The rate or progress for Virtual Reality is indeed stunning. So too is the commercialization of products, services and potential applications. For instance researchers, teachers, politicians and innovators are always stacked with projects that need a Virtual Reality Technicians skill sets to the audience, customer or funding groups better visualize.Of course we realized a cockpit wasn't going to work for every game, so after hitting the research literature on perception, and working through a bunch of ideas we eventually decided to try inserting a nose into the user's field of view," he said.

Of course as things move forward much faster standardization is also coming to a head. Many VR consultants and leading edge thinkers speak of granularity, verbs and software programming methodologies, but none are completely certain that is how things will work in the future in VR, yet we all see this is the push. It is amazing all the competing VR standards, theories and directions the market place is working with now. It is pretty insightful and although 4 years old now is pretty much on the money.

One of the reasons I make this statement is because someone mentioned in an article about the slicing of food on the kitchen in virtual reality and the sound of the knife in EOX (basically that is surround-a-sound) and the granularity (individual animated pixels) dividing the object and yes all that is good for action sequences, explosions, car crashes in video games, VR Life II type things and such, or simulators for training, but there is an issue with combinations of multiple scenarios, with AI and the size of the program, current bandwidth, storage devices, etc.

We can talk all about the future as the VR Technicians see it and we can discuss all the applications for Government, Military, Business, Healthcare, Earth Sciences, Space, Training, Psychology, Sports, Sex, Politics, Distance Learning, Sales or V-travel and yet in the end a standard is needed so that the theories, methods and philosophies can all be on the same page to move the ball down the field and attract the capital needed to bring the VR World into a blurred reality with the real world and to make a profit in doing so. ROI is what the real world is about.


Objective

This report assesses the viability for commercialization of Intellectual Property (IP) assets related to Virtual Reality (VR) technology, which involves computer-simulated worlds to stipulate the sense of reality. It often includes stereoscopic displays to mimic our natural visual sensory input. Other simulated sensory feedback, such as haptic or audio feedback, also form part of VR technology. VR technology has been around for many decades, but its potential was not realized until computer graphics matured and computing capacity became adequate and affordable. Today, VR is extensively used in gaming, entertainment, training and education. VR also has many important medical applications.

This analysis encompasses the overall landscape of Virtual Reality IP assets in terms of the major patent holders and recorded transactions. Assignees with VR patent assets with medical or gaming applications are identified. A list of potential licensees or buyers of VR-related IP assets is arrived at.

Workflow

1. Determine the major patent asset holders in the area of Virtual Reality technologies.
2. Identify relevant transactions (assignment transfers) in the area of Virtual Reality technologies.
3. Obtain the forward citations of patents related to the relevant technology and determine the patent asset holders of the more recently filed forward-cited patents.
 4. Determine the patent asset holders of VR IP assets with medical and gaming applications.
 5. Combine the findings from the above steps to create a short-list of potential licensees or buyers in VR technologies.

Analysis

· The analysis contained in this report is done for VR technology in general. There are many subtechnologies involved in this domain, such as stereoscopic displays, haptic devices, tracking systems, and computer algorithms.
 · Patent assets related to Virtual Reality are identified using a combination of keywords, IPC codes, and US classification codes to obtain the top patent asset holders in the technology area.
 · A search of the assignment database is performed using similar parameters. This yields a list of the various buyers and sellers of patent assets addressing this technology and helps in determining the most active amongst them.
· Assignees for recently filed forward-cited patents in VR technologies are determined.
· Assignees with VR patent assets with applications in either assisting medical or surgical procedures; or addressing gaming are separately identified.
· The analysis of this report is based on the patent assets of various geographies, assignment transfer data provided by the USPTO, and related corporate information available in the public domain. All patent counts mentioned are only indicative.

"One of my students mentioned that in a game he had recently played there was a fixed cockpit that acted as a point of reference and it seemed to have eased the sickness a bit. We hypothesized that if you had a fixed reference in your view point you would do a lot better with sickness. Of course we realized a cockpit wasn't going to work for every game, so after hitting the research literature on perception, and working through a bunch of ideas we eventually decided to try inserting a nose into the user's field of view," he said. "For instance, in the animal kingdom every terrestrial predator can see its nose, so if it were a problem it seems like it would have evolved out. We surmised that being able to see one's nose was likely adaptive – a feature rather than a bug."

Whittinghill and his research team conducted experiments that involved two groups of people who experienced a virtual reality roller coaster ride, an event deemed likely to cause a high simulator sickness reaction. Group one could see a virtual nose in their screen, like you would your own nose, and group two could not. The findings showed that group one experienced less sickness and increased participation time in the simulation than did the second group who could not see the virtual nose.

"What was interesting was that when we asked how distracting the nose was, the participants were baffled because they didn't even realize the nose was there. Just like one's own nose they didn't perceive it," he said. "We observed a 13.5 percent drop in severity of sickness and an increase of time in the simulator, just by adding a simple component that doesn't interfere with the game and is computationally very cheap."