Yes, it is... It's how an aplication can read data from FreeTrackClient.dll interface... It's how a game can read data from Freetrack, no rocket science.

I don't know what W-R likes to know now, really. But he is strange because he thinks that's some kind of "copy/paste from Freetrack site". No, it's in Freetrack SDK, a simple command line application to get data from FreeTrackClient.dll.

What's the big deal? I want that W-R put in "layman's terms" the issues with FreeTrackClient.dll route, please, because I and ArmAII both uses FreeTrackClient.dll to get data from Freetrack. I use Freetrack interface a lot.

But he's not falling into sophistry... We are! Please W-R, point the "irreparable damage" of using FreeTrackClient.dll to get data from Freetrack, please! BIS made "irreparable damage" using and documenting this "evil route" in ArmAII patch 1.05?!?!

"[60457] New: FreeTrack support using FreeTrackClient.dll"

Ohhhhh... BIS made "irreparable damage"... You don't need to be so dramatic... Relax a bit!

:cool:

Yes, after looking at that code. I really don't think he has any leg to stand on. It is completely independent. Maybe he is just a "bitter clinger" from the past. Wants to take out revenge on us Freetrack guys for some stupid reason.

I don't believe LoBi read a word you said, Blackdog ;) sad

No, he will made finally a CLEAR statement about FreeTrackClient.dll, put lines of code that will prove the "evil way", the abusive NP hack...

And I will wait to see W-R NP guy destroying finally any argument used to make 1C use FreeTrackClient.dll as a manner to get 6DOF HT data and use it in IL-2:CoD!

After that, W-R will transform Bohemia Interactive, the major infidels, into ashes! They used FreeTrackClient.dll in ArmAII!!! Blasphemy!!!

:-)

Oh no, he said nothing, as usual...

Funnier than ever! :-P

Now I believe the circus is over, everybody can see how a game can use FreeTrackClient.dll route to access 6DOF data from Freetrack, don't using any "hack" of NP copyrighted - or not - material.

Everybody now knows that BIS uses FreeTrackClient.dll without any trouble.

As I said: life is simple. Using FreeTrackClient.dll to have 6DOF data is really easily, 1C team can make it in one afternoon.

Now I'm tired to discuss this obvious subject. We have ENOUGH data to use ours brains and know the truth, we don't need "half" comments about "hacks" made by some NP troll. We have the facts, show how things work, all simple.

I'm off now. Do wathever you want, 1C. I'm tired to explain simple things.

Pity this forum has no "ignore user" function... but you can do it by sheer will LoBiSoMeM :)

Maybe this week will have something about this issue... one can only hope.

Ok, you like to keep hearing it, so i will oblige and since you like going philosophical about it, let's also touch a bit on how you structure your arguments.

On the technical side of things, FT doesn't use the TIR implementation to track the dots, it makes your computer think it uses NP code when it's not: it reads the movements with its own interface posted here in this threa, then it has to parse them into the game. If the game doesn't support alternative trackers a user can make the game think it's trackIR so it can parse the data.

It's as simple as can be really. It's not trackIR, your computer thinks it is.

I don't know why you keep making the jump from "my PC thinks this is X" to "it thinks this is X, so that makes it true".

You've been given complex explanations, simple explanations, calm replies, offensive replies, the whole nine yards, by a variety of posters. And since i don't think you're mentally incapable of grasping the meaning of what's been said, i'll chalk it up to grasping at straws in order to not accept the explanation. Sorry, you've left me no alternative here.


Also, another thing you keep bringing up is that whenever someone uses an analogy to illustrate a point, you will invariably go "we are not talking about joysticks/AGP ports/other peripherals, but about trackIR and webcams". Maybe because if we draw the parallels it would mean that just as your line of reason implies an associated license fee for using other hardware for a similar purpose (again, this is against US copyright law if the hardware is up to the job), it would also make it reasonable for microsoft to ask a fee from everyone who makes peripherals for windows systems, NP included.

Sorry, but you either apply the same standards to everyone or not at all. If FT or any other head-tracker must pay NP to do the same job with different hardware and software, then NP must also pay the guys who came up with a movable camera in a 3d cockpit in the first place. Isn't NP mooching off the idea of a 3d cockpit by taking the basic idea and adding their own stuff on top of it? Not from where i'm standing, but definitely so according to the way you present it. Like i said, double standards won't fly.

This is all a very simple argumentative tactic on your part really. No offence at all, i'm just calling them as i see them and you're entitled to use whatever trick in the book to push your opinion, that's the meaning of any discussion forum as long as we're civil to each other. Just be prepared to be called out on it if the tactic is completely see through ;)

Step 1: Strongly deny all kinds of explanation that back anything non-favorable to your point of view
Step 2: Since you are denying all explanation, you then make the silent, implied jump that there isn't one
Step 3: Ask for an expanation
Step 4: Go back to step 1 and repeat as necessary.

This creates tension, drives the moderate posters away, maybe even invites a mod to close the thread and generally makes the topic at hand a painful experience to discuss and debate. The objective is then accomplished: people don't want to talk about it or have it cluttering their boards, so the unfavorable opinion is nipped in the bud before it gains momentum. And you think i'm the one who's into sophistry :cool:

Ignore user function or Freetrack suport into IL-2:CoD?

where are your other three fingers pointing, Blackdog?


also sport... explain this - 2nd check box down from the top

I explain clearly to you how the FIRST BOX DOWN FROM THE TOP works...

We just have the second because game devs don't suport the first one.

If you like to see the second one vanish, just suport the inclusion of Freetrack interface into new titles!

I'm tired of all this crap, really. That's the way NP do business...

Yes, I suppose he can say that. All we have to say is , "Why didn't NP decompile the DLL and take it to court as evidence?" Since they haven't done that for all these years, then it is red herring argument he would make. I'm sure it is because NP doesn't want to break their own monopoly by risk losing in court.

I think all we can do is wait for the game to come out. I don't think 1C can talk about this at all because of the NDA. We probably should not bother them anymore. Hopefully they have heard us over these last few days. I think they will come through. Or even NP might secretly give us a patch to shut us up. ;)

Well, at least BIS have guts to stand to consumers side. I'm happy that one major gaming company put your consumers as priority, not some hardware company.

Let's wait and see. All the arguments for Freetrack interface are clear. Now it's into 1C hands to do the right thing. 83.33% for Freetrack.

Yep, this is I think my last post on this topic and maybe this board for a while.

But I want to say this. I've really enjoyed myself. It's been fun battling the Wolf-Rider and reading all the posts. Also, if I slammed you the wrong way, well don't worry about it. Nothing personal from my end. Just look at it as another dogfight.;)

@ LoBi...

The only "all the facts are in" (edited out of your post) fact, is that FT is a hack tool

@ Blaster...

Just another dogfight? I hope you do better in the sim ;)



*Edit

@ Blackdog...

?

+1, and not just a bit.

Hooked up my TIR5 yesterday, and I must say, the product more than just surprised me.
I hate to say it, as I was really fond of my FT cap, but the TIR is just too damn sexy.

I felt perfectly comfortable from the the first second. They supply 3 default settings, one of them felt pretty close to my customized FT setup.

The major difference is: If you play around in the tir software you can achieve same results which previously took you upwards 2hrs in FT.
And it feels much, much more stable, not to mention the precision.
It really is an awesome product.
But then again, that's what I expect from a professional solution.

Conclusion:
I don't regret I went for FT first; I learned a great deal about leds and also improved my soldering skills, so it sure was fun.
If I had to decide again, however, I'm not sure if would go the same path a second time.
FT wasn't free either, and the hours I spent building and adjusting it is a midrange, two digit number.
Hint: If you go for TIR, try to find used one and please don't forget to ask the the seller for serial number, as TIR5 #152000-152914 are lemons.

That's a consistent appraisal common everywhere

Yep. I never believed it though. ;)
(or didn't want to)

Can please explain me the 17 voters against including freetrack in CoD what have to do with TIR? is because they feel pissed off that somebody can use the same kind of device at a fraction of TiR cost? or what?

I already told you, numerous times in fact. Emulating/simulating an interface with different software and hardware doesn't equal using it, just like simulating northrop grumman aircraft in pacific fighters was not the same as building and selling real ones, but that didn't prevent NG from asking Oleg Maddox a ton of money to let him include them in the sim (something everyone agrees was stupid on NG's part).

You just can't or won't wrap your mind around it, so it's a clear waste of my time to have another go. Please don't take this the wrong way as i harbor no ill will against you just for having your opinion, but i have no interest whatsoever in convincing you personally. My interest was in advocating alternatives for the community, because some people obviously use them and this levels the playing field and creates more competition for me when flying online.

I honestly don't believe you are a NP "public relations/damage control" spokesperson who's getting paid to do this, you just have your opinion and i'm fine with that. That being said, you sure do have an axe to grind with FT, just like Lobi has an axe to grind with NP. I think you two are not that different even if you advocate opposing points, but all this "passion for the cause" just clouds your judgment and you both miss the bigger picture sometimes.

I don't care what it's called, i just want a generic head tracking interface as an alternative and guess what, i will still buy a new trackIR set when i scrape the cash together. I just won't have to fly blind in the meantime.

My aim in all of this was to make sure other opinions get some exposure too and we as a whole have more options to choose from, but all this polarization is sure making it harder to look at things in a level-headed way.

Nevertheless, even if people have issues with FT they still voted for it and the interpretation is clear: more and more of us want an alternative form of head tracking. That's regardless of the details and the feud between FT and NP.
We can all argue until we're blue in the face about how NP restricts competition or not, or how FT is a hack tool or isn't, but that doesn't change the meaning of the poll one bit. The cat's out of the bag in regards to CoD headtracking and that's all there is to it at the end of the day.

So, the next logical step is to ask the devs to include the function in a patch, or as part of the SDK that will be available after launch. I think it's time to wrap this one up and do just that, ask for the feature.

Bigger picture, Blackdog:

- Why Bohemia Interactive can suport Freetrack using Freetrack interface? You believe BIS is a company of hackers?

It's one point withou answer by the critics of Freetrack interface. A major software company give FT suport in some big title. Why this same kind of suport can't be part of IL-2: CoD?

If this point can be made clear...

which has nothing to do with the subject at hand, Blackdog


Consensus had already been achieved before you came in with your opinion, Blackdog, and that consensus was for alternatives forms (not just add another one, but make make allowance for many) of headtracker



my judgement hasn't been clouded at all Blackdog, though some have tried to cloud the issue, that being allowance for alternative forms of headtracking


good on you there, Blackdog, many want to have alternative form of headtracking (am I missing the bigger picture yet?)



You don't have to make sure other opinions get some exposure, Blackdog, this isn't a school, and everybody has been free to offer thier opinion and (for those who chose to) have done so, just as equally, everybody is free to question (or not) any opinion or detail of. People also have the right to offer a opinion, without fear of ridicule or intimidation... this is free speech.

*Edit
Agreeing to disagree is a good thing, but continued attempts to force an opinion on another through getting personal (playing the player, instead of the ball so to speak)... isn't. Allowing people to form an opinion from an opinion presented as fact, isn't a healthy premise.

Now, do you agree to disgree and as that should go, leave it as that... or will you come back again and make another attempt to force your opinion?


If you read the comments through, and I believe you should without a biased view but with an eye of appraisal, you would see that many have voted no, because there has been no "don't care" option in the poll was panned as being poorly worded and formed with dubious intent. Others voted in favour of the consesnus that alternative forms of headtracking should be allowed for... people have been saying that for way before you came along.



the poll is not a true reflection, it forces a yes/ no vote for one product



it has been that way since very close to the beginning of discussions, Blackdog.



That had been mentioned right near the beginning there, Blackdog.


Really... it had been wrapped up a long time ago

(looks like you missed on getting on top ;) )

In my case I voted no because I'm against BS polls - I had no other choice than voting no.
Enraging lobi is nice side effect. :grin:

LOLLLLL :grin:

Then what is this?
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=18707

And this?
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=18419

...or this?
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=18425

because they were surveys, and this one is a BS poll which forces a yes/ no for one product to disengeniously prove a point?

It is BS because you dont like it?LOL Its a simple question and the same that I asked in my previous thread,the one that you guys hijacked and turned into an actual BS thread.

wot? because you really don't like it?

Ignore forum user. :D


Second phrase was separate subject... I wasn't very clear, I know. :) I was hoping for an weekly update on CoD that said something about FT interface.

What kind of stupid answer is that?You answer a question with another question?Lol.I love your "arguments".

Thanks, unfortunately I think any attempt to explain it to him is futile.
While you were one a few who understood the point of the whining poll he did not.
It's ok. ;)

Your poll was unnecessary.Period.Why bother?Does that make you feel better?Dont you have anything else to do?Dont need to answer.

@RoyRaiden...

here => http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/t...9/m/5391064019


ask a question to the developers... you might have luck there

Cant you answer?Still avoiding questions.So mature.I say again, you guys are pathetic.Swiss is the biggest troll right now, took the crown from Tree.And you Wolf,you are just a sad person seeking for attention here in the forum.

errr, Roy..... http://www.google.com/moderator/#16/e=59ba5 (the link in the link)


IL-2: Cliffs of Dover Developer Questions
This is your chance to have your questions answered by Game Producer Ilya Shevchenko. No detail is to big or too small!

You can also vote on which questions from other fans you think we should ask. We will then pick the best questions (which a heavy leaning towards the more popular ones) and the final answers will be posted to the official forum (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/for*ums/a/frm/f/8071032709).

Deadline for questions is Monday February 21st at midday GMT.

I am a track ir 4 owner, but I think that people who use Freetrack should enjoy his device. But, If Natural Point has supported O. Maddox ( €€€) he should protect the device link, I would do it.

It makes me feel sooooo superior.
What's your excuse?
http://www.cheesebuerger.de/images/s...liebe/g078.gif


Back to this poll:
It actually reminds me of some African elections where the old despot gets elected with 90% of the votes.
What they forget to mention is that only 20% of the citizens were actually permitted to vote.

So, what we got got here is the proof that >82% of the freetrack users are happy and would actually like to keep their toy.
What an astonishing insight!
http://www.cheesebuerger.de/images/m...edene/a062.gif

@WR

Except you know that talking about freetrack is banned on Ubi forums so any questions about it will not be posted.

okay... its not UBI forum per se, it is done through Google, so ask the question about alternative headtracking in general and what provisions there might be?

Even though many in the thread have admitted to being TrackIR users? If you don't want freetrack support fine, but why bother arguing against it when it would be an addittional feature that would have no impact on you?

... just because he is swiss ...
and bored.

#122

and:

*****

Thank Lord you didn't use a capital letter, ChrisDNT would have felt insulted.

I already have read that post, and ok, you think the poll has some bias (I personally think there is nothing wrong as yes, people who don't care, shouldn't bother voting, not having an opinion doesn't need to be represented in this case and no, this isn't democracy, it's a select representation of some gamers on an internet forum).

Point is, no matter how the poll was set up, you are doing all FT users a disservice by continuing to argue against it when you seem to not care either way.

It is NOT a representation if you exclude an unknown percentage of the community - that was what my example was about, not democracy.
Seriously, don't you guys learn that in school?

The results of this poll are worth exactly: nothing.

Actually I was doing Lobi a disservice, but also a service to his pharmacist, he sure could sell him a big box of drugs to lower his blood pressure.;)

My point was that the people who want to vote 'don't care' isn't important, like it would in a democracy.

Also notice my use of "select representation"...you'll never have absolute representation of the opinion of everyone who would/wouldn't use a feature in a poll anyway, as the majority won't be on these forums yet or those who won't have seen the poll.

Saying the poll means nothing isn't true, it shows at least that some people are interested in FT support and some are not or do not want it. It's not a fully scientific poll no, but that isn't even possible on an internet forum.

A Yes/No poll was good enough to show enough interest in support of FT, on the BI forum for BI to implement it into their game.

Ok, I asked the question http://www.google.com/moderator/#15/...q=59ba5.15f7be

so who want an answer i think should vote for it

thanks

Not entirely true, depends on regulations.
Empty but returned ballots can be extremely important, but this goes too far OT.


But again: Lobi wanted to proof how important them implementation of FT is.
To proof this point you need a survey, a "yes vs. no" poll is rather ill-suited.


Now, let's look at the facts using some logic:

Why would Oleg hesitate to implement FT?
Answer: There is zero reason to exclude it, as long as it can be done fast and easy.

Unless:
a.
there are some legal issues Oleg is worried about and therefore hesitates
(which is obviously not a problem)
b.
He made a deal with NP and took money for it. It is his right to do so.

If it is "b", you can whine all day long, it's not gonna change anything, at least not for the next few months.
In fact, this whole discussion is a joke, we have to wait, and once the game is released face the facts.
Or does anyone seriously believe Oleg could just "forget" to implement FT? It's not like he's retarded or something.
Jeez.

That's the points. The only logical answer for me is the b. letter. But why in this case Oleg can't came here and talk about? Maybe because is something not so "legal" about that?

I'm just speculating in this case. But we can't have a single word from 1C... And I think it's really strange.

The good point is that 1C let the discussions evolve. It's a nice touch.

Now, it's really wait and see what's happens... But one fact is if Oleg/1C dind't have one "hidden exclusivity contract" with NP, they CAN use Freetrack interface in IL-2:CoD. BIS made it, so, it's completly possible and LEGAL to do. People need to understand that.

It is ill-suited in your opinion, and complaining about the poll doesn't actually address the question of whether FT support should be included.



There is nothing there that I would argue with, except i'm not the one whining - i'm adding support for a feature I would like added to the game if it is not already in it.

Swiss can you stop arguing with everybody, cool for you that use trackir, but what's this crusade against it, there's no point on yours, so please stop being a pure bampot, and no more argument.

Can it be?, please.

if the poll had have been run with wording along the lines of;

Should games have provision for alternative headtracking - yes/ no?
Doesn't worry me either way

you may have received an even larger yes vote than the current one

if it had have been along the lines of;

Should FT (or any other headtracker) be included with capacity to sponge/ hack off TIR/ other - yes/ no?
Should FT (or any other headtracker) be included without capacity to sponge/ hack off TIR/ other - yes/ no
Don't care either way

the result would be different again but the intent of the poll would be clear and at all time, the "don't care" vote is neutral and not to be counted as for or against.

Freetrack can't "hack" TIR because Freetrack can't connect with TIR hardware.

It's another thing that I'm tired about, NP guy. Freetrack "hacks" nothing.

Be a little more MORAL, you and your company. I'm a litle bit sick that some NP customers can't see really how things works...

But NP troll, please, some words about BIS:ArmAII and Freetrack use! I love the way you run far away from this subject and keep runnig in circles! It's funny!

But you gather more than 20 votes for your cause! I'm alway amazed how people can chose the wrong side for illogical or limmited thinking! It's nice!

lol @ LoBi...

I think you've got your threads mixed up... this one is on a poorly presented poll and besides which, who are you?

Don't run. Let's talk about BIS suport to Freetrack users. Don't want to talk about that?

Huh? You must confuse me with somebody, I was just playing with lobi.
(I have 2 FT devices, my pc is full of pirated software - I did post my own review of Tir, but again, see above.)


Agreed. This poll doesn't change a thing either - actually here we have two guys arguing about whether FT's interface is legal not.


You was meant as "you among us/them", sorry.

I already addressed this point.
You should remind them to add joystick support...


At least 10% voted for same reason like me - wreck your poll. :mrgreen:

Why don't we discuss which options a new poll should have?

:evil: :grin: ;)

I tend to agree with Swiss regards the Voting options. Headtracking is gaining popularity and there are various systems available. From a Business and marketing perspective I would imagine that the 'Target Market' and 'share' between the various systems is what would be considered and the wether there would be an impact on sales if a particular segment of that 'market share' was unsupported.



If I were marketing a Global product I would establish what segment of the Target Market has, or intends to 'use', Headtracking and what systems they are currently using. May be only 10% use Headtracking and 2% have FT, 7% NP and 1% Other. On the other hand, the use of 'Headtracking' may account for 67% and FT is 35% of that - I haven't a clue and neither has anyone else on this forum. The simple truth, wether you like it or not, is that FT is well established as an 'alternative'. If there are large numbers of FT users in the Headtracking community, and the use of 'Headtracking' represent a significant section of that target market, could omitting support impact on sales?

My approach would be simple (and would apply to permanent Internet connection DRM if the details had not been made public) - place pre-order - send email to UBI asking for spec/HT support - no response or no support for FT/Other - buy 'appropriate' or 'Cancel Order' giving reasons for!

Publisher would find themselves left wide open if that little (or other)requirement wasn't printed on the box, or announced by retail sales assistant at time of purchase... not because of the requirement but for not publishing the details...

In this case, sales wouldn't take that much of hit (I don't know if royalties apply, or how they would work for PC games but you'd be looking at $100 lost in royalties if it was a music album, based on numbers result here), if all refused.

need to keep in mind though, the problem isn't the alternative headtrackers, it the way some of those alternative trackers go about what they do.

Another e-peening tour-de-force.

Its a simple question. If you don't care don't vote.

I have TIR, I don't care about FT, I don't vote. HT is a great idea. If I knew more about Freetrack (and I'm not going to waste my time finding out) I might think its a good idea or I mght think its a bad idea but that would be on technical grounds not some kind of emotional reaction.

As some people have said, why block something that doesn't concern you?

Hmmm maybe this post of mine is an emotional reaction to stupidity.

don't care, so don't vote?
sorta skews the truer picture of what should be a survey poll though.... with non - compulsory voting, the gist of what you're saying happens anyway.

Besides ridiculously dodging the BIS subject, "NP PR" makes another mistake... by using just a single "user account" to constantly reply its nonsense... thus getting to a point where people reading the pages start to feel nausea about that... brand.

I mean... look at this thread... it's like a tennis court... NP guy trying to kick all the balls thrown at him that he think it might put the free versions of interfaces or software or even hardware in a bad light. But letting slip what it's "unpleasant" for NP to respond.

Question for NP.

Would NP consider to dump the production of consumer class cameras (TIR 4 and 5) due to the fact that multicores CPUs these days need only a tiny fraction of their power to calculate what "the chip" on their TIR cameras does?

NP could still sell the NP head clip or reflector and a more simple camera without the chip. Maybe including in the camera kit a small plastic (cheap) mechanism with which the user could quickly and conveniently switch the camera from a standard Webcam (with IR filter on and vis light filter off, maybe even some IR leds on for reflector use) to a IR only webcam (that has IR filter removed and normal light filter on).

Such camera and clip package could be sold around 40$ and given the fact that the software can be made in spare time (hey... look at the others...) would be much cheaper and better penetrate the market niche.

NP could still pretend that their interface is "better" and compete with the other market solutions...



Doesn't sound like a juicy business eh? I bet it doesn't...

what have multicores got to do with anything? and there was a question asked of LoBi which sent him into meltdown; how did BIS integrate the FT? So I don't what this business of ignoring the BIS subject is all about...

"NP guy trying to kick all the balls balls thrown at him"? What am I supposed to do? buckle under the weight of that onslaught?? No! and I'm not affiliated with NP, did you miss that bit? So you (and your mates) are getting personal about it on a consistent and persistent basis, you're casting your free versions of questionable history and practice in a bad light yourselves.

As for your other questions to of NP, you'll have to ask them.. tip! be polite about though, it may help you actually getting a response (if any)

Using Freetrack interface, FreeTrackClient.dll!

Don't - play - stupid - with - me!

And you can shove your "Mouse Look" whatever you want too!

Said that, why BIS can use FreeTrackClient.dll - will say again to the moron understand - FreeTrackClient.dll without any "legal" or "moral" problem?

But I will write again, because stupidity is hard to overcome:

- ArmAII uses FreeTrackClient.dll to communicate with Freetrack! You want to know how to communicate with FreeTrackClient.dll? I put in this forum the sample of command line code to get all the data needed, included in Freetrack SDK!!!

This guy is pathetic...

Again, playing stupid.

Wit MC processor, the amunt of CPU used to process raw data from a cheap webcam and provide in the end 6DOF HT data is tiny.

NP have shivers with Freetrack because of that: for free you can do all TIR do with lessa money. Simple as that.

Who wants to buy te NONSENSE talking about "hack", fell free to embark into the vessel of genious like W-R... I'm living in 2011, and try to "copyright" one trivial thing is pathetic.

all that describes the what and the method. LoBi, it doesn't describe the how it works... what does FT hook into with your ArmAII? eg, does it hook into mouse look, does it hook into NP, does it hook into yet another view system?

How many DoF is available FT in ArmAII (OoTB)?

This guy is idiot or what?

I'll not explalin AGAIN how works FreeTrackClient.dll. If you don't understand until now, you will never can.

ArmAII "hook with my ArmAII" providing Freetrack axis to these actions:

- 2DOF free looking, pitch and yaw;

- Lean right and left, X translation;

- Zoom view, Z translation.

So, 4DOF, like TIR does in ArmAII. If you use TIR, it's the same way to assign TIR axis to ArmAII controls.

What's your point now? NP have a "patent pending" with "looking" into games?

Why should they do that?
If I sell something I try to find the point where the price curve cuts demand.
Even they sold triple the amount: 3x$40= $120, yet a single TIR5 flushes $150 into their account.
That would be kind of stupid.


Competition: I wouldn't call it competition when the alternative product is FREE.



edit: This point is ridiculous.
It's not about it can be made, but was made by some geeks who deliberately decided to work for free. They just didn't get paid for it. Cool.
Why do you think the latest version in from 2008, I mean, it's soooo easy?

so what happened to the 6DoF you keep badgering about? and you still haven't explained in layman's terms the what...

When you can be civil and behave yourself, I'll take you off ignore again

Perfect the last sentence!

And I can't also call a normal consumer who bought an expensive product with a free solution available...

But wait... If NP can make that this free solution is blocked, maybe NP can be the only option available...

But is really hard to some genious here understand that... They think that's all "normal" in they amazing view of economics...

:-)

WTF?!?!?!

I'm talking about Freetrack Interface suport. ArmAII didn't use all 6DOF in the game, just 4 axis, with FT or TIR. What's your stupid point now?

It's better and better! Now I beggin to believe that you don't work for any company. You are really nonsense! My head aches! :confused:

You know what head tracking and 6DOF means at all? I need to explain that to you?

Ohhhh... Maybe NP have a "patent pending" over "6DOF"! Only NP can delivery 6DOF data!

You, NP, and anyone that goes this way is sick.

well, that's slightly better...

yes, LoBi, the interface is the how... can you explain the what?

Point? what happened to the badgering over 6DoF? it looks like you'll happily settle for 4DoF now.

At least it is starting to sink in... I don't work for NP

NP must be happy with that, you are really pathetic. Even NP don't deserves this kind of employee.

I'm not "badgering over 6DOF", if you can't noticed yeat, I'm advocating for Freetrack Interface suport into IL-2:CoD, and in this case with 6DOF, available in IL-2:CoD.

But what I really can't believe is that I loose my time with you and you really believe that you achieve some point because ArmAII uses only 4DOF with FT and TIR. It's really too much nonsense for my brain!

Go take your meds, please. You really need it! :cool:

none of that explains "the what", LoBi...

and no, you're badgering anyone who opposes the hack tool, not advocating for inclusion... if you were "advocating" you should be able to and would have no hesitation to explain how it all works, to the layman. You would approach the developers with a clean product.

Now you may think you're being very clever , but you aren't doing your cause any favours... in fact you're doing it more damage than good.

The normal view of economics is to make as much cash as possible, what's wrong with that?
Look at Apple: They sell you obsolete, or at least cheap, hardware for an astronomical price.
For two reasons:
1st: They can.
2nd: Consumers don't trust cheap stuff(I dont f.i., I hate Apple from the bottom of my heart though)


But let's get back to OM/Ubi vs TIR/FT

Both, FT and TIR offer their interface for free.
Implementing them is not free, you have to pay the programmer, even if it's done in short amount time.

One of the two(FT/TIR) make actually money with the interface/product they offer.

That means you can charge only one of them for implementing their interface.
Of course, they are only willing to pay if you cut the competition out - normal.

Sounds like win-win situation.
Unless, of course, your sales would suffer substantially because you only offer the interface for one device.

This last point is the only important one - this is what this freaking poll should have been about.

I cannot enter in this debate as it will mean to enter politics not only economics... but, you can see for yourself if you look care enough why what you say is wrong.

look around you...

A statement in which you refuse to make a statement, cool.

Problem is: That is the core of our lil' discussion here.

And this guy said that another person was using sophistry...

"The what"... Man, talk clearly... You go around, and around, and aroud... You talk about "mouselook"... You talk about "hack tool"... You talk now about "4DoF"...

And the funniest about that is that you still doing this with some "tone" that you know a lot of things, how world works...

Talk clearly one time in life, please! How do YOU think Freetrack works in ArmAII? You believe the way it works is illegal or imoral? Answer!

Talking about "doing it more damage than good" means nothing here, you are just sound pathetic and without arguments. By the way, until now I like a lot your "insights about nothing"... And they are helping a lot to my "goal":

- People can see that all the lies about Freetrack are vapour, that BIS can use Freetrack Interface without problem, etc.

If 1C don't include FT suport in the new title, that's not my "goal", they have their minds and objectives. I wanto to clarify that's don't exists any reason to NOT INCLUDE FT suport, and that some people will like to have FT suport.

You can't prove nothing against that... Just keep talking nonsense.

Yes, and you don't know a thing about economic abuse.

Try learn why in the world we have some regulations regards that kind of think, instead that pretending we live in a world without any market regulation.

The point about the acceptance (all of a sudden) of 4 Dof was the noise about only 3DoF in another flight sim.

I spent years travelling

I don't know, LoBi, that's why I'm asking

and there you are badgering again


*Edit...

it was a lack of regulation which brought on the GFC


and more badgering from you, this time to another

File a claim, or stfu.;)

Playing stupid again. I'm not surprised.

The "noise" about "3DoF" is because your beloved company have access to 6DoF in this "another filght sim", and the "hack tool" can use just 3DoF...

I'm tired of so much stupidity. I'm bailing out!

You use twisted arguments, can't discuss with true in mind, just that usual crap...

Bye!

Now that's a statement...

Don't bother anymore, norulz. The level of discussion and knowledge here is really low.

I'm out. Too much stupidity. 1C do whatever they want, they even bother to came here to clarify some points, just to know opinions about some engine flame or make statements about Oleg ocupation...

Let's see what happens in the release of IL-2:CoD...

this thread is only about two things:

• would it be legal to make CoD TIR-only compatible?
  Obviously no one here can tell for sure. Sending a letter to whoever is charge will result in a positive or negative replay. So, until we proof, this is all speculating (& bs'ing) about a phantom.
  
  
• Would a TIR-only release affect sales? Again, this thread/poll was unable to provide answers.

Rem:
Last but not least, we're discussing a worst case $150 investment here. Holy cow!
To play the game with descent graphics you'll need a $300 GPU and a $200 CPU.

You go build a CPU... while I go drink my beer.



I think I was wrong though about one think... that NP uses just one "account" to give us nausea...


So... I'm out for drinks too... maybe that is you purpose of linving as NP [s]trolls[/s] PR agents.

lol

In case you are unaware, vote in 'Mysticpumas' IL2forum Poll (link in his opening post) for the inclusion of 6DOF in Stock. Not directly about FT v TIR but the poll includes use of 'alternatives' to TIR.

and most there voted for the inclusion of cockpit modelling that wasn't set for the full 6DoF which will open up another can of worms, that being graphic anomolies.. gaps and missing bits.
It is a completely different poll as determined by its criteria, not a poll for the inclusion of alternative headtrackers per se.


Swiss,

"would it be legal to make CoD TIR-only compatible?
Obviously no one here can tell for sure. Sending a letter to whoever is charge will result in a positive or negative replay. So, until we proof, this is all speculating (& bs'ing) about a phantom.

its been banging on for a bit over two years now ;)

Urm?.....never said it was! But the vote shows some interesting data none the less regards 'system' usage and I am sure that everyone with 'headtracking' has an opinion as to its inclusion in Stock. Simply pointing out that they can express/vote ref 6DOF in stock- just in case they missed that thread you understand. But of course, little bits of 'other' data can also be gleaned.........:grin:

But me thinks you don't like one particular set of results from the headtracking community of a different forum, no suprises there W-R! :grin:

There is also a offspring poll here:
http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/t...3/m/2051024119
where one can see that TIR vs FT equals about 10 to 1.

my reference was to the poll Puma raised, which you pointed out...


whereas you may also be trying to be refer to Bearcat's survey on the UBI forum.


The thing you seem to be not aware of See, is no-one really is against the inclusion of alternative headtracking... this has been the consensus since very early in the piece.
Its the way some alternative headtracking go about what they do, which is the problem.

He's a deaf broken record. Amazing!

and you wonder why there are problems with inclusion...

I don't think it's amazing... rather pathetic. Only a direct interest in keeping the "face" of NP clean at all costs would go to such ridiculous extent of fighting obvious till bitter end.

What a pathetic way of earning your daily salami...

I'm not the one fighting though ;)

I totally agree W-R and that is an honest POV I share. I use FT mainly because it has hot keys to enable/disable any unwanted axis in flight and these are on my POV. I also have TIR but it doesn't have 6 axis hot key support. (I posted on the TIR forum and asked if it could be included at some point). This is why FT is my preferred choice and why it works well in IL2 + 6DOF.

I would like everyone to use their kit in CoD. But if not - then players will have to upgrade, find a work around, not buy CoD and complain to the Devs/publishers. If FT isn't included, there will be a reason. Wether that is made known, only time will tell.

its nice when people see eye to eye, eh?


If a "workaround" can be achieved without infringement... great
If a need for certain features, or changes/ additions made, can be achieved by making a considered approach to the party concerned (ie working with them)... great

Threats of "not to buy" however, has become cliche.

Just wanted to chime in and say nice job WR for keeping a logical and calm discussion against the wave of misplaced rabid fanboism.

I think the personal attacks on you do more to harm whatever convoluted rationalizations they're trying to make anyway but watching their meltdowns does have a rubbernecker kind of morbid appeal.

lol

the pathetic martyr of NP... he's pure soul claimed victory against Mount Obvious.

...let's drink


in a related news... here are some... let's not call them names :D... that are now welcoming "hackers"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-12531127

he he heeee...

go and make your own Kinect then ;) and the article refers to the MS Kinect SDK (soon to be released)

It's always good to start the working day with a laugh. Thanks.