Official Fulqrum Publishing forum - Head Tracking with Cliffs of Dover

Official Fulqrum Publishing forum (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/index.php)

- Controls threads (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/forumdisplay.php?f=194)

- - Head Tracking with Cliffs of Dover (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/showthread.php?t=18648)

Again what is the point of the discussion?You guys dont seem to agree in anything.Why continue?If I could I would have locked the thread.This forum is not so useful if every thread ends up with an off topic discussion.And yes it is off topic.People here dont care what the thread is about, just post what they want and argue to death even if it is not relevant the original post.Some of you did gave me some suggestions ,thanks.No disrespect to the others.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SEE (Post 222599)

There is no point to the argument regards NP V FT and copyright. The guys at FT must have looked at NP's algorithm and came up with something identical or very close and included that as an alternative to their own FT code. To use FT with Il1946 you have to use their version of the NP algorithm (which is open source and anyone can dowload it to take a peek at it). Unfortunately, NP also looked at existing Tracking codes used in other applications and adapted it to their Headtracking product. In that respect it would have been impossible to patent the code as it was a 'development' not an 'invention'. You can write algorithims in many different ways to perform the same output data. NP could only protect their registered trademark and products that they themselves designed - hence the removal of references to the use of existing NP hardware in FT's literature. It's down to interpretation and NP consider that 'headtracking' is their intellectual property as a gaming product accessory and naturally want to protect it in other ways. The solution was simple, develop an encryption code and protect it legally. The real and only sensible argument is wether CoD should use the old code or include FT's code in addition to NP's.

Exactly!

I am very interested on what they will do when face-api will takeoff... AFAIK another NP is trying to get money on that thing and another free version of it will emerge... and again... they will try to encrypt it etc etc... But NP... will be out of business by then.

mmmm, no not "exactly"

FT stripped away the encryption, (encryption which was created by NP to protect what was their work, their software) there wasn't any FT developing of their own algorithms (at that time).

Ft code included as well as and seperate to NP code is fine by me

Wolf Rider,do I have to ask you personally to please dont go on with the silly discussion?

excuse me? now why would you be asking that?

Quote:

Originally Posted by JG52Uther (Post 222596)

Wolf Rider,do you work for NP? You seem to be fighting their corner strongly? Not a dig,just interested.
As for FT and CoD,I have no idea,but I do know that any mention of FT at the UBI forum is strictly verboten,and any thread with their name is instantly moderated.
And as UBI are publishing CoD...

As an aside, I tried FT a couple of years ago,but didn't like it.I am happy enough with my TiR 3 and vector expansion.I use the track hat,as I don't like the flimsy track clip,or its usb connection.
Might treat myself to the latest model soon.

you are right JG52Uther, FT is forbidden at UBI forums, and UBI is the CoD distributor, so I think this is the reason nobody here (Oleg & co.) come to confirm that CoD will only support TIR, so, yes, i believe FT will not be supported... :-x

lol...

How do you know what FT team did? It seems you had read all the source code from FT and NP for that matter... so where you work at? :-P :rolleyes:

How about we let this just drop dead and maybe a dev of CoD will make a statement about the issue the thread is about?

I want to know if I could use face api and facetracknoir with ppJoy in CoD. I don't give a damn about that NP silly interface... and their hat.

Quote:

Originally Posted by norulz (Post 222644)

How do you know what FT team did? It seems you had read all the source code from FT and NP for that matter... so where you work at? :-P :rolleyes:

How? Its a thing called history... so roll your eyes at that perhaps ;)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Royraiden (Post 222396)

Freetrack
Pros:
-FREE software
-Easy to set up and use once you got the setup built correctly
-Easy to replace(if the camera fails)

Cons:
-Support(not all games supporting track ir support freetrack, correct me)
-Bothersome to make clip(at least to me)
-Requires a dark room to work properly most of the time

TrackIR
Pros:
-No need to build
-More complex software(im assuming)
-Comes with reflective clip(does not need a dark room to work properly)
-Better support on games

Cons:
-Expensive!

is Freetrack going to be supported at release?Im fairly new to the forum so maybe this was discussed earlier.

Back on topic......:grin:

a) None of have a clue as to FT support so my first advice would be 'wait and see', or

b) despite the expense , invest in a ready made TrackIR solution if Vector reflection is your preferred option. I have no experience of Reflection setups with NP or FT or how well it deals with stray ambient IR reflections in camera field of view. I would personally vist the NP TrackIR forum to see if there are any issues with reliabilty and functionality.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SEE (Post 222661)

Back on topic......:grin:

a) None of have a clue as to FT support so my first advice would be 'wait and see', or

b) despite the expense , invest in a ready made TrackIR solution if Vector reflection is your preferred option. I have no experience of Reflection setups with NP or FT or how well it deals with stray ambient IR reflections from walls, etc. I would personally vist the NP TrackIR forum to see if there are any issues with reliabilty and functionality.

Thank you sir.