Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolf_Rider
NP took the time and the effort to create their interface, when there was no other product around... why can't others go and do the same?
|
Once again, they can and have. But it is a bad way for head tracking to go... It should go the way joysticks/keyboards/mouses have, and use a standardised interface -
which already exists. I've been saying this since the first page.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolf_Rider
I guess some games only recognise one joystick... one input? which goes back to my earlier comments regarding approaching developers for a patch. Have any actually been approached in a civilsed manner?
|
Most games recognise a few joysticks, Il-2 included, each with up to 8 axes and at least 32 buttons. There should be no need for any negotiation or approaches - IMO using the joystick or mouse interface is simply THE way to do it. I've been saying this since the first page also. I am unaware of the manner in which other trackers' creators have approached game devs.
My question: "YES or NO, Wolf_Rider: Should "BoB accept generic axis inputs for head angle and position"?"
Your answer: "what happens with third parties seeking inclusion in developer's product is between the developer and the third party." - Which is true, but not an answer to the question. So why write it?
Your second answer: "there should be no problem with any third party software accessing simconnect, devicelink, joystick api, or similar." - Which also avoids the question.
Do you understand the difference between trackers "accessing simconnect, devicelink, joystick api, or similar", and
games listening to these protocols?