Hyp3rdyn3

The new ka-52 cockpit is also crying out for 6dof with its chunky frame that can block the horizon in a forward flight profile.

Battlefield 2 does this fairly well, often when you're trying to sneak around the back way they startle and give away your presence. :/ :)

And you can also use TrackIR stuff in which case there is no DIY at all. DirectInput has a standard software disclaimer with no warranty/liability/support/fitness but this has not limited its widespread use. The best industry standards are the open non-commercial ones.

From what I understand, the new encrypted interface is not compatible with TrackIR 1 & 2. So you will need at least a TrackIR 3 for ArmA2.

That is exactly what I was hoping for in the latest ArmA2 head tracking video.

This video was very disappointing because there was nothing new about the head tracking implementation, it was exactly the same as ArmA1, so really it was an ArmA2 preview and nothing more. The conveniently timed TrackIR5 advertisement shamelessly attached to the preview totally killed it. It would not have looked any different if it were TrackIR4, TrackIR3, FreeTrack, Cachya, HatTrack, whatever and only serves to endorse and strengthen a head tracking monopoly which makes about as much sense as a monopoly on six-axis joysticks. I was expecting 6dof in vehicles at least, and maybe smooth crouch and forward leaning. So instead of just side leaning you can lean to the side AND forward around an obstacle. Also more visual cues to assist with determining the orientation of your body would make it more practical for infantry because there is no cockpit or cabin to be used as a frame of reference, only the gun which is not always visible. If there's any reason for TrackIR5 it is that it should be pushing new innovations like this, not more of the same. The video was poorly presented, downbeat, slow, boring even, it didn't sell head tracking at all and it did not get me excited about the game.

TrackIR is a six axis joystick. Arguing that TrackIR exclusivity is OK is no different to arguing that, say, Saitek joystick exclusivity is OK. Assuming this were the case, just because Saitek put effort into producing their own API and convincing developers to exclusively support it in favor of open standards like DirectInput does not make it any more justifiable. FSX does not officially support TrackIR, yet it has TrackIR support by way of its own special API called SimConnect that can be used to get and set a whole bunch of simulation parameters, including the view. This means anyone can use it with whatever head tracking program they have. FSX obviously cannot claim to have TrackIR support so cannot use it for promotional purposes but it hardly needs to, being the juggernaut that it is. On the other hand ArmA may squeeze out a few more sales with 'official TrackIR support' slapped on the box. The contractual limitations that cover this particular six axis joystick are unprecedented for a game controller. ED showed it puts pressure on developers to restrict functionality to ensure exclusivity and to closely moderate forums to limit any bad vibes directed towards it. If a developer doesn't like this the only option would be to reject the terms of the contract, remove the TrackIR API and use an alternative. It would be unlikely that NP would boycott an alternative API if the game is popular enough but it seems most developers are unprepared to take this risk. DirectInput has a device type specifically intended for head tracking devices: 'DI8DEVTYPE1STPERSON_SIXDOF Device with six degrees of freedom; that is, three lateral axes and three rotational axes.' http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb219639(VS.85).aspx With this, the game could easily search for joystick devices that match DI8DEVTYPE1STPERSON_SIXDOF and automatically assign the first one it finds to view control. This would probably be easier than using custom APIs and would ensure everyone can come to the party.