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

[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?

[Wolf_Rider]

after you answer mine grunch... they were asked first

[TheGrunch]

Originally Posted by Wolf_Rider

after you answer mine grunch... they were asked first

I've already answered yours and said that I have no proof. I've already said that I made my conclusion because I believe it is the most likely and reasonable explanation. Have you been reading my posts?
If you seriously believe that it's practical to live by a theory of absolute positivism, there's no point in having arguments or opinions about anything you haven't directly experienced, so I don't see why you became involved in this argument to begin with.
So, will you answer my questions?

[AndyJWest]

...the problem is where freetrack (or other) takes advantage of NP software or hardware R&D

Is this where you think the issue really lies, Wolf_Rider? As far as I'm aware, the only protection against taking advantage of someone else's 'R&D' are patents (which NP doesn't have), and copyright (which is only relevant where NPs proprietry interface is concerned). Can I assume form this that provided 'other' doesn't use NPs interface, they will be in the wrong if they try to prevent this? You seem strangely reluctant to answer this...