|
|
|||||||
| IL-2 Sturmovik The famous combat flight simulator. |
| View Poll Results: Would you sacrifice small graphical issues in order to be able to use 6-DoF | |||
| Yes I could cope with this as it would add to my flying experience |
   
|
270 | 85.44% |
| No, I'd rather have my head on a fixed stick thanks you very much |
  
|
46 | 14.56% |
| Voters: 316. You may not vote on this poll | |||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#2
02-20-2011, 11:51 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Head tracking works also for 2DoF or 4DoF etc... 6DoF is not only about 'tracking device: yes or no'.
Maybe some are just satisfied with how the tracking does work now?
__________________
 ---------------------------------------------- For bugreports, help and support contact: daidalos.team@googlemail.com For modelers - The IL-2 standard modeling specifications: IL-Modeling Bible 
|
|
#3
02-20-2011, 01:03 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
I know the answer: "we have rigid standards of..." Well, we consumers have ours to, and we know we can fly OK with 6DOF, we already do, it's up to OURS "rigid standards"... I never saw in patching history one feature so needed, with all the consumers happy with some glitches, and devs that simply don't give that to us. Amazing! And after all, I'm "rude"... Man, we need to beg a lot to 1C/Oleg/TD, and we receive things we don't want, like the "glorified" arming bomb fuse... Maybe TD need to think a little about what people want...
|
|
#4
02-20-2011, 02:01 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
No... I won't feel pissed. No... I won't....
See, I voted 'yes' too. But my 'yes' is definitly different from yours. And 'your rigid standard' it out of my interest. Too low.
__________________
---------------------------------------------- For bugreports, help and support contact: daidalos.team@googlemail.com For modelers - The IL-2 standard modeling specifications: IL-Modeling Bible
|
|
#5
02-20-2011, 02:55 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Too low for me is flying without 6DOF HT, when I can have it with a little mod.
But really I don't care. Maybe "vanilla" servers can consider the 6DOF mod "stock" and stop this discussion. TD must be ignored in this subject. 6DOF is out there, as a lot of "TD hard work"... Simple. Boring discussion. Just an "insight" why modding is good, not bad as a lot of people in IL-2 community think...
|
|
#6
02-20-2011, 03:05 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
That's an interesting reply, does that 'imply' that your personal view (not TD), is that an 'authorised' 6DOF mod/DLC would be your preffered solution and allow access to stock servers? If so, a lot of us would be happy with that solution. Last edited by SEE; 02-20-2011 at 03:07 PM.
|
|
#7
02-20-2011, 05:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Its not only my own oppinion (speaking of the teams members), that 6DoF functionality, if made properly, would be a very nice feature indeed. We are neither blind nor dumb.
Its just the fact, that the mod-version isn't the way to go for us.
__________________
---------------------------------------------- For bugreports, help and support contact: daidalos.team@googlemail.com For modelers - The IL-2 standard modeling specifications: IL-Modeling Bible
|
|
#8
02-20-2011, 05:42 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
6DoF is useless without a head tracker. Goes hand in hand. 
|
|
#10
02-20-2011, 06:34 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Do me a flavor and Hit this poll at UBI
|
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
