Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolf_Rider
If you want to point the finger at someone else, Blackdog... take note of in which direction the other three fingers are pointing
Some just aren't falling for your sophistry and you could probably do well to err, chill out yourself.
Now, I asked a very simple question, which I thought may have helped their FT cause... too bad it didn't and did irrepairable damage instead, considering the calls made were FT no longer uses TIR.
|
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
