1C's stance on head-tracking devices for BoB?

Wolf_Rider · #1 02-20-2010, 05:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AndyJWest

A simple question, Wolf_Rider: Would you be in favour of PC games supporting generic 6DOF devices by allowing the existing MS Joystick API to be used as an alternative?

Another one: Would you object if 1C:Maddox/TD incorperated 6DOF into the existing DeviceLink interface?

If your answer to either of these questions is no, I'd like to see your reasoning.

this was your question... it has been answered and as you can see your question to me is a redundant one.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheGrunch

I've already answered yours and said that I have no proof.

so you choose to openly slander several companies....

grunch... post #71 might refresh your memory for the other question. When you answer that, you will be answering your own question

TheGrunch · #2 02-20-2010, 05:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wolf_Rider

grunch... post #71 might refresh your memory

Wow, that post is supremely relevant to my above questions.

Unless you're referring to the fact that I haven't answered your question as to why developers should support Freetrack, and the answer is that you've made another major logical mistake. Freetrack head-tracking does not equal ALL open head-tracking. To say that an open interface for head-tracking supports hackers because Freetrack hacked NP's interface is like saying that giving people free emergency medical attention is supporting murderers because some of the people who will receive emergency treatment will be murderers.

Wolf_Rider · #3 02-20-2010, 05:48 AM

it will do you no good to twist things around grunch... refer your post # 73

TheGrunch · #4 02-20-2010, 05:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wolf_Rider

it will do you no good to twist things around grunch... refer your post # 73

Wow, you're really reluctant to answer simple questions, aren't you? What is it about my post #73 that you'd like me to refer back to? That's what I think. NP created the situation themselves, and they'll have to deal with it. My position is that if they had thought ahead they ought to have anticipated that this would happen when they made sure their interface was closed. The error they made was in assuming that only commercial competitors would attempt to create a head-tracking solution. It's practical for them to prosecute competitors that violate their interface. It's not practical for them to prosecute everyone who uses Freetrack.
Either way allowing the use of an open standard for head-tracking doesn't directly support Freetrack any more than emergency medical attention supports murderers. Is there a logical error there? Please explain it to me.
And as long as we're playing the 30-odd posts ago game, care to explain when Freetrack developers used intimidation tactics?

AndyJWest · #5 02-20-2010, 05:59 AM

Wolf_Rider, would you mind answering another couple of questions that as far as I'm aware, haven't been asked yet, but sem relevant to this debate:

(A) Are you employed by anyone who has a financial interest in NP maintaining a share of the 6DOF sim software/hardware market?

(B) do you yourself have a financial interest in NP maintaining a share of the 6DOF sim software/hardware market?

I hesitate to ask such questions, but I have difficulty in otherwise explaining your attitude.

TheGrunch · #6 02-20-2010, 06:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AndyJWest

I hesitate to ask such questions, but I have difficulty in otherwise explaining your attitude.

I've wanted to ask the same myself for quite some time, but I thought it was a little bit invasive.

Wolf_Rider · #7 02-20-2010, 06:04 AM

Hmmm.... I've been waiting for that questioning andyjwest... no I'm not, is that clear enough for you?

why won't you give a genuine reply to my question grunch (are you one of the FT team?)? you seem to be doing all you can to avoid it, including inserting rhetoric I did not make

TheGrunch · #8 02-20-2010, 06:05 AM

Seems like it's just "argument on the Internet" syndrome, then. In answer to your question, I'm not. I've never been involved in software development of any kind. When did I "insert rhetoric that you did not make"?

And now what question is it that you've decided I haven't answered?

Wolf_Rider · #9 02-20-2010, 06:27 AM

"Seems like it's just "argument on the Internet" syndrome, then. you could apply that to yourself, with or wthout your own logic.

Riddle me this; 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? -from #71 did you miss this?