Freetrack interface use in IL-2:CoD

[MadBlaster]

Originally Posted by Wolf_Rider

Lobi...
you use the "FreeTrack Route" huh?

here's a thought, which may help your cause... could you (or anyone else) put up a shot of the FT software page that show's how the "Freetrack route" or for that matter, the "simconnect route" is selected?

*Edit (also indicating which software version)

[Wolf_Rider]

no Simconnect selection, Blaster?

[julian265]

Originally Posted by Wolf_Rider

if FT operated in an honest clean manner, you'd find arguing your part a lot easier

Probably true regarding FT. But why the absolute silence about allowing ANY controller (stick etc) to control the head axes?

[julian265]

Interfaces available - also key output on next tab.

Latest version, 2.2.0.279

PPJoy becomes available when you have it installed. It is my preferred method, but I'm on a different computer so it's greyed out.

[Wolf_Rider]

At least by the silence, there is no way they can be subject to abuse?




*Edit

Originally Posted by julian265

Interfaces available - also key output on next tab.

Latest version, 2.2.0.279

PPJoy becomes available when you have it installed. It is my preferred method, but I'm on a different computer so it's greyed out.

what is the TrackIR Interface tick box for, what's the file listed on the same line... and why was Blaster hiding it?

[WTE_Galway]

I vote for using XBOX 360 Kinect instead

... or maybe a Wii mote.

[julian265]

Originally Posted by Wolf_Rider

At least by the silence, there is no way they can be subject to abuse?

Rubbish. They'll cop more flak for not doing the logical thing and allowing access to the head control axes.

Originally Posted by Wolf_Rider

what is the TrackIR Interface tick box for, what's the file listed on the same line...

You know perfectly well what it's for. Why you have to keep making the same point (amongst a bunch of other strange questions and straw-man arguments) that you don't like the way FT interfaces/uses/emulates NP software is beyond me.
Until game devs do the logical thing (apart from those who already have!) and allow head axes to be assigned to, like joystick axes, I just don't care how head pose is communicated.

[Wolf_Rider]

@ Galway

I'd wait for the VR helmet... screen resolution on touchphones, etc are really good now, so it shouldn't long.

VR Helmet with a wrap around curved high res screen, incorporated speakers and mic. and best of all - offering proper peripheral vision... yum!. Set the zero reference and hit the virtual skies in full real full real.



*Edit

Originally Posted by julian265

Rubbish. They'll cop more flak for not doing the logical thing and allowing access to the head control axes.

Why should they when it hack/ sponges off anothers' copyright and hard work? (I could explain "logical" to you, but I don't think you'll like it ?)

Originally Posted by julian265

You know perfectly well what it's for. Why you have to keep making the same point (amongst a bunch of other strange questions and straw-man arguments) that you don't like the way FT interfaces/uses/emulates NP software is beyond me.

See point above

Originally Posted by julian265

Until game devs do the logical thing (apart from those who already have!) and allow head axes to be assigned to, like joystick axes, I just don't care how head pose is communicated.

Mouse Look (aka Freelook) is available, as you well know... and why should any legitimate developer entertain the incorporation of a product which attracts abuse and threats from its users, or deal with liars, or incorporate a program/s which has/ have questionable ongoing support?

[LoBiSoMeM]

Freetrack has the CRAP TIR interface, the old one, because GAME DEVS DON'T USE FREETRACK INTERFACE IN ALL GAMES!

It's clear ENOUGH for you? And I go further: they don't use Freetrack interface, they dont give an OPEN 6DOF HT solution and EVEN CAN'T TALK ABOUT THE SUBJECT because of NP sick trying to keep a marketing that they clearly see will lose, because any decent today CPU and cheap webcam can provide very good HT experience.

NP can close, I don't care! I care about how I spend MY MONEY in a CPU, MY MONEY in a webcam, mount some led assembly and have all the hardware to have 6DOF HT.

But I need that the game devs put suport for the FREE Fretrack interface, that's have NOTHING TO DO WITH TIR INTERFACE into their games!

BIS devs made it! They have the GUTS to do that! If some company can't survive into market without all this FEAR of a small free software, that uses cheap webcams, its a CRAP company, I'm sorry to said.

It's pathetic... And people still talking nonsense about NP products, policies... They sell cheap IR webcams and mediocre software for HT based on IR detection, by God sake! It's TRIVIAL!!!

This community makes me a little sick. In BIS forums the suport for Freetrack was MASSIVE, even with NP trolls... Here, the community is weak, and maybe the sells prediced with IL-2:CoD made the devs trying to make some cash from "other" sources...

I don't give a crap anymore. If Oleg put Freetrack interface suport in IL-2:CoD, will be good. If not, maybe W-R have more "workarounds" to curse, because the Freetrack community is light years away form mediocre NP.

Simple as that! Bye!

[LoBiSoMeM]

Originally Posted by Wolf_Rider

and why should any legitimate developer entertain the incorporation of a product which attracts abuse and threats from its users, or deal with liars, or incorporate a program which has questionable ongoing support?

Because the USERS of both Freetrack and the game in question demand?

Maybe you can ask to Bohemia Interactive these questions... Or you can't?

But maybe ArmAII and O:A don't have the same standards that IL-2:CoD will have... You can tell this to BIS too... They are a company who does "crap" military sims... LOL!

You talk a lot of crap. We can't be "polite", the "normal" path is a "moderator" close the topic without A WORD form devs.

Shame!