Your first mistake is believing anything Phil said as even slightly remorseful. Executives are full of shit and emotions for them is an act. These layoffs were probably planned months in advance and it’s not like he can publicly applaud them, anyway.
It wasn’t that difficult of a call. Layoffs are common after buyouts like these. I am surprised they didn’t just blame it on “redundant roles”. (It was overused during the pandemic, I suppose.)
The points you make are the exact reason why people are looking at this patent in a funny way.
What they are describing in the patent is basically a save game or checkpoints for subchapters in a game. This is not innovative or new and that is the problem. You can’t patent something that can already be considered public domain or common practice.
It’s very much a big deal if this has been done somewhere else. The patent is obscure enough to look unique but it common enough to start years long legal battles.
On reading the patent, it is specifically referencing streamed game checkpoints. That is, believe it or not, very different than save games stored locally. Still, I find it hard to believe that NVidia, Google or Nintendo wouldn’t have a patent for that already. If not, it may still be considered common use.
The devil is in the details for this issue. Is it really a new thing or is it “reverse” patent trolling?
By pure chance, I am watching Edge of Tomorrow as we type. (It’s a Tom Cruise time loop movie, if you haven’t seen it.)
A game with a story line built around that concept would be very interesting, for sure. However, the old Sierra adventure games came to mind, specifically Space Quest and Leisure Suit Larry, where you just had to keep trying different things until you didn’t die. It was fun back in the day, but it got old really quick.
Implemention in a sports game is a cool idea, though.
This seems suspiciously like a “save game” feature. Many games even auto-save which functions suspiciously like what they are describing as a “trigger point”.
While I am sure this is new and innovative, it still reminds me of when pyramid schemes mostly converted to MLM terminology. I had a friend that tried to convince me that MLM wasn’t a pyramid. So, I had him draw their sales hierarchy on a sheet of paper for me…
I have no clue. VR has its uses, but it absolutely has no place in my daily life like the zuck wants to believe.
There would be more sympathy for Meta of they actually produced something innovative, but they aren’t. The screens and the lenses might be getting better and the device might be getting a few ounces lighter, but that is about it. Maybe augmented reality is getting a bit better? Whatever they are doing, it can’t justify the billions they have spent on it.