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

[TheGrunch]

Originally Posted by Wolf_Rider

which means?

That there was no good reason to create the interface in the first place except to cause other implementations difficulty once theirs was in use. It made developers' lives harder as well since they had to add TrackIR support specifically.

As to BIS, given what's written in that thread it seems like the Freetrack developers were tearing their hair out about showing their API to BIS and BIS saying that they couldn't implement it because it used the NP API. Which it didn't. Sounds like a misunderstanding, but it looks like it got pretty out of hand.

EDIT: Anyway, I'm off out, talk to you guys later.

[Wolf_Rider]

err did sim connect or devicelink exist when TIR first came out?

Following your "logic" why couldn't other people interested in headtracking write their own and approach developers for inclusion, or take advanatge of what was available? its what I've said before.. its between the developer and the particular tracker people... nothing to do with NP

Why hammer NP?

The BIS biz didn't read like you were suggesting at all... they say quite clearly; no-one approached them about inclusion... quite clearly the FT does use the TIR side of things (if nothing else is available) and that goes against NP licensing and copyright.

Perhaps FT should just get rid of anything NP, in any form and go about taking an honest approach?

[sigur_ros]

Originally Posted by Wolf_Rider

quite clearly the FT does use the TIR side of things (if nothing else is available) and that goes against NP licensing and copyright.

BIS set a precedent by supporting both TrackIR and Freetrack so it is clear there is no license problem or legal issue with Freetrack. The only unclear thing is your motivation for spending a 14 page thread slandering Freetrack.

[Wolf_Rider]

I don't believe anyone has said there is any issue with FT (or any other) and TIR running side by side Sigur... where did this come from?
Also pointed out were the means of having a camera run as tracker, without having to hack into NP software.

[julian265]

Wow.... I go out for the day and the thread doubles in length!

Wolf_Rider, you'd make a great politician or lawyer.

Neither AndyJWest or TheGrunch have an issue with NP developing their own interface.

We all have a problem with games not accepting standard axis inputs for head tracking, for the nth time. We also have a problem with businesses which lobby game devs, to get them to not accept standard axis inputs.

You seem to avoid making comments directly about the above issue, instead changing the question, or choosing to comment about businesses protecting their interests instead, or a completely unrelated issue, regarding NP dealing with "hackers".

Also, Wolf_Rider, you asked for proof of NP being in a financial arrangement with Ubi, in order for them to "moderate" discussion of freetrack. I'll accept that this is not proof, however I have read it on the Ubi forum that there is a "sponsorship" arrangement between Ubi and NP which causes the issue to be "moderated". I'm looking for the post now, but it's a bit hard when the search terms needed have all been "moderated" out.

[Wolf_Rider]

Wow.... I go out for the day and the thread doubles in length!

Wolf_Rider, you'd make a great politician or lawyer.

thank you for your kind words, but neither take my fancy

Neither AndyJWest or TheGrunch have an issue with NP developing their own interface.

I have noticed that, and I don't believe anyone has indicated otherwise

We all have a problem with games not accepting standard axis inputs for head tracking, for the nth time.

PPJoy and TIR2joy does this, doesn't it?

We also have a problem with businesses which lobby game devs, to get them to not accept standard axis inputs.

why would NP have both PPJoy and TIR2joy listed on their site, for download, if this was truly the case?

You seem to avoid making comments directly about the above issue, instead changing the question, or choosing to comment about businesses protecting their interests instead, or a completely unrelated issue, regarding NP dealing with "hackers".

The true point of the matter is exactly that of NP dealing with hackers... and please don't go twisting things around

Also, Wolf_Rider, you asked for proof of NP being in a financial arrangement with Ubi, in order for them to "moderate" discussion of freetrack. I'll accept that this is not proof, however I have read it on the Ubi forum that there is a "sponsorship" arrangement between Ubi and NP which causes the issue to be "moderated". I'm looking for the post now, but it's a bit hard when the search terms needed have all been "moderated" out.

err, no..... proof was asked of grunch's allegations that NP were locking out other software/ hardware developers, in order to run a monopoly. grunch stated he had no proof, yet continues to make allegation... please don't alter the issue there.

regarding what other forums run by developers/ publishers do in relation to content on their forums, or in their product; why should any developer/ publisher support an outfit which hacks a company's software and (on their public forums) openly supports hacks and intimidation of other companies?

[AndyJWest]

....intimidation of other companies

That is a pretty serious allegation, Wolf_Rider. I don't suppose for one minute you are going to back it up with evidence?

[julian265]

Originally Posted by Wolf_Rider

PPJoy and TIR2joy does this, doesn't it?

It's a workaround, for sure, but there are still no generic head tracking inputs, when it's obvious that there should be. Some games also limit what you can input to head pose without TIR - eg limited to 2DoF when you emulate mouse movement.

Originally Posted by Wolf_Rider

why would NP have both PPJoy and TIR2joy listed on their site, for download, if this was truly the case?

Out of interest, can you post a link? Head trackers don't pop up in the "game controllers" control panel, and games do not communicate with them like almost all other gaming hardware. So it is truly not the case. Also, without seeing the context in which the links you mentioned are posted, I'm guessing that it's a workaround for early TIR owners who would otherwise have been screwed by NP's move to the encrypted interface, by making games ignore TIR 1, 2 and 3 (which cannot communicate in encrypted form like TIR 4+ does)

Originally Posted by Wolf_Rider

The true point of the matter is exactly that of NP dealing with hackers... and please don't go twisting things around[/COLOR]

Actually, the point at any one time is the question or statement that you choose to respond to.

Originally Posted by Wolf_Rider

[I]err, no..... proof was asked of grunch's allegations that NP were locking out other software/ hardware developers, in order to run a monopoly... please don't alter the issue there.

See:

Originally Posted by TheGrunch

Go to the Ubisoft forum, see for yourself. Start a topic about Freetrack and see what happens. If there's not a payment of some description in effect there, what's happening? Care to provide a theory?

And your response:

Originally Posted by Wolf_Rider

err nooo, that's still an allegation. Where is your proof?

But if you want proof of the locking out, see my link from early (post 15) in this thread: http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?...0&postcount=40

The entire thread is at : http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.ph...080#post589080

Originally Posted by Wolf_Rider

regarding what other forums run by developers/ publishers do in relation to content on their forums, or in their product; why should any developer/ publisher support an outfit which hacks a company's software and (on their public forums) openly supports hacks and intimidation of other companies?[/COLOR]

They should not support a "hacking outfit". IMO they should allow discussion. What intimidation?