It's a workaround, for sure, but there are still no generic head tracking inputs, when it's obvious that there should be. Some games also limit what you can input to head pose without TIR - eg limited to 2DoF when you emulate mouse movement.
as mentioned before, all that is between the developer and the various headtracking people... and so it seems that FT need not violate NP copyright at all then
Out of interest, can you post a link? Head trackers don't pop up in the "game controllers" control panel, and games do not communicate with them like almost all other gaming hardware. So it is truly not the case. Also, without seeing the context in which the links you mentioned are posted, I'm guessing that it's a workaround for early TIR owners who would otherwise have been screwed by NP's move to the encrypted interface, by making games ignore TIR 1, 2 and 3 (which cannot communicate in encrypted form like TIR 4+ does)
I'm sorry but you'll need to do your own homework there...
Actually, the point at any one time is the question or statement that you choose to respond to.
Things would OT rather quickly in that regard... better to just stick to the topic at hand
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolf_Rider
[I]err, no..... proof was asked of grunch's allegations that NP were locking out other software/ hardware developers, in order to run a monopoly... please don't alter the issue there.
See:
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheGrunch
Go to the Ubisoft forum, see for yourself. Start a topic about Freetrack and see what happens. If there's not a payment of some description in effect there, what's happening? Care to provide a theory?
And your response:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolf_Rider
err nooo, that's still an allegation. Where is your proof?
But if you want proof of the locking out, see my link from early (post 15) in this thread:
http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?...0&postcount=40
The entire thread is at :
http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.ph...080#post589080
you should have mentioned the post above that one, which mentions an NDA.... also in your linked post, take note of the last sentence
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolf_Rider
regarding what other forums run by developers/ publishers do in relation to content on their forums, or in their product; why should any developer/ publisher support an outfit which hacks a company's software and (on their public forums) openly supports hacks and intimidation of other companies?[/COLOR]
They should not support a "hacking outfit". IMO they should allow discussion.
why should they do that?... its the product which quite often gets hacked
What intimidation?
we could go around in circles for page after page on that one.....