Head Tracking with Cliffs of Dover

[Wolf_Rider]

Originally Posted by vicinity

Well, actually Blackdog_kt's post shows the law is very clear. It is NP and not FT breaking the law. You don't have to go to court to see how the law works, case studys obviously make things a lot clearer but that's not going to happen until another company decides to get in on the head tracking market.

It quite possibly would be if there are no alternatives, but, alternatives have shown

Originally Posted by vicinity

Also, mouselook is not 6dof - mouselook moves in two axis x and y.

You mention one of those alternatives here and Mouse Look (aka Freelook) offers the full 6DoF

Originally Posted by vicinity

Actually FT is at 2.2 something atm and future updates are still planned.

last maintenance release was on 200 Nov 2008

Originally Posted by vicinity

If there was a standard interface for headtracking in games anyone could come into the market.

I don't see anyone as disputing that


[QUOTE=vicinity;224950]

NP obviously don't want that though because you can charge for much more your product when there is no competition. Most of their updates are just to allow you to use their software on the most recently supported games and that is only because of the encryption they added to prevent other headtrackers entering the market and as they see it, using their hardwork (of getting developers to support headtracking).

[QUOTE=vicinity;224950]


Many have agreed that a software author has every right to protect the work and efforts

Originally Posted by vicinity

What really should happen is for developers to leave headtracking options for all, rather than only supporting TrackIR and allowing NP to keep their monopoly.

refer back to Mouse Look comments