Head Tracking with Cliffs of Dover

[Wolf_Rider]

Originally Posted by LoBiSoMeM

It's not NP technology, please! ~

its NP software, and that is what they are protecting, with every right to do so

Originally Posted by GHarris

Regarding Wolf_Rider's comments that Freetrack developers should "make the approach" or "seek inclusion - professionally"... "Professonal approaches" are what people with something to sell do. The Freetrack developers are not in it to make a profit. I don't understand why they *should* be expected to "approach" a sim developer. Freetrack is out there, it's open source, that's all that is needed. Oleg and his colleagues have heard of Freetrack (they must have done) and all they need to know about implementing it is readily available to them.

I am a supporter of Freetrack because I simply prefer an open and free (as in speech) implementation of head tracking to a proprietary one. A proprietary implementation will inevitably be abused by the people in control of it at the expense of current and past customers. As was the case when TrackIR started encrypting its data stream and made versions 1 and 2 of its TrackIR hardware incompatible with new games when they could otherwise still work. The controllers of a proprietary implementation might also seek to stifle competition from other proprietary or open implementations. As was the case when "Implementation of the "HeadTracker" interface <was> canceled at the request of NaturalPoint." in DCS: Black Shark.

wot, use somebody elses' (FT) gear without their permission, or include a method of FT gear getting stuck into somebody elses' (NP) software.

nah... the professional thing to do is to make the approach and seek inclusion, offering a proper product.


NP were protecting their rights... if the FT software did its own work, instead of syphoning off from somebody elses', you'd find it would have been a completely different ballgame - be sure

Originally Posted by julian265

They've wooed developers into implementing an interface which ONLY ACCEPTS TIR, which was the logical thing for them to do.

correct and completely understandable for NP to professionally make the approach to seek inclusion and then protect their software, after all, they made the effort. Would it have been too hard for FT to develop their own interface in the beginning, instead of hacking another?

Originally Posted by julian265

However, they're still lobbying for the exclusion of a generic interface (like mice/joysticks/throttles/wheels/pedals use) - which is holding back competition and development.

do you have some proof of that?

and

how does that gear get to work in the games at the moment and has been for many years now?

[MadBlaster]

One year ago:

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthr...devices+BoB%3F

[MadBlaster]

Another way to go about this. Simply bifurcate the head tracking interface functionality out of the stock game. Make it mouse only. Then offer two separate add-on packages. One for TrackIR users with their encrypted/proprietary interface and the other for Freetrack users with their free-use interface. The game is priced at ~$50 right now. So, say drop the price to $48 and price each headtracking add-on at say $2 dollars each as an example. This will maximize sales of the game and give the user more flexibility in how they want to play the game.

[SEE]

Originally Posted by MadBlaster

Another way to go about this. Simply bifurcate the head tracking interface functionality out of the stock game. Make it mouse only. Then offer two separate add-on packages. One for TrackIR users with their encrypted/proprietary interface and the other for Freetrack users with their free-use interface. The game is priced at ~$50 right now. So, say drop the price to $48 and price each headtracking add-on at say $2 dollars each as an example. This will maximize sales of the game and give the user more flexibility in how they want to play the game.

I certainly wouldn't object if it was possible to do! Like Lobisomem says, I too don't quite understand why there has not been an official response - certainly stirred up a lot of debate in the past looking at that thread you linked to. Ah well, only a few weeks to go and all will be revealed!

[Royraiden]

If a mod sees this please close it, its useless.

[Wolf_Rider]

Originally Posted by MadBlaster

Another way to go about this. Simply bifurcate the head tracking interface functionality out of the stock game. Make it mouse only. Then offer two separate add-on packages. One for TrackIR users with their encrypted/proprietary interface and the other for Freetrack users with their free-use interface. The game is priced at ~$50 right now. So, say drop the price to $48 and price each headtracking add-on at say $2 dollars each as an example. This will maximize sales of the game and give the user more flexibility in how they want to play the game.

I think that is what quite a few people seem to be saying... "FT, make your own software and interface, and make it independantly and being dependant on other peoples' software and interface, or parts of. Also don't use the NP SDK to do so."

[MadBlaster]

They already have made it. Apparently it is being used by other game developers now. I see an SDK folder where I have Freetrack saved on my computer. There is a stereo button in the GUI to activate the freetrack interface. So, it must exist.

The problem is that 1C has given us all the impression that TrakIR interface will be bundled (again!) into the game with the video advertisments it has provided to us. It has done nothing to lead us to believe that we can use another headtracking solution such as Freetrak. That is the relevant issue here. I don't think there is a "professional" representive from Freetrak to do a business deal with 1C because it is free license. So, if we want to get an answer from 1C (and I do believe this is the goal of this thread) then we the users of Freetrak and other solutions should be pointing out economic reasons why it would be prudent to do so. I see no economic reason to bundle TrakIR interface again. Why, because there are now legitimate competitive options available and if you exclude them you disenfranchise a segment of the market that would otherwise buy your game. It is not like 2001. Speaking for myself, I've been playing IL-2 4 years now, have plenty of money to invest in the hobby. But I have no intention of spending $150 for something I can do for $40. That is just the way I am. I'm a saver. My mortgage will be paid off soon while my friends lose their house. Simple rational budgeting. 1C should address this segment of the market because there are a lot of us who will just keep on playing the old game because it has become quite good with the efforts of DT and the "other guys" and frankly, there simply hasn't been enough time to enjoy their latest efforts now that we are all distracted with the release date of CoD. So, I suggest we steer this thread around and get 1C's attention. And the only way I think we can do that is to point out how they can make more money if they go in this direction. Or we can party down with Johnny Lee again next year with the same old arguements. I do like that video. A classic youtube moment imho.

[Wolf_Rider]

Originally Posted by MadBlaster

They already have made it. Apparently it is being used by other game developers now. I see an SDK folder where I have Freetrack saved on my computer. There is a stereo button in the GUI to activate the freetrack interface. So, it must exist.

how does this interface work? how was it developed?

Originally Posted by MadBlaster

I don't think there is a "professional" representive from Freetrak to do a business deal with 1C because it is free license.

the software must have been created by someone and hosted on a site created by someone...

[MadBlaster]

I am not a programmer. I won't be able to tell you. In the meantime, I have just sent a message to the Freetrack author to post here. Hopefully, that request will pan out. In the meantime, you can certianly do your own research at their website. I suppose if you are a programmer, you could download the program and deconstruct it to figure it out. But it also been stated earlier in this thread that other games are making it available to users. I assume that to be true, but I did not verify. Of course, we all know your well-documented position on this topic W-R. So, your future comments will be weighed accordingly by me and by others I think.