1C's stance on head-tracking devices for BoB?

[TheGrunch]

Wow, I'm a troll for applying basic logic to a situation. Brilliant.

[Wolf_Rider]

if you call contradiction and slander, with a pinch of evasion 'logic', then yes... you've succeeded


here... let me show you how logic works;



Are you over there (points in that direction)? - No

Are you over here (points in another direction)? - No

If you aren't over there or over here (the directions pointed in), then logically you must be somewhere else? - Yes

If you are somewhere else, you can't be at your screen typing, can you? - err

[TheGrunch]

Originally Posted by Wolf_Rider

if you call contradiction and slander, with a pinch of evasion 'logic', then yes... you've succeeded

Well, I see that determining explanations by a process of elimination has eluded you.

Anyway, as Andy says, I'd hope that head position can be controlled by a standard joystick device in SoW to provide an opportunity for other solutions to be used.

[Wolf_Rider]

...and still you evade my honest question - good onya

[TheGrunch]

Originally Posted by Wolf_Rider

...and still you evade my honest question - good onya

Your honest question? In a situation where it is impossible for me to know for sure, you want me to ignore by far the most probable explanation? I know there is some kind of agreement between Ubisoft and NaturalPoint. I know that it is against the rules to speak about Freetrack on the Ubi forums. Therefore, I believe that it is very likely that there is an exclusivity agreement between NaturalPoint and Ubisoft. It's a completely reasonable conclusion to make given the circumstances.
Either way, the current situation where developers support only the closed standard provides the opportunity for abuse, and that is why developers should support joystick view positioning by axis.

[Wolf_Rider]

andyjwest...

you must have read this "As I said before, if freetrack (or other) support is totally between freetrack and the game/ sim, then there is no problem, except for maybe on the hardware side of things... the problem is where freetrack (or other) takes advantage of NP software or hardware R&D - have you got it now Mikkowl??", which answers your question. You must have read it seeing as you quoted it in your post.... you do read, don't you?


grunch, that is all purely allegation. now seriously, we're not really going to go 400 posts of this crap from you are we?

[TheGrunch]

Originally Posted by Wolf_Rider

grunch, that is all purely allegation. now seriously, we're not really going to go 400 posts of this crap from you are we?

Okay, but answer me two questions. Do you think my allegation is unlikely, and why?

[AndyJWest]

...post #35 looks interesting and seems quite clear

Post 35:

Originally Posted by MikkOwl

so you support hacking then, eh?

modding your ECU is illegal in some countries and yeah the vehicle manufacturer is flexing its copyright by voiding the warranty

As I said before, if freetrack (or other) support is totally between freetrack and the game/ sim, then there is no problem, except for maybe on the hardware side of things... the problem is where freetrack (or other) takes advantage of NP software or hardware R&D - have you got it now Mikkowl??

and yeah... do keep looking it up, there's a good boy

Interesting, yes. Clear, no. I have no idea what 'flexing it's copyright by voiding the warranty' could mean - they are two entirely different legal issues. As for 'R&D', if you think that NP were the first in the field, can you explain why they haven't taken on MicroSoft over the issue, given that they have had a 6DOF inteface in their flight sims for some time?