PDA

View Full Version : Oleg: Will the patch fix the Linda Blair cheat?



XyZspineZyX
06-22-2003, 05:44 PM
It has just come to my attention that if you use TrackIR early versions then you can turn your head a full 360 degrees. Obviously, this gives TrackIR users a huge advantage over other pilots who have the limited range of motion.
Will the patch override this feature?

<img src=http://www.simops.com/graphics/wildcard.gif>

IRON SKIES
As real as you want it to be.

XyZspineZyX
06-22-2003, 05:44 PM
It has just come to my attention that if you use TrackIR early versions then you can turn your head a full 360 degrees. Obviously, this gives TrackIR users a huge advantage over other pilots who have the limited range of motion.
Will the patch override this feature?

<img src=http://www.simops.com/graphics/wildcard.gif>

IRON SKIES
As real as you want it to be.

XyZspineZyX
06-22-2003, 05:52 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/messages/message_view-topic.asp?name=Olegmaddoxreadyroom&id=zvnkd

Or rather should this feature be present for everyone is another view.

S!
609IAP_Recon

Forgotten Wars Virtual War
Forum: http://fogwar.luftwaffe.net/forums/index.php
Website: http://forgottenwars.dyndns.org
Visit 609IAP at http://takeoff.to/609IAP

http://www.leeboats.com/609/sig/609_recon3.jpg

Agnus Dei, Qui Tollis peccata mundi, Miserere nobis. Dona nobis pacem

XyZspineZyX
06-22-2003, 05:57 PM
Nothing he can do the old drivers will always be out there

http://mysite.verizon.net/vze4jz7i/ls.gif

Good dogfighters bring ammo home, Great ones don't. (c) Leadspitter

XyZspineZyX
06-22-2003, 06:01 PM
Sure he can - he needs to enable it for everyone. It's not a cheat in my opinion.

The only problem at this point is that only a certain group can do it - and everyone should be able to.


S!
609IAP_Recon

Forgotten Wars Virtual War
Forum: http://fogwar.luftwaffe.net/forums/index.php
Website: http://forgottenwars.dyndns.org
Visit 609IAP at http://takeoff.to/609IAP

http://www.leeboats.com/609/sig/609_recon3.jpg

Agnus Dei, Qui Tollis peccata mundi, Miserere nobis. Dona nobis pacem

XyZspineZyX
06-22-2003, 06:16 PM
"It's not a cheat in my opinion."

Can your head turn to 360? ? /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Cheers,

XyZspineZyX
06-22-2003, 06:25 PM
CHDT wrote:
- "It's not a cheat in my opinion."
-
- Can your head turn to 360? ? /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif
-
- Cheers,


it's about view not head, that's something slightly different

or can't you move your eyes? /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

quiet_man

XyZspineZyX
06-22-2003, 06:31 PM
CHDT

It's not about turning 360 degrees. It's 180 degrees we're talking about. Can I twist my body, and turm my head 180 degrees? Easily. Not to mention turning my eyes too.

Da Buzz
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Only the spirit of attack, born in a brave heart, will bring success to any fighter aircraft, no matter how highly developed it may be.... Adolf Galland
<center>
http://www.elknet.pl/acestory/foto1/hartm1-2.jpg

XyZspineZyX
06-22-2003, 06:34 PM
If you've been once strapped to the seat of a combat aircraft, you will know it's not possible to have a direct view behind. But of course, if you move your shoulders (only in level flight, in evolutions, much clever to fasten firmly your seatbelts!), you can see better in the 3/4 behind than in FB.

Cheers,

XyZspineZyX
06-22-2003, 06:39 PM
Doesn't giving everybody the 180 view, make more sense?

Da Buzz
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Only the spirit of attack, born in a brave heart, will bring success to any fighter aircraft, no matter how highly developed it may be.... Adolf Galland
<center>
http://www.elknet.pl/acestory/foto1/hartm1-2.jpg

XyZspineZyX
06-22-2003, 08:08 PM
Wellcome to whine alley

"Never forget the past so we dont make the same mistakes in the future"

XyZspineZyX
06-22-2003, 08:13 PM
"Doesn't giving everybody the 180 view, make more sense? "


Yes, in a game, why not. In something called a "sim", I don't know.

But you will agree with me. If you're ok to get an artificially better field of view this way, why not an artificially better field of view for the 190 pilots too? /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Cheers,

XyZspineZyX
06-22-2003, 08:17 PM
Just give it to all.


Period end of discussion.


Just I ask to only allow it in cocpit mode not HUD. Sometime its hard to find a cockpit server when I fly and Im out against the HUD and padlock. Very tough situation to say the least. Those of us using TIR fly cockpit because HUD is dissorenting.


<Center>http://www.geocities.com/mad_squadron/index.html
<Center>http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0RADeAnwUNsF!xmzi74V7fM0zsNZLrdqP6EJfhM3yD3f!sLEO4 CdvQZqaQWugce7lDgv!bcKdQTASFYHmbE1x5F2s6VkEKqZOH67 8VupJ4y0/Toad's.jpg?dc=4675413127089644669
</a>
<Center>
&lt;script>var YourPicName='http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0RgDdAo4Ue9rMgrGRpm67Ij*O8isG1PQXDYqaZ*pZOuenHzj31 K61WxrXQmZKj6P0FGhxrm*4FYgMBI6aoAIC6oqXGW0NPjerG5o II1eYIkg/tranflag.gif?dc=4675417702733748611';var a=document.all.tags("img");for(var i=0;i<a.length;i++){if[a[i].src.indexOf["/i/icons")!=-1)var o=a[i]}o.src=YourPicName</script>
&lt;script>var a=document.all.tags("table");a[a.length-2].bgColor ="#666600";a[a.length-3].bgColor = "#660000";a[a.length-4].bgColor = "#003300";if(a[a.length-5].innerHTML.indexOf("User Options")!=-1){a[a.length-5].bgColor = "#2B3038";a[a.length-8].bgColor = "#000000";}else{a[a.length-7].bgColor = "#000000";}</script>

XyZspineZyX
06-22-2003, 08:19 PM
"Those of us using TIR fly cockpit because HUD is dissorenting."

Poor little TIR boys, you are dissoriented. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
06-22-2003, 08:22 PM
CHDT

I've posted in the past that i thought the Fw190 view should be made better, for playability. I don't fool myself into thinking i'm flying a real WW2 fighter. I'm playing a game, with all it's restrictions. I want it to be fun, not harder than real life. I'm blind as a freaking bat, but I refuse to fly in anything but cockpit view. I'm just asking for a little slack in helping me to see something!

Da Buzz
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Only the spirit of attack, born in a brave heart, will bring success to any fighter aircraft, no matter how highly developed it may be.... Adolf Galland
<center>
http://www.elknet.pl/acestory/foto/kozedub3.jpg

XyZspineZyX
06-22-2003, 09:55 PM
Currently the rear-view is to restrictive, I wish that when you used the "look-back left/right" views that you would lean a bit to see better. If this game had head movements simulated it would add a HUGE amount of realism and immersion IMHO. If anybody has played Superbike 2001 by EA they would know what I am talking about as you lean around corners and such your head leans/moves also from behind your windscreen. That feature helped make that game one of the best of all time IMHO.

And BuzzU, how many planes are you gonna put in your sig this week? (P-51, 109, La-5/7....) /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

http://www.brewsterbuffalos.org/yoj/pictures/006.jpg


Message Edited on 06/22/03 08:56PM by kyrule2

Message Edited on 06/22/0309:02PM by kyrule2

XyZspineZyX
06-22-2003, 10:01 PM
kyrule2

I planned on keepingthe 109 for awhile, but someone complained about the swastika. It's hard to find a 109 without one../i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Da Buzz
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Only the spirit of attack, born in a brave heart, will bring success to any fighter aircraft, no matter how highly developed it may be.... Adolf Galland
<center>
http://www.elknet.pl/acestory/foto/kozedub3.jpg

XyZspineZyX
06-22-2003, 10:05 PM
That's funny, because I have gone back to my 109 probably for good, or until spitfire comes out. Just bought more detailed books on it, so I'm really into it again. I was going to look for some good 109 pics, but you said someone complained about swastika? You mean here on the boards? Shame if it was here. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

http://www.brewsterbuffalos.org/yoj/pictures/006.jpg

XyZspineZyX
06-22-2003, 10:09 PM
I like the 109 too. It's like a hot rod.

It's actually against the rules to have a swastika in your sig on this forum. I thought i'd sneak it in, but it lasted only one day.

Da Buzz
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Only the spirit of attack, born in a brave heart, will bring success to any fighter aircraft, no matter how highly developed it may be.... Adolf Galland
<center>
http://www.elknet.pl/acestory/foto/kozedub3.jpg

XyZspineZyX
06-22-2003, 10:30 PM
- It has just come to my attention that if you use
- TrackIR early versions then you can turn your head a
- full 360 degrees. Obviously, this gives TrackIR
- users a huge advantage over other pilots who have
- the limited range of motion.
- Will the patch override this feature?

Huh.. I have TrackIR.. and had the old, and have the new drivers.. During the learning curve I ran across a setting that did allow me to look straight back.. right at the seat head rest.. but the *transition* to the veiw was so convluted and jumpy and jerky and discontinues that it was useless. Even with the new drivers, if you hit the F8 key it kind of jumps to a down right look.. then when you move your head SWOOOOOOSH the view goes nuts! But, it does go to some views you normaly dont have.. where most of the time it goes straight down looking at the seat.. So in short, I wouldnt loose any sleep over it, anyone that is trying to make use of this view is going to spend more time trying to get out of it then it is worth.. just too disorenting.



TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
06-22-2003, 10:55 PM
CHDT:

Did you read the link - or just responded without reading?

If so, are you saying Robert Shaw is incorrect?

What experience tells you that they couldn't look behind? Or you basing this on some subjective idea?

Just saying you don't think something is right or wrong means nothing - purely subjective - give something objective at least to base your argument on.

S!
609IAP_Recon

Forgotten Wars Virtual War
Forum: http://fogwar.luftwaffe.net/forums/index.php
Website: http://forgottenwars.dyndns.org
Visit 609IAP at http://takeoff.to/609IAP

http://www.leeboats.com/609/sig/609_recon3.jpg

Agnus Dei, Qui Tollis peccata mundi, Miserere nobis. Dona nobis pacem

XyZspineZyX
06-22-2003, 10:59 PM
"Poor little TIR boys, you are dissoriented"

Again - instead of these type posts - why not try bringing something substantial to the table?

Rebuke the argument with some facts will ya?

S!
609IAP_Recon

Forgotten Wars Virtual War
Forum: http://fogwar.luftwaffe.net/forums/index.php
Website: http://forgottenwars.dyndns.org
Visit 609IAP at http://takeoff.to/609IAP

http://www.leeboats.com/609/sig/609_recon3.jpg

Agnus Dei, Qui Tollis peccata mundi, Miserere nobis. Dona nobis pacem

XyZspineZyX
06-22-2003, 11:09 PM
"What experience tells you that they couldn't look behind? "

When I made this picture...

http://www.pbase.com/image/18142332

... I had unfasten the upper part of the seatbelts letting me move my shoulders a little bit to the left or to the right. But even like that, it was not easy to look behind. And during evolutions, you can forget it. If your shoulders are not firmly fixed on the seat, you can get fast into big trouble! You can move your neck and your head, but not much more!

Cheers,

XyZspineZyX
06-22-2003, 11:13 PM
lol - ok nice picture - I've seen alot of aircraft pictures.



did you read the fighter pilot, Robert Shaw's quotes on the link yet?

Guess he is wrong I asked?

S!
609IAP_Recon

Forgotten Wars Virtual War
Forum: http://fogwar.luftwaffe.net/forums/index.php
Website: http://forgottenwars.dyndns.org
Visit 609IAP at http://takeoff.to/609IAP

http://www.leeboats.com/609/sig/609_recon3.jpg

Agnus Dei, Qui Tollis peccata mundi, Miserere nobis. Dona nobis pacem

XyZspineZyX
06-22-2003, 11:19 PM
It's interesting to note that all of those ultra-realistic TrackIR users that were constantly calling for the removal and dumbing down of padlock etc.... were mostly silent on this issue.

I don't have a problem with TrackIR or any hardware in the game. What I have a problem with is pilots that use this hardware to cheat against others by disabling in game views, and rationalizing it as more realistic.

We saw the same behavior in Cfs with pilots altering air files, sneaking into unrestricted bomb runs and calling it a more realistic flight model.

Funny they never seem to reveal their hanky panky until after the fact.

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

"Loyalty to the country always, loyalty to the government when it deserves it."

Mark Twain

XyZspineZyX
06-22-2003, 11:23 PM
"I've seen alot of aircraft pictures."


and I've done a lot of aircraft pictures!


Look here:

http://www.pbase.com/image/18142712



I was simply in a PC-7 for this pic. That was about the maximum I could lean behind and below for photographing the entire aircraft and I was holding the camera just with the end of my fingers. I could have look with the eyes a little more behind, but certainly not "directly" behind. Simply not possible and again, NOT during aerobatics or combat manoeuvers, during this phase of the flight you HAVE to be fixed very firmly on your seat!

Cheers,

XyZspineZyX
06-22-2003, 11:46 PM
Btw, a real fighter pilot never flies straight, but is always making curves to check his six, alone or with the help of his wingman. For the simple reason that it is not possible to look straight behind!

Cheers,

XyZspineZyX
06-23-2003, 12:18 AM
Recon_609IAP wrote:
- Did you read the link - or just responded without
- reading?

Yes.. and here is a copy of your post

--Fight Combat by Robert Shaw:
--
--p375
--
--"It is often necessary to turn almost completely
--around in the seat in either direction to look
--behind...Restraining straps must be designed
--and adjusted to allow this freedom of movement"
--
--also.
--
--"...flight controls should be designed to be
--used by either hand, so the pilot can rotate
--his body completely around in either direction
--and still fly the airplane".

To be honest Recon.. this sounds like it was taken out of context.. In that when you read the two paragaphs you posted it sounds like he is talking about the way a fighter should be design to falicitate *these* things

NOTE: He says "necessary" which does not mean it is posable to do, only neccessary to do to maitain track. That and the flight controls, enabling either hand.. This all just sounds like he is sugesting that a good figher would have these qualitys... NOT THAT EVERY FIGHTER HAS THESE QUALITIES! And in WWII, and even today, have a poor rear view! Even if you could do the Linda Blair you would basically be looking at the back of the seat. Now with that said..

I think we can all agree that due to the Linda Blair aspect of *simulting* the views by *only* turing... it does LIMIT how well we can look back. In *real* life the pilot would LEAN, TWIST UPPER BODY, *AND* TURN HEAD to look back.. to get a *nearly* straight back view DOWN ONE SIDE of the aircraft... AND how well that can be done is DEPENDENT on the aircraft itself!! For example, the.. Oh dang, I forgot the name.. those semi buble canopys that were put on the Spitfires and P51B's that allowed the pilot to lean out a little farther to look back.. Before that, you couldnt lean very far before your face hit the glass, thus looking back all you saw was seat and window frame.


- If so, are you saying Robert Shaw is incorrect?

Depends.. I would like to see the paragraphs leading up to and following those posts of yours. It really sounds like he is describing what a good fighter would enalbe the pilot to do.. Not to be confused with what ALL fighters can do.



TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
06-23-2003, 12:53 AM
"hose semi buble canopys that were put on the Spitfires and P51B's "

Malcolm hood for the P-51B and some Razorback too.

Cheers,

XyZspineZyX
06-23-2003, 01:12 AM
CHDT wrote:
- "hose semi buble canopys that were put on the
- Spitfires and P51B's "
-
- Malcolm hood for the P-51B and some Razorback too.
-
- Cheers,

Dat's it! Thanks! Getting old sucks! <G>



TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
06-23-2003, 02:08 AM
Do you think that some pilots sticked some small mirrors on the horizontal metal bar of their cockpits just because they were too lazy to lean back?

And look at a 190 picture, see the size of the cockpit and then say if they could lean back and see their sixes...

I believe it should be up to the users to choose if using or not the old drivers... If u wanna cheat, cheat, nothing can stop you from cheating (CS is an example) But when you get shot down( and that WILL happen) Just remember you were shot down by a MUCH more skilled pilot, because he hunted you even you knowing he was there /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif
I would be very embarassed being shot down by someone knowing he was there, mainly because most WWII pilots were shot down withouth knowledge of the bandit, another chunk got shot down in head-on attacks and gunner fire. What do we have left? You...
I rest my case /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
06-23-2003, 02:20 AM
tagert:

Currently with that software you do see and are limited by the seat, etc...


This is not a open cockpit back six view we are discussing now - it's a fully modelled cockpit with a view to the back of the cockpit.

So - to go along with your statement, you are limited, ie. i16 vs p47 bubble - the p47 is a much nicer back six view.

Therefore I don't see the problem - as to clarify, Robert Shaw is not theorizing in his statements - these are facts.

These are facts, not Shaw attempting to say 'it should be this way'

Listen to this, as further proof. p375:

"The pilots flight equipment and the aircraft design and maintenance are also important factors. A pilots' clothing should be as lightweight and nonrestricting as possible so that movement in the cockpit is not hindered. It is often necessary to turn almost completely around in the seat in either direction to look directly behind, no easy task in a full pressure suit. Restraining straps must also be designed and adjusted to allow this freedom of movement.

The Japanese early in World War II considered this cockpit freedom so important that their fighter pilots generally did not even wear parachutes."

This addresses issues posted here in and of itself.

S!
609IAP_Recon

Forgotten Wars Virtual War
Forum: http://fogwar.luftwaffe.net/forums/index.php
Website: http://forgottenwars.dyndns.org
Visit 609IAP at http://takeoff.to/609IAP

http://www.leeboats.com/609/sig/609_recon3.jpg

Agnus Dei, Qui Tollis peccata mundi, Miserere nobis. Dona nobis pacem

XyZspineZyX
06-23-2003, 03:19 AM
Recon_609IAP wrote:
- Currently with that software you do see and are
- limited by the seat, etc...

As it should be. The only thing in question is how much of your view to the rear is blocked.

- This is not a open cockpit back six view we are
- discussing now - it's a fully modelled cockpit with
- a view to the back of the cockpit.

I understand.

- So - to go along with your statement, you are
- limited, ie. i16 vs p47 bubble - the p47 is a much
- nicer back six view.

Agreed.

- Therefore I don't see the problem - as to clarify,
- Robert Shaw is not theorizing in his statements -
- these are facts.

Disagree. He may not be theorizing, but he is clearly talking in general! And he apears to be talking about the way a good fighter should be.. when he says:

"Restraining straps must be designed"

"flight controls should be designed"

Another *key* you seem to be missing, and or avoiding is he says:

"It is often necessary to turn ALMOST completely
around in the seat in either direction to look
behind..."

In that if one could do the Linda Blair then WHY would he have to, as Shaw put it.

"so the pilot can rotate his body completely around in either direction"

If he could completely.. not ALMOST completely turn around in the seat and look STRAIGHT back then he wouldnt have to look to EITHER side. Thus, unless your a double jointed FREQ, you aint going to lood dead astern!!

- These are facts, not Shaw attempting to say 'it
- should be this way'

Disagree.

- Listen to this, as further proof. p375:
-
- <SNIP>

Again, even with a silk scarf, he notes you can only ALMOST completely turn around..

- The Japanese early in World War II considered this
- cockpit freedom so important that their fighter
- pilots generally did not even wear parachutes."

And the price of tea in china is what? They didnt have radios in alot of them AC too.. And by the end of the war they were plum out o pilots. Too bad they didnt give up a little movment for a para!

- This addresses issues posted here in and of itself.

Disagree.



TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
06-23-2003, 05:08 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/messages/message_view-topic.asp?name=Olegmaddoxreadyroom&id=zvnkd

see here



You know - you can nitpick his words all day - these are factual comments.


I'll find more - you find some comments showing it wasn't possible. Robert Johnson speaks of looking behind as well. Let me dig out some more quotes.





S!
609IAP_Recon

Forgotten Wars Virtual War
Forum: http://fogwar.luftwaffe.net/forums/index.php
Website: http://forgottenwars.dyndns.org
Visit 609IAP at http://takeoff.to/609IAP

http://www.leeboats.com/609/sig/609_recon3.jpg

Agnus Dei, Qui Tollis peccata mundi, Miserere nobis. Dona nobis pacem

XyZspineZyX
06-23-2003, 05:16 AM
Recon_609IAP wrote:
- Sure he can - he needs to enable it for everyone.
- It's not a cheat in my opinion.
-
- The only problem at this point is that only a
- certain group can do it - and everyone should be
- able to.
-
-

DITTO - well, not exactly, I'd like to get rid of the last 5-10? of motion if possible coz it does feel ridiculous like that. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif Still a lot more immersive than the standard FB FOV.

<hr width="400">Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes.
That way, when you criticize them, you're a mile away and have their
shoes!
http://members.rogers.com/teemaz/sig.jpg (http://www.jagdgeschwader1.com)

XyZspineZyX
06-23-2003, 05:20 AM
That seems plain silliness to me Tagert. The quote doesn't say that the pilot needed to turn their body completely around in order to view the limit allowed by the frame of the plane. And if Japanese pilots were in fact not wearing parachutes, it stands to reason that it wasn't because it unsuccessfully aided them in viewing objects outside the aircraft. The reason is because it worked, within the limits of the airframe.

Certainly, it will be easier to view rear objects in this sim than it would in real life, just as taking a high-G turn is easier in the sim than in real life. But that doesn't mean it wasn't possible. It was possible, or the concerns Robert Shaw had wouldn't have been made in those quotes.

Frankly, not only should the 180 view be allowed, but side to side head movements should also be incorporated, to look around the cockpit pillars, as real pilots did.

Remember, the cockpit still restricts.

XyZspineZyX
06-23-2003, 05:22 AM
Sooo ..

If i understand correctly, what Tagart is saying is he wants the rear view variable depending on the historical aircraaft seating.

In aircraft where you CAN see directly behind (like my real time cessna) he will allow a 180 view, but in aircraft where the seating firmly strapped the pilot into a front only orientation of the torso he wants the rear view limited to head movement only.

Thata a lot of work for the programmers !!!



Also ... assuming this is done, you would also have to limit mouse view which looks almost as far back, in those aircraft with tight seats.

XyZspineZyX
06-23-2003, 05:27 AM
Agreed, Jetbuff. 180 back allows a little more than direct back in those pics. No need for that. Unless the pilots saw it that way, which I doubt.

It would probably be more like a view back, followed by a head-tilt, to allow as backward a view as possible.

XyZspineZyX
06-23-2003, 07:21 AM
Recon_609IAP wrote:
- see here

saw

- You know - you can nitpick his words all day

Not nitpicking them at all! Just trying to get you to see that your interptaion of his words could be wrong.

- these are factual comments.

The only fact is he said those words, but your interptation of those words are not fact!

- I'll find more - you find some comments showing it
- wasn't possible.

Better yet, simply answer the following few questions:

Q1 Do you agree that ALLMOST completly around is NOT equal to completly around?

Q2 You say that shaws word mean a pilot could look dead astern, as in those picks you took in that link

Q2 Lets assume that you can look 180 back,.. Then why would you need to, as Shaw said, have a stick that enbles either hand to fly, so you can turn both LEFT and RIGHT to look dead astern?

After those few simple question, I think you will realise that you cant look back, dead astern, as in those pics you took.. maybe sitting on the run way and sitting in the seat backwords.... but in combat.. under "g"... no way!

On that note, Im not aginst the 180 view! Im all for it! But not for the reasons you state... ie it was *real* to do so... No, Im for it in that we, in the simulation, allready have our view so limited do to the simple fact that it is a simulation, ANYTHING to make up for that, within reason, is good IMHO.

- Robert Johnson speaks of looking
- behind as well. Let me dig out some more quotes.

LOL! Dude.. we are arguing symantics now.. how big is big... how dark is dark... and.. how ALLMOST COMPLETE is COMPLETE.. there is no amount of quotes or pictures that will prove or disprove it.. Thus, resort to common sense.. At which point, do you really think guys could do the linda blair like in those pics you have?



TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
06-23-2003, 07:28 AM
WTE_Galway wrote:
- Sooo ..
-
- If i understand correctly, what Tagart is saying is
- he wants the rear view variable depending on the
- historical aircraaft seating.

Huh? No.. all I am saying is that in most, if not all AC of WWII you could not look dead astern, ie 180.

- In aircraft where you CAN see directly behind (like
- my real time cessna) he will allow a 180 view, but
- in aircraft where the seating firmly strapped the
- pilot into a front only orientation of the torso he
- wants the rear view limited to head movement only.

Not sure, but does your cessna, but I think the view limits (minus the TrackIR cheat) we have now are pretty close to real... Real as far as the limts go.

- Thata a lot of work for the programmers !!!

Must not be.. in that the sim does it now.

- Also ... assuming this is done, you would also have
- to limit mouse view which looks almost as far back,
- in those aircraft with tight seats.

Ah.. not sure I follow.. basically I dont want any limits, or changes on the current views.. espically in the name of realism!! But, if you all want the 180 view, Im all for it, but not becaus it is more realistic!! No, but because our view in the sim is allready mega limited in contrast to real life,.. so anything, within limits, that will help maek up for that Im all for!!



TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
06-23-2003, 07:41 AM
skinStick wrote:
- That seems plain silliness to me Tagert. The quote
- doesn't say that the pilot needed to turn their body
- completely around in order to view the limit allowed
- by the frame of the plane.

And I never said it did!!! I agree with you!! What others are saying is there should be a 180 view added! On the notion that you could look dead astern in real life. Which aint true! Even shaw says several times ALLMOST completly around... and ALLMOST completly is not dead astern

- And if Japanese pilots
- were in fact not wearing parachutes, it stands to
- reason that it wasn't because it unsuccessfully
- aided them in viewing objects outside the aircraft.

Not saying it did or didnt, only that in looking back the Japanese did alot of things that seem down right stupid! Like not putting radios in aircraft.. and the para things is just anohter one that seems downrigh dumb!

- The reason is because it worked, within the limits
- of the airframe.

YES!! You said it, LIMITS! There were limits! and twising your head 180 degrees to stair into the head rest does not fall into those limits!

- Certainly, it will be easier to view rear objects in
- this sim than it would in real life,

Disagree 100%! When you take into account the limited perfial view, the limited resolution, the fact that canopys bars appear solid as if you only had one eye.. etc.. Our view in sims are for S**T! On that note, Im all for adding the 180 view to make up for some of those limitations.. but not under the premis that it was realistic! Becaue it just wasnt!

- just as taking a high-G turn is easier in the
- sim than in real life.

Agreed

- But that doesn't mean it wasn't possible. It
- was possible, or the concerns Robert Shaw had
- wouldn't have been made in those quotes.

Maybe parked on the runway one could unstrap and sit backwards to stair into the head rest with their back pressed up aginst the gun sight so they could see out both sides at once... but not in flight, let alone combat, under g force!!

- Frankly, not only should the 180 view be allowed,
- but side to side head movements should also be
- incorporated,

Im all for it! Just not for the same reasons!

- to look around the cockpit pillars, as
- real pilots did.

Ding! And with two eyes thos pillars practally disaper anyways! Which is why Im also for semi-transparent pillers!

- Remember, the cockpit still restricts.

E X A C T A L L Y! Dude.. you pretty much saying what Im saying!


TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
06-23-2003, 11:27 AM
What about the fact that ypu lose padlock when a e/a/c is in your 50 clock possition still visible!

XyZspineZyX
06-23-2003, 12:18 PM
I do think it's more realistic to have that view - now, do I think it's a snap view? no . However, I would rather have 'more' of a view than the current system.

It would take more effort - but, thing is , we lack g forces, etc.. it's not perfect obviously - but to lose this important view is my bigger concern.

And I do believe in some, not all aircraft, this was possible. For those aircraft, this current lockdown is not right.

The 'best' correction is one of considerable effort - where each aircraft back view ability is correct - ie. 190 - wouldn't see as far back as a p47 bubble top, etc..

I find though for this particular issue, the "give the view to all" is a better compromise than the ability for some to have it vs some not.


S!
609IAP_Recon

Forgotten Wars Virtual War
Forum: http://fogwar.luftwaffe.net/forums/index.php
Website: http://forgottenwars.dyndns.org
Visit 609IAP at http://takeoff.to/609IAP

http://www.leeboats.com/609/sig/609_recon3.jpg

Agnus Dei, Qui Tollis peccata mundi, Miserere nobis. Dona nobis pacem



Message Edited on 06/23/0311:23AM by Recon_609IAP

XyZspineZyX
06-23-2003, 06:33 PM
Recon_609IAP wrote:
- I do think it's more realistic to have that view -

And I dont.. And.. how did I know you wouldnt address, let alone answer those 3 little questions? You allways toss out to people "bring some facts" to the table.. but when pressed you avoid the hard questions? Well, sense you like FACTS so much, let me list a few.

FACT 1: P51B's were modified to improve the rear view with the Malcom Hood semi bubble canopys. These semi bubble canopys allowed the pilot to LEAN a little farther LEFT and RIGHT to improve the view back DOWN ONE SIDE of the aircrat... not centered, dead astern staring into the head rest. If a P51B pilot could do the linda blair.. and get the views your saying are real, then there would not have been a need for the Malcom Hoods, let alone the later buble canopys with their wider (ie left and right) head space.

FACT 2: In your quotes of Shaw he refered to looking back three times, and two of the three times he said ALLMOST COMPLETLY, and in the 3rd he clearfied it by saying EITHER SIDE.

FACT 3: No one short of a circus act could twist his head and body to obtain the view you are saying is real.

- I find though for this particular issue, the "give
- the view to all" is a better compromise than the
- ability for some to have it vs some not.

NOTE! Those TrackIR views are USELESS in real time! Thus if you give a snap view to some, then the TrakIR folks will be left out! In that to obtain those dead astern views in TrackIR you have to press the F8 key... which makes the view VERY LOOSE AND JERKY (ie useless) but if you fly straight and level and mover very very gingerly.. you could grab a view of the rear.. but switching back and forth between the useful mouse like views, and the dead astern view via the F8 keys is more trouble than it is worth!


TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
06-23-2003, 07:41 PM
Well, I have a TIR, and I immediately banished the enhanced mode when the LB view was enabled, and use mouse view only.

Why? Because it's an advantage I would have over a non-TIR user.

If I get beat, if I win, I want it to be because of skill and luck, not some gadget.

It's lose-lose. If I win, I had an unfair advantage. If I lose, that means that not only was I bested, but I'm even worse than terrible - I couldn't win even when exploiting hardware!

This is all about fun, not one upsmanship at any cost (and if it is about that, then I suggest you find some female companionship for an evening and re-evaluate your life).

XyZspineZyX
06-23-2003, 08:38 PM
BA_Dart wrote:
- Well, I have a TIR, and I immediately banished the
- enhanced mode when the LB view was enabled, and use
- mouse view only.
-
- Why? Because it's an advantage I would have over a
- non-TIR user.
-
- If I get beat, if I win, I want it to be because of
- skill and luck, not some gadget.
-
- It's lose-lose. If I win, I had an unfair
- advantage. If I lose, that means that not only was
- I bested, but I'm even worse than terrible - I
- couldn't win even when exploiting hardware!
-
- This is all about fun, not one upsmanship at any
- cost (and if it is about that, then I suggest you
- find some female companionship for an evening and
- re-evaluate your life).

EXACTALLY! That and the mode is useless in real time!

TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
06-23-2003, 08:45 PM
I only play for fun, if I want real, I'll walk down to the airport.

XyZspineZyX
06-23-2003, 08:48 PM
Tagert, more information for you (I'm still waiting for some factual proof - you saying 'FACT' after your own personal comments is no authority).

Here is some more real pilot experiences and comments:

http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=84784&


"I flew at Air Combat USA and pulled 4+G's sustained with my head bent straight back trying to track a bogie through several loops. It never physically hurt except my eyes and my brain. My brain fell out of my head when I landed but my neck felt fine.

Also it should be noted that while I was fighting for my life making all kinds of funny sounds the pilot next to me who had flown a million dogfights was pratically napping. He felt nothing at all and he was tracking the same target I was.

I honestly think when the Cheif test pilot of a WW2 aircraft says that you can see the virtical fin from the cockpit you can pretty much believe it. It was not in his best interest to lie while standing in a room full of combat pilots that fly his airplane.

BTW in the same meeting where Mr. Guyton makes his statement about the F4U 6 view a Mustang pilot mentions he can see his right horizontal stab over his left shoulder.
"


Also this one:


"I can't tell if you are being sarcastic or not but I don't think shoulder straps ever prevented a pilot in WW2 from checking his 6 view more than once.

I would highly reccomend that people order a copy of the 1944 Report on Joint Fighter Conferance. It is not a book written by an author. It is the minutes of a meeting held in 1944 to discuss fighter desgn with Combat Pilots, Contractors both British and American. They discuss at length the ability of a pilot to check his 6 view. Based on this I think it is very clear that you could see at least as much over your left and right shoulder as you do in AH. The view straight back over you head may be out of wack but that is due to the lack of rear view mirrors."

I suggest you read the book mentioned above - I don't have time to type it all in. Then you will be able to base the argument on facts rather than personal views. Granted, different aircraft are going to be different! But certainly better than the view given now.

TrackIr itself, in that particular version, which is not fair, everyone knows that - is not the point I'm making.

I am simply attempting to show that the view given with this software that is not available now, should be available, and this view should also be available to pilots without trackir. And these quotes and sources are linked and quoted from real pilots' comments and experiences.



S!
609IAP_Recon

Forgotten Wars Virtual War
Forum: http://fogwar.luftwaffe.net/forums/index.php
Website: http://forgottenwars.dyndns.org
Visit 609IAP at http://takeoff.to/609IAP

http://www.leeboats.com/609/sig/609_recon3.jpg

Agnus Dei, Qui Tollis peccata mundi, Miserere nobis. Dona nobis pacem

XyZspineZyX
06-23-2003, 09:53 PM
So you are saying that padlock shouldn't disengage from the rear either if there is a bubble top? And that it should lock further back than it does now for all other planes that can see further back with TrackIR?

That's a lot of programming!

If Oleg and Co. were willing to do that then they wouldn't have all padlock break at the same point that the IL-2 cannot look back any further.

Since they are not willing to do that, there can never be a level playing field against TrackIR players.

Therefore, it would be better (and simpler for Oleg) to simply disable the TrackIR the same way the mouse panning is disabled. Patch it so that the early versions of TrackIR won't function.

And for God's sake, don't let them pass that stupid vote on Natural Point to allow Linda Blair back in later versions!

<img src=http://www.simops.com/graphics/wildcard.gif>

IRON SKIES
As real as you want it to be.

XyZspineZyX
06-23-2003, 10:54 PM
I think padlock shouldn't disengage as long as the aircraft is viewable - ie . above.

Now, if the bandit dropped below low on your six you should lose padlock.



This is only an issue on bubble top - aircraft like the i16, the seat blocks your view.



I'm not sure how this works as I am running the latest TrackIR software - but if someone tests it, that would be good



S!
609IAP_Recon

Forgotten Wars Virtual War
Forum: http://fogwar.luftwaffe.net/forums/index.php
Website: http://forgottenwars.dyndns.org
Visit 609IAP at http://takeoff.to/609IAP

http://www.leeboats.com/609/sig/609_recon3.jpg

Agnus Dei, Qui Tollis peccata mundi, Miserere nobis. Dona nobis pacem

XyZspineZyX
06-24-2003, 12:32 AM
Recon_609IAP wrote:
- Tagert, more information for you

More useless out of context info.. yes, you have alot, thanks... But where are the 3 answers to my 3 questions?

- (I'm still waiting for some factual proof

I gave you three, how many more would you like?

- you saying 'FACT' after your own personal
- comments is no authority).

Oh really? So which FACT are you disputing? FACT1, FACT2 or FACT3?

If FACT1 are you saying NO P51B's were equiped with Malcom Hoods?

If FACT2 are you saying that Shaw did not say ALLMOST?

If FACT3 are you saying that anyone in any aircraft could twist thier body, head and neck so they could look down BOTH side of the aircraft at the SAME time?


- Here is some more real pilot experiences and
- comments:

First off.. you may need an update on the what "real pilot" means.. But let me give you my definiton first, a "real pilot" is NOT someone who goes to one of those weekend war games in "tandom" civilain aircraft made up to look like fighters that have themselfs and a REAL PILOT along with them just encase. With that said, lets look at your post of just that.


- "I flew at Air Combat USA and pulled 4+G's sustained
- with my head bent straight back trying to track a
- bogie through several loops. It never physically
- hurt except my eyes and my brain. My brain fell out
- of my head when I landed but my neck felt fine.

So.. 4g's aint *really* that much, THAT and there is no referance to HOW LONG that 4g's was maitained... And Ill bet dollars to donuts that the 4g's was the max the meter registerd for the full flight... OR ARE YOU TELLING ME THAT THIS "REAL PILOT" HAD HIS HEAD BENT STRAIGHT BACK AND AT THE SAME TIME LOOKING AT THE GAUGE ON THE DASH IN THE FRONT OF THE PLANE! Now THAT I would like to see! LOL!

Oh, while we are on the topic.. If I recall corrctly, Air Combat USA uses aircraft with tandom seating and are rear window! Hence a VERY VERY LARGE cockpit area... UNLIKE MOST Fighters in WWII, Thus one could LEAN very far to the LEFT or RIGHT to assist in looking down one side or the other.

- Also it should be noted that while I was fighting
- for my life making all kinds of funny sounds the
- pilot next to me who had flown a million dogfights
- was pratically napping. He felt nothing at all and
- he was tracking the same target I was.

All that proves is that with conditioning the g force effect does not affect you much.. it says noting, and contributes nothing to the topic at hand.

- I honestly think when the Cheif test pilot of a WW2
- aircraft says that you can see the virtical fin from
- the cockpit you can pretty much believe it. It was
- not in his best interest to lie while standing in a
- room full of combat pilots that fly his airplane.

Agreed! And in some aircraft, like the P47 and P51 with the large BUBBLE canopys that allowed the pilot to LEAN farther to the LEFT and RIGHT one could see the tail fin.

- BTW in the same meeting where Mr. Guyton makes his
- statement about the F4U 6 view a Mustang pilot
- mentions he can see his right horizontal stab over
- his left shoulder.

In that if it was a bubble canopy P51, Im sure that he could, where as in the F4U it would be a very very VERY differnt case! Note, it was a Mustang driver telling a F4U guy what he could do... No mention of the F4U drivers saying me too!

- Also this one:
-
- "I can't tell if you are being sarcastic or not but
- I don't think shoulder straps ever prevented a pilot
- in WW2 from checking his 6 view more than once.

And the price of tea in china is....

- I would highly reccomend that people order a copy of
- the 1944 Report on Joint Fighter Conferance. It is
- not a book written by an author. It is the minutes
- of a meeting held in 1944 to discuss fighter desgn
- with Combat Pilots, Contractors both British and
- American. They discuss at length the ability of a
- pilot to check his 6 view. Based on this I think it
- is very clear that you could see at least as much
- over your left and right shoulder as you do in AH.
- The view straight back over you head may be out of
- wack but that is due to the lack of rear view
- mirrors."

DUDE! who ever this quote is from, HE MAKES MY CASE! Did you not read it? Look, he says, and I quote!

>>The view straight back over you head may be
>>OUT OF WACK but that is due to the lack of
>>rear view mirrors."

Even he agree that view is.. how did he put it, OUT OF WACK! He is wrong about the mirrors, in that we all know that not all WWII ac had mirrors... In that MOST of the ones that DID had such small, tight, restrictive cockpits that is was nearly imposable to LEAN to the LEFT or RIGHT to check 6 down one side of the AIRCRAFT! And before you say something about the P51 having mirrors.. read it again, and notice the word MOST.

- I suggest you read the book mentioned above - I
- don't have time to type it all in.

You dont even have time to answer my simple three questions!!!!!!

- Then you will be able to base the argument on
- facts rather than personal views.

GET THIS! I dont base my FACTS on personal views or interptations... but you have! Pick any of my 3 facts.. tell me which one you think I did.. Lets talk.. maybe I did.. but I dont think so.. But Ill bet you dont question any of them because you KNOW IM RIGHT!

- Granted, different aircraft are going to
- be different!

MASTER OF THE OBVIOUS!

- But certainly better than the view given now.

Disagree 100%!

- TrackIr itself, in that particular version, which is
- not fair, everyone knows that - is not the point I'm
- making.

Even the new version does it!! Just hit the F8 key... BUT BE READY FOR YOUR VIEW TO GO NUTS!!! It is true, TrackIR will look dead astern... but it is USLESS in that the view system becomes so unstable that you can not maitain that view or any other for long.

- I am simply attempting to show that the view given
- with this software that is not available now, should
- be available,

Why? Because that view is more realistic? NO! But if you want it to make up for other view limitations.. real limitations between sim and reality.. IM ALL FOR IT! JUST CALL A SPADE A SPADE!! This view is not real, if added it is a simple attempt to try and make up for the limitations of the sim.

- and this view should also be available
- to pilots without trackir.

As I said, even the TrakIR folks cant use it in real time! So dont add it, if anything add code to remove the ability of the TrakIR folks to use it at all.


- And these quotes and sources are linked and
- quoted from real pilots' comments and experiences.

Nope! Going to Air Combat USA does not make you a real pilot!



TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
06-24-2003, 02:20 AM
Ah, I am done arguing Tagert

I posted my opinion and posted several sources, not interested in bantering more than I have.

Good luck Tagert! Salute Comrade!

S!
609IAP_Recon

Forgotten Wars Virtual War
Forum: http://fogwar.luftwaffe.net/forums/index.php
Website: http://forgottenwars.dyndns.org
Visit 609IAP at http://takeoff.to/609IAP

http://www.leeboats.com/609/sig/609_recon3.jpg

Agnus Dei, Qui Tollis peccata mundi, Miserere nobis. Dona nobis pacem



Message Edited on 06/24/0301:28AM by Recon_609IAP

XyZspineZyX
06-24-2003, 07:15 PM
Recon_609IAP wrote:
- Ah, I am done arguing Tagert
-
- I posted my opinion and posted several sources, not
- interested in bantering more than I have.

Arguing? Who's arguing? I'm just trying to get 3 answers to 3 questions! Why don't you answerer the questions? I mean come on it is a sim.. Oh.. Wait.. I get it, Ok, Ok, No problem, Im use to this. In that over the years I have fond there are two types of people in this world, ONE when faced with indisputable facts will admit they made a mistake, and TWO when faced with indisputable facts will avoid the whole subject ending it, or switching to a different topic. Where switching typical consists of childish insults that is intended to make the other guys so mad that he will forget what they were talking about. So, as a type 2 person, Ill give you credit not makings use of the switch!

Either way Im just happy knowing that at least you walk away knowing and understanding the truth and error in your ways!

- Good luck Tagert! Salute Comrade!

You too... and good luck with your unrealistic 180 view!



TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
06-25-2003, 06:05 AM
If FACT1 are you saying NO P51B's were equiped with Malcom Hoods?

If FACT2 are you saying that Shaw did not say ALLMOST?

If FACT3 are you saying that anyone in any aircraft could twist thier body, head and neck so they could look down BOTH side of the aircraft at the SAME time?



Point 1 - I do not know - I am not a P51 authority.
Point 2 - you read what i read. Is this sort of retorical question for our amusement?
Point 3 - I haven't flown a real WW2 aircraft. I have no idea. I can only try to base this on what people who did fly, or have flown can provide. I imagine they couldn't - but I imagine they could see more than FB shows us...I have that quote from a pilot showing they have - what more can I provide?

There are hundreds of aircraft- certainly it's different for them all.


Are these 'facts'?


You don't know me at all - how about we meet up for a cold beer sometime and you can tell me then which sort of person I am? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I'll buy the first round - where does that put me in your personality test?

S!
609IAP_Recon

Forgotten Wars Virtual War
Forum: http://fogwar.luftwaffe.net/forums/index.php
Website: http://forgottenwars.dyndns.org
Visit 609IAP at http://takeoff.to/609IAP

http://www.leeboats.com/609/sig/609_recon3.jpg

Agnus Dei, Qui Tollis peccata mundi, Miserere nobis. Dona nobis pacem

XyZspineZyX
06-25-2003, 06:07 AM
By the way - there was no prize to win.

Just because you put the last word in doesn't mean it's truth.


I don't use that software version - that would be cheating - and I am no cheat.



S!
609IAP_Recon

Forgotten Wars Virtual War
Forum: http://fogwar.luftwaffe.net/forums/index.php
Website: http://forgottenwars.dyndns.org
Visit 609IAP at http://takeoff.to/609IAP

http://www.leeboats.com/609/sig/609_recon3.jpg

Agnus Dei, Qui Tollis peccata mundi, Miserere nobis. Dona nobis pacem

XyZspineZyX
06-25-2003, 06:57 AM
Recon_609IAP wrote:
- By the way - there was no prize to win.

Well, in a way there is, in that the prize for me is to get a patch that does not add a bunch of none realistic things to a game I love.

- Just because you put the last word in doesn't mean
- it's truth.

That is a FACT, but not answering a simple question means only one of two things, ONE you dont know, or TWO you know but wont answer because it would mean you have to admit you made a mistake.

- I don't use that software version - that would be
- cheating - and I am no cheat.

Both versions can do it, thus with your logic your a cheater?



TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
06-25-2003, 07:17 AM
Recon_609IAP wrote:
- If FACT1 are you saying NO P51B's were equiped with
- Malcom Hoods?
-
- If FACT2 are you saying that Shaw did not say
- ALLMOST?
-
- If FACT3 are you saying that anyone in any aircraft
- could twist thier body, head and neck so they could
- look down BOTH side of the aircraft at the SAME
- time?
-
-
-
- Point 1 - I do not know - I am not a P51 authority.

Huh.. because you sure seemed to be an authority when you said that saying FACT after my own personal commnets is not authority.. Thay is you were authority enough to discount them, but now admit your not authority.. thus why didnt you just say that in the 1st place? In that if your no authority to validate them, your also no authority to discount them.

- Point 2 - you read what i read. Is this sort of
- retorical question for our amusement?

Hardly, sense it is clear that you miss the point, let me re-state it. The point I was making was SHAW said ALLMOST COMPLETLY around, not COMPLETLY around. Now, do you agree that the view in those pictures in that link you provide are ones of a COMPLETLY around and not ALLMOST... Oh, wait, you dont answer question do you?

- Point 3 - I haven't flown a real WW2 aircraft. I
- have no idea.

Agreed 100%

- I can only try to base this on what
- people who did fly, or have flown can provide.

Agreed 100%

- I imagine they couldn't

AH! A FIRST! THIS IS PROGRESS! The fist step to recovery is admitting your mistake... This is good, there is hope!

- but I imagine they could see more than FB
- shows us...

Based on... what? Well, never mind, that leads down the path of how dark is black, how bright is white, how far is allmost. There is no difinitive answer, BUT AT LEAST YOU NOW AGREE THAT THOSE DEAD ASTERN 180 VIEWS ARE NOT POSIABLE!!

- I have that quote from a pilot showing they
- have - what more can I provide?

A little reason, and take a moment to consider the context the statment was made in, dont take it literaly! That is the problem with most human experances, without meeters to measure things to calibrate a persons words it is hard to tell how dark is black, how bright is white, how far is allmost! That is why TEST pilots are very carful with thier wording.. where as fighter jocks and want to be's who pay big $ for a ride use words like COMPLETLY.

- There are hundreds of aircraft- certainly it's
- different for them all.

Agreed 100% Which is far from what you were claming just a few days ago! GOOD WORK!! KEEP IT UP!

- Are these 'facts'?

Which?

- You don't know me at all - how about we meet up for
- a cold beer sometime and you can tell me then which
- sort of person I am? /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Ok, where do you live? Im in So Cal we could meet at the proud bird down by LAX, they have a bunch of mock up WWII and KOREA AC at that place, that and a bunch of cool old WWII photos and stuff, that and it is close to my work! Or we could meet out at CHINO and check out the only ZERO in the world that still flys and has the orginal engine (rebuild ofcorse), that and many other flyable WWII and KOREA aircraft... You pick!

- I'll buy the first round - where does that put me in
- your personality test?

A good joe who just has a little trouble admiting he made a mistake! But generally a good guy! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif



TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
06-25-2003, 08:07 PM
Both versions can do what?

If you are saying they both can look back 6 - your incorrect.

You haven't actually used this have you?

The current view isn't that good, if it was a expanded at least somewhat it would help.

I have a feeling your voicing this without ever experiencing it - screenshots really aren't adequate.


"contempt prior to investigation"



S!
609IAP_Recon

Forgotten Wars Virtual War
Forum: http://fogwar.luftwaffe.net/forums/index.php
Website: http://forgottenwars.dyndns.org
Visit 609IAP at http://takeoff.to/609IAP

http://www.leeboats.com/609/sig/609_recon3.jpg

Agnus Dei, Qui Tollis peccata mundi, Miserere nobis. Dona nobis pacem

XyZspineZyX
06-25-2003, 11:24 PM
Recon_609IAP wrote:
- Both versions can do what?

Allow you to look dead astern.

- If you are saying they both can look back 6 - your
- incorrect.

Nope, Im right. In that I have the most current drivers and if I hit the F8 key I can move the view to see out the back. Granted, it aint smooth, stable, and thus useless in the new drivers. But I can obtain a dead astern view long enough to get a snap shot.

- You haven't actually used this have you?

used? depends on your definition of use! I have obtained the view, but like I said it is very hard to maintain the view, it is very jerky, hyper sensetive, unstable, and easy to lose your orentaiton, thus useless to me.

- The current view isn't that good, if it was a
- expanded at least somewhat it would help.

expanded views will help for sure, the only thing Im pointing out is they are NOT realistic views... The ones your calling for that is. Which is not to say Im aganist them, only lets call them what they are, and we cant call them realistic.

- I have a feeling your voicing this without ever
- experiencing it - screenshots really aren't
- adequate.

Than you would be making yet another mistake.

- "contempt prior to investigation"

What ever! Hey, your taking advantage of the switch... That is trying to change the topic without ever finishing the last... WHERE ARE THE ANSWERS TO THE THREE QUESTIONS I gave to you so many messages ago? /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif



TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
06-26-2003, 01:25 AM
I can't look back six in the current drivers.

Not sure how you enabled that to happen.

S!
609IAP_Recon

Forgotten Wars Virtual War
Forum: http://fogwar.luftwaffe.net/forums/index.php
Website: http://forgottenwars.dyndns.org
Visit 609IAP at http://takeoff.to/609IAP

http://www.leeboats.com/609/sig/609_recon3.jpg

Agnus Dei, Qui Tollis peccata mundi, Miserere nobis. Dona nobis pacem

XyZspineZyX
06-26-2003, 04:27 AM
Recon_609IAP wrote:
- I can't look back six in the current drivers.
-
- Not sure how you enabled that to happen.

WOW.. Well, I dont know what more I can say? I mean I know I have said press the F8 key about three times now... Ok, ah, let me try and make it a little more clear. Here are the steps to obtain the view with ver 2.00 of the TrackIR software

1) inhale

2) Start the TrackIR software. Stick the dot where you usally do, insure the mouse is moving and that your Mode is set to F8 mouse Emulation.

3) exhale

4) Start IL2

5) inhalte

6) Do what ever you do to get behind the wheel/stick of an aircraft.

7) exhale

8) insure your TrackIR software is working properly and that the view limits are limiting.

9) inhale

10) Press the F8 key, this will put you into trackIR Enhanced mode.

11) exhale

12) Now move your head around (note I assume you got the dot on your head somewhere) about ten times slower than you are use to. Note how unstable and down right useless the view system becomes... BUT notice if you mover your head Juuuust right, and slowly that your view will as some point sweep threw the dead astern view.

13) inhale

14) goto 11 until you see 12.




TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
06-26-2003, 04:38 AM
You don't have to be so rude - I know what ver 2.00 did, I don't use version 2.0 - perhaps you should check your version:


The correct version is:

NaturalPoint_trackIR_2_01_final.exe


That is what I am running - which has no back 6 view.

S!
609IAP_Recon

Forgotten Wars Virtual War
Forum: http://fogwar.luftwaffe.net/forums/index.php
Website: http://forgottenwars.dyndns.org
Visit 609IAP at http://takeoff.to/609IAP

http://www.leeboats.com/609/sig/609_recon3.jpg

Agnus Dei, Qui Tollis peccata mundi, Miserere nobis. Dona nobis pacem



Message Edited on 06/26/0303:43AM by Recon_609IAP

XyZspineZyX
06-26-2003, 05:37 AM
Recon, it is obvious the guy's not out to achieve anything other than get on your nerves. I say let him be.

<hr width="400">Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes.
That way, when you criticize them, you're a mile away and have their
shoes!
http://members.rogers.com/teemaz/sig.jpg (http://www.jagdgeschwader1.com)

XyZspineZyX
06-26-2003, 06:16 AM
Recon_609IAP wrote:
- You don't have to be so rude -

Dam.. thought I was trying to be funny! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

- I know what ver 2.00 did, I don't use version
- 2.0 - perhaps you should check your version:
-
- The correct version is:
-
- NaturalPoint_trackIR_2_01_final.exe

Well Ill be an SOB! Recon, I owe you an apoligy! I was thinking ver 1.00 vs 2.00, I didnt realise they had a 2.01 out!! Really sorry bud! My Bad!

- That is what I am running - which has no back 6
- view.

Roger.. Sorry! My mistake!! I just Dl v2.00 like a month or so ago.. I didnt think it was posiable that a new ver was out allready.. But no excuse, my bad, SORRY!



TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
06-26-2003, 06:40 AM
Recon_609IAP wrote:
- The correct version is:
-
- NaturalPoint_trackIR_2_01_final.exe

I just realised something.. I was under the impression that we were talking ver 1.00 vs 2.00. When you said the old driver had the 180 view, I assumed we were talking about ver 1.00, and I assumed that ver 1.00 must be prety good... But now I realised we are talking about ver 2.00.. The version I was talking about using the F8 key... With that said..


THE 180 VIEW IN THE OLD DRIVER (i.e. 2.00) IS USELESS IN FLIGHT!!!

It will give you the 180 view to take a snap shot of the head rest, but there is no way you could use that view in combat!!! Once you goto the enhanced mode via the F8 key the view system goes unstable!!! Thus all this argument to add the 180 for everyone else because the TrakIR folks have it is BULL!! We dont have it, we cant use it, it is too unstable to use!!




TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
06-26-2003, 11:21 AM
tagert wrote:

- THE 180 VIEW IN THE OLD DRIVER (i.e. 2.00) IS
- USELESS IN FLIGHT!!!
-
- It will give you the 180 view to take a snap shot of
- the head rest, but there is no way you could use
- that view in combat!!! Once you goto the enhanced
- mode via the F8 key the view system goes unstable!!!
- Thus all this argument to add the 180 for everyone
- else because the TrakIR folks have it is BULL!! We
- dont have it, we cant use it, it is too unstable to
- use!!

LOL /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Speak for yourself.

If you haven't figured out how to use the trackIR comfortably WITH the 180 back view, you simply don't realize the advantages yet /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif Go practice some more or set it up properly.

FYI my view never goes unstable even if i were to use the Linda Blair view. It didn't go unstable in the first IL2 demo, where there was 3(!) times the Linda Blair panning ability (in mouse emulation mode). And it certainly didn't go unstable in the 2.00 version enhanced mode. The times i used Linda Blair view it's always been rocksteady. But the Linda Blair ability was a bug so that's why the original view restrictions as intended by Oleg were put back in by Naturalpoint, with 2.01.

/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
06-26-2003, 02:40 PM
tag-dude

you're losing all credibility with your behavior that may or may not seem as if it were getting a wee bit emotional and to me a bit silly

<shrug>

recon, cool it, he's not going to stop and it's embarrasing

<sigh>

enjoy the game folks

XyZspineZyX
06-26-2003, 04:26 PM
Falcon-6 wrote:
- tag-dude

Hey Birdie!

- you're losing all credibility with your behavior

Lose? Dude I Lost that years ago!

- that may or may not seem as if it were getting
- a wee bit emotional and to me a bit silly

Gee... I feel so empty inside... What will I do now that Birdie does not aprove?

- <shrug>

<yawn>

- recon, cool it, he's not going to stop and it's
- embarrasing

Agreed.. And I still sleep like a baby last night... What is wrong with me that I dont heed Birdies words? Do I not care about anything?

- <sigh>

<yawn>

- enjoy the game folks

Been!



TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
06-26-2003, 04:38 PM
Dnmy wrote:
- Speak for yourself.
-
- If you haven't figured out how to use the trackIR
- comfortably WITH the 180 back view, you simply don't
- realize the advantages yet

NEGATIVE GHOST RIDER! Just because I have not... how did you put it? Figured Out How to cheat does not mean I dont realize the advantages of a Cheat.

- Go practice some more or set it up properly.

Well, if you say there are setting that make it useful for you, more power to you brother! I personaly find it unstable, and didnt give it any more time investment than that. In that stairing into the head rest on most planes is not something I fancy, it would be a cheat/crutch that I would start to depend on. I personaly would rater learn real tatics that work without the cheat.

- FYI my view never goes unstable even if i were to
- use the Linda Blair view.

Well lucky you! Or maybe one mans unstable is another mans stable.. For example, I dont date fat chicks.. but the fat chicks I turn down.. another guy might consider thin.

- It didn't go unstable in the first IL2 demo,
- where there was 3(!) times the Linda Blair
- panning ability (in mouse emulation mode).

Three times huh? So what were you seeing beyond the dead astern view? Looking into the future were you? Maybe there is another explantion here? /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

- And it certainly didn't go unstable in the
- 2.00 version enhanced mode.

Does in mine. Granted I didnt invest much time in it, I didnt want to mess up my normal settings, but hey IF YOU NEED THAT DEAD ASTERN VIEW TO GET THE JOB DONE.. HAVE AT IT! I personaly dont need it!

- The times i used Linda Blair view it's always been
- rocksteady.

Ok, I stand corrected than, I was wrong! Thus for some people that invest enough time can get it to work... Sad but seems true.

- But the Linda Blair ability was a bug so that's
- why the original view restrictions as intended
- by Oleg were put back in by Naturalpoint, with 2.01.

That is good news! I just hope Oleg can do something to make version 2.00 not work at all!



TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
06-26-2003, 10:47 PM
There you have it /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

About the Linda Blair view:

just because it's unstable for you doesn't mean it's unstable for everyone else. Just because it's useless to you, doesn't mean it's useless for every other trackIR user out there. That's why i said, speak for yourself /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif I know i'd be able to do things with Linda Blair view i'd never be able to do with the restricted views.

And about the 3 x Linda Blair panning ability:
i've been playing with trackIR since the earliest IL2 demo. That's why i know what it was like in mouseview mode there. With trackIR i could turn my virtual head about 3 times 360 degs in X-axis (maybe exaggeration but you get the point /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif ). All i'm saying is that having that ability was very easy for me to use and to control (in mouse emulation mode). No problems. None (Was fixed in the final IL2 release ofcourse).

So all i'm saying is that some trackIR users around here are experienced with the device. And where others might not see, or wanna see, the advantages of Linda Blair panning capability, other trackIR users will reckognize the advantages right away.

I don't mind either way what Oleg decides to restrict or not restrict, i'd simply appreciate it if every FB player had the same restrictions whatever method of viewing he chooses.
And final decision should rest with Oleg.

/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
06-27-2003, 02:08 AM
Dnmy wrote:
- There you have it

That I do!

- About the Linda Blair view:
-
- just because it's unstable for you doesn't mean it's
- unstable for everyone else.

Agreed! It is all relitive, a girl that I might consider ugly, another guy might consider thin! Thus I was wrong and stand corrected! If you can make use of the whipping around hyper sensitve view, knock yourself out!

/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

- Just because it's useless to you, doesn't mean
- it's useless for every other trackIR user out
- there.

Agreed! It is all relitive, a girl that I might consider ugly, another guy might consider thin! Thus I was wrong and stand corrected! If you can make use of the whipping around hyper sensitve view, knock yourself out!



TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
06-27-2003, 02:10 AM
- All i'm saying is that having that ability was
- very easy for me to use and to control (in mouse
- emulation mode). No problems. None
- (Was fixed in the final IL2 release ofcourse).

Ah, so, can you *still* make use of it in the current release? Because that is what we are talking about... not the beta!

- So all i'm saying is that some trackIR users around
- here are experienced with the device.

Agreed, some people spend more time trying to hack and cheat then just learing how to be good... Too bad really, makes alot of online games worthless.

- And where others might not see, or wanna see,
- the advantages of Linda Blair panning capability,
- other trackIR users will reckognize the advantages
- right away.

Depends... in that what you consider an advantage, other might consider A crutch! A cheat! And thus not an advantage.

- I don't mind either way what Oleg decides to
- restrict or not restrict, i'd simply appreciate
- it if every FB player had the same restrictions
- whatever method of viewing he chooses.

Agreed, an even playing field is a must! But, that starts off a whole new question, of where do you draw the line. I mean there are some people out there that think using rudder pedels is a cheat.. because not eveyone has them. I think the TrackIR is the best thing to happen to flight sims sense the joystick!!! If your into flight sims, you have to stay current, hardware wise and the rest... but I personaly would draw the line anywhere folks are making use of features that were not intended to be used... But that is just me.

- And final decision should rest with Oleg.

Not that it should, but it will! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif


TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
06-27-2003, 02:14 AM
Agreed! You can get some pretty neat shots of the head rest!

- And about the 3 x Linda Blair panning ability:
- i've been playing with trackIR since the earliest
- IL2 demo. That's why i know what it was like in
- mouseview mode there. With trackIR i could turn my
- virtual head about 3 times 360 degs in X-axis

Ahhh, that is that is one of the aspects of that unstableness Im refering too! A little movement and SWOOOOOSH! The pan view goes through about 3x revs around the cockpit.... How you hold your head still enough DURRING COMBAT to LOOK out the back is beyond me!

I mean just the movment due to breathing is enough to send the view around 360 once or twice... That and it locks it in the X and lower, you cant look 45 up, only level and into the seat.. And if you have to go tweaking the settings to make that view work.. wont it mess up the typical/standard view? Something Im not willing to do or trade for.

TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
06-27-2003, 02:17 AM
That was strange.. sorry for the multi post, keept on telling my I had a BAD WORD in my text, but the word it listed ie

F followed by..

A followed by..

G ending with

was not in it anywhere.. oh well add it to the bug list! <G>



TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
06-27-2003, 03:34 AM
You seem to misunderstand me.

When i say experienced with the trackIR, i mean, having the ability of absolute control over the view, to be able to pan and pinpoint at a moments notice at high panning speeds, without the view going unsteady. That has nothing to do with finding cheats/hacks, it's simply a matter of being in absolute control over your view. Which is important if you wanna maintain SA.

edit:

And yes, that also means being in absolute control over the view (and the plane) while dogfighting while looking at the back (in no cockpit view too).

Just a reminder, if you're looking straight at the back at the bandit, don't nescessarily mean you're in disadvantaged position/energy state./i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Message Edited on 06/27/0304:39AM by Dnmy

XyZspineZyX
06-27-2003, 04:18 AM
Dnmy wrote:
- You seem to misunderstand me.

Nope, I got you pretty well figured out! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

- When i say experienced with the trackIR, i mean,
- having the ability of absolute control over the
- view, to be able to pan and pinpoint at a moments
- notice at high panning speeds, without the view
- going unsteady.

Well, I didnt waste that much time with it, in that I didnt want to depend on a crutch/cheat to be good. As for unsteady, your the one that mentined the 3x360 thing, and I just noted that was one of the thing I consider made it unstable.. you can loose your frame of reference in some ac if the view goes by that fast.

- That has nothing to do with finding
- cheats/hacks, it's simply a matter of being in
- absolute control over your view.

Ah, not talking about the normal view system, I got that diled in just fine, Im talking about... which I think most here are, is that dead astern view and the mode you have to be in to obtain it.

- Which is important if you wanna maintain SA.

Never said it wasnt

- And yes, that also means being in absolute control
- over the view (and the plane) while dogfighting
- while looking at the back (in no cockpit view too).

Yet another crutch.

- Just a reminder, if you're looking straight at the
- back at the bandit, don't nescessarily mean you're
- in disadvantaged position/energy state.

Who said or implied that it did?



TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
06-27-2003, 05:28 AM
Oleg,

If you DO start to exclude people from this forum, take tagert first, he is an embarrassment.





Message Edited on 06/27/0305:18AM by Eisen_Frettchen

XyZspineZyX
06-27-2003, 06:38 AM
Eisen_Frettchen wrote:
- Oleg,
-
- If you DO start to exclude people from this forum,
- take tagert first, he is an embarrassment.

ROTFLMAO! Boo Hooo, how will I ever find the courager to get out of bed in the morning knowing deep down that Felttchen does not like me.... Geee... What is that empty feeling in my chest... Oh my.. How will i continue.. Boo Hoo!



TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
06-27-2003, 10:16 AM
Sorry but you have no clue what i'm talking about here. That's very clear from your reply /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

The 3 x 360 degree panning ability was in the first IL2 demo only. Not in IL2's final release nor FB's release. Nor in any other trackIR software.

You say you lose your frame of reference if the view goes by that fast, but can you imagine that there might be trackIR users not losing their frame of reference no matter how fast the view goes by? That's right you can't /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif I OTOH can imagine it.

I just wanted to make clear that being able to look at the back at the bandit can hold very distinct advantages for those in absolute control of their views.
That's why i feel that trackIR users who say that Linda Blair panning ability doesn't hold any advantages, and/or is useless (because the view supposedly goes unsteady), simply do not realize the advantages or do not want to admit the advantages.

But imo all FB players should all have the same viewing restrictions. Either Oleg should make the Linda Blair panning available to all FB players, or he should restrict it so, that trackIR users can't use the Linda Blair panning any longer with the bugged or any other version trackIR software.

/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
06-27-2003, 02:26 PM
I do absolutely agree that whatever they decide, it should be the same for both.


Now - I do not necessarily believe the TOTAL back six is justified - I do think they could increase the amount of back view - enough that you couldn't see both sides from a back six view.


Whatever they do, I'll be playing with the same views everyone has - it's a shame they can't detect the version of trackir when fb is launched to prevent older versions.

S!
609IAP_Recon

Forgotten Wars Virtual War
Forum: http://fogwar.luftwaffe.net/forums/index.php
Website: http://forgottenwars.dyndns.org
Visit 609IAP at http://takeoff.to/609IAP

http://www.leeboats.com/609/sig/609_recon3.jpg

Agnus Dei, Qui Tollis peccata mundi, Miserere nobis. Dona nobis pacem

XyZspineZyX
06-27-2003, 06:14 PM
Dnmy wrote:
- Sorry but you have no clue what i'm talking about
- here. That's very clear from your reply

Well, you are talking in pretty vauge terms.

- The 3 x 360 degree panning ability was in the first
- IL2 demo only. Not in IL2's final release nor FB's
- release. Nor in any other trackIR software.

Well, I have TrackIR 2.00 installed right now, when I toggle the mode via the F8 key it makes the sensitivty about 10x. That is to say when I move my head an inch in normal mode, the view moves about an inch, when I toggle the mode (F8) that same inch head movment translates into a view that moves all the way around (360) and never stops, that is I can move my head to the left, and the view will go left, all the way to the back, continue to the right, then front and pass right by the left and continue on...

- You say you lose your frame of reference if the view
- goes by that fast, but can you imagine that there
- might be trackIR users not losing their frame of
- reference no matter how fast the view goes by?
- That's right you can't

That's right I cant! See what I described above, thus if what I see is what your seeing, then the only difference here is our definitions of maitaing a frame of reference. Mine is when I look left I see left, Yours is When you look left, you dont care if it ends up looking to the right, or back, or what ever.. Than you just try and find a point you can reconize... a window strut... head rest... something.. and thus you consider that not loosing your reference. If that is the case, we defintally have different def of reference.

- I OTOH can imagine it.

Im sure you can imagine alot of things, in that in your mind you justifed that it is not a cheat, so Im sure you can justify alot of things beyond that! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

- I just wanted to make clear that being able to look
- at the back at the bandit can hold very distinct
- advantages for those in absolute control of their
- views.

Never said it didnt, I just wanted to make it clear that I dont want to use something that is unrealistic and thus a cheat and a crutch. I would rather suceed within the paramters/rules of the game... Anything else would be a false victory.. Thus not very rewarding personally.

- That's why i feel that trackIR users who say that
- Linda Blair panning ability doesn't hold any
- advantages, and/or is useless (because the view
- supposedly goes unsteady), simply do not realize the
- advantages or do not want to admit the advantages.

LOL! It is too seperate issue! We realise the advantages, everyone knows that cheat has an advantage! But what I have to give up to get it, just aint worth it to me. That is I would rather maintain my stable frame of reference and do realistic tatics to suceed, then to rely on a cheat.

- But imo all FB players should all have the same
- viewing restrictions. Either Oleg should make the
- Linda Blair panning available to all FB players, or
- he should restrict it so, that trackIR users can't
- use the Linda Blair panning any longer with the
- bugged or any other version trackIR software.

Im for taking it out, in that with my definition of "frame of reference" it is pretty useles.



TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
06-27-2003, 11:03 PM
Seems to me you haven't optimized your settings in the trackIR software. Doesn't take much tweaking either. 5 mins tops.
If your settings would be optimized, you'd be able to make statements based on proper settings.

There should be no need to keep toggling F8. Once in enhanced mode it is best left in enhanced mode. But the settings for enhanced mode and mouse emulation mode are seperate and thus can be quite different from eachother. I have a mouse emulation setting but i'd personally only use the enhanced mode. It's all a matter of proper settings. That's the basis for proper use of the trackIR.

I don't use the Linda Blair view, but i wouldn't go as far as to call those who do use it, cheats. Let others be the judge. And i won't go into realism debates in favour or against Linda Blair view. That's a neverending story. Just like there's a lot to be said in favour of padlock or no cockpit, there are as many people who can give arguments against those settings.

I don't need any of those settings but i wouldn't call them crutches or cheats either. I simply realize the advantages/disadvantages and shortcomings of these settings so that i can use them to my advantage when they're enabled. And when they're disabled, that's ok too, coz i don't need them anyway./i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

I can only say that i'd not be against it if the Linda Blair view were implemented for all FB players. But i would be against it it were implemented for trackIR users only.

/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
06-28-2003, 10:15 AM
A pic is worth a thousand words and a movie is even better!

Go here...

http://www.warbirdheaven.de/dlsystem/index.php?mekat=Videos&seite=1

... and download the vid number 11.


You will see how really a pilot (in this case a Me110 pilot) can move to look behind.

Cheers,

XyZspineZyX
06-28-2003, 04:31 PM
CHDT wrote:
- A pic is worth a thousand words and a movie is even
- better!
-
- Go here...
-
- ... and download the vid number 11.

Huh.. just not my day, downloaded it twice and the zip is bad.. The other were ok thuogh



TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
06-28-2003, 04:56 PM
Dnmy wrote:
- Seems to me you haven't optimized your settings in
- the trackIR software.

Seems your wrong yet again.

- Doesn't take much tweaking either. 5 mins tops.

Agreed

- If your settings would be optimized, you'd be able
- to make statements based on proper settings.

Are and did.

- There should be no need to keep toggling F8.

To a point. If your one that likes to make use of the cheat/crutch and thus use enhanced more, I agree, but Im not thus I dont.

- Once in enhanced mode it is best left in
- enhanced mode.

EXACTALLY, and the same it true for Mouse Emulation Mode.

- But the settings for enhanced mode and mouse emulation
- mode are seperate and thus can be quite different
- from eachother.

NOW YOU UNDERSTAND! And now that you understand how setting for mouse emulation mode will not be good setting for cheat mode... I mean enhaced mode, you should be able to understand when I say UNSTABLE!! See the difference between you and I is when I came across the ability to look dead astern via the enhanced mode I didnt say to myself, WOW, I need to play with this so I can have an edge over others.. No, I looked at it and said that is unreal, thus, didnt want to have anything to do with it.. In that if I started using it, it would alter my style of flying and make me depended on it.


- I have a mouse emulation setting but
- i'd personally only use the enhanced mode.

Ill bet.

- It's all a matter of proper settings.
- That's the basis for proper use of the trackIR.

Agreed, each mode has proper settings, but the settings for one mode are not good for the other. And sense I dont like to make use of the cheat, I never wasted any time optimizing settings for the cheat mode.


- I don't use the Linda Blair view,

Sure.. sure you dont.

- but i wouldn't go as far as to call those
- who do use it, cheats.

Ofcorse, Ofcorse you wouldnt.

- Let others be the judge.

I be other.

- And i won't go into realism debates in favour
- or against Linda Blair view.

Ofcorse, Ofcorse you wouldnt.

- That's a neverending story.

Nope, it is pretty black and white and one of the easier storys to prove.

- Just like there's a lot to be said in favour
- of padlock or no cockpit,

LOL! Im sure you have no problem justfing anything to get to sleep at night!

- there are as many people who can give arguments
- against those settings.

Agreed! But if you look, most are making case for those view to make up for the fact that a PC monitor can not simulate a real cockpit, thus, we need things to make up for that fact... That is they are not saying padlock and no cockpit are/were REAL! Just that something has to be done to make up for the limitations of the 19" PC monitor.


- I don't need any of those settings but i wouldn't
- call them crutches or cheats either.

But I wouldnt call them real either, and I call anything a cheat that allows you to do something in a sim that was not intended to be done.. it is THAT SIMPLE of a line.

- I simply realize the advantages/disadvantages and
- shortcomings of these settings so that i can use
- them to my advantage when they're enabled.

As I have said over and over, any bone head understands the advantages of the linda blair!

- And when they're disabled, that's ok too, coz
- i don't need them anyway.

You dont huh? Well sounds like you spent alot of time on it, and still use the enhanced mode... I guess you just close your eyes if the view should happen to look dead astern?

- I can only say that i'd not be against it if the
- Linda Blair view were implemented for all FB
- players.

ILL BET!

- But i would be against it it were
- implemented for trackIR users only.

I dont know about that.



TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
06-28-2003, 11:47 PM
Unbelievable...the ignorance.

You have absolutely no clue whatsoever, only false suspicions. Here's some background info for you:

At the time when the first IL2 demo was released, i was already using the trackIR, and i reported the 3 x 360 Linda Blair panning ability bug (in mouse emulation mode) to a beta tester (Ham from Sturmovik Technika), expecting it to get fixed in the final IL2 release. And he assured me it would get fixed, and that was good, coz in the final release everybody had the same panning angle restrictions.

Much later on, i took part in betatesting the first enhanced software for Naturalpoint. At the time no other sim than FS2002 supported absolute mode, but the BDG, who worked with the released source code on Rowan's BoB, had just implemented enhanced trackIR support in their sim. They were the first. So that was good, coz us trackIR betatesters, could then test the enhanced software on BoB. Yet none of us had access to FB at the time, which was still in betatesting as well. So we basically had no idea how enhanced mode would work or how it would be implemented in FB.

Then when FB finally arrived in Europe, i was very surprised and disappointed when i saw what was possible with enhanced mode in FB. I had already reported a similar bug, way back when the first IL2 demo was released, fully expecting that bug to be fixed. And logically assuming never to see a similar bug resurface again, in any of the Maddox games. So it was quite a disappointing surprise in that respect. Was like we'd gone back to square one.

So first thing i did when i saw what was possible with the trackIR bugged software, was to strongly protest at Naturalpoint and ask explanation from Oleg, why it was implemented the way it was. There was a big riot about it on both SimHQ and the UBI forum and ofcourse Naturalpoint forums. I was the first one sticking my neck out to appeal to Oleg and Naturalpoint to get it fixed. I say sticking my neck out, because other trackIR users who liked the Linda Blair panning ability strongly disagreed with me and very much liked to have that ability stay in. They still do i guess. Some even blame me for pointing the bug out in the first place.

Later on, i was told personally by Oleg during a pre chat session, that the Linda Blair panning ability was an unfortunate mistake. Naturalpoint very quickly offered Oleg to fix it themselves so he could work on other important things. So Naturalpoint pulled the bugged version of the trackIR software, to release a new version (the latest version which i've used from that point on) with the same viewing restrictions as every other FB user. So it was not because of me, but as soon as i had FB, i was the first one to point it out, the only thought in mind was to appeal to getting it fixed, just like i'd reported with the IL2 demo Linda Blair bug. And FYI i'm now using the latest beta trackIR software of which i can assure you doesn't have the Linda Blair panning ability.

So get your facts straight first. If anything, i think you owe me an apology for suggesting false things. I don't know why you suggest these things, because i've done nothing in this thread than to point out that the Linda Blair ability does offer very distinct advantages for those who know how to use them.

/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
06-29-2003, 12:48 AM
James_Gang wrote:
- It's interesting to note that all of those
- ultra-realistic TrackIR users that were constantly
- calling for the removal and dumbing down of padlock
- etc.... were mostly silent on this issue.
-
- I don't have a problem with TrackIR or any hardware
- in the game. What I have a problem with is pilots
- that use this hardware to cheat against others by
- disabling in game views, and rationalizing it as
- more realistic.
-
- We saw the same behavior in Cfs with pilots altering
- air files, sneaking into unrestricted bomb runs and
- calling it a more realistic flight model.
-
- Funny they never seem to reveal their hanky panky
- until after the fact.
-



Exactly.

It's not the harware, its the hardware user.



Message Edited on 06/28/0306:50PM by Supr

XyZspineZyX
06-29-2003, 01:47 AM
theres a program that uses the trackir beta driver for the pov to turn 360 its in jpnese and comes with a dll,

gokarts are fast DOWNHILL

http://mysite.verizon.net/vze4jz7i/ls.gif

Good dogfighters bring ammo home, Great ones don't. (c) Leadspitter

XyZspineZyX
06-29-2003, 02:13 AM
I still can't get over the physical argument for this discussion.

Maybe I'm one in a million but

My neck tells me that looking back at dead centre rudder position for an unlimited amount of time JUST DON'T SEEM NATURAL.


And my eyeballs feel like they are about to explode in their sockets and thats just for 30 seconds.


Don't beleive EVERYTHING you read. experiment try it for yourself.

Tell us if you are still comfortable after a minute I know a good physio-therapist if your experiment goes wrong /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
06-29-2003, 06:02 PM
Dnmy wrote:
- Unbelievable...the ignorance.

Now dont be too hard on yourelf!

- You have absolutely no clue whatsoever, only false
- suspicions. Here's some background info for you:
- <SNIP>

Only CLUE I had to go on was a guy telling me he could obtain a useful 180 view by spending time with the settings, thus you had to use it to do it. Thus followed by my assumption that only someone who plans to use it would spend time getting the right settings for it. But you NOW say that is not the case and the only reason you spent time on it was to DO US ALL A FAVOR and beta test the bugs..... Well, than I guess Ill have to take your word for it that you dont use it, even though you say you make use of the enhanced more... Just wondering now how you dont make use of it in that mode? Do you close your eyes when the view goes to the 180?

- So get your facts straight first.

Only FACTS I had to go on was a guy telling me he could obtain a useful 180 view by spending time with the settings, thus you had to use it to do it. Thus followed by my assumption that only someone who plans to use it would spend time getting the right settings for it. But you NOW say that is not the case and the only reason you spent time on it was to DO US ALL A FAVOR and beta test the bugs..... Well, than I guess Ill have to take your word for it that you dont use it, even though you say you make use of the enhanced more... Just wondering now how you dont make use of it in that mode? Do you close your eyes when the view goes to the 180?

- If anything, i think you owe me an apology
- for suggesting false things.

Well, dont hold your breath!

- I don't know why you suggest these things,
- because i've done nothing in this thread than to
- point out that the Linda Blair ability does offer
- very distinct advantages for those who know how to
- use them.

Only SUGGEST THESE THINGS in that all I had to go on was a guy telling me he could obtain a useful 180 view by spending time with the settings, thus you had to use it to do it. Thus followed by my assumption that only someone who plans to use it would spend time getting the right settings for it. But you NOW say that is not the case and the only reason you spent time on it was to DO US ALL A FAVOR and beta test the bugs..... Well, than I guess Ill have to take your word for it that you dont use it, even though you say you make use of the enhanced more... Just wondering now how you dont make use of it in that mode? Do you close your eyes when the view goes to the 180?


TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
06-29-2003, 06:08 PM
Pye wrote:
- I still can't get over the physical argument for
- this discussion.
-
- Maybe I'm one in a million but
-
- My neck tells me that looking back at dead centre
- rudder position for an unlimited amount of time JUST
- DON'T SEEM NATURAL.
-
-
- And my eyeballs feel like they are about to explode
- in their sockets and thats just for 30 seconds.
-
-
- Don't beleive EVERYTHING you read. experiment try it
- for yourself.

LOL! And it is things like this that prove there will never be peace in the middle east! I mean if we can even agree that a person can NOT turn his head and body around to look out both sides of the rear of the aircraft at the same time... Something that one would think would be a no brainer turns into pages or arguments... In a nut shell we are DOOMED Or Quaked.. take your pick! <G>




TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
06-29-2003, 07:43 PM
" things like this that prove there will never be peace in the middle east"

We aren't shooting each other over it. Big difference http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif



Only issue I see is the lack of understanding other's views and treating one view as absolute despite lack of evidence,

In this particular argument, (it's more a side issue) - I've beening playing without this view for quite awhile now, doesn't really bother me that much - although I've read accounts of the ability to look back in certain AC.

What I think is humourous is in HL 90% of these dogfight servers have external views on - but when you speak of a back view in the forum it's criticized - lol.

I think the external view is quite impossible and don't know why it is allowable in the game.

Maybe you can argue that one tagert - might get more fanfare.

S!
609IAP_Recon

Forgotten Wars Virtual War
Forum: http://fogwar.luftwaffe.net/forums/index.php
Website: http://forgottenwars.dyndns.org
Visit 609IAP at http://takeoff.to/609IAP

http://www.leeboats.com/609/sig/609_recon3.jpg

Agnus Dei, Qui Tollis peccata mundi, Miserere nobis. Dona nobis pacem

XyZspineZyX
06-29-2003, 09:33 PM
Recon_609IAP wrote:
- " things like this that prove there will never be
- peace in the middle east"
-
- We aren't shooting each other over it. Big
- difference /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Only Difference! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

- Only issue I see is the lack of understanding
- other's views and treating one view as absolute

Agreed! But sometimes it is not a lack of understanding as much as a misunderstanding! From day one I have said I would be all for adding this view.. if folks want it, but just not under the guize of it being more realistic to add it. If added, it would fall under the premis of "we added it to try and make up for the fact and limitations of the PC monitor"

- despite lack of evidence,

Agreed! I have yet to see anyone do the Linda Blair except Linda Blair... Oh, and that one guy at the circus!

- In this particular argument, (it's more a side
- issue) - I've beening playing without this view for
- quite awhile now,

Same here.

- doesn't really bother me that much

Really? /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

- although I've read accounts of the ability to look
- back in certain AC.

Ive read accounts of accedint reports too, and dont mean they discribe what really happened. Ask three people what they saw, you can get three totally different answers. When faced with such a situation, ie writing on the page, it is best to not take it so literal.

- What I think is humourous is in HL 90% of these
- dogfight servers have external views on - but when
- you speak of a back view in the forum it's
- criticized - lol.

Well, when you coniser the old flight sim comunity use to be a very purest bunch 10 years ago, now we are seeing an influx of the Quake and DOOM generation looking for something a little more satisfying then BOOM DIE RESPAWN.. Probelm is most of them just having grown up enough yet! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif So, dont base it on that, most folks that bother to come to a forum usally means they care about the product... And usally, not allways, but usally the ones that care, are the ones that also care about the realism of it all

- I think the external view is quite impossible and
- don't know why it is allowable in the game.

Options is good... GOOD FOR SALES!! And if making a GREAT sim means you have to add OPTIONS for the Quake and DOOM folks to buy it, and thus make more money!! IM DOWN WITH THAT!! ADD DONKEY KONG in there too if it means a good sim maker will prosper and make more sims for us!!!!! Just make sure it is an option that the realistic folks can disable!!!

- Maybe you can argue that one tagert - might get more
- fanfare.

See Above

Start Fanning! <G>


TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
06-29-2003, 10:51 PM
- doesn't really bother me that much

Really?

Yeah - I've played Il2 for so long, then FB - it was more of a gimic - and when I realized that not everyone had it - I was a tad dispointed - because I liked it :P

S!
609IAP_Recon

Forgotten Wars Virtual War
Forum: http://fogwar.luftwaffe.net/forums/index.php
Website: http://forgottenwars.dyndns.org
Visit 609IAP at http://takeoff.to/609IAP

http://www.leeboats.com/609/sig/609_recon3.jpg

Agnus Dei, Qui Tollis peccata mundi, Miserere nobis. Dona nobis pacem

XyZspineZyX
06-29-2003, 11:03 PM
Stop it pls, you have no clue whatsoever. Not even a single one.

You make assumptions based on nothing but inexperience. And you can't read and understand that well either. Coz you totally and utterly misinterpret what i write.

I never said i was doing anybody a favour by betatesting the bugs. I was asked to join in on betatesting the trackIR software. But i had no clue as to how enhanced mode would work in FB, because all we could test the trackIR enhanced software on, was Rowan's BoB and for those who had it, FS2002.

I could only point out the bug when i finally got a chance to try FB (that was when it was released in Europe). And that's exactly what i did right after i tried it. In fact i was the only one who pointed out the bug in the first place.

Furthermore, you don't seem to realize there's more than just one version of trackIR enhanced software available. The one i'm using is the new beta version. The old bugged software was pulled by Naturalpoint. But sad thing is, once you release software, you can not unrelease it. Once it's released, it will spread around the net anyway. But Naturalpoint on their website strongly recommended to NOT use the bugged software but the latest official version (2.01)

The bugged software allowed for Linda Blair panning abilities. The new software DOESN'T. Not even in enhanced mode. But both software versions make it possible to run the trackIR in enhanced mode, which is completely different than mouse emulation mode.

So here's some other big clue for you, coz you lack a lot of them.

It boils down to this:

1. if you're using the latest official software (2.01), you don't have the Linda Blair panning ability, not even in enhanced mode

2. if you're using the bugged software you have the Linda Blair panning ability, but in enhanced mode only.

I know you're still wondering how i can't use Linda Blair view, while i am still using enhanced mode:

I am running the new trackIR beta version, which doesn't have the Linda Blair panning ability. Before that i used the 2.01 final version which also didn't have the Linda Blair panning ability in enhanced mode.

Has it finally sunk in now? Coz it's kinda tiring to explaining simple and elementary things to thickheads like you.

/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
06-29-2003, 11:34 PM
Dnmy wrote:
- Stop it pls, you have no clue whatsoever. Not even a
- single one.

I got a clue about you, and it sure seems to rub you the wrong way. The clue being you spent alot of time optimizing the settings in ver 2.00 to use the 180 view.. More time than I spent on it, more time than anyone who didnt plan to use it spent on it... And now you want me to belive you dont use ver 2.00... Sorry! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

- You make assumptions based on nothing but
- inexperience.

Nope, wrong again, I make/made assumption about you based on what you said and human nature. Typically someone wouldnt waste their time setting up something they didnt plan to use. It is that simple.

- And you can't read and understand that
- well either.

LOL! Said the guy that types COZ.

- Coz you totally and utterly
- misinterpret what i write.

Nope, I got you all figured out, and it is killing you, hence your need to try and change the subject now by making childish persoanl attack comments. Wont work, been there done that! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

- I never said i was doing anybody a favour by
- betatesting the bugs. I was asked to join in on
- betatesting the trackIR software.

So.. who's benift was the resumae for than? Just.. to? What hear yourself go on about how rightes you are? What a marter you are? Here is what you sound like:

"Im the only one that complained about it, other got made at me too for exposing the bug they use, Im such a marter, poor me, Im so misunderstood!"

- But i had no clue as to how enhanced mode would
- work in FB, because all we could test the trackIR
- enhanced software on, was Rowan's BoB and for
- those who had it, FS2002.
-
- I could only point out the bug when i finally got a
- chance to try FB (that was when it was released in
- Europe). And that's exactly what i did right after i
- tried it.

Well arnt you the good little boy!

- In fact i was the only one who pointed out
- the bug in the first place.

Oooooooooooo the marter! WOW! Where should I send the thank you card? Your such a giver! Where would we be without you holding their feet to the fire and keeping the sim world safe!

- Furthermore, you don't seem to realize there's more
- than just one version of trackIR enhanced software
- available.

Again, your wrong.

- The one i'm using is the new beta version.

Ill say it again, SURE YOU ARE! In that nobody in thier right mind would spend as much time geting the settings right to cheat, then stop cheating!

- The old bugged software was pulled by
- Naturalpoint. But sad thing is, once you release
- software, you can not unrelease it.
- Once it's released, it will spread around the
- net anyway.

Too True!

- But Naturalpoint on their website strongly recommended
- to NOT use the bugged software but the latest
- official version (2.01)

Master of the obious!

- The bugged software allowed for Linda Blair panning
- abilities. The new software DOESN'T. Not even in
- enhanced mode. But both software versions make it
- possible to run the trackIR in enhanced mode, which
- is completely different than mouse emulation mode.

Yup

- So here's some other big clue for you, coz you lack
- a lot of them.

Ok, let em rip!

- It boils down to this:
-
- 1. if you're using the latest official software
- (2.01), you don't have the Linda Blair panning
- ability, not even in enhanced mode
-
- 2. if you're using the bugged software you have the
- Linda Blair panning ability, but in enhanced mode
- only.

WOW did you figure that one out all by yourself?

- I know you're still wondering how i can't use Linda
- Blair view, while i am still using enhanced mode:
-
- I am running the new trackIR beta version, which
- doesn't have the Linda Blair panning ability.

And I know your still wondering why I know your still using it, because your full of it!

- Before that i used the 2.01 final version which
- also didn't have the Linda Blair panning ability
- in enhanced mode.

Sure.. sure you do.. I mean did, yeah, you just did all that cheat testing for our benifit so you could be the fist one in line to say "look at what I found a bug" and than to take all that heat from eveyone mad at you.. WOW, saint hood is just around the corner for you for sure!!

- Has it finally sunk in now? Coz it's kinda tiring to
- explaining simple and elementary things to
- thickheads like you.

LOL! Promise? Now go check your six for the last time and hurry up and unstale that v2.00 before someone sees you using it!



TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
06-30-2003, 01:42 AM
You really don't have a clue at all, none, whatsoever.
No clue about trackIR, nor about the software or how to set it up properly. And certainly not about me.

But pls continue to remain ignorant.

/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
06-30-2003, 03:04 AM
Dnmy wrote:
- You really don't have a clue at all, none,
- whatsoever. No clue about trackIR, nor about
- the software or how to set it up properly.
- And certainly not about me.
-
- But pls continue to remain ignorant.

Sorry... Didnt mean to get you so upset! Hmmmmm hey before you go, answer a question for me...

If you think Im so ignorant, stupid, uninformed, etc... Why oh why are you so upset and worried about what I say?

Do you walk up to crazy people on the street and start arguing with them about their work for food sign? No normal person would... Yet.. you do?

Which makes me wonder... Why are your pantys in such a wad? Hmmmmmm... Oh... Maybe, just maybe I have hit pretty close to the truth about you! That would explain your actions beter!

Instead of admting you use the cheat, you are hoping you can start calling me names and that ill get off the subject... Sorry, been there done that.. U CHEATER! <G>



TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
06-30-2003, 03:27 AM
Tagert, how long have you been in this community? I'm asking coz:

a) you don't seem to be aware that DNMY was the first to voice his concerns about the Linda Blair view of v2.0 of trackIR when FB was first released.

b) your behaviour is far too disrespectful compared to any of the forum regulars. In fact, it is so blatantly inflammatory that I suspect that this is merely an alias used to stir up trouble.


I'm only pointing this out to say that if you indeed intend to be a part of this community you will need to rethink your trollish behaviour. Winning an argument isn't the most important thing, preserving your self-respect and others' is.

Cheers.

<hr width="400">Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes.
That way, when you criticize them, you're a mile away and have their
shoes!
http://members.rogers.com/teemaz/sig.jpg (http://www.jagdgeschwader1.com)

Message Edited on 06/29/0310:29PM by Jetbuff

XyZspineZyX
06-30-2003, 03:43 AM
also people use the old trackir driver with a mouse cursor control making the pov have a smooth pan which enables the 360 linda blair view with povs

http://mysite.verizon.net/vze4jz7i/ls.gif

Good dogfighters bring ammo home, Great ones don't. (c) Leadspitter

XyZspineZyX
06-30-2003, 04:54 AM
Jetbuff wrote:
- Tagert, how long have you been in this community?
- I'm asking coz:

This community, as in flight sims... Hmmm let's see, fist sim I played with was some old thing on a commordore 64.. but dint really get into it until 1991 with dynamix's Red Baron, Really got into it when I made a few mods for SWOTL, AOTP and AOE. Been playing ever sense... Does that answer your question?

- a) you don't seem to be aware that DNMY was the
- first to voice his concerns about the Linda Blair
- view of v2.0 of trackIR when FB was first released.

Not that Im not aware, it's more that I dont care! I dont know who he is, dont care to, dont know you, and dont care to, you dont know me, and I could care less. Thus all I have to base things on is from what people post to me. And what I got from dnmy was a guy gonig on and on about all the advantages of the cheat... So.. now you and he want to tell me he doesnt use it? Fine! Ill take your word for it, but if you want to sue me for getting the wrong impression of dnmy from his post, or sue me for not knowing who he is, well have at it! I really give a rip!

- b) your behaviour is far too disrespectful compared
- to any of the forum regulars. In fact, it is so
- blatantly inflammatory that I suspect that this is
- merely an alias used to stir up trouble.

nope! It's pretty much the way I have been for 10+ years in the sim comunity! Do a search on the usenet.. There is plenty of proof of it out there.. I speak my mind and dont give a rip what you or anyone else thinks! It's my opinion, if you dont like it, Sorry bout your bad luck!

- I'm only pointing this out to say that if you indeed
- intend to be a part of this community you will need
- to rethink your trollish behaviour.

Thanks dad! But no thanks!

- Winning an argument isn't the most important
- thing, preserving your self-respect and
- others' is.

Disagree.



TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
06-30-2003, 09:34 AM
tagert wrote:

- If you think Im so ignorant, stupid, uninformed,
- etc... Why oh why are you so upset and worried about
- what I say?

Not upset at all, just surprised at so much ignorance.
I never believed people could be so stupid and uninformed like you. But you've proven that it can be possible.

/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
07-01-2003, 03:46 AM
Dnmy wrote:

- Not upset at all, just surprised at so much
- ignorance.

Ah, Ok, sure, again, what you say you do, and what you do are two differnt things.





TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
07-01-2003, 06:15 AM
CHDT wrote:
- "It's not a cheat in my opinion."
-
- Can your head turn to 360? ? /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif
-
- Cheers,
-

I concur... I use TrackIR, and was glad when they fixed the beta driver on release so that one couldn't swivel a full 180 degrees behind you. I DO view it as a cheat.

Regards,
HerrBaron

XyZspineZyX
07-01-2003, 06:57 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/messages/message_view.asp?name=Olegmaddoxreadyroom&id=zwwnu

http://oldsite.simhq.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=35;t=018697#000010

What i say i do and do are the same. But you're simply too ignorant to realize.


/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Message Edited on 07/01/0308:11AM by Dnmy

XyZspineZyX
07-02-2003, 01:57 AM
Dnmy wrote:
- What i say i do and do are the same.

Nope, sorry, Wish, but not the case here.





TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
07-02-2003, 07:04 AM
Follow the links in the threads above. It doesn't get any clearer than that. I mean, if you still have no clue after following the links (which i suspect to be the case), then you're even dumber than i thought.

If i used and liked the bugged version, the logical thing would be to keep quiet about it, never mention it and hope nobody noticed. Heaven forbid to apply to Oleg and Naturalpoint to get it fixed. Yet, that was exactly what i did.

I was the ONLY and first trackIR user to raise the issue at ALL here in an appeal to Oleg to get it fixed and on SimHQ and on the Naturalpoint forums. The temporary solution was supplied by Naturalpoint (i.e. the latest official version). It's only a temporary solution ofcourse, but that's the best Naturalpoint could do given the circumstances. And i'm glad they temporarily fixed it the way they have. I consider the bugged version totally arcade so i'm still hoping and waiting for the patch for a permanent solution.

BTW where were you when the bugged version surfaced? Never seen you complain before when it got out? First thing i did was raise the issue. The final result of that was, that Naturalpoint revised their software version. At least i did something which led to the latest official trackIR software version.

What have you done to get it fixed, i.e. besides falsely accusing people of cheating?

Nothing? That's what i thought..Yeah sure go on and remain ignorant again. That's what you do best /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
07-02-2003, 02:16 PM
Delayed reply, because I only just came back to my post, that tagert replyed to.

Pye Quote "My neck tells me that looking back at dead centre rudder position for an unlimited amount of time JUST
DON'T SEEM NATURAL"


Tagert, If you failed to see the words in my sentance "Unlimited amount of time" then how can the peace be acheived in the middle East in your point of view. This cleary shows and proves that you only see what you want to as have been doing in the middle East peace process.

Ps. did you try it. I doubt it. If you did and lasted 5 minutes, maybe 10 minutes maybe 1 hour ! well I congratulate you. But it is still not an UNLIMITED AMOUNT OF TIME. Now my turn to LOL and say we're DOOMED or QUAKED,


----------------------------------------------------------
tagert wrote:
- Pye wrote:
-- I still can't get over the physical argument for
-- this discussion.
--
-- Maybe I'm one in a million but
--
-- My neck tells me that looking back at dead centre
-- rudder position for an unlimited amount of time JUST
-- DON'T SEEM NATURAL.
--
--
-- And my eyeballs feel like they are about to explode
-- in their sockets and thats just for 30 seconds.
--
--
-- Don't beleive EVERYTHING you read. experiment try it
-- for yourself.
-
- LOL! And it is things like this that prove there
- will never be peace in the middle east! I mean if we
- can even agree that a person can NOT turn his head
- and body around to look out both sides of the rear
- of the aircraft at the same time... Something that
- one would think would be a no brainer turns into
- pages or arguments... In a nut shell we are DOOMED
- Or Quaked.. take your pick! <G>
-
-

XyZspineZyX
07-03-2003, 01:18 AM
Pye wrote:
- Tagert, If you failed to see the words in my
- sentance "Unlimited amount of time" then how can the
- peace be acheived in the middle East in your point
- of view.

Huh?

- This cleary shows and proves that you only
- see what you want to as have been doing in the
- middle East peace process.

Ah, Ok?

- Ps. did you try it. I doubt it. If you did and
- lasted 5 minutes, maybe 10 minutes maybe 1 hour !
- well I congratulate you. But it is still not an
- UNLIMITED AMOUNT OF TIME. Now my turn to LOL and
- say we're DOOMED or QUAKED,

LOL! Bud... I TOTALLY AGREED WITH YOU! At least I thought I did? Or are you being sarcastic? In that I was under the impression that you are saying that it is NOT posable to obtain the dead astern view... Which is what I have been saying... If so, then I agree with you! And my whole middle east thing was with regards to human nature... In that if *we* cant even agree that the dead astern (180) view is imposable to do... how will we (as humans) agree on terms in the middle east...

Eitherway... Wouldnt be the fist time my attempt at humor got totally missunderstood! So, dont feel bad! <G>





TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
07-03-2003, 01:26 AM
Dnmy wrote:
- Follow the links in the threads above.

Well F Me... Dnmy... I think I owe you an apolgy! I went back and read your emails/posts to me... with open eyes and mind this round... And Ill have to admit, I had you pegged the wrong way!

Sorry, not to be an excuse.. in that there isnt one, just an explanation... When you can into this thread talking about all the advantages of the cheat, and how you spent time getting those settings to make the cheat work even better... Well, I have to admit.. I kind of closed my mind to anything else you had to say after that.. So, I was wrong! And unjustly accused you of cheating! My bad, all the way!





TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
07-03-2003, 01:32 AM
Don't worry too much about it, this guy is all over the place constantly flip flopping.

Was a time he agitated for 170 degree FOV's, wondering when he's going to start on that band wagon again.

http://oldsite.simhq.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=35;t=016947

XyZspineZyX
07-03-2003, 02:32 AM
LeadSpitter_ wrote:
- also people use the old trackir driver with a mouse
- cursor control making the pov have a smooth pan
- which enables the 360 linda blair view with povs
-


LOL


They're too busy to notice. Give it another month or two, this one will finally catch on and we'll have a whole new v-fight to read.

/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

PS: this has been floating around for some time. maybe we should elect an "Official Whistle-blower"??

<font face="Courier New">
&nbspBaldieJr
_____ | _____
_\__(o)__/_
./ \.
Whiners don't play vulchers
(er, winners)
</font>

XyZspineZyX
07-03-2003, 07:03 AM
Ah..i strongly suspect here is the prime example of a disgruntled trackIR user who fears his 180 deg back view might be taken away from him. Here's a suggestion, try to convince Oleg to put in the Linda Blair view. Otherwise, just suck it up like all the rest of the FB and IL2 players.

And FYI field of view (FOV) is quite something else than maximum panning angles/viewing restrictions as being discussed in this thread. You're totally Off topic.

Besides, you also twist my words or never read them properly. I never lobbied for 170 degs FOV, i lobbied for useradjustable field of views up to 110 degs. And that in itself has nothing to do with Linda Blair view.

Come back when you have some valid points.

bye. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif



BfHeFwMe wrote:
- Don't worry too much about it, this guy is all over
- the place constantly flip flopping.
-
- Was a time he agitated for 170 degree FOV's,
- wondering when he's going to start on that band
- wagon again.

/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
07-03-2003, 07:03 AM
tagert wrote:
- Dnmy wrote:
-- Follow the links in the threads above.
-
- Well F Me... Dnmy... I think I owe you an apolgy! I
- went back and read your emails/posts to me... with
- open eyes and mind this round... And Ill have to
- admit, I had you pegged the wrong way!
-
- Sorry, not to be an excuse.. in that there isnt one,
- just an explanation... When you can into this thread
- talking about all the advantages of the cheat, and
- how you spent time getting those settings to make
- the cheat work even better... Well, I have to
- admit.. I kind of closed my mind to anything else
- you had to say after that.. So, I was wrong! And
- unjustly accused you of cheating! My bad, all the
- way!

Don't worry. Apology accepted.

/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
07-03-2003, 07:30 AM
Points very valid. Take the view limiter as it is now, tack on a 110 degree view you advocate, whalaaa, one is looking past his seat again at the limiter. So whats the difference between that and Linda Blair? But do keep blowing the hot air, whatever give you kicks bud.

XyZspineZyX
07-03-2003, 03:56 PM
Ofcourse not, an expansion to 110 degs field of view would also imply new viewing restriction angles. That goes without saying. But you prolly hadn't figured that one out yet.

In any case, the FOV issue is moot anyway, as i have already asked Oleg about widening the field of view in a pre chat session. And he said it wasn't possible with the current cockpits. So that was the end of it and that was good enough for me. If you wanna change the views in FB, ask Oleg and not Naturalpoint. And if you can not get it done, just suck it up like the rest of us.

Or you can continue whining about me when you fear losing your beloved Blair view, and see if i care. Whatever gives you kicks bud

bye



Message Edited on 07/03/0305:10PM by Dnmy

XyZspineZyX
07-03-2003, 04:17 PM
The point was not missed Baldie

And you and Leadspitter make a good one. That's why i hope that Oleg can put in viewing restrictions in FB, independant on what the trackIR enhanced panning allows. (the trackIR software is not just meant for FB only).

If he can do that, then i think that the issue might be solved once and for all. So here's a bump for that.



/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
07-03-2003, 05:57 PM
Well, I still must be doing something wrong...

I had a buddy take me up in his Piper Cheyenne a few days ago, his has shoulder straps, and I got myself strapped in pretty tight.

He estimates we were pulling about 4 Gs or so, and I was able to twist my torso (shoulders), neck, and then glance my eyes to the side, and I saw right out the six o'clock (ok, I actually basically saw the front of my headrest, but still).

Guess I just can never agree with people that haven't a clue what is possible in high-performance airframes*, and also what is possible by turning torsos, eyes, shoulders, etc.

IL2 can't model the turning of your eyes.
IL2 can't model the rotating of your torso.
IL2 can't model G force restrictions**

Therefore:

180 degree (direct 6) view, which is really the issue, not the 360 degree "problem" (which HAMPERS TrackIR users, anyhow), is completely viable and acceptable, given proper G force constraints.

It SHOULD be made a "difficulty" setting
view_restrictions 1/0

And it SHOULD be available for mouse/pov/trackir.


* The Piper Cheyenne is not really high performance, but we were traveling around 300kph (about 186 miles per hour at sea level), 5800 feet (roughly 1770 meters or so), pulling 3 - 4G.

** G force would affect all viewing ability, and padlock, if it was (could) be properly modelled. The problem is that it is SO subjective, depending upon pilot strength and the angle the Gs are being applied to the body.

This is a ridiculous thread, focusing anger on the wrong problems.

I agree that NaturalPoint has a "bug" in that if you tilt your head a certain way, the thing spins in circles. This is "bad" keeping the Y axis steady, and rotating strictly X axis.

They can't really fix it, because you CAN turn 360 in a way, if you modify the Y axis of your neck (you have no "stop" points in view restrictions - you know, rotating your head about your shoulders is possible given some positive Y angle).

Given this information, it's likely best to just keep the "problem" of full rotation around X with 0deg Y, as in reality for the game, this would be a handicap to the TrackIR user, and an acceptable risk.

It rarely happens to me, unless I'm reaching for a beer away from the monitor and the receptor.

I'll never upgrade from 2. 180 degree view is indeed realistic, regardless of what you non-aviators like to think (given reasonable G limits).

I also agree it should be available for ALL people; and at the very least, throw it in the Difficulty options. Problem solved.

XyZspineZyX
07-03-2003, 10:29 PM
tolwyn.com wrote:
- Well, I still must be doing something wrong...

Agreed.

- I had a buddy take me up in his Piper Cheyenne a few
- days ago, his has shoulder straps, and I got myself
- strapped in pretty tight.

Piper Cheyenne... Correct me if Im wrong... But... aint that an AC where the seats are side by side... That is to say.. like a CAR? You know, front seats, back seats, etc.

- Guess I just can never agree with people that
- haven't a clue what is possible in high-performance
- airframes*,

Or we just disagree of what you consider to be high-performance?

- and also what is possible by turning
- torsos, eyes, shoulders, etc.

Which is only ONE aspect of the whole argument. You experment is nothing like a high performance WWII fighter senario.

- IL2 can't model the turning of your eyes.
- IL2 can't model the rotating of your torso.
- IL2 can't model G force restrictions**

Disagree.

- Therefore:
-
- 180 degree (direct 6) view, which is really the
- issue, not the 360 degree "problem" (which HAMPERS
- TrackIR users, anyhow), is completely viable and
- acceptable, given proper G force constraints.

Disagree.

- * The Piper Cheyenne is not really high performance,

DING!

- but we were traveling around 300kph (about 186 miles
- per hour at sea level), 5800 feet (roughly 1770
- meters or so), pulling 3 - 4G.

Again, a Cheyenne is ROOMIE as all get out comparied to a WWII FIGHTER!!! That FACT along with the limitaions of the human body is why the view is not realistic. Which is not to say Im against adding the view... Im just not willing to add it because it is a realistic thing... it is more of a fudge to MAKE UP for the other vies limitations.

- I'll never upgrade from 2. 180 degree view is indeed
- realistic, regardless of what you non-aviators like
- to think (given reasonable G limits).

LOL! Said the guy who had his buddy do the flying!



TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?