are available or may join a gameplay session that pipelining engine 126 determines will likely finish at approximately the same time that the two friends' gameplay session is expected to finish. For example, pipelining engine 126 may determine that the two friends will complete their gameplay session in ten minutes and may match the first player into a gameplay session that is expected to be complete in ten minutes. In this manner, all three friends may be expected to become available at around the same time.
In one implementation, pipelining engine 126 may coordinate the gameplay sessions for multiple players so that they synchronize to start a subsequent gameplay session (with soft reservations made for each of the players for the subsequent gameplay session). For example, continuing with the foregoing example (in which a player is waiting to be matched with two friends), a first friend's current gameplay session may be expected to end in five minutes, while the second friend's current gameplay session is expected to end in ten minutes. Pipelining engine 126 may place the player into a gameplay session expected to last ten minutes, place the first friend into a gameplay session expected to last five minutes after the first player's gameplay session is over, and wait for the second friend's gameplay session to end in ten minutes. In this manner, multiple players may be synchronized to start a subsequent gameplay session.
In an implementation, pipelining engine 126 may match the first player into a temporary gameplay session with other players who are similarly waiting until their respective future gameplay sessions have started (e.g., when their soft reservations become available). The temporary gameplay session may be such that players may enter and leave at any time so that they may play until their soft reservations become available. Matchmaking for such temporary gameplay sessions may be performed as described herein (e.g., using match scores, game profiles, player profiles, etc.). For example, a temporary gameplay session may include a practice mode area, where game statistics and skill ratings may or may not be affected by gameplay.
In another example, a player may prefer to play a particular type or mode of a game that requires a certain number of players for a match to be made, but the number of currently available players is insufficient. Such preference may be explicitly made by the player and/or be based on a player profile. Pipelining engine 126 may match the player in a gameplay session that is predicted to end when the certain number of players is expected to become available (e.g., based on expected end times of current gameplay sessions for other players, expected number of logons by suitable players who will be able to join the gameplay session, etc.). In an implementation, pipelining engine 126 may place the player into a temporary gaming session described herein until the number of currently available players becomes sufficient.
The number of subsequent gameplay sessions that are “soft” reserved for a player may be based on the expected total logon time for the player (e.g., how long the player is expected to stay logged on) based on a player profile, an expected duration of each of the subsequent gameplay sessions that are scheduled, and/or other information.
Influencing Game-Related Purchases through Targeted Matchmaking
According to an aspect of the invention, microtransaction engine 128 may arrange matches to influence game-related purchases. Game-related purchases may include an acquisition by a player of an item in exchange for a fee, such as a real currency fee, a virtual currency fee, and/or other type of fee. The item may include an in-game item (e.g., a power-up, virtual weaponry, a virtual vehicle, an extra life, an extended life, etc.), a new level or map, and/or other item that may be used in relation to a game.
For example, microtransaction engine 128 may match a more expert/marquee or otherwise influential player (e.g., clan leader) with a junior player to encourage the junior player to make game-related purchases. A junior player may wish to emulate a marquee player by obtaining weapons or other items used by the marquee player. Other types of pairings and/or other groupings of players may be used as well.
Microtransaction engine 128 may analyze various items used by marquee players and, if at least one of the items is currently being offered for sale (with or without a promotion), match the marquee player with another player (e.g., a junior player) that does not use or own the item. Similarly, microtransaction engine 128 may identify items offered for sale, identify marquee players that use or possess those items, and match the marquee players with other players who do not use or possess those items. In this manner, microtransaction engine 128 may leverage the matchmaking abilities described herein to influence purchase decisions for game-related purchases.
In an implementation, microtransaction engine 128 may target particular players to make game-related purchases based on their interests. For example, microtransaction engine 128 may identify a junior player to match with a marquee player based on a player profile of the junior player. In a particular example, the junior player may wish to become an expert sniper in a game (e.g., as determined from the player profile). Microtransaction engine 128 may match the junior player with a player that is a highly skilled sniper in the game. In this manner, the junior player may be encouraged to make game-related purchases such as a rifle or other item used by the highly skilled sniper.
In an implementation, when a player makes a game-related purchase, microtransaction engine 128 may encourage future purchases by matching the player (e.g., using matchmaking described herein) in a gameplay session that will utilize the game-related purchase. Doing so may enhance a level of enjoyment by the player for the game-related purchase, which may encourage future purchases. For example, if the player purchased a particular weapon, microtransaction engine 128 may match the player in a gameplay session in which the particular weapon is highly effective, giving the player an impression that the particular weapon was a good purchase. This may encourage the player to make future purchases to achieve similar gameplay results.
In an implementation, UI engine 130 may provide a match interface used to interact with match information. For example, a player may tune coefficients using the interface, select potential matches to join (which may include match description information such as match scores, clan compositions, etc.), and/or interact with match information. Through the match interface, a player may be provided with a list of one or more potential matches that may be selected by the player. The list may be ranked according to a match score. The player may select a potential match (and enter a gameplay sessions associated with the selected match) or wait until other potential matches are provided/become available.
The match interface may be provided to the player upon entry into a lobby room, by request, and/or responsive to other inputs.
Clan Formation and Management of Non-Player Characters (“NPCs”)
The matchmaking systems and methods herein may be used in contexts in addition to or other than for matching players for a given gameplay session. For example, matchmaking described herein may be applied to clan formation, management of non-player characters (“NPCs”), and/or other applications.
The matchmaking described herein may be used to suggest clans or teams. For example, one or more players may wish to form or join a clan for a given game, but not know what would be an appropriate mix of player styles, player roles, skill levels, and/or other player characteristics that would make an optimal clan, given the player's own characteristics.
The system may identify optimal clan composition based on matchmaking-related information such as, without limitation, a game profile, a player profile (e.g., explicit preferences, purchases made, player styles, player geography, player historical play schedules, etc.), prior match scores, prior quality scores, and/or other information. Optimal clans may be those that have performed successfully (e.g., accomplished the most wins, objectives, etc.), are associated with the highest player enjoyment (e.g., based on quality scores), play together most frequently, and/or are otherwise deemed to be desirable.
The matchmaking described herein may be used to manage NPCs. For example, the system may be used to select/generate a NPC to fill a gap in a clan or team (e.g., a sniper-style NPC), generate a team or clan of NPCs, analyze NPCs post-game to identify successful NPCs, and/or perform other actions with respect to NPCs.
The system may identify a gap in a number of players required for a given gameplay session, such as in a game that requires ten players in a clan, but only nine (or less) human players have joined. In this case, the system may assign one or more NPCs to play along with the human players in the clan. The system may generate potential matches between the human players who have joined and potential NPCs to fill the gaps. The system may score each potential match and select NPCs that are associated with the highest match scores. For example, in a game in which the system has determined that five snipers and five run-and-gunners represent an optimal mix of player roles, the system may select NPCs to fill gaps such that the desire combination of five snipers and five run-and-gunners is achieved to the extent possible (because potential matches having this ratio will have higher match scores).
The system may identify one or more NPCs to serve as an opponent to one or more human players. For example, a combination of NPCs having higher match scores where coefficients related to performance are highly weighted may represent a “more difficult” to beat opponent than those with lower match scores. The system may therefore dynamically select NPC opponents based on match scores and an appropriate level of difficulty to be provided to the player (e.g., more skilled players may be presented with NPCs having higher match scores).
The system may generate NPC profiles analogous to player profiles. In this manner, the system may analyze NPCs in a manner similar to player analysis. The system may therefore continually improve NPC performance and selection based on NPC profiles, which may take into account NPC logic, strategy, and/or other NPC characteristics.
In an operation 502, a potential match may be determined. The potential match may include two or more players that may be grouped to play in a gameplay session.
In an operation 504, a match variable related to a potential match may be obtained. A match variable may relate to at least one player's characteristic that may influence whether a player enjoys gameplay while placed in a match. The value of a match variable may be quantified in a normalized manner. For example, a given match variable may be assigned with a value that ranges from, without limitation, 1 to 10. In the examples that follow, 10 will be considered the “best” value and 1 will be considered the “worst” value—although the converse may be true and other values may be used as well. Furthermore, the examples of latency and player preference will be used, although other match variables may be (and typically are) used as well.
A value of a match variable may refer to the potential match as a whole, which may be determined differently for different match variables. For example, a latency match variable may describe an average latency of all players in a potential match such that different ranges of latency are assigned with values ranging from 0 to 10. High latency times (e.g., longer delays) may be associated with a value closer to (or at) 0, while low latency times (e.g., shorter delays) may be associated with a value closer to (or at) 10. The particular arrangement of such values may be predefined and/or tuned as described herein.
In another example, a value for a player preference match variable may be assigned with a value that depends on whether preferences of each of the players in a potential match are fulfilled by the potential match. For example, if all player preferences have been fulfilled (e.g., they will play in the potential match as a player role that they each prefer), then the value for the player preference match variable may be set to 10, while if no player preferences have been fulfilled, then the player preference match variable may be set to zero. The range between zero and 10 may be determined in various ways, such as being dependent on a number of players in the potential match whose player preferences have been fulfilled.
In this manner, each match variable may be associated with a normalized value in order to generate an overall match score for the potential match.
In an operation 506, one or more coefficients may be obtained and applied to the match variables. For example, each match variable may be associated with its corresponding coefficient, which may be defined by game developer, defined by a player, tuned automatically by the system, and/or otherwise defined using a value. The coefficient may be applied to its corresponding match variable to weight, or determine a relative importance of, the corresponding match variable. The coefficient may be expressed as a fraction, a multiplier, and/or other manner to indicate a relative importance of a match variable.
For example, the coefficient may be expressed as a fraction of one such that a sum of all coefficients for all match variables equals one. Assuming only two equally-weighted match variables are used (although other numbers of match variables may be and are typically used), each coefficient may be assigned with a value of 0.5 (e.g., one-half). If a first match variable is three times as important as a second match variable, a first coefficient associated with the first match variable may be assigned with a value of 0.75 while a second coefficient associated with the second match variable may be assigned with a value of 0.25. In this manner, the value of match variables may be weighted with respect to one another.
In an operation 508, a weighted value may be determined for a match variable based on the value of the match variable and its coefficient.
In an operation 510, a determination of whether more match variables are to be considered may be made. If more match variables are to be considered, processing may return to operation 504, where the next match variable to considered may be obtained.
In an operation 512, responsive to a determination that no more match variables are to be considered, a match score for the potential match may be determined based on the weighted values of the match variables. Continuing the foregoing example, a given match score may range from zero to ten. For example, if a latency score is 8 and its coefficient is 0.75, then the weighted value for latency may be 6 (8×0.75). If a player preference score is 4 and its coefficient is 0.25, then the weighted value for player preference may be 1 (4×0.25). The overall match score may be 7 (6+1).
In implementations where a player may tune coefficients, a match score may be custom-generated for that player (because of the use of coefficients specific for that player). Other players in the potential match may be provided with their own custom match scores if they tuned the coefficients as well. Otherwise, a system and/or game provided coefficient may be used.
In an operation 514, a determination of whether the match score crosses a predetermined match score threshold may be made. If the match score does not cross the predetermined match score threshold, then the potential match may no longer be considered in an operation 516. On the other hand, if the match score crosses the predetermined match score threshold, then the potential match may be automatically selected or provided to the player(s) in the potential match for selection in an operation 518. In an implementation, processing may then proceed to portion “A” of process 600, which is illustrated in
In an operation 602, one or more quality factors may be obtained in relation to a selected match (e.g., a match that has been used to initiate a gameplay session). A quality factor may include an observable metric that indicates a player's level of satisfaction with gameplay. The one or more quality factors may be obtained during a gameplay session associated with the selected match to assess a quality of the match during gameplay and/or after the gameplay session has been completed. Each quality factor may be normalized on some predetermined scale (e.g., having values ranging from zero to 10).
In an operation 604, a quality score may be generated based on the one or more quality factors. For example, the one or more quality factors may be summed (or otherwise calculated) to obtain a quality score.
In an operation 606, a determination of whether the quality score crosses a threshold quality score may be made.
In an operation 608, if the quality score does not cross a threshold quality score, a determination that a quality of the match was poor (e.g., undesirable) may be made. In other words, a match may be determined to be unsatisfying for the players involved in the match based on observations and/or analysis of objective metrics associated with a gameplay session for which the match was made. In some instances, a quality score for each individual player in a given session may be generated (as described herein with respect to generating quality scores) and assessed. In this example, individual player statistics may be analyzed for each given match (which may be aggregated with other individual player statistics from other matches). As such, players in a given match may be assessed as a unit and/or individually.
In an implementation, a threshold score may not be used. Instead, one or more ranges of values may correspond to different levels of “poor” quality matches and/or one or more ranges of values may correspond to different levels of “good” quality matches.
In an operation 610, one or more match variables and/or one or more coefficients used to generate a match score for the match may be identified and correlated with a poor quality match. In this manner, process 600 may identify match variables and/or coefficients that tend to result in poor quality matches.
Returning to operation 606, if the quality score crosses a threshold quality score, a determination that a quality of the match was good (e.g., desirable) may be made in an operation 612. In other words, a match may be determined to be satisfying for the players involved in the match based on observations and/or analysis of objective metrics associated with a gameplay session.
In an operation 614, one or more match variables and/or one or more coefficients used to generate a match score for the match may be identified and correlated with a good quality match. In this manner, process 600 may identify match variables and/or coefficients that tend to result in good quality matches.
In an operation 616, the one or more variables and/or the one or more coefficients may be tuned based on whether each are associated with a poor quality match or a good quality match. In addition, a level of tuning may be based on a level of poor quality or a level of good quality.
In an operation 702, first availability information for a first player may be obtained. The first availability information may indicate a time and/or date that a first player will be available to join a gameplay session. For example, the first availability information may include, without limitation, information indicating that the first player is: waiting to be matched, not yet logged on but predicted to login at the indicated time/date, is currently playing in a gameplay session that is expected to end at the indicated time/date, and/or will otherwise become available.
In an operation 704, a subsequent gameplay session that is relevant to (e.g., will likely interest) the first player may be identified based on a game profile, a player profile, and/or other information.
In an operation 706, a soft reservation may be made for the first player to play in the subsequent gameplay session.
In an operation 708, second availability information for a second player who may be interested in playing with the first player and/or playing in the subsequent gameplay session may be obtained. Similar to the first availability information, the second availability information may indicate a time and/or date that a second player will be available to join a gameplay session. The second player's interest in playing with the first player and/or in the subsequent gameplay session may be determined based on a game profile, a player profile, and/or other information.
In an operation 710, a soft reservation may be made for the second player to play in the subsequent gameplay session.
In an operation 712, a determination of whether the first player and the second player will become available at the same time (e.g., when the subsequent gameplay session is set to start) may be made.
In an operation 714, responsive to a determination that the first player and the second player will not become available at the same time (and at least one of the players will become available before the other), an interim gameplay session may be provided to whichever player becomes available to occupy the player until the other player becomes available. Processing may return to an operation 712, where a determination of whether the first player and the second player will become available at the same time is made.
In an operation 716, responsive to a determination that the first player and the second player will become available at the same time, the first and second players may be invited to accept the soft reservation (e.g., start a gameplay session associated with the soft reservation).
In an operation 802, an in-game item that may be relevant for (e.g., of interest to) a first player may be identified. The in-game item may be identified based on a preference of the first player (e.g., a desire to play as a sniper may cause sniper weapons to be identified), and/or a usefulness to a player (e.g., an in-game item that may be suited for a particular level that the player has repeatedly failed may be identified).
In an operation 804, a second user that has acquired (e.g., purchased), used, or otherwise possesses the in-game item may be identified.
In an operation 806, a value of a match variable and/or a coefficient related to the match variable may be tuned to cause a match score between the first player and the second player to increase (or otherwise indicate a good match) to thereby increase a likelihood (or guarantee) that the first player and the second player will be matched.
In an operation 808, the first player and the second player may be matched based on the match score such that the first player and the second player play in a gameplay session.
In an operation 810, a determination of whether the first player purchased the in-game item may be made. For example, process 800 may monitor the activity of the first player during and/or after the gameplay session or otherwise obtain purchase information of the first player.
In an operation 812, responsive to a determination that the first player purchased the in-game item, the player profile may be updated to reflect the purchase and the first player may be matched (e.g., match variables and/or coefficients tuned) to play a second gameplay session in which the in-game item is suitable to be used. For example, if the in-game item is a weapon (e.g., an accurate and powerful sniper rifle), the second gameplay session may be selected because the weapon is highly effective in the second gameplay session. Doing so may encourage the first player to make subsequent purchases due to the satisfaction of effectively using the in-game item during the second gameplay session.
In an operation 814, responsive to a determination that the first player did not purchase the in-game item, the player profile may be updated to reflect such non-purchase so that future targeted marketing of in-game items and other game-related purchases may be adjusted based on what has not been successful at enticing a given player to make a game-related purchase.
Other implementations, uses and advantages of the invention will be apparent to those skilled in the art from consideration of the specification and practice of the invention disclosed herein. The specification should be considered exemplary only, and the scope of the invention is accordingly intended to be limited only by the following claims.
This application is a continuation application of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/712,514, entitled “Matchmaking System and Method for Multiplayer Video Games” and filed on May 14, 2015, which claims priority to U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 62/020,732, filed on Jul. 3, 2014; U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 62/020,739, filed on Jul. 3, 2014; U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 62/020,743, filed on Jul. 3, 2014; and U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 62/020,750, filed on Jul. 3, 2014, the entireties of which are hereby incorporated by reference herein in their entireties. U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/712,514 is related to U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/712,541, entitled “SOFT RESERVATION SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR MULTIPLAYER VIDEO GAMES”; U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/712,566, entitled “SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR DRIVING MICROTRANSACTIONS IN MULTIPLAYER VIDEO GAMES” and issued as U.S. Pat. No. 9,789,406 on Oct. 17, 2017; and U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/712,608, entitled “GROUP COMPOSITION MATCH-MAKING SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR MULTIPLAYER VIDEO GAMES”, all of which are hereby incorporated by reference herein in their entireties.
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 4461301 | Ochs | Jul 1984 | A |
| 4908761 | Tai | Mar 1990 | A |
| 5031089 | Liu | Jul 1991 | A |
| 5058180 | Khan | Oct 1991 | A |
| 5365360 | Torres | Nov 1994 | A |
| 5371673 | Fan | Dec 1994 | A |
| 5432934 | Levin | Jul 1995 | A |
| 5442569 | Osano | Aug 1995 | A |
| 5493692 | Theimer | Feb 1996 | A |
| 5497186 | Kawasaki | Mar 1996 | A |
| 5530796 | Wang | Jun 1996 | A |
| 5539883 | Allon | Jul 1996 | A |
| 5561736 | Moore | Oct 1996 | A |
| 5563946 | Cooper | Oct 1996 | A |
| 5606702 | Diel | Feb 1997 | A |
| 5630129 | Wheat | May 1997 | A |
| 5685775 | Bakoglu | Nov 1997 | A |
| 5694616 | Johnson | Dec 1997 | A |
| 5706507 | Schloss | Jan 1998 | A |
| 5708764 | Borrel | Jan 1998 | A |
| 5726883 | Levine | Mar 1998 | A |
| 5736985 | Lection | Apr 1998 | A |
| 5736990 | Barrus | Apr 1998 | A |
| 5737416 | Cooper | Apr 1998 | A |
| 5745113 | Jordan | Apr 1998 | A |
| 5745678 | Herzberg | Apr 1998 | A |
| 5758079 | Ludwig | May 1998 | A |
| 5761083 | Brown | Jun 1998 | A |
| 5762552 | Vuong | Jun 1998 | A |
| 5768511 | Galvin | Jun 1998 | A |
| 5774668 | Choquier | Jun 1998 | A |
| 5793365 | Tang | Aug 1998 | A |
| 5825877 | Dan | Oct 1998 | A |
| 5828839 | Moncreiff | Oct 1998 | A |
| 5835692 | Cragun | Nov 1998 | A |
| 5860137 | Raz | Jan 1999 | A |
| 5877763 | Berry | Mar 1999 | A |
| 5878233 | Schloss | Mar 1999 | A |
| 5880731 | Liles | Mar 1999 | A |
| 5883628 | Mullaly | Mar 1999 | A |
| 5900879 | Berry | May 1999 | A |
| 5903266 | Berstis | May 1999 | A |
| 5903271 | Bardon | May 1999 | A |
| 5911045 | Leyba | Jun 1999 | A |
| 5920325 | Morgan | Jul 1999 | A |
| 5920692 | Nguyen | Jul 1999 | A |
| 5920848 | Schutzer | Jul 1999 | A |
| 5923324 | Berry | Jul 1999 | A |
| 5926100 | Escolar | Jul 1999 | A |
| 5933818 | Kasravi | Aug 1999 | A |
| 5938722 | Johnson | Aug 1999 | A |
| 5958014 | Cave | Sep 1999 | A |
| 5969724 | Berry | Oct 1999 | A |
| 5977979 | Clough | Nov 1999 | A |
| 5983003 | Lection | Nov 1999 | A |
| 5990887 | Redpath | Nov 1999 | A |
| 5990888 | Blades | Nov 1999 | A |
| 6006223 | Agrawal | Dec 1999 | A |
| 6008848 | Tiwari | Dec 1999 | A |
| 6009455 | Doyle | Dec 1999 | A |
| 6012096 | Link | Jan 2000 | A |
| 6014145 | Bardon | Jan 2000 | A |
| 6018734 | Zhang | Jan 2000 | A |
| 6021268 | Johnson | Feb 2000 | A |
| 6021496 | Dutcher | Feb 2000 | A |
| 6023729 | Samuel | Feb 2000 | A |
| 6025839 | Schell | Feb 2000 | A |
| 6032129 | Greef | Feb 2000 | A |
| 6049819 | Buckle | Apr 2000 | A |
| 6058266 | Megiddo | May 2000 | A |
| 6059842 | Dumarot | May 2000 | A |
| 6061722 | Lipa | May 2000 | A |
| 6067355 | Lim | May 2000 | A |
| 6069632 | Mullaly | May 2000 | A |
| 6070143 | Barney | May 2000 | A |
| 6076093 | Pickering | Jun 2000 | A |
| 6081270 | Berry | Jun 2000 | A |
| 6081271 | Bardon | Jun 2000 | A |
| 6088727 | Hosokawa | Jul 2000 | A |
| 6088732 | Smith | Jul 2000 | A |
| 6091410 | Lection | Jul 2000 | A |
| 6094196 | Berry | Jul 2000 | A |
| 6098056 | Rusnak | Aug 2000 | A |
| 6101538 | Brown | Aug 2000 | A |
| 6104406 | Berry | Aug 2000 | A |
| 6108420 | Larose | Aug 2000 | A |
| 6111581 | Berry | Aug 2000 | A |
| 6115718 | Huberman | Sep 2000 | A |
| 6134588 | Guenthner | Oct 2000 | A |
| 6138128 | Perkowitz | Oct 2000 | A |
| 6141699 | Luzzi | Oct 2000 | A |
| 6144381 | Lection | Nov 2000 | A |
| 6148294 | Beyda | Nov 2000 | A |
| 6148328 | Cuomo | Nov 2000 | A |
| 6157953 | Chang | Dec 2000 | A |
| 6177932 | Galdes | Jan 2001 | B1 |
| 6179713 | James | Jan 2001 | B1 |
| 6182067 | Presnell | Jan 2001 | B1 |
| 6185614 | Cuomo | Feb 2001 | B1 |
| 6195657 | Rucker | Feb 2001 | B1 |
| 6199067 | Geller | Mar 2001 | B1 |
| 6201881 | Masuda | Mar 2001 | B1 |
| 6212494 | Boguraev | Apr 2001 | B1 |
| 6212548 | Desimone | Apr 2001 | B1 |
| 6216098 | Clancey | Apr 2001 | B1 |
| 6222551 | Schneider | Apr 2001 | B1 |
| 6226686 | Rothschild | May 2001 | B1 |
| 6233583 | Hoth | May 2001 | B1 |
| 6249779 | Hitt | Jun 2001 | B1 |
| 6266649 | Linden | Jul 2001 | B1 |
| 6271842 | Bardon | Aug 2001 | B1 |
| 6271843 | Lection | Aug 2001 | B1 |
| 6275820 | Navin-Chandra | Aug 2001 | B1 |
| 6282547 | Hirsch | Aug 2001 | B1 |
| 6293865 | Kelly | Sep 2001 | B1 |
| 6301609 | Aravamudan et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
| 6308208 | Jung | Oct 2001 | B1 |
| 6311206 | Malkin | Oct 2001 | B1 |
| 6314465 | Paul | Nov 2001 | B1 |
| 6330281 | Mann | Dec 2001 | B1 |
| 6334127 | Bieganski | Dec 2001 | B1 |
| 6334141 | Varma | Dec 2001 | B1 |
| 6336134 | Varma | Jan 2002 | B1 |
| 6337700 | Kinoe | Jan 2002 | B1 |
| 6345264 | Breese | Feb 2002 | B1 |
| 6345287 | Fong | Feb 2002 | B1 |
| 6349091 | Li | Feb 2002 | B1 |
| 6351775 | Yu | Feb 2002 | B1 |
| 6353449 | Gregg | Mar 2002 | B1 |
| 6356297 | Cheng | Mar 2002 | B1 |
| 6360254 | Linden | Mar 2002 | B1 |
| 6363174 | Lu | Mar 2002 | B1 |
| 6370560 | Robertazzi | Apr 2002 | B1 |
| 6396513 | Helfman | May 2002 | B1 |
| 6411312 | Sheppard | Jun 2002 | B1 |
| 6418424 | Hoffberg | Jul 2002 | B1 |
| 6418462 | Xu | Jul 2002 | B1 |
| 6426757 | Smith | Jul 2002 | B1 |
| 6445389 | Bossen | Sep 2002 | B1 |
| 6452593 | Challener | Sep 2002 | B1 |
| 6462760 | Cox, Jr. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
| 6463078 | Engstrom | Oct 2002 | B1 |
| 6466550 | Foster | Oct 2002 | B1 |
| 6469712 | Hilpert, Jr. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
| 6473085 | Brock | Oct 2002 | B1 |
| 6473103 | Bailey | Oct 2002 | B1 |
| 6473597 | Johnson | Oct 2002 | B1 |
| 6476830 | Farmer | Nov 2002 | B1 |
| 6499053 | Marquette | Dec 2002 | B1 |
| 6501834 | Milewski | Dec 2002 | B1 |
| 6505208 | Kanevsky | Jan 2003 | B1 |
| 6509925 | Dermler | Jan 2003 | B1 |
| 6525731 | Suits | Feb 2003 | B1 |
| 6539415 | Mercs | Mar 2003 | B1 |
| 6549933 | Barrett | Apr 2003 | B1 |
| 6559863 | Megiddo | May 2003 | B1 |
| 6567109 | Todd | May 2003 | B1 |
| 6567813 | Zhu | May 2003 | B1 |
| 6574477 | Rathunde | Jun 2003 | B1 |
| 6580981 | Masood | Jun 2003 | B1 |
| 6594673 | Smith | Jul 2003 | B1 |
| 6601084 | Bhaskaran | Jul 2003 | B1 |
| 6618751 | Challenger | Sep 2003 | B1 |
| 6640230 | Alexander | Oct 2003 | B1 |
| 6641481 | Mai | Nov 2003 | B1 |
| 6645153 | Kroll | Nov 2003 | B2 |
| RE38375 | Herzberg Amir | Dec 2003 | E |
| 6657617 | Paolini | Dec 2003 | B2 |
| 6657642 | Bardon | Dec 2003 | B1 |
| 6684255 | Martin | Jan 2004 | B1 |
| 6717600 | Dutta | Apr 2004 | B2 |
| 6734884 | Berry | May 2004 | B1 |
| 6742032 | Castellani | May 2004 | B1 |
| 6765596 | Lection | Jul 2004 | B2 |
| 6781607 | Benham | Aug 2004 | B1 |
| 6801930 | Dionne | Oct 2004 | B1 |
| 6807562 | Pennock | Oct 2004 | B1 |
| 6819669 | Rooney | Nov 2004 | B2 |
| 6832239 | Kraft | Dec 2004 | B1 |
| 6836480 | Basso | Dec 2004 | B2 |
| 6845389 | Sen | Jan 2005 | B1 |
| 6854007 | Hammond | Feb 2005 | B1 |
| 6886026 | Hanson | Apr 2005 | B1 |
| 6901379 | Balter | May 2005 | B1 |
| 6941236 | Huelsbergen | Sep 2005 | B2 |
| 6948168 | Kuprionas | Sep 2005 | B1 |
| RE38865 | Dumarot | Nov 2005 | E |
| 6970929 | Bae | Nov 2005 | B2 |
| 6993596 | Hinton | Jan 2006 | B2 |
| 7006616 | Christofferson | Feb 2006 | B1 |
| 7028296 | Irfan | Apr 2006 | B2 |
| 7031473 | Morais | Apr 2006 | B2 |
| 7050868 | Graepel | May 2006 | B1 |
| 7062533 | Brown | Jun 2006 | B2 |
| 7089266 | Stolte | Aug 2006 | B2 |
| 7124071 | Rich | Oct 2006 | B2 |
| 7124164 | Chemtob | Oct 2006 | B1 |
| 7139792 | Mishra | Nov 2006 | B1 |
| 7143409 | Herrero | Nov 2006 | B2 |
| 7159217 | Pulsipher | Jan 2007 | B2 |
| 7185067 | Viswanath | Feb 2007 | B1 |
| 7192352 | Walker | Mar 2007 | B2 |
| 7209137 | Brokenshire | Apr 2007 | B2 |
| 7230616 | Taubin | Jun 2007 | B2 |
| 7240093 | Danieli | Jul 2007 | B1 |
| 7249123 | Elder | Jul 2007 | B2 |
| 7263511 | Bodin | Aug 2007 | B2 |
| 7278108 | Duarte | Oct 2007 | B2 |
| 7287053 | Bodin | Oct 2007 | B2 |
| 7292870 | Heredia | Nov 2007 | B2 |
| 7305438 | Christensen | Dec 2007 | B2 |
| 7308476 | Mannaru | Dec 2007 | B2 |
| 7314411 | Lannert | Jan 2008 | B2 |
| 7328242 | McCarthy | Feb 2008 | B1 |
| 7353295 | Crow | Apr 2008 | B1 |
| 7376474 | Graepel | May 2008 | B2 |
| 7383307 | Kirkland | Jun 2008 | B2 |
| 7404149 | Fox | Jul 2008 | B2 |
| 7426538 | Bodin | Sep 2008 | B2 |
| 7427980 | Partridge | Sep 2008 | B1 |
| 7428588 | Berstis | Sep 2008 | B2 |
| 7429987 | Leah | Sep 2008 | B2 |
| 7436407 | Doi | Oct 2008 | B2 |
| 7439975 | Hsu | Oct 2008 | B2 |
| 7443393 | Shen | Oct 2008 | B2 |
| 7447996 | Cox | Nov 2008 | B1 |
| 7467180 | Kaufman | Dec 2008 | B2 |
| 7467181 | McGowan | Dec 2008 | B2 |
| 7475354 | Guido | Jan 2009 | B2 |
| 7478127 | Creamer | Jan 2009 | B2 |
| 7484012 | Hinton | Jan 2009 | B2 |
| 7503007 | Goodman | Mar 2009 | B2 |
| 7506264 | Polan | Mar 2009 | B2 |
| 7509388 | Allen | Mar 2009 | B2 |
| 7515136 | Kanevsky | Apr 2009 | B1 |
| 7525964 | Astley | Apr 2009 | B2 |
| 7527191 | Takayama | May 2009 | B2 |
| 7552177 | Kessen | Jun 2009 | B2 |
| 7565650 | Bhogal | Jul 2009 | B2 |
| 7571224 | Childress | Aug 2009 | B2 |
| 7571389 | Broussard | Aug 2009 | B2 |
| 7580888 | Ur | Aug 2009 | B2 |
| 7590984 | Kaufman | Sep 2009 | B2 |
| 7596596 | Chen | Sep 2009 | B2 |
| 7614955 | Farnham | Nov 2009 | B2 |
| 7617283 | Aaron | Nov 2009 | B2 |
| 7640587 | Fox | Dec 2009 | B2 |
| 7667701 | Leah | Feb 2010 | B2 |
| 7677970 | O'Kelley, II | Mar 2010 | B2 |
| 7698656 | Srivastava | Apr 2010 | B2 |
| 7702730 | Spataro | Apr 2010 | B2 |
| 7702784 | Berstis | Apr 2010 | B2 |
| 7714867 | Doi | May 2010 | B2 |
| 7719532 | Schardt | May 2010 | B2 |
| 7719535 | Tadokoro | May 2010 | B2 |
| 7734691 | Creamer | Jun 2010 | B2 |
| 7737969 | Shen | Jun 2010 | B2 |
| 7743095 | Goldberg | Jun 2010 | B2 |
| 7747679 | Galvin | Jun 2010 | B2 |
| 7765478 | Reed | Jul 2010 | B2 |
| 7768514 | Pagan | Aug 2010 | B2 |
| 7770114 | Sriprakash | Aug 2010 | B2 |
| 7773087 | Fowler | Aug 2010 | B2 |
| 7774407 | Daly | Aug 2010 | B2 |
| 7780525 | Walker | Aug 2010 | B2 |
| 7782318 | Shearer | Aug 2010 | B2 |
| 7792263 | D Amora | Sep 2010 | B2 |
| 7792801 | Hamilton, II | Sep 2010 | B2 |
| 7796128 | Radzikowski | Sep 2010 | B2 |
| 7808500 | Shearer | Oct 2010 | B2 |
| 7814152 | McGowan | Oct 2010 | B2 |
| 7827318 | Hinton | Nov 2010 | B2 |
| 7843471 | Doan | Nov 2010 | B2 |
| 7844663 | Boutboul | Nov 2010 | B2 |
| 7844673 | Bostick | Nov 2010 | B2 |
| 7846024 | Graepel | Dec 2010 | B2 |
| 7847799 | Taubin | Dec 2010 | B2 |
| 7853594 | Elder | Dec 2010 | B2 |
| 7856469 | Chen | Dec 2010 | B2 |
| 7865393 | Leason | Jan 2011 | B2 |
| 7873485 | Castelli | Jan 2011 | B2 |
| 7882222 | Dolbier | Feb 2011 | B2 |
| 7882243 | Ivory | Feb 2011 | B2 |
| 7884819 | Kuesel | Feb 2011 | B2 |
| 7886045 | Bates | Feb 2011 | B2 |
| 7890623 | Bates | Feb 2011 | B2 |
| 7893936 | Shearer | Feb 2011 | B2 |
| 7904829 | Fox | Mar 2011 | B2 |
| 7921128 | Hamilton, II | Apr 2011 | B2 |
| 7940265 | Brown | May 2011 | B2 |
| 7945620 | Bou-Ghannam | May 2011 | B2 |
| 7945802 | Hamilton, II | May 2011 | B2 |
| 7955171 | Jorasch | Jun 2011 | B2 |
| 7970837 | Lyle | Jun 2011 | B2 |
| 7970840 | Cannon | Jun 2011 | B2 |
| 7985132 | Walker | Jul 2011 | B2 |
| 7985138 | Acharya | Jul 2011 | B2 |
| 7990387 | Hamilton, II | Aug 2011 | B2 |
| 7996164 | Hamilton, II | Aug 2011 | B2 |
| 7997987 | Johnson | Aug 2011 | B2 |
| 8001161 | Finn | Aug 2011 | B2 |
| 8004518 | Fowler | Aug 2011 | B2 |
| 8005025 | Bodin | Aug 2011 | B2 |
| 8006182 | Bates | Aug 2011 | B2 |
| 8013861 | Hamilton, II | Sep 2011 | B2 |
| 8018453 | Fowler | Sep 2011 | B2 |
| 8018462 | Bhogal | Sep 2011 | B2 |
| 8019797 | Hamilton, II | Sep 2011 | B2 |
| 8019858 | Bauchot | Sep 2011 | B2 |
| 8022948 | Garbow | Sep 2011 | B2 |
| 8022950 | Brown | Sep 2011 | B2 |
| 8026913 | Garbow | Sep 2011 | B2 |
| 8028021 | Reisinger | Sep 2011 | B2 |
| 8028022 | Brownholtz | Sep 2011 | B2 |
| 8037416 | Bates | Oct 2011 | B2 |
| 8041614 | Bhogal | Oct 2011 | B2 |
| 8046700 | Bates | Oct 2011 | B2 |
| 8051462 | Hamilton, II | Nov 2011 | B2 |
| 8055656 | Cradick | Nov 2011 | B2 |
| 8056121 | Hamilton, II | Nov 2011 | B2 |
| 8057307 | Berstis | Nov 2011 | B2 |
| 8062130 | Smith | Nov 2011 | B2 |
| 8063905 | Brown | Nov 2011 | B2 |
| 8070601 | Acharya | Dec 2011 | B2 |
| 8082245 | Bates | Dec 2011 | B2 |
| 8085267 | Brown | Dec 2011 | B2 |
| 8089481 | Shearer | Jan 2012 | B2 |
| 8092288 | Theis | Jan 2012 | B2 |
| 8095881 | Reisinger | Jan 2012 | B2 |
| 8099338 | Betzler | Jan 2012 | B2 |
| 8099668 | Garbow | Jan 2012 | B2 |
| 8102334 | Brown | Jan 2012 | B2 |
| 8103640 | Lo | Jan 2012 | B2 |
| 8103959 | Cannon | Jan 2012 | B2 |
| 8105165 | Karstens | Jan 2012 | B2 |
| 8108774 | Finn | Jan 2012 | B2 |
| 8113959 | De Judicibus | Feb 2012 | B2 |
| 8117551 | Cheng | Feb 2012 | B2 |
| 8125485 | Brown | Feb 2012 | B2 |
| 8127235 | Haggar | Feb 2012 | B2 |
| 8127236 | Hamilton, II | Feb 2012 | B2 |
| 8128487 | Hamilton, II | Mar 2012 | B2 |
| 8131740 | Cradick | Mar 2012 | B2 |
| 8132235 | Bussani | Mar 2012 | B2 |
| 8134560 | Bates | Mar 2012 | B2 |
| 8139060 | Brown | Mar 2012 | B2 |
| 8139780 | Shearer | Mar 2012 | B2 |
| 8140340 | Bhogal | Mar 2012 | B2 |
| 8140620 | Creamer | Mar 2012 | B2 |
| 8140978 | Betzler | Mar 2012 | B2 |
| 8140982 | Hamilton, II | Mar 2012 | B2 |
| 8145676 | Bhogal | Mar 2012 | B2 |
| 8145725 | Dawson | Mar 2012 | B2 |
| 8149241 | Do | Apr 2012 | B2 |
| 8151191 | Nicol, II | Apr 2012 | B2 |
| 8156184 | Kurata | Apr 2012 | B2 |
| 8165350 | Fuhrmann | Apr 2012 | B2 |
| 8171407 | Huang | May 2012 | B2 |
| 8171408 | Dawson | May 2012 | B2 |
| 8171559 | Hamilton, II | May 2012 | B2 |
| 8174541 | Greene | May 2012 | B2 |
| 8176421 | Dawson | May 2012 | B2 |
| 8176422 | Bergman | May 2012 | B2 |
| 8184092 | Cox | May 2012 | B2 |
| 8184116 | Finn | May 2012 | B2 |
| 8185450 | McVey | May 2012 | B2 |
| 8185829 | Cannon | May 2012 | B2 |
| 8187067 | Hamilton, II | May 2012 | B2 |
| 8199145 | Hamilton, II | Jun 2012 | B2 |
| 8203561 | Carter | Jun 2012 | B2 |
| 8214335 | Hamilton, II | Jul 2012 | B2 |
| 8214433 | Dawson | Jul 2012 | B2 |
| 8214750 | Hamilton, II | Jul 2012 | B2 |
| 8214751 | Dawson | Jul 2012 | B2 |
| 8217953 | Comparan | Jul 2012 | B2 |
| 8219616 | Dawson | Jul 2012 | B2 |
| 8230045 | Kawachiya | Jul 2012 | B2 |
| 8230338 | Dugan | Jul 2012 | B2 |
| 8233005 | Finn | Jul 2012 | B2 |
| 8234234 | Shearer | Jul 2012 | B2 |
| 8234579 | Do | Jul 2012 | B2 |
| 8239775 | Beverland | Aug 2012 | B2 |
| 8241131 | Bhogal | Aug 2012 | B2 |
| 8245241 | Hamilton, II | Aug 2012 | B2 |
| 8245283 | Dawson | Aug 2012 | B2 |
| 8265253 | D Amora | Sep 2012 | B2 |
| 8310497 | Comparan | Nov 2012 | B2 |
| 8334871 | Hamilton, II | Dec 2012 | B2 |
| 8360886 | Karstens | Jan 2013 | B2 |
| 8364804 | Childress | Jan 2013 | B2 |
| 8425326 | Chudley | Apr 2013 | B2 |
| 8442946 | Hamilton, II | May 2013 | B2 |
| 8489925 | Antukh | Jul 2013 | B1 |
| 8496531 | Youm | Jul 2013 | B2 |
| 8506372 | Chudley | Aug 2013 | B2 |
| 8514249 | Hamilton, II | Aug 2013 | B2 |
| 8554841 | Kurata | Oct 2013 | B2 |
| 8607142 | Bergman | Dec 2013 | B2 |
| 8607356 | Hamilton, II | Dec 2013 | B2 |
| 8624903 | Hamilton, II | Jan 2014 | B2 |
| 8626836 | Dawson | Jan 2014 | B2 |
| 8692835 | Hamilton, II | Apr 2014 | B2 |
| 8696465 | Gatto | Apr 2014 | B2 |
| 8721412 | Chudley | May 2014 | B2 |
| 8827816 | Bhogal | Sep 2014 | B2 |
| 8838640 | Bates | Sep 2014 | B2 |
| 8849917 | Dawson | Sep 2014 | B2 |
| 8911296 | Chudley | Dec 2014 | B2 |
| 8992316 | Smith | Mar 2015 | B2 |
| 9083654 | Dawson | Jul 2015 | B2 |
| 9152914 | Haggar | Oct 2015 | B2 |
| 9205328 | Bansi | Dec 2015 | B2 |
| 9286731 | Hamilton, II | Mar 2016 | B2 |
| 9299080 | Dawson | Mar 2016 | B2 |
| 9364746 | Chudley | Jun 2016 | B2 |
| 9525746 | Bates | Dec 2016 | B2 |
| 9583109 | Kurata | Feb 2017 | B2 |
| 9682324 | Bansi | Jun 2017 | B2 |
| 9764244 | Bansi | Sep 2017 | B2 |
| 9789406 | Marr | Oct 2017 | B2 |
| 9795887 | Lin | Oct 2017 | B2 |
| 9808722 | Kawachiya | Nov 2017 | B2 |
| 9827488 | Pearce | Nov 2017 | B2 |
| 9942013 | Malladi | Apr 2018 | B2 |
| 20010032240 | Malone | Oct 2001 | A1 |
| 20020002514 | Kamachi | Jan 2002 | A1 |
| 20020007319 | Yu | Jan 2002 | A1 |
| 20020026388 | Roebuck | Feb 2002 | A1 |
| 20020035480 | Gordon | Mar 2002 | A1 |
| 20020035593 | Salim | Mar 2002 | A1 |
| 20020043568 | Hess | Apr 2002 | A1 |
| 20020065870 | Baehr-Jones | May 2002 | A1 |
| 20020095586 | Doyle | Jul 2002 | A1 |
| 20020096831 | Nakayama | Jul 2002 | A1 |
| 20020097856 | Wullert | Jul 2002 | A1 |
| 20020116466 | Trevithick | Aug 2002 | A1 |
| 20020124137 | Ulrich | Sep 2002 | A1 |
| 20020130904 | Becker | Sep 2002 | A1 |
| 20020135618 | Maes | Sep 2002 | A1 |
| 20020169665 | Hughes | Nov 2002 | A1 |
| 20020184373 | Maes | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20020184391 | Phillips | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20020188688 | Bice | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20030008712 | Poulin | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030014297 | Kaufman | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030032476 | Walker | Feb 2003 | A1 |
| 20030050977 | Puthenkulam | Mar 2003 | A1 |
| 20030055892 | Huitema | Mar 2003 | A1 |
| 20030056002 | Trethewey | Mar 2003 | A1 |
| 20030076353 | Blackstock | Apr 2003 | A1 |
| 20030101343 | Eaton | May 2003 | A1 |
| 20030112952 | Brown | Jun 2003 | A1 |
| 20030135621 | Romagnoli | Jul 2003 | A1 |
| 20030141977 | Brown | Jul 2003 | A1 |
| 20030145128 | Baird | Jul 2003 | A1 |
| 20030149675 | Ansari | Aug 2003 | A1 |
| 20030158827 | Ansari | Aug 2003 | A1 |
| 20030177187 | Levine | Sep 2003 | A1 |
| 20030195957 | Banginwar | Oct 2003 | A1 |
| 20030210265 | Haimberg | Nov 2003 | A1 |
| 20040014514 | Yacenda | Jan 2004 | A1 |
| 20040054667 | Kake | Mar 2004 | A1 |
| 20040059781 | Yoakum | Mar 2004 | A1 |
| 20040078432 | Manber | Apr 2004 | A1 |
| 20040078596 | Kent | Apr 2004 | A1 |
| 20040088303 | Elder | May 2004 | A1 |
| 20040097287 | Postrel | May 2004 | A1 |
| 20040103079 | Tokusho | May 2004 | A1 |
| 20040113756 | Mollenkopf | Jun 2004 | A1 |
| 20040127277 | Walker | Jul 2004 | A1 |
| 20040128181 | Zurko | Jul 2004 | A1 |
| 20040172339 | Snelgrove | Sep 2004 | A1 |
| 20040174392 | Bjoernsen | Sep 2004 | A1 |
| 20040186886 | Galli et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
| 20040205134 | Digate | Oct 2004 | A1 |
| 20040210627 | Kroening | Oct 2004 | A1 |
| 20040228291 | Huslak | Nov 2004 | A1 |
| 20040244006 | Kaufman | Dec 2004 | A1 |
| 20040260771 | Gusler et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
| 20050015571 | Kaufman | Jan 2005 | A1 |
| 20050021484 | Bodin | Jan 2005 | A1 |
| 20050027696 | Swaminathan | Feb 2005 | A1 |
| 20050050137 | Bodin | Mar 2005 | A1 |
| 20050060368 | Wang | Mar 2005 | A1 |
| 20050071428 | Khakoo | Mar 2005 | A1 |
| 20050071462 | Bodin | Mar 2005 | A1 |
| 20050080859 | Lake | Apr 2005 | A1 |
| 20050091380 | Gonen | Apr 2005 | A1 |
| 20050097440 | Lusk | May 2005 | A1 |
| 20050113164 | Buecheler | May 2005 | A1 |
| 20050132009 | Solie | Jun 2005 | A1 |
| 20050138108 | Galvin | Jun 2005 | A1 |
| 20050149620 | Kirkland | Jul 2005 | A1 |
| 20050161878 | Nally | Jul 2005 | A1 |
| 20050165893 | Feinberg | Jul 2005 | A1 |
| 20050216346 | Kusumoto | Sep 2005 | A1 |
| 20050223075 | Swearingen et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
| 20050246711 | Berstis | Nov 2005 | A1 |
| 20050277472 | Gillan | Dec 2005 | A1 |
| 20060003305 | Kelmar | Jan 2006 | A1 |
| 20060004659 | Hutchison | Jan 2006 | A1 |
| 20060026253 | Kessen | Feb 2006 | A1 |
| 20060031322 | Kessen | Feb 2006 | A1 |
| 20060031326 | Ovenden | Feb 2006 | A1 |
| 20060036688 | McMahan | Feb 2006 | A1 |
| 20060121990 | O'Kelley, II | Jun 2006 | A1 |
| 20060128460 | Muir | Jun 2006 | A1 |
| 20060129643 | Nielson | Jun 2006 | A1 |
| 20060155813 | Dietz et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
| 20060161852 | Chen | Jul 2006 | A1 |
| 20060178968 | Jung | Aug 2006 | A1 |
| 20060184260 | Graepel | Aug 2006 | A1 |
| 20060190591 | Bobde | Aug 2006 | A1 |
| 20060252526 | Walker | Nov 2006 | A1 |
| 20060258463 | Cugno | Nov 2006 | A1 |
| 20070026934 | Herbrich | Feb 2007 | A1 |
| 20070066403 | Conkwright | Mar 2007 | A1 |
| 20070073582 | Jung | Mar 2007 | A1 |
| 20070106526 | Jung | May 2007 | A1 |
| 20070111789 | van Deursen | May 2007 | A1 |
| 20070112624 | Jung | May 2007 | A1 |
| 20070112706 | Herbrich | May 2007 | A1 |
| 20070117623 | Nelson | May 2007 | A1 |
| 20070130001 | Jung | Jun 2007 | A1 |
| 20070168444 | Chen | Jul 2007 | A1 |
| 20070168447 | Chen | Jul 2007 | A1 |
| 20070173323 | Johnson | Jul 2007 | A1 |
| 20070180040 | Etgen | Aug 2007 | A1 |
| 20070265718 | Graepel | Nov 2007 | A1 |
| 20070281285 | Jayaweera | Dec 2007 | A1 |
| 20070298867 | Huang | Dec 2007 | A1 |
| 20080019353 | Foote | Jan 2008 | A1 |
| 20080059304 | Kimsey | Mar 2008 | A1 |
| 20080064467 | Reiner | Mar 2008 | A1 |
| 20080113815 | Weingardt | May 2008 | A1 |
| 20080126350 | Shoemaker | May 2008 | A1 |
| 20080155019 | Wallace | Jun 2008 | A1 |
| 20080176655 | James | Jul 2008 | A1 |
| 20080207329 | Wallace | Aug 2008 | A1 |
| 20080214287 | Lutnick | Sep 2008 | A1 |
| 20080242420 | Graepel | Oct 2008 | A1 |
| 20080254893 | Patel | Oct 2008 | A1 |
| 20080268943 | Jacob | Oct 2008 | A1 |
| 20080270605 | Berstis | Oct 2008 | A1 |
| 20080270916 | Chen | Oct 2008 | A1 |
| 20080301405 | Kaufman | Dec 2008 | A1 |
| 20090005172 | Shibahara | Jan 2009 | A1 |
| 20090075738 | Pearce | Mar 2009 | A1 |
| 20090088233 | O'Rourke | Apr 2009 | A1 |
| 20090113448 | Smith | Apr 2009 | A1 |
| 20090137320 | Kimura | May 2009 | A1 |
| 20090253494 | Fitch | Oct 2009 | A1 |
| 20090325711 | Bronstein | Dec 2009 | A1 |
| 20100304839 | Johnson | Dec 2010 | A1 |
| 20100306672 | McEniry | Dec 2010 | A1 |
| 20110190063 | Kajii | Aug 2011 | A1 |
| 20120009997 | Youm | Jan 2012 | A1 |
| 20120010734 | Youm | Jan 2012 | A1 |
| 20120021823 | Youm | Jan 2012 | A1 |
| 20120021825 | Harp | Jan 2012 | A1 |
| 20120064968 | Youm | Mar 2012 | A1 |
| 20120122552 | Youm | May 2012 | A1 |
| 20130225260 | Cudak | Aug 2013 | A1 |
| 20130252737 | Mescon | Sep 2013 | A1 |
| 20130296046 | Mianji | Nov 2013 | A1 |
| 20140004955 | Nahari | Jan 2014 | A1 |
| 20140004960 | Soti | Jan 2014 | A1 |
| 20140011595 | Muller | Jan 2014 | A1 |
| 20140162763 | Kim | Jun 2014 | A1 |
| 20140162781 | Butler | Jun 2014 | A1 |
| 20140274402 | Michel | Sep 2014 | A1 |
| 20140344725 | Bates | Nov 2014 | A1 |
| 20140349753 | Imai | Nov 2014 | A1 |
| 20150031426 | Alloway | Jan 2015 | A1 |
| 20150038233 | Rom | Feb 2015 | A1 |
| 20150310698 | Polis | Oct 2015 | A1 |
| 20160001181 | Marr | Jan 2016 | A1 |
| 20160001182 | Marr | Jan 2016 | A1 |
| 20160001186 | Marr | Jan 2016 | A1 |
| 20160005270 | Marr | Jan 2016 | A1 |
| 20160067611 | Ware | Mar 2016 | A1 |
| 20160067612 | Ntoulas | Mar 2016 | A1 |
| 20160191671 | Dawson | Jun 2016 | A1 |
| 20160296840 | Kaewell | Oct 2016 | A1 |
| 20180169515 | Rice | Jun 2018 | A1 |
| Number | Date | Country |
|---|---|---|
| 768367 | Mar 2004 | AU |
| 2005215048 | Oct 2011 | AU |
| 2143874 | Jun 2000 | CA |
| 2292678 | Jul 2005 | CA |
| 2552135 | Jul 2013 | CA |
| 1334650 | Feb 2002 | CN |
| 1202652 | Oct 2002 | CN |
| 1141641 | Mar 2004 | CN |
| 1494679 | May 2004 | CN |
| 1219384 | Sep 2005 | CN |
| 1307544 | Mar 2007 | CN |
| 100407675 | Jul 2008 | CN |
| 100423016 | Oct 2008 | CN |
| 100557637 | Nov 2009 | CN |
| 101001678 | May 2010 | CN |
| 101436242 | Dec 2010 | CN |
| 101801482 | Dec 2014 | CN |
| 668583 | Aug 1995 | EP |
| 0627728 | Sep 2000 | EP |
| 0717337 | Aug 2001 | EP |
| 1207694 | May 2002 | EP |
| 1209849 | May 2002 | EP |
| 0679977 | Oct 2002 | EP |
| 0679978 | Mar 2003 | EP |
| 0890924 | Sep 2003 | EP |
| 1377902 | Aug 2004 | EP |
| 0813132 | Jan 2005 | EP |
| 1380133 | Mar 2005 | EP |
| 1021021 | Sep 2005 | EP |
| 0930584 | Oct 2005 | EP |
| 0883087 | Aug 2007 | EP |
| 1176828 | Oct 2007 | EP |
| 2076888 | Jul 2015 | EP |
| 2339938 | Oct 2002 | GB |
| 2352154 | Jul 2003 | GB |
| H11191097 | Apr 1999 | JP |
| 11191097 | Jul 1999 | JP |
| 3033956 | Apr 2000 | JP |
| 3124916 | Jan 2001 | JP |
| 2001119403 | Apr 2001 | JP |
| 3177221 | Jun 2001 | JP |
| 2001204973 | Jul 2001 | JP |
| 3199231 | Aug 2001 | JP |
| 2001230883 | Aug 2001 | JP |
| 3210558 | Sep 2001 | JP |
| 3275935 | Feb 2002 | JP |
| 3361745 | Jan 2003 | JP |
| 3368188 | Jan 2003 | JP |
| 3470955 | Sep 2003 | JP |
| 3503774 | Dec 2003 | JP |
| 2004062539 | Feb 2004 | JP |
| 3575598 | Jul 2004 | JP |
| 3579823 | Jul 2004 | JP |
| 3579154 | Oct 2004 | JP |
| 3701773 | Oct 2005 | JP |
| 3777161 | Mar 2006 | JP |
| 3914430 | Feb 2007 | JP |
| 3942090 | Apr 2007 | JP |
| 3962361 | May 2007 | JP |
| 4009235 | Sep 2007 | JP |
| 4225376 | Dec 2008 | JP |
| 4653075 | Dec 2010 | JP |
| 5063698 | Aug 2012 | JP |
| 5159375 | Mar 2013 | JP |
| 5352200 | Nov 2013 | JP |
| 555072062 | Jul 2014 | JP |
| 2015002839 | Jan 2015 | JP |
| 5734566 | Jun 2015 | JP |
| 20020038229 | May 2002 | KR |
| 20030039019 | May 2003 | KR |
| 117864 | Aug 2004 | MY |
| 55396 | Dec 1998 | SG |
| 424213 | Mar 2001 | TW |
| 527825 | Apr 2003 | TW |
| 0060444 | Oct 2000 | WO |
| 0062231 | Oct 2000 | WO |
| 0137162 | May 2001 | WO |
| 0201455 | Jan 2002 | WO |
| 0203645 | Jan 2002 | WO |
| 2002073457 | Sep 2002 | WO |
| 20020087156 | Oct 2002 | WO |
| 03044755 | May 2003 | WO |
| 03049459 | Jun 2003 | WO |
| 03058518 | Jul 2003 | WO |
| 2004086212 | Oct 2004 | WO |
| 2005079538 | Sep 2005 | WO |
| 2007101785 | Sep 2007 | WO |
| 2008037599 | Apr 2008 | WO |
| 2008074627 | Jun 2008 | WO |
| 2008095767 | Aug 2008 | WO |
| 2009037257 | Mar 2009 | WO |
| 2009104564 | Aug 2009 | WO |
| 2010096738 | Aug 2010 | WO |
| Entry |
|---|
| Ma et al., “A Scalable Parallel Cell-Projection Volume Rendering Algorithm for Three-Dimensional Unstructured Data”, IEEE 1997, pp. 1-10. |
| Hassen et al., “A Task-and Data-Parallel Programming Language Based on Shared Objects,” ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, vol. 20, No. 6, Nov. 1998, pp. 1131-1170. |
| Y. Zhao et al., “A 3D virtual shopping mall that has the intelligent virtual purchasing guider and cooperative purchasing functionalities”, CSCWD 2004—8th International Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work in Design—Proceedings, 2004, p. 381-385. |
| V. Stojanovic, “Virtual boutique-try clothes on-line”, 5th International Conference on Telecommunications in Modern Satellite, Cable and Broadcasting Service. TELSIKS 2001. Proceedings of Papers (Cat. No. 01EX517), 2001, pt. 2, p. 802-3 vol. 2. |
| Kautz, H., B. Selman, M. Shah.. “Referral Web: Combining Social Networks and Collaborative Filtering”. Communications of the ACM, vol. 40, No. 3, Mar. 1997. |
| Schwartz, M. F., D. C. M. Wood. “Discovering shared interests among people using graph analysis of global electronic mail traffic”. Department of Computer Science, University of Colorado, Boulder CO. Oct. 1992. |
| Wellman, B. “For a social network analysis of computer networks: a sociological perspective on collaborative work and virtual community”. Proceedings of the 1996 conference on ACM SIGCPR/SIGMIS. 1-11. |
| Qureshi, S. “Supporting electronic group processes: a social perspective”. Proceedings of the 1995 ACM SIGCPR Conference on Supporting teams, groups, and learning inside the IS function. ACM Press. 24-34. |
| Ackerman, M.S., B. Starr. “Social activity indicators: interface components for CSCW systems”. Proceedings of the 8th ACM Symposium on User Interface and Software Technology. ACM Press. 159-168, Nov. 14-17, 1995. |
| Garton, L., C. Haythornthwaite, B. Wellman. “Studying on-line social networks in Doing Internet Research”, Jun. 1997. |
| Srivastava, Jaidepp, Robert Cooley, Mukund Deshpande, Pang-Ning Tan. “Web Usage Mining: Discovery and Applications of Usage Patterns from Web Data”. SIGKDD Explorations, vol. 1, Issue 2. Jan. 2000. 12-23. |
| Wang, Y. “Web Mining and Knowledge Discovery of Usage Patterns”. CS748T Project (Part I) Feb. 2000. |
| Sack, W. “Conversation Map: a content-based Usenet newsgroup browser”. Proceedings of the 2000 International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. ACM Press. 233-240. |
| Feldman, R. “Mining unstructured data”. Tutorial notes for ACK SIGKDD 1999. ACM Press. 182-236. |
| International Search Report as Published as WO2005/079538 in corresponding international application No. PCT/US2005/005550, dated Jul. 5, 2006. |
| IBM developer Works, OptimalGrid—autonomic computing on the Grid, James H. Kaufman; Tobin J. Lehman; Glenn Deen; and John Thomas, Jun. 2003. |
| IBM, Transcoding: Extending e-business to new environments, Britton et al., Sep. 22, 2000. |
| Duong et al; “A dynamic load sharing algorithm for massivly multiplayer online games” published Sep. 28, 2003-Oct. 1, 2003.http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/iel5/8945/28322/01266179.pdf?tp=&arnumber-=1266179&isnumber=28322http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/absprintf.jsp?arnumb- er=1266179. |
| “A multi-server architecture for distributed virtual walkthrough” http://delivery.acm.org/10.1145/590000/585768/p163-ng.pdf?key1=585768&key-2=0554824911&coll=GUIDE&dl=GUIDE&CFID=41712537&CFTOKEN=50783297. Nov. 11, 2002. |
| Mauve, M., Fischer, S., and Widmer, J. 2002. A generic proxy system for networked computer games. In Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on Network and System Support for Games (Braunschweig, Germany, Apr. 16-17, 2002). NetGames '02. ACM, New York, NY, 25-28. DOI= http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/566500.566504. |
| Lee et al., “A Self-Adjusting Data Distribution Mechanism for Multidimensional Load Balancing in Multiprocessor-Based Database Systems,” Information Systems vol. 19, No. 7, pp. 549-567, 1994. |
| Feng et al., “A Parallel Hierarchical Radiosity Algorithm for Complex Scenes,” Proceedings IEEE Symposium on Parallel Rendering (PRS) '97), IEEE Computer Society Technical Committee on Computer Graphics in cooperation with ACM SIGGRAPH pp. 71-79, 1997. |
| Andert, “A Simulation of Dynamic Task Allocation in a Distributed Computer System,” Proceedings of the 1987 Winter Simulation Conference, 1987, pp. 1-9. |
| Roaming Virtual World Is a Real Trip; [Final Edition] Leslie Walker. The Washington Post. Washington, D.C.: Mar. 30, 2006. |
| E-Entrepreneurship: Learning in a Simulated Environment Salim Jiwa, Dawn Lavelle, Arjun Rose. Journal of Electronic Commerce in Organizations. Hershey: Jul.-Sep. 2005. vol. 3, Iss. 3. |
| “Universally Unique Identifier”, 2006 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UUID). |
| K. Loesing et al., “Privacy-aware presence management in instant messaging systems”, Distributed & Mobile Syst. Group, Otto-Friedrich-Univ. Germany, Proceedings. 20th International Parallel and Distributed Processing Symposium Rhodes Island, Greece; (IEEE Cat. No. 06TH8860), 2006, 8 pp. |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20200114268 A1 | Apr 2020 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 62020732 | Jul 2014 | US | |
| 62020750 | Jul 2014 | US | |
| 62020743 | Jul 2014 | US | |
| 62020739 | Jul 2014 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Parent | 14712514 | May 2015 | US |
| Child | 16397599 | US |
