U.S. patent application number 13/048235 was filed with the patent office on 2011-09-22 for social networking word game.
Invention is credited to Michael Helman Brook, Lun-Shin Yuen.
Application Number | 20110230246 13/048235 |
Document ID | / |
Family ID | 44647646 |
Filed Date | 2011-09-22 |
United States Patent
Application |
20110230246 |
Kind Code |
A1 |
Brook; Michael Helman ; et
al. |
September 22, 2011 |
Social networking word game
Abstract
A social networking word game that features a set of letters
generated randomly from a list of player-associated names or themed
words, with letter values determined by the ordinal position of the
letter in the name or word, wherein the player is presented with a
set of these randomly generated letters and corresponding values
and must within a given time limit and a given point system,
assemble the highest scoring single word or words. Each player's
unique game content may in turn be used to generate new instances
of the game. The game can be played as part of a community of
players, where each player's unique sub-community is managed by a
server, which handles player-to-player challenges and the
presentation of game instances. The client side collects game data,
the server side processes this data, and then makes it available to
the community at large.
Inventors: |
Brook; Michael Helman; (Palo
Alto, CA) ; Yuen; Lun-Shin; (Palo Alto, CA) |
Family ID: |
44647646 |
Appl. No.: |
13/048235 |
Filed: |
March 15, 2011 |
Related U.S. Patent Documents
|
|
|
|
|
|
Application
Number |
Filing Date |
Patent Number |
|
|
61315467 |
Mar 19, 2010 |
|
|
|
Current U.S.
Class: |
463/9 |
Current CPC
Class: |
A63F 13/46 20140902;
A63F 13/80 20140902; A63F 2003/0428 20130101; A63F 2300/8064
20130101; A63F 13/65 20140902; A63F 2300/61 20130101; A63F 3/0421
20130101; A63F 3/0423 20130101; A63F 2011/0062 20130101; A63F 13/44
20140902 |
Class at
Publication: |
463/9 |
International
Class: |
A63F 9/24 20060101
A63F009/24 |
Claims
1. In a word game of the type comprising, a set of letters
generated randomly from a list of names or words, with letter
values determined by the ordinal position of the letter in the name
or word, wherein the player is presented with a set of these
randomly generated letters and corresponding values and must within
a given time limit and a given point system, assemble the highest
scoring single word or words, the improvements in combination: A)
player chooses the base names or words from which the random letter
and ordinal value is selected, which could for example be a subset
of a list of the player's friends on a social networking site,
player's contacts on a cell phone, or a themed list of names or
words (e.g. U.S. Presidents) B) game generates a set of letters and
ordinal values from the list of base names or words provided by the
player, with a letter and its given ordinal value referred to here
together as a "tile" C) player submits a single optimal word or
multiple optimal words from the set of tiles D) the submitted word
is checked for validity against a dictionary list of words E) the
player is notified if the word is not listed in the dictionary F)
there may or may not be a penalty for submitting words that are not
valid dictionary words G) the dictionary may be broken into a set
of common words and a set of uncommon words, or a subset of themed
words may be created, and these may be scored differently H) if the
word is valid, the player is awarded points based on a point system
that is unique for each instance of the game; the point system may
or may not take into account the ordinal values of the letters, the
specific sequence of the letters in the word selected, the
"commonness" of the word in the specific language or compared to
other players presented with the same letter and value choices, the
length of the word, the amount of time expired before the player
submitted the word, the point value rank of the word compared to
other possible words that could have been made from the same set of
letters I) once a letter has been randomly selected for
presentation by the game, that letter may or may not be available
for selection again J) the player may or may not be credited with
bonus points for using letters from the same base name or word in
consecutive rounds; likewise, the player may or may not be
penalized for NOT using letters from the same base name or word in
consecutive rounds K) in subsequent game rounds, players can choose
to replace one or more of the the base names or words used by the
game to generate a letter with a different base name or word L) if
a player does not submit a valid word within the allotted time, the
round ends, the player scores no points or alternatively receives a
penalty, and play moves to the next round M) some keyboard
characters may be eliminated from consideration for random
selection in the case where they are not letters in the alphabet of
the dictionary used to validate words N) after completion of the
round or game, the player is presented with a list of the top
ranking common and/or uncommon words that could have been made from
the set of randomly selected letters O) the background of the
letter tiles may or may not be comprised of images representing the
base name or word itself, which could for example be the profile
picture of the player's friend whose name is used as the base name
for randomly generating the letter P) other data relating to the
base name or word itself may also be made available to players or
replay players, for example the base name or word itself, contact
or social networking information for the person, product or
organization whose base name is used, and/or additional photos or
video tied to the base name. Q) the game may be played using
dictionaries of different languages, regardless of the base names
or words from which the letters are randomly generated
2. In the game of claim 1, the specific set of letters and values
("tiles") offered in a given round may be subsequently offered to
other players A) for the purposes of comparing one player's score
to another player's score, from the same set of letters and values
(creating a "fair" replay game) B) for the purposes of generating a
round that does not require the player to choose a set of base
names or words from which the game randomly chooses a letter
3. In the game of claim 1, the original base name or words may be
used by the game to randomly generate a new set of letters with
corresponding ordinal values, to be presented to the original or
other players; this randomly generated set of letters may itself be
filtered by any number of criteria, for example presence of vowels,
before presentation to players
4. In the game of claim 1, the list of names or words from which
the letters will be randomly selected maybe itself selected
randomly selected
5. In the game of claim 1, the specific instance where the number
of randomly selected letters is 10, one from each of ten names or
words, the ordinal value of each letter is the positional value of
the letter in the name or word starting from the left, the number
of rounds in a game are 10, the length bonus is 10 points for a six
letter word, 25 points for a seven letter word, 50 points for an
eight letter word, 80 points for a nine letter word, and 120 points
for a ten letter word, and the time bonus is 1 point for every 2
seconds of the 60 seconds remaining on the timer
6. In the game of claim 1, the specific instance where the player
can enter multiple words from the set of randomly selected letters,
and receives points for the ordinal ranking of the word compared to
the lists of either or both common and uncommon words that could be
assembled from the set of randomly selected letters
7. In the game of claim 1, the player's or other players' scores
can be presented as an index of highest scoring or most recently
played games from which to select games for replay in which the
player is presented with the identical set of randomly selected
letters as the original player, and the scores are compared
8. In the game of claim 1, players may be able to create or be
presented with a subgroup of other players with which to compare
scores or challenge to play replay games
9. In the game of claim 1, the client may collect game information
regarding player's games, such as time and date of original play,
base names or words selected, words submitted, and points scored,
pass this data onto the server, where it is aggregated and made
available to other player's client applications
10. In the game of claim 1, where the same round is played
synchronously between players who are online at the same time
11. In the game of claim 1, where players must achieve a set of
game play requirements or alternatively buy access, to unlock a set
of game features
12. In the game of claim 5, where once a letter has been randomly
generated from the base name or word, that letter is no longer
available for consideration in subsequent rounds, nor is it
considered when determining the ordinal value of randomly selected
letters from the the base name or word in subsequent rounds
13. In the game of claim 5, where the player receives a "streak
bonus" of one or more points for each consecutive round that the
player uses the randomly selected letter from the same base name or
word in the valid submitted word; this streak ends when the player
fails to use the randomly selected letter from the same base name
or word in the valid submitted word, or removes the base name or
word from consideration for the subsequent round
14. In the game of claim 5, where the player receives a "streak
penalty" of one or more points for each consecutive round that the
player fails to use the randomly selected letter from the same base
name or word in the valid submitted word; this streak ends when the
player uses the randomly selected letter from the same base name or
word in the valid submitted word, or removes the base name or word
from consideration for the subsequent round
15. In the game of claim 5, the streak bonus or streak penalty may
be combined with the ordinal value of the randomly generated letter
in display of the tile value to the player or replay players
16. In the game of claim 5, where the highest player score for a
given round is combined with highest scores of teammates' rounds of
the same game to establish a team score for comparative purposes
with other teams or the team's previous and future games
Description
CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS
[0001] A provisional patent application for this invention was
filed Mar. 19, 2010 by the above inventors, priority which is
claimed. The application number of the provisional patent is
61/315,467.
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
[0002] 1. Field of Invention
[0003] This invention relates to word games, specifically social
networking word games
REFERENCES CITED
[0004] U.S. Patent Documents [0005] U.S. Pat. No. 742,498 October
1903 Roy [0006] U.S. Pat. No. 977,117 November 1910 McPherson
[0007] U.S. Pat. No. 1,012,574 December 1911 Adams [0008] U.S. Pat.
No. 1,332,249 March 1920 Feero [0009] U.S. Pat. No. 1,584,316 May
1926 Mayhew [0010] U.S. Pat. No. 2,091,555 August 1937 Messinger
[0011] U.S. Pat. No. 2,265,334 December 1941 Armbruster [0012] U.S.
Pat. No. 2,783,998 March 1957 Collins [0013] U.S. Pat. No.
3,326,557 June 1967 Berendt [0014] U.S. Pat. No. 3,333,351 August
1967 Williams [0015] U.S. Pat. No. 3,393,914 July 1968 Hill [0016]
U.S. Pat. No. 3,413,004 November 1968 Smith [0017] U.S. Pat. No.
3,606,336 September 1971 Krause [0018] U.S. Pat. No. 4,014,548
March 1977 Trilling [0019] U.S. Pat. No. 4,026,558 May 1977 Patin
[0020] U.S. Pat. No. 4,204,343 May 1980 Brooks [0021] U.S. Pat. No.
4,299,391 November 1981 Silver [0022] U.S. Pat. No. 4,341,387 July
1982 Freyman [0023] U.S. Pat. No. 4,402,513 September 1983 Head
[0024] U.S. Pat. No. 4,448,423 May 1984 Augusta [0025] U.S. Pat.
No. 4,469,329 September 1984 Guyer [0026] U.S. Pat. No. 4,601,473
July 1986 Dubren et al. [0027] U.S. Pat. No. 4,690,409 September
1987 Scalia [0028] U.S. Pat. No. 4,690,410 September 1987 Berton
[0029] U.S. Pat. No. 4,826,175 May 1989 Quatrino [0030] U.S. Pat.
No. 4,923,199 May 1990 Hahn [0031] U.S. Pat. No. 4,934,700 June
1990 Turek [0032] U.S. Pat. No. 4,934,711 June 1990 Runstein [0033]
U.S. Pat. No. 4,966,366 October 1990 Mercado-Torres [0034] U.S.
Pat. No. 4,973,058 November 1990 Breen [0035] U.S. Pat. No.
5,024,440 June 1991 Tidalgo et al. [0036] U.S. Pat. No. 5,054,789
October 1991 Pellerin [0037] U.S. Pat. No. 5,100,150 March 1992
Larman [0038] U.S. Pat. No. 5,106,103 April 1992 Fiore [0039] U.S.
Pat. No. 5,149,103 September 1992 Ross [0040] U.S. Pat. No.
5,207,435 May 1993 Tanner [0041] U.S. Pat. No. 5,230,515 July 1993
Cohen [0042] U.S. Pat. No. 5,230,518 July 1993 Crowe et al. [0043]
U.S. Pat. No. 5,306,153 April 1994 Foster [0044] U.S. Pat. No.
5,324,040 June 1994 Panda [0045] U.S. Pat. No. 5,417,432 May 1995
Dwyer [0046] U.S. Pat. No. 5,458,338 October 1995 Beardsley [0047]
U.S. Pat. No. 5,558,328 September 1996 Krantz [0048] U.S. Pat. No.
5,564,710 October 1996 Bolding et al. [0049] U.S. Pat. No.
5,615,886 April 1997 Chalfin et al. [0050] U.S. Pat. No. 5,657,994
August 1997 O'Connor [0051] U.S. Pat. No. 5,769,421 June 1998
Wakefield [0052] U.S. Pat. No. 5,788,238 August 1998 LeBriton et
al. [0053] U.S. Pat. No. 5,921,864 July 1999 Walker et al. [0054]
U.S. Pat. No. 6,168,439 January 2001 Anderson [0055] U.S. Pat. No.
6,234,486 May 2001 Wallice [0056] U.S. Pat. No. 6,241,246 June 2001
Guttin et al. [0057] U.S. Pat. No. 6,279,911 August 2001 Cherry
[0058] U.S. Pat. No. 6,367,798 April 2002 Lawal [0059] U.S. Pat.
No. 6,378,868 April 2002 La Bossiere [0060] U.S. Pat. No. 6,412,781
July 2002 Lund [0061] U.S. Pat. No. 6,422,562 July 2002 Daniel
[0062] U.S. Pat. No. 6,612,578 September 2003 Falciglia, Sr. [0063]
U.S. Pat. No. 6,655,688 December 2003 Boateng [0064] U.S. Pat. No.
6,986,512 January 2006 Charpentier [0065] U.S. Pat. No. 7,275,746
October 2007 Jensen [0066] U.S. Pat. No. 7,618,042 November 2009
Johnson
OTHER REFERENCES
[0066] [0067] Letras. T M. game 1998 Letras Grand Isle Games, Inc.
[0068] Quiddler. T M. game 1998 Quiddler Set Enterprises, Inc.
[0069] Scrabble. T M. game [0070] Word Yahtzee. T M. game [0071]
Scramble. T M. game [0072] Boggle. T M. game [0073] Bookworm. T M.
Game
[0074] 2. Description of Prior Art
[0075] Word forming games using individual letters of the alphabet
are known in the prior art. "Scrabble" (trademark) is the most
famous. In this game, players receive a number of tiles containing
letters and point values, from a fixed set of tiles which never
changes. The point values are based on the frequency of the letters
in the specific language. Players attempt to use all of their tiles
to make words which they place on a game board, each player
building on the first and subsequent words that are formed by
players so the result looks like a crossword puzzle. Players add up
the points on each of the letter tiles they use in their words and
they record the result. Players end up with a total of points for
the game which they compare with each others' score. There are
other word forming games that have features similar to those in
Scrabble. Some of these games use playing cards instead of tiles
and they do not use a game board.
[0076] "Boggle" (trademark) is another type of word game. Boggle
style games have a rectangular array of letters and the player is
expected to form as many words from adjacent letters as is possible
in a fixed time. Sometimes the player is given a bonus for finding
specific words, using a specific letter, or for finding words of a
longer length. Sometimes the letters are replaced by other letters
once used, and sometimes the rectangular array of letters is fixed
throughout the game. Popular casual games on the market which
derive from Boggle include "Bookworm" (trademark) and "Scramble"
(trademark).
[0077] "Word Yahtzee" (trademark) is a word game where the letters
are chosen by rolling dice which have letters on their faces. After
a roll the player has a set amount of time to make as many words as
possible out of the letters rolled. The scoring is somewhat complex
being based on a per letter value (as in Scrabble) with a number of
other special situations (e.g., all vowels).
[0078] Some word card games consist of a deck of cards and method
of play, the cards of which contain a letter of the alphabet and
point designation. Player attempts to use all of his or her cards
to form a word or words before other players. They also add up the
point value of letters in the words they make to determine a score
for the game. Games currently on the market called "Letras"
(trademark) and "Quiddler" (trademark) are examples of these. Both
Letras and Quiddler include a method of play in which one game
consists of several hands. In Letras, the dealer decides on the
number of cards to be dealt in each of such hands, such number to
be between three and eight. Hands are dealt and words formed until
a player accumulates a certain predetermined number of points. In
Quiddler, the number of cards dealt in each hand is fixed, with the
first hand being three cards, the next four, and on up to a hand of
ten cards. Then point scores are compared.
[0079] Known prior art therefore discloses and suggests word games
that, while possessing a common goal of forming words, suffer from
the following disadvantages:
[0080] a) The object of most of these games is to form as many
words as possible, rather than a single optimal word. There is a
need for a word game which focuses on finding the single most
valuable word.
[0081] b) The player has no control over the random selection of
the letters from which the words are made, nor their corresponding
point value. There is a need for a word game where part of the
player's strategy is to influence the random selection of the
available letters.
[0082] c) The point value of the letters is based on the frequency
of use in the given language. There is a need for a word game in
which the value of the letters is not just based on the infrequency
of occurrence within the language, but rather can be influenced by
the player, can differ for different instances of the same letter,
and hence requires a layer of strategic word making apart from just
word recognition (making mathematical calculations simultaneous
with finding an optimal word).
[0083] d) The player is only presented with a small number of
letters (seven or less) from which to make a word. There is a need
for a word game with ten or more available letters to test players'
vocabulary of longer words.
[0084] e) All words in the dictionary are considered with equal
validity. There is a need for a word game which gives credit for
recognizing the most common words and not penalizing the player for
not recognizing esoteric three letter words or obscure longer
words.
[0085] f) While some online games present players the opportunity
to challenge other players to play a game with identical letter
choices, there is a need for a game in which a player can
personalize and customize the instance of the game that the
challenged players must play.
BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
[0086] A multi-round word game in which players select a subset of
their friends or contact list as the base names to determine a set
of randomly selected letters and corresponding ordinal values, from
which players must submit a valid optimal word within a given time
frame, whose point value is determined by a combination of the
ordinal values of each of the letters used, the length of the word,
the time remaining when submitted, and the characteristics of the
names and usage of the chosen base names.
OBJECTS AND ADVANTAGES
[0087] Accordingly, several objects and advantages of the present
invention are:
[0088] 1. The letters are selected from a set of base names or
words selected by the player, giving the player some strategic
control over which letters are selected by determining the pool of
letters from which some are randomly selected
[0089] 2. The player is encouraged to expand the set of base names
or words he is able to choose from, by, for example, acquiring new
friends on a social networking site so that he has a broader range
of base names or words to choose from
[0090] 3. The value of the letters is determined by their ordinal
position in the base name or word, as opposed to the prior art
where the letter values are either a uniform "1" (length of the
word being the sole or primary determinant of value) or are
determined by letter usage frequency, such as in Scrabble 4.
Different instances of the same letter can have different values,
encouraging the player to correctly choose the letter with higher
value when forming the word for submission
[0091] 5. Players can challenge other players to replay the
personalized and customized instance of the game that they have
created through careful selection of the base names or words from
which the randomly selected letters are chosen
[0092] 6. The dictionary is broken down into a set of common and
uncommon words, and players may be rewarded for finding common
words while not being penalized for missing esoteric or obscure
words.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE SEVERAL VIEWS OF THE DRAWINGS
Drawing Figures--Preferred Embodiment
[0093] FIG. 1 shows the game flow for an original game
[0094] FIGS. 1A-1F shows more detailed looks at the game flow
components
[0095] FIG. 2 shows the graphical look of a tile
[0096] FIG. 3 shows how the game is scored
[0097] FIG. 4 shows a common and uncommon list of optimal words
from a given set of letters and corresponding values
Drawing Figures--Alternative Embodiments
[0098] FIG. 5 shows the game flow for a replay game
[0099] FIG. 6 shows the scoring for a replay game
[0100] FIGS. 7A-7C show three alternatives for how game replay
results can be presented
[0101] FIG. 8 shows the game flow for a ranked word game
[0102] FIG. 9 shows the scoring for a ranked word game
[0103] FIG. 10 shows the scoring for a cooperative team game
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION
Definitions
[0104] Base Names or Words--the set of letters from which one
letter is randomly selected and the ordinal value calculated
[0105] Game--a game is comprised of fixed rounds and a score which
is a summary of the scores of all rounds
[0106] Game Instance--a specific set of fixed rounds, letter
choices and values, and rules which is presented to the player as
the current game
[0107] Length Bonus--a bonus given to the player for making a word
of a certain length, for instance 25 points for a 7-letter word
[0108] Ordinal Value--the value assigned to a randomly selected
letter based on the position of the letter in the base name or
word; for instance, in the name John Doe, the "e" would have an
ordinal value of 7 because it is the seventh letter, whereas the
"h" would have an ordinal value of 3 because it is the third
letter
[0109] Replay Game--a game in which a player is offered exactly the
same tiles as was previously offered other players of that exact
same game
[0110] Round--a round is a single opportunity for a player to
choose the optimal word or words from a given set of letters
[0111] Streak Bonus--a bonus given to the player for using the
randomly selected letter from the same base name or word in the
valid submitted word in subsequent rounds; for instance, in the
name John Doe, if the player is offered an "e" in round 1, and uses
it to submit the word "patent", and then is offered an "n" in round
2, and uses it to submit the word "application", the player may
receive a streak bonus of 1 point
[0112] Streak Penalty--a penalty given to the player for NOT using
the randomly selected letter from the same base name or word in the
valid submitted word in subsequent rounds; for instance, in the
name John Doe, if the player is offered an "e" in round 1, and
submits the word "applicant", and then is offered an "n" in round
2, and submits the word "accept", the player may receive a streak
penalty of negative 1 point
[0113] Tile--the combination of a letter and its corresponding
ordinal value
Preferred Embodiment
[0114] The Preferred Embodiment of the game consists of a player
selecting a subset of names from a broader lists of base names, for
example a subset of 10 names from a Facebook friends list of 300
names. The game then generates a single tile from each of these
names, each tile containing a letter and its ordinal value. The
player then creates the single highest value word in the limited
time available, and submits it. The game's dictionary checks the
validity of the word, and if valid the game presents the scoring of
the word. The player then makes adjustments to the subset of 10
names, and the process continues for 10 rounds.
[0115] FIG. 1 shows the game flow for this Preferred
Embodiment.
[0116] FIG. 1A shows a scrolling list of all the player's Facebook
friends on the list, and the subset of 10 the player has selected
for the first round.
[0117] FIG. 1B shows how the game creates tiles by randomly
selecting one letter from each name in the subset of 10, and
assigning it an ordinal value.
[0118] FIG. 1C shows the word the player has created from the rack
of 10 tiles, just prior to submission.
[0119] FIG. 1D shows the scoring of the word after the dictionary
has established the validity of the word, with a breakdown of
points awarded for Tile Value, Time Bonus, Length Bonus, and Streak
Bonus.
[0120] FIG. 1E shows a revised subset of names that the player has
selected for round 2, with the previously used letters of the names
removed, and the streak bonus/penalty values listed to the right of
the relevant names.
[0121] FIG. 1F shows the words and unused tiles after the player
has finished the game, that is, all 10 rounds, as well as the final
score of the game.
[0122] FIG. 2 shows the makeup of a sample tile. Each tile includes
a letter, an ordinal value for the letter, and a background for the
tile.
[0123] FIG. 3 shows how the Total Points are calculated for a
single round, by adding the Tile Value, Time Bonus, Length Bonus,
and Streak Bonus.
[0124] FIG. 4 shows how a completed round is presented to a player,
indicating how the player's word was scored, and how it compares
with lists of both all "common" words and all "full dictionary"
words the player could have made from the 10 tiles offered.
Alternative Embodiments
[0125] In the first Alternative Embodiment, the player does not
need to select a subset of names from which tiles are generated.
Instead, the tiles from a previous original game are used, speeding
up game play. All other aspects of the game are the same. Since the
player is replaying a game from previously generated tiles, it is
possible to do a "fair" comparison of the player's game with other
player's initial plays of that same game.
[0126] FIG. 5 shows the game flow for this first Alternative
Embodiment
[0127] FIG. 6 shows how the score is calculated for this first
Alternative Embodiment.
[0128] FIG. 7A shows one way the comparative scores between two (or
more) players of the same game can be displayed, in this case just
showing the time the game was played, and the comparative scores of
the two players.
[0129] FIG. 7B shows another way the comparative games can be
displayed, in this case showing the words and scoring for each of
the 10 rounds for both players.
[0130] FIG. 7C shows yet a third way the comparative games can be
displayed, in this case comparing the players' performance against
the top 10 dictionary words that could have been possibly made from
the 10 tiles offered.
[0131] In the second Alternative Embodiment, the player is tasked
with trying to come up with as many of the highest 20 scoring words
as possible from the set of 10 tiles offered. The player has
unlimited time to do so, but loses points as time passes.
[0132] FIG. 8 shows the game flow for this second Alternative
Embodiment.
[0133] FIG. 9 shows the game display for this second Alternative
Embodiment. The available tiles are displayed in the upper rack,
from which the player creates words for submission. The game
displays three lists of the submitted words, along with the points
received for the submitted word. The left most list contains spaces
for the top 20 ranked common valid words that could possibly be
created from the 10 available tiles. The center list contains any
uncommon valid words the player submits. The right most list
contains any valid words the player has submitted that have values
below the 20th ranked word. The player receives no points for these
"unranked" words.
[0134] In the third Alternative Embodiment, players each play the
same instance of a game individually, synchronously or
asynchronously, and the top individual score from each round is
used to generate a team score for the 10 round game.
[0135] FIG. 10 shows how a team score is calculated from the top
score in each round. Three players played the game individually,
and the best word and score for each round is taken to create a
team score for comparative purposes against other teams.
Operation Of Invention--Preferred Embodiment
[0136] A method and system for playing the Preferred Embodiment of
the game are disclosed (using one gender for simplicity's sake).
FIG. 1 shows the game flow for an original game of ten rounds. In
Step 100, the player is presented with a list of base names or
words. This list might be a list of all a player's Facebook
friends, her phone contact list, a themed list like all U.S.
presidents, or list of names like U.S. capital cities. In Step 105,
the player chooses a subset of ten of these names from the base
list of what could be a few dozen or a few hundred base names. FIG.
1A shows these steps in more detail, with an alphabetized list of
base names on the left hand side, and options for adding or
removing friend names to the subset of ten on the right hand side.
The player could ask for the subset of names to be automatically
chosen by the game, or she could pick a few and then ask the game
to randomly fill in the rest, or she could have the game choose and
then adjust the randomly selected list.
[0137] There are strategies to picking the subset of names. A good
player will try to go for longer names, since the ordinal values
have the potential to be higher. For instance, the "S" in the name
John Jones would have an ordinal value of 9, whereas the "S" in the
name Madeleine Landers would have an ordinal value of 15. But it is
also important to pick names that have a low amount of difficult
letters, like "Z" and "Q", and to pick names that have a high vowel
content to help ensure that at lest some of the ten letters are
vowels. Names that have multiple letters used in common prefixes
and suffixes are also valuable, like "I", "N", "G", "S". Of course,
this is no guaranty that any particular letter will be randomly
selected by the game, but it does influence the odds of the letter
being selected at least once. Also, shorter names receive a higher
streak bonus for consecutive use and lower names a higher streak
penalty for lack of use, so an effective strategy mixes the use of
long and short base names. Finally, since once a letter has been
selected it is removed from the base name, a name that has been
selected for the subset will decline on value. After five rounds,
the name Madeleine Landers will only have 10 of its original 15
letters remaining, so even if the "S" is still available it will
have an ordinal value of just 10.
[0138] For all the preceding reasons, it is important for a player
to carefully choose her subset of ten names, and replace these in
subsequent rounds. A player who does not replace the subset of ten
names will find that some names no longer have any letters
remaining, and hence no tile for that name will be created, and the
others have tiles with low single-digit values, or even negative
values once the streak penalties are factored in.
[0139] FIG. 1B shows how the game generates ten tiles from the
subset list of Step 105. For each name, one letter is randomly
chosen and assigned the ordinal value of the letter. For instance,
in the first name "Adam Sussman", the first S has been randomly
selected and assigned an ordinal value of 5. A tile is created in
Step 110 for each of the randomly generated letters from the subset
of ten names from Step 105. This tile may have a generic background
or a background that may be a picture relating to Adam Sussman, as
in FIG. 2.
[0140] At the completion of Step 110, the player is presented with
the ten tiles that have been generated and the timer starts winding
down from 60 seconds. The player looks for the optimal word that
she can make, simultaneously taking into account the value of each
tile, a length bonus tied to the length of the word for words of
six or more letters, the certainty of the validity of the word in
the game's dictionary, and the time bonus for the amount of time
remaining on the timer when the valid word is submitted. The first
valid word submitted is the word from which the player's score is
derived, so she wants to make sure that that is the best word she
can come up with before submitting. To form a word, the player
clicks on a tile in the top row list of all available letters and
that tile is placed as the next tile in the word below. Depending
on the device, the player can also touch select a tile or place it
between letters or rearrange the order of the tile on either rack.
FIG. 1C shows Step 115, where the player has formed the "optimal"
word, and is ready to submit it for a validity check (Step 120 in
FIG. 1). As FIG. 1C shows, the player can also have the game
shuffle the remaining available tiles or completely clear the tiles
that have been selected for the word, placing them back in the rack
of available tiles above. The player can also click on a tile in
the Word rack to remove it, returning it to the available tiles
rack.
[0141] The player only gets to submit one valid word for scoring,
no matter how many words she sees. That is one of the features that
separates this game from many other word games in the prior art. If
the player submits a word that is not in the games dictionary, the
game will simply report back to the player that the "Word is not in
the dictionary" and the player can use the remaining time, if any,
to try again. Players are hence encouraged to "try" new words that
they might be unsure of. However, the process of forming a word on
the word rack takes time, so this discourages extensive
guessing.
[0142] If a player fails to submit a valid word in the time frame
allowed, the player "Times Out" and no valid word is submitted, the
player receives zero points for the round.
[0143] If a player needs to pause the game (e.g. take a phone call
on a mobile device), the tiles disappear and the player will return
to that same moment in the game when the player is ready to resume
playing that game.
[0144] After the player submits her valid word, the word is
instantly scored in Step 125. FIG. 1D shows how the scores for the
valid submitted word "BASHER" are presented in detailed breakdown.
FIG. 3 shows how these scores were generated by category. The
player received 23 points for the ordinal values of each tile, 1
for "B", 2 for the "A", 5 for the "S", 7 for the "H", 2 for the
"E", and 6 for the "R". The remaining tiles are shown to the right
of the submitted word, tempting the player to flesh out what word
opportunity she missed, for instance "LASHER" which would have
earned her ten more points. The player received 1 point in time
bonus, since there were two seconds remaining when the valid word
was submitted. The length bonus was 10 for a six letter word. Had
she found a longer word, she could have received 25 points for
seven letter word, 50 points for an eight letter word, 80 points
for a nine letter word, or 120 points for a ten letter word. The
streak bonus was 0 since this was the first round, and no
consecutive use or disuse streaks had been established yet. Hence,
the player received a total of 34 points for her entry of
"BASHER".
[0145] Note that had the player submitted the word "BASHER" with
the other "R" tile, the one with an ordinal value of 3, she would
have received three less points for the tile value. Part of the
game play requires the player to quickly select not only the
desired letter, but also the one with the most value since there
are frequently two or more of the same letters with different
values. In subsequent rounds, the players also have to take into
account the streak values and streak continuation when making this
decision, enhancing the difficulty of quick decision making and
tile selection when playing this Preferred Embodiment. Having tiles
of the same letter, but differing values is another feature that
distinguishes this game from much of the prior art.
[0146] In Step 130, the game proceeds to Round 2. In FIG. 1E, the
player is presented once again with the list of base names on the
left, and the adjustable subset of selected names on the right. The
streak bonus is presented to the right of the base names, and there
is an "_" in place of the letter for the letters that were offered
up in previous rounds. For instance, the "S" in the first name on
the right, "Adam Sussman", no longer appears ("Adam_ussman"), and
there is a +1 to the right of Adam Sussman's name indicating that
the "S" was used in the valid submitted word "BASHER" in the
previous round. The player has removed three subset names and
replaced them with three new names from the base name list, as
indicated by the highlight of the three names at the bottom of the
subset name list on the right.
[0147] Steps 100 through 130 are repeated until all ten rounds have
been played. In Step 135 the game is ended and the final score is
tallied. FIG. 1F shows one way of showing the words selected, the
tiles bypassed, and the points, for all ten rounds in a summary
fashion. FIG. 3 shows an alternative form, in which a player's
single round is compared against the top ten possible dictionary
words and top ten possible common words, and ranked accordingly. In
this case, the player's word "ANOINTER" has a word score (tile plus
length score, with time not factored in) of 136 points, placing it
in a tie for #2 ranking on the Common Word Rank list on the left
and in a tie for #4 ranking on the Dictionary Word Rank list on the
right. The use of a common word rank list is yet another feature
which distinguishes this game from much of the prior art.
Operations of Invention--Alternative Embodiments
[0148] In the first Alternative Embodiment, the player does not
need to select a subset of names from which tiles are generated.
Instead, the tiles from a previous original game are used, speeding
up game play. All other aspects of the game are the same. Since the
player is replaying a game from previously generated tiles, it is
possible to do a "fair" comparison of the player's game with other
players' initial plays of that same game. Also, this speeds up the
game considerably, by cutting out steps 100 and 105.
[0149] FIG. 5 shows the game flow for the first Alternative
Embodiment. The game, again the first of ten rounds, starts with a
display of 10 tiles from a previously generated game (Step 210).
The player submits a word (Step 215), the game dictionary checks
the word for validity (Step 220), and then the game presents the
scoring of that word (Step 225). FIG. 6 shows how the score is
calculated in the Alternative Embodiment, basically the same as in
the Preferred Embodiment, except there are no streaks and hence no
streak bonus, it having been already incorporated into the tile's
value.
[0150] After the ten rounds, the game ends and the final score is
tallied (Step 235). The player then compares her score against
other players of the same game. FIGS. 7A, 7B, and 7C provide three
alternate ways for players to view comparative scores. In FIG. 7A,
the players' photo, name, score and time and date of the game are
displayed in order by score. In FIG. 7B, a player can compare her
word and detailed score each round against another player who has
also played that same game. In FIG. 7C, players are held in
suspense as they compare their word and detailed score round by
round against each other and against the Common Word Rank list and
Dictionary Word Rank lists of highest scoring available words for
that round. Only one round is displayed at a time, the player
moving sequentially through the rounds with a running game score
versus other players displayed in the upper right hand corner.
Players can click on the word to see a dictionary definition of
that word.
[0151] In the second Alternative Embodiment, the player is tasked
with trying to come up with as many of the highest 20 scoring words
as possible from the set of 10 tiles offered. The player has
unlimited time to do so, but loses points as time passes. FIG. 8
shows the game flow for this second Alternative Embodiment. Again,
as in the first Alternative Embodiment, the player is shown ten
tiles from a previously generated game (Step 310). The player
submits a word (Step 315) and the dictionary checks it for validity
(Step 320).
[0152] FIG. 9 shows the game board and scoring once a word is
submitted. If the word's tile plus length bonus score rank it in
the top 20 of all common words possible from the Common Word Rank
list for that round, the word is placed on the game's digital board
in the left hand column, with points worth 21 less the common word
rank received for the word. For example, in the case presented in
FIG. 9, the word "ALIGNED" is the #3 ranked common word on the
Common Word Rank list, and hence the player receives 21-3=18 points
for submitting that word. There are initially empty slots for each
of the top 20 ranked common words, and these are filled in the
proper position as the player submits them. Words that have the
same tile plus length bonus score are ranked alphabetically, hence
in the above example "ALIGNED", with a tile plus length bonus value
of 78 is considered the #3 ranked word ahead of "DEALING, with has
the same tile plus length bonus value.
[0153] If the submitted word is a valid dictionary word, but the
tile plus length bonus value is below the value required to make
the top 20 ranking of Common Word Rank list, then the word is
listed in the right-most column, and the player receives no points
for it. If the submitted word is a valid dictionary word and is of
sufficient value to make the top 20 ranking of Common Word Rank
list, but deemed an uncommon word, the player receives the same
value as if the word had been on the Common Word Rank list. For
example, in the case resented in FIG. 9, the player has submitted
the word "ALIENAGE", listed in the middle column, with a tile plus
length value of 85. ALIENAGE is considered by the game's dictionary
as an uncommon word, but its value of 85 would have put it as the
top ranked common word, hence it is worth 21-1=20 to the player.
Any uncommon words the player uncovers are placed in the middle
column. The player has no idea how many of these words exist, so
they end up truly being a bonus to the player for finding an
uncommon word. However, if the player submits a word that is not
considered valid by the dictionary, the player loses a point,
promoting educated guesses only.
[0154] There is not time limit to the second Alternative Embodiment
game. Instead, the player receives a time penalty of one point for
every 15 seconds of time that expire. The player can end the game
at any time. The object of this game is to achieve the high water
mark score, that is the Max Score So Far listed in the far right
hand corner of FIG. 9, in this case 108 points.
[0155] The player can pause the game at any time, and the game
board disappears, with play picking up at the precise point the
player paused when play resumes.
[0156] In the third Alternative Embodiment, players each play the
same instance of a game individually, synchronously or
asynchronously, and the top individual score from each round is
used to generate a team score for the 10 round game. FIG. 10 shows
instances of the same game being played by three separate players
(Boxes 400, 410, and 420). The top scoring round by any of these
three players is used in the calculation of the team's score, used
to compare with the team's previous games or other team's or
individual's scores of the same game. For round 1, the player in
Box 420 had "STAMPERS" worth 149, including the time bonus, whereas
the player in Box 410 also had "STAMPERS", but only worth 138,
while the player in Box 400 had "TRASHES" only worth 125. So, the
149 point "STAMPERS" from Box 420 is the one that is used in
calculating the team's score for this round. Using this same
methodology for all ten rounds, in this case the Team Score of 1192
is calculated by using high round scores of Box 420 for rounds 1-4
and 6-8, Box 410 for rounds 5 and 9, and Box 400 for round 10.
CONCLUSIONS, RAMIFICATIONS, AND SCOPE
[0157] Accordingly the reader will see that the proposed game
provides:
[0158] a) a word game which focuses on finding the single most
valuable word, instead of simply forming as many words as
possible.
[0159] b) a word game in which the player has strategic influence
over the specific letters available and their corresponding point
values, instead of just being presented with letters of preset
value from a fixed pool of letters.
[0160] c) a word game in which the values of the letters can be
influenced by the player, instead of being based on the infrequency
of occurrence within the language, and can differ even between
instances of the same letter, forcing the player to make
mathematical calculations simultaneous with finding an optimal
word.
[0161] d) a word game which has more than seven letters available
from which to make a word, extending players' vocabularies of
longer words, prefixes, and suffixes.
[0162] e) a word game which gives credit for recognizing common
words instead of penalizing players for not recognizing obscure
three letter words or obscure longer words
[0163] f) a word game in which players can challenge other players
to play a game with identical tile choices, the letters and values
of which have been influenced by the initiating player
[0164] g) a word game in which players cooperate as a team playing
synchronously or asynchronously to improve the team score and
compete against other teams
[0165] While the above description contains many specificities,
these should not be construed as limiting the scope of the
invention, but as merely providing illustrations of some of the
presently preferred embodiment of the invention. For example, the
number of available tiles from which to make a word could be more
or less than ten; the amount of available time and the scoring for
time remaining could be changed or turned off entirely; the streak
bonuses and penalties could be adjusted or turned off entirely; the
length bonuses could changed; the language, letters and dictionary
could be changed to Spanish, German, French or other languages; or
players could swap or acquire different base names from which to
select from.
[0166] Accordingly, the scope of the invention should be determined
not by the embodiment illustrated, but by the appended claims or
their legal equivalents.
* * * * *