TrackIR Pros & Cons???

[NaturalPoint_Vincent 0]

Now, i wonder if the aheuser bush company will offer to replace their stuff as well...

HAHA

[The Corinthian 0]

I read this thread with interest as after seeing the Dyslexci videos and others I have TrackIR4 Pro bundle on my christmas present list and am really looking forward to it.

Regarding the argument over FreeTrack v TIR, I would rather opt for the hardware version than build it myself (im lazy like that) but theres also the fact that NP have been innovative enough to come up with TIR and I think they deserve the support and recognition.

Their success should also prompt for more and more games to offer support for TIR. Personally Id like to see TIR support on every FPS and vehicle sim game.

[CharveL 0]

It seems like making that freetrack device may be fun - have anyone of you done it?

Not exactly. There's a Finnish chap on the FT forums who will either supply you with all the appropriate bits (the combination of LED and resisters is crucial) either loose in a bag or pre assembled.

Being a lightweight, I went for the ready made one. I spent 19 Euros (iirc) on the kit and a few quid on a webcam and I had it all working within hours. I haven't seen TrackIr in action, but I am certainly most happy with Freetrack.

Lightweight indeed.

If you think this cheesy hack comes anywhere close to the performance and algorithmic optimization of the real thing you're missing out on quite a bit.

I've been using TIR since the first and had every iteration since as well as tried out these webcam versions.

First of all webcams are just not suited to this type of processing. They are inaccurate and akin to using one of those old serial mouses. Secondly, without the dedicated hardware it's up to your CPU to take on the processing which as we all know ArmA doesn't have much to spare.

Thirdly, the optimizations in TIR algorithms, not to mention the ability to fine tune the response curves to your own particular style is in and of itself a dealbreaker for webcam alternatives.

Fourthly, the hardware in a TIR4 refreshes at least twice as fast as a webcam and is much better at filtering out light.

Fifthly, does your webcam solution do 6DOF? If so, does it know how to move laterally when looking over your shoulder? This may be better feature for cockpit type sims though.

Using a webcam solution is great to get you used to the idea but it's also bad because it can turn you off to the fidelity and possibilities of real head tracking. NaturalPoint has done amazing things over the years including THE best support for any computer product I've ever seen.

Yes, it can be a lot of money for one game but more and more games are offering head tracking and once you have it (and get used to it) it's difficult to go back.

[Tankbuster 1746]

I spent E19 to get FT working.

How much is TrackIR?

[GAU-8 0]

about the cost of a good quality graphic card.

you guys spend that much and more anyways in just a year on your 'puter alone, to stay up with gaming tech. rather than more FPS this time.. get more immersed in a game. you will love it.

[Mehmehmeh 0]

I have not used webcam or such to compare with TIR that I have.

So i will say nothing much about that.

However, the support that NP has in place is truly A class compared to other hardware companies.

Swift and fast response plus solution.

Btw, no ArmA without TIR for me anymore.

[kestrel7e7 0]

Quote[/b] ]I've been using TIR since the first and had every iteration since as well as tried out these webcam versions.

Having invested so much of your money into every TIR version would have to make you more than a little biased. I have a vested interest in FreeTrack but at the same time I try and have an unbiased scientific view towards both quantitative and the more subjective qualitative realities of head tracking.

Quote[/b] ]First of all webcams are just not suited to this type of processing. They are inaccurate and akin to using one of those old serial mouses.

Standard webcams have been used for image processing and motion tracking for PCs for decades. PC webcam games use them, as well as games on the XBox and PS2.

Quote[/b] ]Secondly, without the dedicated hardware it's up to your CPU to take on the processing which as we all know ArmA doesn't have much to spare.

Which uses 1-3% of a good cpu... but you ARE a hardcore gamer and you DO have a good cpu, right?   If you invest in a better cpu you won't need expensive dedicated hardware, the extra computing power comes in handy also.

Quote[/b] ]Thirdly, the optimizations in TIR algorithms, not to mention the ability to fine tune the response curves to your own particular style is in and of itself a dealbreaker for webcam alternatives.

You obviously haven't tried FreeTrack, it's a free download and the response curves are clearly visible.

Quote[/b] ]Fourthly, the hardware in a TIR4 refreshes at least twice as fast as a webcam

Most webcams are 30fps, so TIR4's 120fps would be 4 times faster. Some webcams can reach 60fps (you may be referring to this) and the ps3 cam is capable of 120fps. But this is head tracking, not a fine art like mouse aiming, your head is not as responsive as a mouse, nor should it be. Also note that TIR may not be directly using all frames (remember TIR3 and TIR4 hardware are both 120fps but there was an improvement in responsiveness between them), instead sacrificing responsiveness in favour of noise reduction by putting the frames through a Kalman filter for example. The comparison is further explored in the wiki link below.

Quote[/b] ]

and is much better at filtering out light.

Magnetic tape, film negatives and/or IR-pass plastics are more than adequate.

Quote[/b] ]Fifthly, does your webcam solution do 6DOF?  If so, does it know  how to move laterally when looking over your shoulder?  This may be better feature for cockpit type sims though.

FreeTrack had 6dof from the outset. Many games already implement view relative translation themselves and the next version of FreeTrack will support it for those that don't.

Quote[/b] ]Their success should also prompt for more and more games to offer support for TIR. Personally Id like to see TIR support on every FPS and vehicle sim game.

Some developers, like Dice (Battlefield series) may not be supporting TIR because they feel it creates an unfair playing field. FreeTrack may encourage them to see things differently.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FreeTrack

http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=kestrel7e7

[CharveL 0]

Quote[/b] ]I've been using TIR since the first and had every iteration since as well as tried out these webcam versions.

Having invested so much of your money into every TIR version would have to make you more than a little biased. I have a vested interest in FreeTrack but at the same time I try and have an unbiased scientific view towards both quantitative and the more subjective qualitative realities of head tracking.

Quote[/b] ]First of all webcams are just not suited to this type of processing. They are inaccurate and akin to using one of those old serial mouses.

Standard webcams have been used for image processing and motion tracking for PCs for decades. PC webcam games use them, as well as games on the XBox and PS2.

Quote[/b] ]Secondly, without the dedicated hardware it's up to your CPU to take on the processing which as we all know ArmA doesn't have much to spare.

Which uses 1-3% of a good cpu... but you ARE a hardcore gamer and you DO have a good cpu, right? If you invest in a better cpu you won't need expensive dedicated hardware, the extra computing power comes in handy also.

Quote[/b] ]Thirdly, the optimizations in TIR algorithms, not to mention the ability to fine tune the response curves to your own particular style is in and of itself a dealbreaker for webcam alternatives.

You obviously haven't tried FreeTrack, it's a free download and the response curves are clearly visible.

Quote[/b] ]Fourthly, the hardware in a TIR4 refreshes at least twice as fast as a webcam

Most webcams are 30fps, so TIR4's 120fps would be 4 times faster. Some webcams can reach 60fps (you may be referring to this) and the ps3 cam is capable of 120fps. But this is head tracking, not a fine art like mouse aiming, your head is not as responsive as a mouse, nor should it be. Also note that TIR may not be directly using all frames (remember TIR3 and TIR4 hardware are both 120fps but there was an improvement in responsiveness between them), instead sacrificing responsiveness in favour of noise reduction by putting the frames through a Kalman filter for example. The comparison is further explored in the wiki link below.

Quote[/b] ]

and is much better at filtering out light.

Magnetic tape, film negatives and/or IR-pass plastics are more than adequate.

Quote[/b] ]Fifthly, does your webcam solution do 6DOF? If so, does it know how to move laterally when looking over your shoulder? This may be better feature for cockpit type sims though.

FreeTrack had 6dof from the outset. Many games already implement view relative translation themselves and the next version of FreeTrack will support it for those that don't.

Quote[/b] ]Their success should also prompt for more and more games to offer support for TIR. Personally Id like to see TIR support on every FPS and vehicle sim game.

Some developers, like Dice (Battlefield series) may not be supporting TIR because they feel it creates an unfair playing field. FreeTrack may encourage them to see things differently.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FreeTrack

http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=kestrel7e7

Instead of pointing out each one of your misconceptions line by line I'll try to be brief because I have a feeling you will not hear anything I'm saying anyway. So this response is more for anyone interested in facts than misconceptions.

Not to be argumentative but how do you get your "scientific" and "subjective quantitative realities" (whatever that means) without having actually compared a webcam solution to the hardware one? I certainly can't claim to be unbiased because as a beta tester for the TrackIR products over the years I've made a point to know the difference. I'm also a flight simmer, where this device was developed for initially, and seen how the hardware specs have improved over the years. You know, facts and stuff.

Webcams have not been around for decades, let alone for motion tracking first off. Secondly, you are comparing apples and oranges with PC/console webcam games. I'm not up on the Wii system but even as good as it is I would seriously doubt their tracking hardware is anywhere close to the TrackIR.

The thing you are missing while downplaying the framerate is that no matter how you slice it, more makes a difference. A noticeable difference. There are always people who think 24fps in ArmA is good enough and 60fps is just a waste the eye can't see but it doesn't make them right either. Of course, you don't miss what you've never had either do you?

It's nice that FreeTrack supports 6DOF and response curves. The more people that are exposed to head tracking the better implementation we will see in games. Unfortunately, in my experience over the years in the flight sim community is that most people who try these webcam hacks end up getting turned off to the whole experience because of the implementation. Some, like you I imagine, have their interest piqued enough to stick with it and learn how to tailer it for their own needs. But when my friends ask me for advice on buying a guitar for their kids I don't recommend a Walmart guitar because I know they aren't going to stay interested when they have to tune it every five minutes and it performs like a wet fart.

Quote[/b] ]FreeTrack plus Saitek W300 webcam use only 1-3% of an Opteron 175 CPU

You forgot to quote the whole line and besides, most people don't have optimal webcams or care to go buy another one. Then you need to get film negative and print out a card to stick on your forehead and tweak, tweak some more until you find the right contrast settings, etc. Great if you have the time and like to fiddle about endlessly to get an experience that you wouldn't have otherwise. But then again these "hardcore" gamers you mention would rather save the hassle and buy a product that will work twice as good and not sacrifice framerate from their other expensive components would they?

Beyond the hardware (which is much, much more suited to tracking than video) the software that runs it has seen many optimizations to make for the best possible experience. Although Aces High is not exactly a hardcore flight simulator (I don't have it but it does support 6DOF, or better yet try FSX) try firing it up sometime and looking over your shoulder, then lean your head towards the glass for a better view. You'll likely notice that you have to actually move your head the opposite way to make it do so with FreeTrack. TrackIR added TrueView which uses a bit of clever algorithmic play to make your view move intuitively.

Again, it's about fidelity and accuracy. Don't be insulted, FreeTrack looks great and I'm happy to see a free solution out there that keeps improving and drawing in more people to the immersive experience of head tracking! It's just that there is no comparison, much like no matter how many mods you put on an old civic, as nice and fast as you make it, it will never be a Ferrari as much as you are happy with what you have.

[icebreakr 3159]

Around 5 of guys from my team use TiR4 Pro in ArmA. We bought it at discount price at official Slovenian dealer: http://intella.si/trackir/

I think TIR4 is really worth its price, its almost a must for our pilots that love to see where are they actually landing.

[Pulverizer 1]

Quote[/b] ]Some developers, like Dice (Battlefield series) may not be supporting TIR because they feel it creates an unfair playing field. FreeTrack may encourage them to see things differently.

Yeah right. If they're so concerned about fairness then how come they don't force a certain resolution and a 4:3 aspect. And not everyone can afford a good joystick and a gaming mouse & keyboard either so they should prevent their use in the game to not give anyone an unfair advantage

[kestrel7e7 0]

Yeah right. If they're so concerned about fairness then how come they don't force a certain resolution and a 4:3 aspect. And not everyone can afford a good joystick and a gaming mouse & keyboard either so they should prevent their use in the game to not give anyone an unfair advantage

Battlefield widescreen is cropped 4:3.

Mouse/joystick/keyboard devices are in a competitive market with a variety of brands at a broad range of prices, unlike TIR.

[dmarkwick 261]

Quote[/b] ]Some developers, like Dice (Battlefield series) may not be supporting TIR because they feel it creates an unfair playing field. FreeTrack may encourage them to see things differently.

Yeah right. If they're so concerned about fairness then how come they don't force a certain resolution and a 4:3 aspect. And not everyone can afford a good joystick and a gaming mouse & keyboard either so they should prevent their use in the game to not give anyone an unfair advantage

LOL, yeah that was (nearly) my response too Another straw man arguing point. For a guy who professes scientific quantitative whateveritwas there's a lot of "may/may not be"s tossed in to support this.

But anyways, I guess the point is moot. The thing exists, people are using it.

[dmarkwick 261]

Mouse/joystick/keyboard devices are in a competitive market with a variety of brands at a broad range of prices, unlike TIR.

'Scuse me I was going to leave this whole thing alone but this seems like an unfair critisism for an innovation. Are you suggesting that NP are the bad guys because they made something that works, works pretty well, is being supported by many sims AND want to charge for the product?

TrackIR wasn't a minor purchase for me, but then neither was my Cougar. In both cases I paid for great design and innovation. OK there are cheaper joysticks, but as far as I can tell NP do not practice non-competitive strategies, they're just the only ones making such a product. To complain that there is not a broad range of prices (which I guess for most people will translate directly to "cheaper") is disingenuous.

[kestrel7e7 0]

Quote[/b] ] and seen how the hardware specs have improved over the years.

It’s funny how it took four hardware iterations (and a vector license) over more than four years to achieve something that is only marginally more responsive than FreeTrack which took only a few years of on-and-off casual unpaid voluntary work by one person and then followed by myself.

Quote[/b] ]Webcams have not been around for decades, let alone for motion tracking first off.  

The first webcam was released in 1991, so they’ve been around for about 1.6 decades, where there’s video, there’s motion tracking. Both of the motion tracking algorithms used in FreeTrack were published in 1992.

Quote[/b] ]The thing you are missing while downplaying the framerate is that no matter how you slice it, more makes a difference.  A noticeable difference.  There are always people who think 24fps in ArmA is good enough and 60fps is just a waste the eye can't see but it doesn't make them right either.  Of course, you don't miss what you've never had either do you?

You seem to be mistaken between webcam frame rate and in-game frame rate, they’re two completely different things. FreeTrack uses interpolation to fill in the gaps such that the webcam’s frame rate only affects tracking responsiveness.

Of course I’m downplaying the webcam framerate, and with good reason, the more-is-better mentality is a gross over-simplification. The relationship between perceived responsiveness and frame rate is not linear, four times faster responsiveness is not perceived by human senses as four times better for latencies around the tens of milliseconds. The higher the frame rate the less noticeable a further increase is.

A 30fps camera works well (max 33.3ms lag), a 60fps camera works better (max 16.7ms lag) and if you could find a black and white 120fps camera that uses compression to minimize USB bandwidth (you never know :P) then it would be a little better again (max 8.3ms lag).

Quote[/b] ] You forgot to quote the whole line and besides, most people don't have optimal webcams or care to go buy another one.  Then you need to get film negative and print out a card to stick on your forehead and tweak, tweak some more until you find the right contrast settings, etc.   Great if you have the time and like to fiddle about endlessly to get an experience that you wouldn't have otherwise.  But then again these "hardcore" gamers you mention would rather save the hassle and buy a product that will work twice as good and not sacrifice framerate from their other expensive components would they?

Print out a card and stick it on your forehead? Now you’re just making stuff up.

You seem to be forgetting that the head tracking target audience is largely composed of simulator fans, tinkering with technology is what they do.  

The hardware setup can be as simple or as complicated as you want it to be.  In the easiest setup you would use a TrackClip Pro, only requiring you to disable your webcam’s automatic exposure, manually reduce exposure and use the magnetic disc inside a floppy disk as an IR pass filter. Then you’re set. BTW FreeTrack can be setup to force the exposure automatically.

1-3% cpu usage may cause you to lose a few frames, maybe, but thanks to cpu advancements, you can be sure that these frames will be saved in the future.

Quote[/b] ]Beyond the hardware (which is much, much more suited to tracking than video) the software that runs it has seen many optimizations to make for the best possible experience.  Although Aces High is not exactly a hardcore flight simulator (I don't have it but it does support 6DOF, or better yet try FSX) try firing it up sometime and looking over your shoulder, then lean your head towards the glass for a better view.  You'll likely notice that you have to actually move your head the opposite way to make it do so with FreeTrack.  TrackIR added TrueView which uses a bit of clever algorithmic play to make your view move intuitively.

A TrackIR with TrueView is not required to create the effect you describe, Aces High has a built-in optional head relative translation mode instead of cockpit relative translation mode. rFactor uses head relative translation by default, as well as many other games. This ‘clever algorithmic play’ that you speak of is nothing more than a matrix rotation; entry level junior high maths. It’s already implemented for the next version of FreeTrack for those games that don’t use it by default.

@DMarkwick: Then explain to me why Battlefield *still* does not have official TIR support (given it suits the vehicle combat so well and NP have lobbied for it, to the point of making their own unofficial hack for single player)?

[dmarkwick 261]

@DMarkwick: Then explain to me why Battlefield *still* does not have official TIR support (given it suits the vehicle combat so well and NP have lobbied for it, to the point of making their own unofficial hack for single player)?

Ah I see, you used this fact as a direct marketing tool for your hack. By surmising a reason that aligns with your agenda fair enough, many people do exactly the same thing. Wars get started in exactly this manner

If I were to hallucinate a reason to why they don't incorporate TrackIR, I might just say that it pays Dice/EA not one single penny to do so. Easier to not do something and rake the money in than do something and rake the same money in

[Pulverizer 1]

Quote[/b] ]Then explain to me why Battlefield *still* does not have official TIR support (given it suits the vehicle combat so well and NP have lobbied for it, to the point of making their own unofficial hack for single player)?

Perhaps because, generally, the people who have TIR couldn't care less about Battlefield and vice versa. Why spend money making a feature that almost none of the buyers would ever use or want.

[sneekn 0]

so basically:

TIR is GREAT and costs some money.

Freelook is great and costs little money but you have to 1) find geek neighbor, relative, or off duty geek squad guy to come by and build it then tweak it twice a day for two months before he gets it to your liking and then must be on call 24/7 in case something happens to it at 2am in the middle of the most bitcheness firefight EVER.

2) after 7 middle of the night calls his mom says no more so your hosed anyway.

3) you get arrested for stalking the little ba$tard cause he stops answering your calls and you cant stand to play without it.

Yep I think I will just shell out the dough and play, play, play... IMHO of course

Thanks for clearing that up for me guys... now if I could only get Santa to come early this year...

[CharveL 0]

Quote[/b] ]It’s funny how it took four hardware iterations (and a vector license) over more than four years to achieve something that is only marginally more responsive than FreeTrack which took only a few years of on-and-off casual unpaid voluntary work by one person and then followed by myself.

Please tell me you weren't being serious when you posted this. Each iteration of TIR used progressively better hardware, ALL of which were better suited to head tracking than ANY webcam/software hack available at the time - and likely since.

Quote[/b] ]The first webcam was released in 1991, so they’ve been around for about 1.6 decades, where there’s video, there’s motion tracking. Both of the motion tracking algorithms used in FreeTrack were published in 1992.

What? And the first mouse was invented in 1963 so what does that have any relevence? Please feel free to show me head tracking implemented in a game - or any commercial software for that matter - back in 1991. Basic tracking algorithms are hardly new, I never said they were, but things get a bit more complex when you have to deal with different size dots or dealing with motion and range when moving in 3D space. Try to keep up here.

Quote[/b] ]You seem to be mistaken between webcam frame rate and in-game frame rate, they’re two completely different things. FreeTrack uses interpolation to fill in the gaps such that the webcam’s frame rate only affects tracking responsiveness.

Actually I'm not mistaken at all, just your ability to read what I wrote or understand what you just said about interpolation. I'll try to make it simple for you. Input frame rate, or polling of an input device, most definitely has an effect on the perceived framerate of a game. Try running a mouse at 40hz on your favourite game and then go back to your new one and let me know how it felt.

Interpolation (or smoothing) doesn't magically give you better precision as there is a cost. It will give you better resolution but less accuracy and the end effect with lots of interpolation is similar to mouse lag. Even with TIR you would want to find a good balance for smoothing, especially if the game involves lots of fast input movements.

Quote[/b] ]Of course I’m downplaying the webcam framerate, and with good reason, the more-is-better mentality is a gross over-simplification. The relationship between perceived responsiveness and frame rate is not linear, four times faster responsiveness is not perceived by human senses as four times better for latencies around the tens of milliseconds. The higher the frame rate the less noticeable a further increase is.

This statement is true, and much the same as with video framerate. The difference is in where that sweet spot in perception lies. Some people are happy with 30fps and others prefer 60fps - and more especially in first person shooters. I'd also mention that when your video framerate is limited, having lower frames on your input device makes it worse.

Quote[/b] ]A 30fps camera works well (max 33.3ms lag), a 60fps camera works better (max 16.7ms lag) and if you could find a black and white 120fps camera that uses compression to minimize USB bandwidth (you never know :P) then it would be a little better again (max 8.3ms lag).

An oversimplification, as you are not taking into account the software overhead which is more prevelant on a webcam solution.

In the case of ArmA which does not utilize dual-core processing you will indeed get a benefit in regard to cpu utilization (I'd imagine if you set the affinity to use the other core) but what about newer games that are much more efficient using multi-cores for video and audio processing? Bottom line is it's better to have dedicated hardware do the work rather than competing with the cpu(s). Whether the end experience is worth the difference is semantics and better argued with direct side-by-side comparison not speculation.

Also, from responses I've seen, 1%-3% cpu is a bit optimistic and I've seen up to 30% or more. Either way, I've been saying all along that there's nothing wrong with FreeTrack, only that it is not as good as TIR and in most situations not even close. I would even go so far as to suggest someone give it a try first to see how they like it keeping in mind that the TIR software will likely be more intuitive and hassle free.

Cheers!

[dmarkwick 261]

It’s funny how it took four hardware iterations (and a vector license) over more than four years to achieve something that is only marginally more responsive than FreeTrack which took only a few years of on-and-off casual unpaid voluntary work by one person and then followed by myself.

LOL

Oh, how did I ever miss this gem?

I'm reminded of a comedy sketch similar to Spinal Tap:

"Well I learned Stairway To Heaven on the guitar when I was twelve, but Jimmy Page didn't even write it until he was thirty. I think that says something."

[CharveL 0]

(and for the record that quote was Kestrels which you have attributed to me.)

[andersson 285]

@kestrel7e7

I think its good that you inform people about freetrack as alot of them cant pay that much for a trackir. I have told my friends about it so they also can enjoy the games in the same way as I.

What I dont get is why you seem to be against naturalpoint. It cant be any financial reasons (?). Can it be that you "care" about internetstrangers buying a product they can download?

At first I took you for a person that couldnt afford trackir and was jelaous, but I dont think that anymore as I guess your interest comes from developing(?) freetrack (not mean to offend you, hope you dont take this wrong). So why do I see you post after every post NP vincent makes? It doesnt look good and I think it can be counteractive to what you are trying (not exactly sure what that is, but pro freetrack and con NP).

So ok, freetrack is a good alternative. Why bashing NP?

[Tankbuster 1746]

so basically:

TIR is GREAT and costs some money.

Freelook is great and costs little money but you have to 1) find geek neighbor, relative, or off duty geek squad guy to come by and build it then tweak it twice a day for two months before he gets it to your liking and then must be on call 24/7 in case something happens to it at 2am in the middle of the most bitcheness firefight EVER.

2) after 7 middle of the night calls his mom says no more so your hosed anyway.

3) you get arrested for stalking the little ba$tard cause he stops answering your calls and you cant stand to play without it.

Yep I think I will just shell out the dough and play, play, play... IMHO of course

Thanks for clearing that up for me guys... now if I could only get Santa to come early this year...

That's quite an over simplification, but it's fairly close with a couple of exceptions.

I probably could have made the headset myself, there are clear instructions, but for 19 Euros, I had someone else do it for me, which is essentially what you pay NP to do, though with your ruined currency, paying Euros for something must be more and more attractive.

It doesn't need regular tweaking and it's quite reliable, so you don't need 24/7 support and even if you do, they have some good forums, though the best of them are in French.

[CharveL 0]

Chances are once you set it up (whether TIR or FreeLook) you won't have to do much more with it depending on how well you build it. The nice thing about the ProClip for TIR is that it's designed to clip quickly and easily to any headphone set you would be using anyway with comms.

You can buy a fake lamborghini body kit to make a Fiero look pretty good but it's still a Fiero underneath. That's good enough for some.

As for Kestrel's motivations it's hard to tell. I've read some of his posts on other forums where he calls TIR a "hack" so it's a bit of a head scratcher why he puts so much spin and sprinkles on it.

[Jarvis 0]

Pros overwhelmingly defeat the cons and the only con I know of that hasn't been mentioned is about the trackIR clip. the clip you can buy, while definitely worth it if you use headphones and/or dont like to wear hats, is fairly cheaply made (read cheap, breakable plastic) Mine broke within 2 weeks and i have to use tape to keep it in position. No effect on performance, just an eyesore, but annoying.

Other than that, the TrackIR becomes as indispensable to gaming (if you're a big flight guy, Arma, FSX, etc) as a joystick. I could get carried away and say it's almost as crucial as high speed but that may be a bit much....

Did you order from us?

Send your order info to me, and I will see about getting it replaced for you..........

support @ naturalpoint.com

Hey Vincent, I broke my track clip pro too. I had my leg wrapped in a bunch of chords and my headphones hit the ground and the 3 peg end peice(with the lazers) broke. It still works but the one of the pegs that help it in place snapped - so it just sort of hangs there.

So you can replace it?

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]I probably could have made the headset myself

I actually did exactly that as there were no good headsets available for a reasonable price 7 years ago.

I think the free alternative to TIr is a good thing as it gives you the chance to test the effects and useability of such before you invest a considerable amount of money into something that will either collect dust on the shelve or finds a happy buyer on ebay.

Apart from that i´m a fan of DIY stuff. Hell, I even built my video-beamer on my own that has contrast rates and pixels like a high-price product for a budget of a bad used one on ebay.

I´ll certainly try the Freetrack approach as it´s fun for me to build such stuff.