Fulqrum Publishing Home   |   Register   |   Today Posts   |   Members   |   UserCP   |   Calendar   |   Search   |   FAQ

Go Back   Official Fulqrum Publishing forum > Fulqrum Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik

IL-2 Sturmovik The famous combat flight simulator.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #71  
Old 10-14-2010, 01:50 PM
Blackdog_kt Blackdog_kt is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,715
Default

I don't know the exact details, but the way i see it is this.

1) If Freetrack uses its own API, independent from NaturalPoint's API, but NP goes around to game developers and tells them to use only the NP API, then NP is clearly limiting the choices of users. Game developers should realize that and allow access to other head tracking APIs along the NP one, so that their customers are satisfied and not forced into a monopoly situation.

2) If Freetrack uses the NaturalPoint API and NP decides to encrypt it, then tough sh*t. It's NP's API and they do what they want with it. In that case, it's Freetrack itself that limits Freetrack by not coming up with a complete solution of their own, not NP who are marketing their software as they see fit.

I don't know the exact circumstances, but i'd be surprised if both sides weren't a bit right and a bit wrong at the same time as usually happens

That sums it up for me.
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 10-14-2010, 05:55 PM
albx albx is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Italy
Posts: 716
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt View Post
I don't know the exact details, but the way i see it is this.

1) If Freetrack uses its own API, independent from NaturalPoint's API, but NP goes around to game developers and tells them to use only the NP API, then NP is clearly limiting the choices of users. Game developers should realize that and allow access to other head tracking APIs along the NP one, so that their customers are satisfied and not forced into a monopoly situation.

2) If Freetrack uses the NaturalPoint API and NP decides to encrypt it, then tough sh*t. It's NP's API and they do what they want with it. In that case, it's Freetrack itself that limits Freetrack by not coming up with a complete solution of their own, not NP who are marketing their software as they see fit.

I don't know the exact circumstances, but i'd be surprised if both sides weren't a bit right and a bit wrong at the same time as usually happens

That sums it up for me.
I agree with you... but what seems is that NP don't want the developers support other tracking devices but only TIR, we will see how Oleg & C. will support in SOW... i think if TIR will be used then no other tracking device will be allowed... somebody want bet??
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 10-14-2010, 08:26 PM
LoBiSoMeM LoBiSoMeM is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 963
Default

I bet.

Bohemia Interactive - producer of ArmAII - decided to give support to FreeTrack API after consumers request.

If 1C didn't do the same, will be really a shame and a disrespect with their customers who uses FreeTrack as head tracking solution. And we aren't just a few, by the way - look at Bohemia Interactive forums...
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 10-14-2010, 10:25 PM
WTE_Galway WTE_Galway is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,207
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by swiss View Post
Now that IS weird.
It's like a bicycle mechanic who buys a bike off the shelf.
You do build your own computers, right?
Only when its obviously better to do it that way Sometimes you will find a place which will assemble and test a PC from provided specs that only charge for the parts. If someone else will assemble and test a PC for me then I am happy to let them, I do not see assembling PCs as particularly "fun".

I also worked with audio and sound equipment at one stage and have when necessary built PA systems graphic equalizers etc from scratch but when I wanted a guitar amp I went out and picked up a Peavey.

Just saying I see building your own head-tracker as more an enthusiast thing a bit like the guys spending their weekends putting custom exhausts and fancy wheels and a custom stereo in their car or the overclocking types that put their PC system specs in their forum signature.

The real point is that regardless of using freetrack, or trackIR or having an elephant watch your head movements and move the mouse with its trunk ... some form of head tracking is almost as important as a good joystick.
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 10-14-2010, 10:42 PM
julian265 julian265 is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 195
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by albx View Post
I agree with you... but what seems is that NP don't want the developers support other tracking devices but only TIR, we will see how Oleg & C. will support in SOW... i think if TIR will be used then no other tracking device will be allowed... somebody want bet??
hence http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=16938

DCS allows TIR and generic head axis inputs. I use freetrack and PPJoy. Just check the PPJoy box in freetrack, assign the axes in DCS, and it's done.

Unless FT's developers have lobbied for game devs to use the FT API, you can't complain about it not being used.

It's when a game only uses the TIR interface, excluding all others, that I see it as unacceptable.

But at the core of the issue - with 6DoF head tracking, it makes NO sense to have a proprietary API. It's more work for everyone (especially the game devs), and hurts the consumer.
Reply With Quote
  #76  
Old 10-14-2010, 11:22 PM
Blackdog_kt Blackdog_kt is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,715
Default

I think the best solution would be a widely accepted standard of a single API to be used by game developers, so that they could cut down on development time. Then the people who make head tracking software would have to come up with someting that complies to this standard, or make sure their own API can interface with or "plug into" the game developer's implementation.

This not only makes it easier and faster for developers to code stuff, it also streamlines production of further titles and makes sure that everyone who wants to develop a head-tracking solution has a chance at making something work.

Some will say that NP will lobby against this and it could be true, but the bottom line is they couldn't roll it back if it started. Just imagine it, SoW, DCS A-10, the next ArmA title all come out with the same head-tracking API and demand the developers of head-tracking software and devices to conform with it, instead of vice versa where the developer has to do the work. If NP doesn't do it, they'll have a whole lot of angry customers, so they will be forced to
Reply With Quote
  #77  
Old 10-14-2010, 11:59 PM
julian265 julian265 is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 195
Default

Absolutely. Except that the API is pretty much already present, by use of the usual analog axis inputs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt View Post
If NP doesn't do it, they'll have a whole lot of angry customers, so they will be forced to
Like TIR 1,2,3 owners who can't use TIR in new titles due to the "enhanced" NP interface!
Reply With Quote
  #78  
Old 10-15-2010, 02:01 AM
swiss swiss is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Zürich, Swiss Confederation
Posts: 2,266
Default

you can make Tir 1,2,3, work with FT software.
Reply With Quote
  #79  
Old 10-15-2010, 03:22 AM
julian265 julian265 is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 195
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by swiss View Post
you can make Tir 1,2,3, work with FT software.
the irony!
Reply With Quote
  #80  
Old 10-15-2010, 04:13 AM
swiss swiss is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Zürich, Swiss Confederation
Posts: 2,266
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by julian265 View Post
the irony!
sure.

On the other hand: You cant get spare parts for a 4 year old Sony TV - and they are not dominating the market.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:29 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.