Freetrack interface use in IL-2:CoD

[swiss]

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt

i have tried both FT and trackIR and for me trackIR was smoother and better.

+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.

[Wolf_Rider]

That's a consistent appraisal common everywhere

[swiss]

Originally Posted by Wolf_Rider

That's a consistent appraisal common everywhere

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

[albx]

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?

[Blackdog_kt]

Originally Posted by Wolf_Rider

where are your other three fingers pointing, Blackdog?


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

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.

[LoBiSoMeM]

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt

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...

[Wolf_Rider]

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt

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).

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

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt

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.

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

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt

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.

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

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt

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.

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

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt

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.

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?

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt

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.

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.

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt

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

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt

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.

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

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt

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.

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

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt

I think it's time to wrap this one up and do just that, ask for the feature.

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

(looks like you missed on getting on top )

[swiss]

Originally Posted by albx

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?

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.

[albx]

Originally Posted by swiss

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.

LOLLLLL

[Royraiden]

Originally Posted by swiss

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.

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