jireland607

I hope so, it was very dusty so guess it probably is one of the older ones. I'll probably test it on FaceTrackNoIR first before trying to get the filter out.

Webcam, Wiimote and Kinect are only really only input devices (they're all really just webcams), they all need the tracking software like FaceTrackNoIR or FreeTrack to function. I have tried to keep the petition generic to appeal to users of both systems. For the moment, I just want to show ED how many people are in support of this movement. The more the signatures the better. My personal preference would be FreeTrack as it is supported by both FreeTrack and FaceTrackNoIR, but there may be legal reasons preventing the use of the FreeTrack protocol. FreeTrack it seems is also no longer being developed, so something else for the future may be? ED has said they were building their own interface before they were stopped by NP. By the way, have seen how many people with TrackIR systems have signed? I'm blown away by that.

I've just bought a PS3 eye, hopefully get a chance to set it up tonight. Bargain at £8 pre-owned from a shop. Cheaper than a cheap webcam

That's a wild accusation, which I really do not appreciate. I was only trying to set your mind to rest on the matters that you highlighted. I am not the only person that you have made an attack on today (Sobek?) I am not affiliated with any software house so therefore have nothing to personally gain. All of my time spent raising the profile for this petition is for the community of people who want to use alternative head tracking software. As author of the on-line petition, it is my job to encourage people to sign it. If you chose not to, as I said, clearly in my previous post, that is fine, your choice. I no longer which to make any communication with you any more so please do not direct any more posts at me and I will do likewise. Thanks

How is your experience with the PS3 Eye? Is it much better that normal webcam? I'm very close to getting one.

If you go the WiiMote route, beware that not all bluetooth dongle software works with the Wiimote properly. I had a webcam before but liked the idea of the lower cpu usage. I got a cheap but genuine wiimote from flea-bay. I already had a bluetooth adapter but it did not work with it. I purchased 2 further dongles before I found one that worked. TBH the difference was not really worth it. Plus you have to make some kind of stand for it (I used an old camera tripod). And of course batteries, and linking the Bluetooth up everytime you want to use it. I have recently been reading about the PS3 eye. It seems to have the high frequency required for smooth movement, and has a USB connector. It seems to require a bit of jiggery-pokery with drivers but seems like a much simpler setup. I have not tried it yet so can not offer any advice..... yet!

@ wolfrider - I included a comments section, you could put in there you want hack free products. We all want to use hack free products, that's pretty much why we are doing this. If ED listens to the petition then I am sure that's what we will get. If they do not change their stance however, the other head tracking software developers will always be forced to hack to access their only interface into the game. As you have suggested before it would be nice to have DirectX support for headtracking but more likely NP will have killed off any competition before that happens. Obviously it's your choice to sign and if you are happy to continue with NaturalPoint's hold on the Headtracking market, that's fine too. This post is mainly aimed at other users reading your comments.

Your choice obviously but may I ask why not?

I've never been able to get it to work at all :(

Take 5 minutest to have a look at this thread on the subject of Head Tracking. http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=74315 You may find it interesting

Please take 5 minutes to have a look at this thread http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=74315 You may find it of interest

Please take five minutes to have a look at this thread regarding HeadTracking: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=74315

There are many different ways to connect head tracking software to the sim. The only reason the free versions use the TrackIR SDK is because it is all thats available to them. ED did start developing their own interface but, according to a previous thread, NP asked them to stop. We (the DCS community) believe that a condition of having access to the TrackIR interface is that you must not include any other head tracking software. Sucks hey? Check out this thread for some more detail: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=74315 This subject has been discussed in detail on another thread: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=73665

Please help me in my quest to include support for more types of Head Tracking Software within the DCS/Lockon series. The Background -------------------- With the Lockon/DCS series, the only head tracking interface that is supported is NaturalPoints TrackIR. To use a different system; FreeTrack or FaceTracknoIR for example, an exploit must be applied to one of the dll files that is packaged with the flight simulator. As well as being illegal, it will also not work with 64 bit versions of windows, which in turn means that you have to run your games in 32 bit mode. So, why do Eagle Dynamics only support TrackIR? Well, they did start developing an interface to allow alternative head tracking systems but they were asked to stop by NaturalPoint. It has not been confirmed but it is believed that Eagle Dynamics were told if they included any other system, then they were not allowed to include TrackIR. Possible Solutions ---------------------- These unfortunately are few and far between. There is an option to use ppjoy, but myself and many others can not get it to work, it is quite a complicated setup, mainly caused by the unsigned drivers. To sign the drivers would cost a lot of money. By far the best and easiest way would be if Eagle Dynamics changed their decision and included another protocol. There are methods that are very easy to implement and would not require any code or software developed by NaturalPoint. Why would Eagle Dynamics do that? ------------------------------- If NaturalPoint wanted to stop people from exploiting their software, then they have failed. By stopping other head tracking interfaces from competing, FreeTrack (and others) have been forced to exploit the TrackIR's files. Eagle Dynamics would actually be helping to stop the exploitation of the TrackIR software. Another reason would be the numbers of people using the other available head tracking systems, these are very rough figures but so far the number of downloads are: FreeTrack - 50,000 + FaceTracknoIR 20,000 + I do not have figures on other systems but they still show 70,000 downloads combined. Yes, some may have download several times but even when taken into consideration it is still an amazing figure that can not be ignored by Eagle Dynamics. This would also open up many other possibilieies So what can we do? ------------------------- Well, this situation has existed before. A game called ArmA which was produced by Bohemia Interactive went through exactly the same thing. The community got together and started an online petition. After 900+ signatures, Bohemia Interactive changed their stance and included a FreeTrack interface in one of their following updates. So it can be done! On other matters, Eagle Dynamics are absolutely brilliant. Unlike most developers, they listen to what their end users want from their software and implement most of it very quickly indeed. As far as I am concerned, for a company of their size, I think their support is second to none. It is because of this, I believe they will listen to us if we make our voices heard. In an attempt to persuade Eagle Dynamics I have started an online petition as well. It is quickly gaining popularity. I hope with your support that we can exceed the 900 signatures received for ArmA and get into the thousands. It takes very little time, costs you nothing, your email address remains hidden (unless you specify otherwise) and this might just work. The Petition can be found here: http://www.petitiononline.com/Tracking/petition.html I look forward to your support and hope we can make a difference.

I have started a petition to Eagle Dynamics to include support for an alternative method of head movement tracking with the Lockon/DCS Series. http://www.petitiononline.com/Tracking/petition.html It was on this very petition site that support was raised to include FreeTrack on Bohemia Interactive's ArmA. I see it fitting that we launch our petition on the same site. I hope you will all support the petition. I hope to raise over 1000 signatories, this will exceed the 900 for ArmA. I will post a few threads on the DCS Forums to make more people aware of the petition in the coming days. Even if you do not think it will make a difference, still sign please it will only take less than a minute of your time. Thank you for your support

Anything stored in memory is accessible by any application anyway. Anyone can read what is stored in RAM with some very freely available programs. The point V4Friend is making is that if Eagle Dynamics agreed to create an area of shared memory with a particular pattern, then it could be used for these purposes. It would not open the program up any more than it currently is. Think of it like the LUA files they currently use, it would work in much the same way. You are correct, it probably would help. Trouble is that the only reason we need to exploit the TrackIR protocol is because it is the only interface available for our games. If NP stopped its policy of stopping free competition, then there would be no need to include their protocol. Strangely, NP's method of protecting their product is forcing people to exploit it. This is why I (and call me a conspiracy theorist if you wish) think they are not protecting their software but instead their market share. As for Microsoft, inclusion in DirectX would be great. Two problems though, firstly any implementation would take a long time, maybe years to be released. Secondly, how bothered are the developers? With the DCS series, head tracking is in my opinion essential to enjoy the gameplay, therefore it's important to ED. As for Microsoft, us FreeTrack users are a tiny dot within their many millions of business as well as personal users. In the short term, we need to lobby ED to include support for other systems, or at the very least it would be nice to see their stance on it and have a representative post on this thread.

I do not want to enter into an war of words so sorry if it looks like we are have arguing amongst ourselves, I feel its very important to have this debate though and I welcome your side of it. Several threads I have read and indeed started on this subject have ended after just a couple of posts. You make a fair point with your quote from FaceTracknoir, and I was unaware of that having not played any of those games with it. That API, as stated in the manual was freely available on the NP website, this was up till version 4 of TrackIR. This reinforces the fact that none of NP's code or programs have been integrated into FaceTracknoir, the end user had to get the freely available interface for themselves. It's no different to using PPJoy. Unfortunately for us, NP decided they did not want anybody else using their dll file, and again, I fully understand that, they made it, they should profit from it. But why insist that ED can not support any other method of HeadTracking? As I have said previously, it is possible to simply use memory mapping to read and write headtracking data between the program and the game. No need for downloading dll, using API's or reverse engineering protocols, just co-operation from ED and for NP to release its unreasonable grip.

Again respectfully, it was you who started used the heli sim analogy:doh:, I was simply just putting it the correct way round. Take FaceTracknoir for example, it uses NONE of the code from ANY NP software AT ALL. It uses an API that is available on the FREE market to track a face from the webcam. The developer can then move that data input into the game in whatever way ED agree on. There has been NO reverse engineering or stealing of code so copyright does not apply. This is not about NP protecting their code or software, plain and simple its about keeping their market share.

With all due respect, that's not a very good analogy. What you seem to be forgetting is that NP would actually be the 'alternative helicopter sim developer' creating a mod for a game. Also with what you said, the gamer would already have purchased and installed BlackShark for it to share the memory with. I'm sure everybody would say "I paid for the game, I'll mod it how I like". Quite rightly so. To use a better analogy: Its more like Thrustmaster saying to DCS "We have a HOTAS modelled on the Warthog, loads of people have it or will want it. If you remove support for any other joystick from your game, you will be allowed to use ours. If you fail to comply however, we will not allow you to use our joystick. You will then lose customers and annoy your users." Why would they do that? To force users to spend £300 on a joystick rather than using what they already have or what they could build on a shoestring. It's unfortunate that DCS have gone along with their request, and I'm sure they had their reasons but despite your negative comments, you must admit it is at best anti-competitive. If they did that over here in the UK, they would be under investigation by now. I'm all for protecting your software, and that's fine, that is why they added encryption, good for them, NP users spent a lot of money for their setup so I expect them to enjoy a better piece of software than my free one. But to then stop a completely independent developer from producing a piece of software that in no way uses borrowed code from TIR then that's just plain wrong. Again, I invite anyone from the ED team to post on this thread, I would like very much to see your comments.

Hey ClearDark, hows 1.6 coming on? You've got to give us some new's, the suspense is killing me. Been checking the forum at least twice a day for the last three weeks - :cry:, I feel its going to be a big update.

Anyone know if its possible to program the Saitek X45 so you pull the trigger for PAC1 and pull the pinky in for PAC2/Fire?

The mad thing is, you do not need an API or anything like to support FreeTrack or other. A small area of memory that is shared between the headtracking software and the game is all that is needed. In Lay terms: ... You move your head up..... Freetrack increases the Y axis value stored in a memory location, the game sees that value has changed so moves the cockpit view up. Its fairly straight forward. (Says me who can't program for toffee :D) Its not like implementing a massive interface or anything, ED just need to read a section of memory which is set aside for the task. A tiny section of memory at that. Then tell the headtracking software developers which addresses they are using so they can use the same areas in their code. [sorry, I got the point of what you were saying while typing that, about the API. You are saying that if its integrated into DirectX then NP have no say as to whether ED implements it or not. I've left the above paragraphs in because I think it shows a good point.] I have been in contact with one of the developers of FaceTrackNoIR. He has offered to discuss and probably tailor his software to suit ED. I'm sure it would also be possible to make an interface between any new standard and FreeTrack (which it seems is no longer being developed.) so ED could literally lead us into a new HeadTracking standard if required, or use the many already available. It's so simple... Its just that ED have bowed under pressure, don't take that as an attack on ED. I have seen the amazing support that they have given on these forums. The way they fix, repair and build their flight sims, in my opinion is second to no other software company. I do not know under what circumstances that decision was made or why, that is why I would like to see a response from somebody from the ED development team to get their side of the story. Even then I do not believe there is not some kind of legal loophole. What if there was an option for a "Generic Controller" within the sim which worked in a way that could be exploited to use a headtracking system perhaps? Even Microsoft, yes, the allegedly, anti-competitive super company, Microsoft implemented Simconnect which allowed users to run head tracking on FSX Oh, and allowed everyone to use it, no matter the device. I think Druid is right, NP need some good competition to get the horse on the correct end of the cart. So, come on ED, listen to your users and do the right thing, I think you'd be surprised how many people use FreeTrack. ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ AMD Phenom II X4 955 3.4 Ghz | 8GB DDR3 Dual Channel | Ati HD4850 XFX | 22" Samsung TFT & NEC 17" touchscreen

Well my campaign to include another interface looks to have been blown out of the water quite quickly. As with Wolf Rider, I also could find nothing more on the forums than "cancelled at NP's request". That statement, although it did not explain the matter very well at all, made me think that it was a legal request (A threat to take ED to court for producing a similar protocol to TrackIR). I never thought that it would be that ED was held to ransom. What a strange way of doing business. If your products good then people will buy it whatever. TrackIR's is probably artificially high in price due to a lack of competitive market. I can not afford the +£100 so will have to try again with ppjoy but can't get the bloody thing to work. :( I'm still glad I started this thread, it has given me, and I'm sure others reading it, clarity as to the reason why we can not use FreeTrack as intended. Thanks Nate, thats cleared it up for me.

I would like to see support for another Head Tracking technology. A large number of players are using FreeTrack which as you know is not fully supported by the DCS series. A 'hotfix' has to be release to allow it to use the TrackIR protocol. My main concerns, as well as the fact that FreeTrack will not work with 64bit Windows, is that the people who release the fixer may stop doing so. We need a more secure and practical method of interfacing with the game. I have posted within these forums and was promptly pointed towards some threads where it looks like a certain manufacturer has asked ED to not include support for other tracking methods. I have been communicating with the developer of FaceTrackNoIR, trying to learn all of the in's and out's of the technology. His product outputs using any of the following protocols: FlightGear; Free-track; PPJoy; fake TrackIR (evt. with TIRViews for some older games); SimConnect (for Microsoft Flight Simulator X); FSUIPC (for Microsoft Flight Simulator 2002 and 2004) He explained to me also that all the programs use to interface with the game is a section of shared memory, the difference with TrackIR is they have a section of this memory that contains their encryption. FreeTrack works in the same way but does not have the encryption. As you are not using any dll's or components created by NaturalPoint, there is no fear of reprisals. You are simply reading a section of memory. Another thought I had, if the memory map is too similar to that used by TrackIR is that ED implement an interface, then suggest the developers of alternate HeadTracking systems, use your implementation. After all, Microsoft and the developers of FlightGear did it. Would be nice to settle on a standard though. Wim (The developer for FaceTrackNoIR has very kindly offered to discuss a way of implementing either a FreeTrack or other protocol into the DCS series. If any ED developer views this post and would like to get in touch with Wim, please let me know. Would an online petition help to persuade ED to integrate such and interface?

Not sure about the others but I would not hold your breath for a Kinect based tracking system. I'm no expert but all of the youtube videos I have seen shows that the Kinect simply follows the silhouette of the head. If you look at the image the Kinect is viewing, the body is simply a blue blob and does not distinguish individual features. That means the Kinect will only be cable of moving up/down left/right or 2DOF. Don't flame me if that's not correct, I'm judging that purely on some YouTube vids. I guess Razer's system will not be free either...