Will ArmA 2 support FreeTrack?!

[mr burns 132]

Merely a suggestion, more like a direct question at Bohemia Interactive for their stance towards NaturalPoints alleged actions against the legal support of Free-Track alternatives.

During an unharmful and very delightful talk on our german hx3 forums about building and using FreeTrack alternatives, one user came up with the fact that Natural Point (original TrackIR Vendor) put the Developers of DCS:BS Shark on a hold for the implementation of a newly built 6DOF API/implementation in their game.

Of course this arose a little uproar .. eventually leading to the creation of following (now closed) thread: http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=72510&page=6

There´s many truths to be heard from both sides in this, but sadly it got all nasty way to soon .. blabla .. and now we´re here

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So today we´re allowed* to open another thread regarding the fair question for FreeTrack support in ArmA2.

*Placebo says: So tomorrow someone is welcome to start up the discussion again, I would suggest that the suggestions forum be the most appropriate place.

A simple answer from BI, like "Yes, Freetrack will work in ArmA2 as it did in ArmA1",

or "No, Freetrack is not gonna work in ArmA2 (for whatever reasons)" would´ve sufficed to end this thread(s) for good.

But it seems we´re forced to ask for this over and over again.

So, dear users, please state your opinion!

And for the love of Victor Troska, dont let this end up in an open flamefest like the other thread did. imho this topic is way to important to be flushed away by personal griefs, fanboi´ism or other BS.....

Words in italic mean: That i was too frickin lazy rereading any other forum links to verify the things being told.

Just take it as common sense, verify for yourself, stfu, or provide proper quotes against said facts.

Edited May 5, 2009 by Mr Burns

[mr.g-c 6]

I would love to have freetrack support in Arma2, definitely despite the fact that the included Track-IR API might by encrypted.

What to do to support it natively, is BIS should implement the Free-Track API, included in Free-Tracks SDK (which itself is included in their latest release).

I keep my fingers crossed that Free-Track works with Arma2.....

[Maddmatt 1]

I've been meaning to set up Freetrack for a while but haven't got around to it. Already have a cheap webcam.

I would love for ArmA 2 to support it :)

The price of TrackIR is just more than I'm willing to spend, and because I'm in New Zealand it is even more expensive.

[dslyecxi 23]

alleged

fact

Which is it? Alleged, or fact?

If it's a fact, you should source it in this thread.

[sparks50 0]

Can we please NOT discuss TrackIR here? Naturalpoint has all the right in the world to stop people from using their software in ways they were not intended.

The way I understand it, BI is going to need to use a separate Freetrack API, something I hope we can speak about here.

Edited May 6, 2009 by sparks50

[bionic 10]

I also use Free Track and it would be nice if BIS could implement the Free Track Api into ArmA 2. Alot of people are spending hours and days on writing tutorials and building their Free Track Setup to make it as perfect as possible.

In ArmA it worked great and it would be a big disappointment and loss if it wouldn´t be supported.

We simply want to be able to choose which devices we will use to play ArmA 2 and not be limited to one manufacturer.

Thx.

[mr.g-c 6]

Can we please NOT discuss TrackIR here? Naturalpoint has all the right in the world to stop people from abusing their software.

The way I understand it, BI is going to need to use a separate Freetrack API, something I hope we can speak about here.

Correct! You understood it right. This is the only way i can think of to have Free-Treack support.

The Problem is only (like it was with DCS Black shark western-release), that when BIS signed or agreed to NaturalPoints contract conditions for the use of their API, then it might happen that Naturalpoint can fully legal stop BIS from including any other Head-Tracking API.

It happend to DCS.BS as the first game in history of head-tracking supporting games..

This was the Statement of the DCS Black-shark Dev in their Forums, after the fans started a heavy Naturalpoint bashing:

Every joystick has standard software interface, that's why every joystick works in every game. For now there is no standard for head tracking devices software interface. We were going to add vendor-independent SDK in English release to allow every head tracking vendor (including FreeTrack) implement support of their devices for BlackShark. SDK has been removed from English release because of NaturalPoint request. Now we make agreement with NaturalPoint and we will release 3DOF version of our head tracking SDK soon.

On other Websites we can read about it even more, but that goes to far into NP-Bashing so i wont link it here.

[speculation]

Now if thats the case with BIS too, then we can actually forget any other head-tracking device getting used in Arma2, can't we?

This would be a scandal....

[/speculation]

[kegetys 2]

The only thing needed to have both TrackIR and freetrack (and, as far as I know, older TrackIR devices) working is to not "use" the encryption introduced in the newest TrackIR interface. There seems to be no reason for the encryption other than to break compatibility with other devices, so I see no sane reason why it should be used (or, most importantly, added, as it is not used in ArmA).

Having separate FreeTrack API support and encrypted TrackIR interface support seems just a waste of time and effort to me when both can work fine with what's used now.

[mr.g-c 6]

Kegetys, this would be perfect thats true!

However, [speculation-mode on] after watching the TIR5/Arma2 Presentation Video and after the speaking person claims that Arma2 is fully optimized for the new TIR5, with better reactions/precision and stuff, i think they must have used the newer API in order to get those improvements, right?

Or do you think they may have updated the old encryption-free API for new neat TIR5 features too?

[speculation-mode off]

I would be very interested in your opinion here...

[kegetys 2]

However, [speculation-mode on] after watching the TIR5/Arma2 Presentation Video and after the speaking person claims that Arma2 is fully optimized for the new TIR5, with better reactions/precision and stuff, i think they must have used the newer API in order to get those improvements, right?

The better precision etc. really should come from the device (better sensor, cooling, etc) and the TrackIR software (possibly some extra processing to get better tracking results), the applicationg (ArmA) doesn't need to do any of that. The API is there just to pass the position values to the application, its basically just six float values and nothing else in the TIR4 API (+ some extra features like ability to trigger centering). I cant imagine why there would need to be anything more complicated for TIR 5.

[PhilippRauch 0]

I guess he means .. newer API == obfuscated protocol == no FreeTrack

[Placebo 29]

Yes I said this can be discussed again, I did not say you can discuss Naturalpoint's business decisions, encryption of their API etc. etc. if Freetrack wants to be supported in games/apps then surely the onus is on them to provide everything that's required, if they can only provide a system/method that requires jerry rigging onto another company's software/API/IP or such then that should be something discussed directly with them.

I provided clear opinion in the last thread about one company choosing to encrypt/protect their own API/Software/IP digging up the same topic over and over is pointless and serves only to inflame the situation. To start the new thread with the very same allegations and insinuations moves the whole topic closer and closer to a topic that will end up not being discussable on these forums.

[[frl]myke 14]

I've read now this discussion and also had followed the now-closed thread about this topic and there is one point of view which was never mentoined: the POV of BIS.

Freetrack users always refered to theyr POV, so did TIR Users. No one ever speculated in a logical manner why TIR is supported but (if rumours/speculations are true) Freetrack isn't supported by ArmA 2.

So let's get through this. As far as i understood Placebo, NP did asked if BIS would implement TIR support, Freetrack didn't asked. I guess this can be seen as a fact.

Also as far as i understand it, Freetrack is based on NP's API to work. In other games recently released, the TIR API was protected against use of other Headtracking software/devices other than TIR, making Freetrack useless by it's meaning.

I think it's safe to assume that the same protected API is included in ArmA 2 since there is no logical reason to include an older/outdated API in a new Game.

Ok, so far the facts (more or less), now let's go into speculation.

Even as Freetrack didn't sent a request to be supported by ArmA 2, let us guess the Spanel Brothers have at least discussed about it (very wild guess, i know), what arguments would have rised up?

- can we get a non-protected API from NP so Freetrack can work with it?

- can we implement both with equal functionality?

- which headtracking method is probably more often used?

- will NP allow/deny us the implementation of a alternative API beside theyrs?

I guess for the first question a "No" is more than likely. It is NP piece of Software. It might be nice, but nice wont pay you off at the end of the month.

The second question is more tricky to answer, at least for me. Is there a free API for Freetrack which would work alongside with NP's API without interfering each other? I don't know. Informations about are welcome.

Third question. Well, with all due respect for those who had managed to build a working Freetrack device, personally i think the majority of computer users will prefer a pre-build solution. Be it for lazyness, be it because they have a certain level of guarantee that all components work together as intended. So i also think it's more than likely that TIR users will outnumber Vreetrack users by far.

Conclusion: if not both can be included, the API which has probably more users will make it.

And finally last question: will NP allow any other headtracking solution besides theyr own being supported by ArmA 2.

Well, at first you might ask how they could dictate BIS what they have to implement or what not. But on some way they can. NP probably knows the fact that the usercount of their product outnumbers any other headtracking usercount. And it's theyr software (API) so they can deny the use of it if any other headtracking API besides their own.

Ok, let's now put those (guessed) facts together:

- TIR users probably outnumbers Fretrack users

- NP is probably deniyng the use of any other headtracking API in the same prduct together with theyr API

At the end, for BIS it results in one single question:

- Do we serve the majority or the minority?

I guess, you know the answer.

[bionic 10]

Who says that Free Track users are a minority you underestimate the DIY Community. Go on youtube or google and check for Free Track and Track IR you will find as many if not more Free Track users as Track IR users.

Not everyone is able and willing to buy a device for 180€ which you don´t use regulary instead they are going to build one themself for less than 50€.

And whats wrong with supporting both Api´s the Free Track SDK is included in the Release. The Free Track Community don´t even need to have support the only thing they need is to be able to use their homemade devices in ArmA2.

Would you agree if BIS only support Nvidia cards because ATI users are a minority, why should they support Linuxserver at all?

And by the way this Thread is not to discuss why they should not support it, this thread is to get Free Track support in ArmA2.

Edited May 6, 2009 by bionic

[S!fkaIaC 10]

BIS can do whatever they want, we just have to make them aware how we see it - maybe by a poll.

IMHO it would be pretty much stupid if BIS signed an agreement with any company that makes a proprietary protocol/API the one and only to be used.

If they did already for ArmA 2 - bad luck - learn for ArmA 3.

My vote: keep your engine as open as you can.

[[frl]myke 14]

Calm down bionic, nowhere in my post i ever stated that Freetrack shouldn't be supported. Of course the best would be that any headtracking solution will be supported, no doubt about this point.

As reference for the count of freetrackusers, youtube is no reference at all. Since Freetrack is DIY stuff, people are proud of theyr work (and no doubt they can be) and like to show how they did it. I even state that they're doin it to give advices to others how they can prevent/solve some problems that may occure in the DIY process. For TIR users there is just less interest to show that they plugged a USB device and installed the included software. Which would be pointless at all.

And funny you bring up the comparison to Graphic Cards since this would be the best solution of all (although even less likely than NP opening it's API to freetrack): include general headtracking API in DirectX! This is the way it is done for Graphics, this is how it's done for Sound. Not even mention keyboards, mouse, joystick and all the rest. But this isn't the right place to go that way, we should head over to MS related forums.

Again, i've never said it is wrong to support both API's, indeed this would be the best solution. All i was showing was, based on the facts and rumours available, why BIS will (not should, again) probably chose to support TIR and not freetrack.

[=wfl= sgt bilko 10]

Everyone wants something for free!

You blame NP when they're basically taking care of their business? You should spam the freetrack dudes to get them to take care of theirs instead of freeloading on NP.

To be honest I don't understand why freetrack would rely/build their product/concept on someone else's API that may change at any time.

Whether it should be supported in ArmA2?

I highly doubt that BIS (or any other company) are being the active part. It's probably companies like NP that actively approach BIS with a working concept. Again you should spam freetrack to do the same.

Personally I'd rather see hardware based audio in Arma2 offloading cpu, than support for five different game devices.

[bionic 10]

Personally I'd rather see hardware based audio in Arma2 offloading cpu, than support for five different game devices.

Thats because you are a Track IR user if Free Track would be supported but no Track IR you wouldn´t say so.;)

Don´t know what is so hard to understand this thread is to get Free Track support in ArmA2. Free Track Users are not allowed to discuss in the Track IR thread so plz if you use Track IR keep out of this we don´t want your opinions why it should not be supported in here.

[[frl]myke 14]

@bionic

Reading is an art and you, Sir, aren't an artist at all.

The quote you've refered yourself to didn't said anything about NOT supporting freetrack at all. He just stated that he would prefer proper audio HW acceleration support before any sort of gaming device.

Also i didn't said one single sentence that freetrack should NOT be supported in ArmA 2. I just posted a personal opinion why it will unlikely happen.

And finally, as Placebo already stated, NP contacted BIS about making use of theyr headtracking device, freetrack didn't. So it is not BIS business to run after any piece of hardware that might be fun being used in ArmA 2.

So you better contact freetrack developer team to contact BIS about this issue but i higly fear that this is already too late for.

I think i can say that no TIR user will state that freetrack shouldn't be supported.

[S!fkaIaC 10]

To be honest I don't understand why freetrack would rely/build their product/concept on someone else's API that may change at any time.

It is rather about the rumour that in the T&C of NP it might defined that the NP API is the only one existing in the product if licensed. But NOBODY knows at the moment if it is really like that.

IF such a phrase exists it would lock out all other supplier for such similar product.

IF freetrack should be supported by BIS assuming that there is NOT any phrase suggesting that NP is the only one, I agree with Myke, it is up to the frretrack makers to provide a API, it's description to BIS first

[mr.g-c 6]

Please Gentleman no personal attacks and stuff, we wont get this locked.

BTT:

We can see that this is a rather tricky issue in my opinion and on top of that we have no official word from a Arma2 responsible yet, so all is left is speculation currently.

It is rather about the rumour that in the T&C of NP it might defined that the NP API is the only one existing in the product if licensed. But NOBODY knows at the moment if it is really like that.

This is correct, this could be one of the issues making a use of Free-Track impossible.

And finally, as Placebo already stated, NP contacted BIS about making use of theyr headtracking device, freetrack didn't. So it is not BIS business to run after any piece of hardware that might be fun being used in ArmA 2.

So you better contact freetrack developer team to contact BIS about this issue but i higly fear that this is already too late for.

You are most likely correct with this too, but you see NP is a company, Free-Track guys are like "modders" who doing their open source coding in their free-time. They can never offer any big support or whatever you would await from a commercial partner.

You see, up to October 2008 there was never a own initiative of Free-Track neccessary, as before they could always chose the TIR Api and it worked flawlessly. If there were a bug it was corrected with next update of Free-Track "Client-Software".

So this time i think its the community of Free-Track users and interessted users, plus people who want a support of this device, who should come to BIS and requesting a "device-support" - and thats exactly what we are doing here in this topic i think.

[[frl]myke 14]

@mr.g-c

I agree to the last post except at one point i can't agree 100% (nevertheless i wouldn't disagree):

So this time i think its the community of Free-Track users and interessted users, plus people who want a support of this device, who should come to BIS and requesting a support - and thats exactly what we are doing here in this topic i think.

Regarding the fact that freetrack isn't a company nor has it any PR-guy i understand that you ask (in widest trerms) BIS to support freetrack. But as you probably know that "just asking" hardly might lead to the desired result, why don't you take the temporary job of freetracks PR-Manager? Just for ArmA 2 of course (other games are up to you to decide).

So work out a documentary about freetracks benefits, point to the community behind it. Provide links to the necessary API and, if there are, to any document that might be useful for a successful implementing it into ArmA 2.

I don't know if this could lead to a success for freetrack but i bet my ass (and it's a nice one) chances are much higher than just complaining about why freetrack will not be supported.

[maddogx 13]

If BIS is to include FreeTrack support in Arma 2, the FreeTrack devs will probably have to develop their own API. NaturalPoint obviously protected their API to stop its usage with free alternatives like FreeTrack that could hurt their business. I don't think BIS will include an unprotected version of the NP API just to facilitate something that NP are trying to avoid. Unless NP are okay with that.

[bionic 10]

@bionic

Reading is an art and you, Sir, aren't an artist at all.

The quote you've refered yourself to didn't said anything about NOT supporting freetrack at all. He just stated that he would prefer proper audio HW acceleration support before any sort of gaming device.

Also i didn't said one single sentence that freetrack should NOT be supported in ArmA 2. I just posted a personal opinion why it will unlikely happen.

And finally, as Placebo already stated, NP contacted BIS about making use of theyr headtracking device, freetrack didn't. So it is not BIS business to run after any piece of hardware that might be fun being used in ArmA 2.

So you better contact freetrack developer team to contact BIS about this issue but i higly fear that this is already too late for.

I think i can say that no TIR user will state that freetrack shouldn't be supported.

No offence taken i couldn´t care less if iam an artist in reading or writing english i never wanted to be one. Its not my first language but sometimes you need to read between the lines.

And who wonders that NP is contacting Studios if i want to sell my product i also would do the same so nothing wrong with that.

In the matter of Free Track its freeware they don´t have the intention to sell anything so why should they go out and beg for implementation in any game? Calling for a sales or marketing manager for freeware sounds a bit funny doesn´t it? Can´t see the problem BIS having a look at Free Track it costs nothing to do so. And if they make it work in ArmA 2 they would make alot of people happy.

And yes at the moment it is more a rumor that Free Track will not work in ArmA 2 but why should we wait for the Release of ArmA 2 to see if it works or not? Better to say now that we want to see it implemented isn´t this the ArmA 2 Suggestions Thread?

[mr.g-c 6]

If BIS is to include FreeTrack support in Arma 2, the FreeTrack devs will probably have to develop their own API. NaturalPoint obviously protected their API to stop its usage with free alternatives like FreeTrack that could hurt their business. I don't think BIS will include an unprotected version of the NP API just to facilitate something that NP are trying to avoid. Unless NP are okay with that.

Hey Luke, i don't know if you read the whole topic, but it was already stated that Free-Track have their own API, included in a own and open source SDK, which itself is freely available in the lastest driver package ;):)