[Merged] Planetside 2 & TrackIR

[Coreldan]

In the latest video you could see that they had implemented free look in vehicles. From there on it's very easy to implement TrackIR!

[Eyeklops]

I can't remember where..but recently a dev did state support for head tracking. I think it might have been Higby in one of the cockpit threads.

Edit: Found it. The post was by higby here in this thread

[maradine]

You fools! Vile necromancy!

Freelook is in, but actual support for headtracking is not. This is being worked on from the appropriate channels -

https://twitter.com/mhigby/status/207910300341645313

[wraithverge]

The ability to glance forward in a tank means not crashing into things while driving, that alone is gold whether they have track IR or not. Give tanks free look please.

[ccrumley]

Originally Posted by kaffis

Look, it's not that it's not cool technology. It clearly is. I love anything and everything Virtual Reality, including the full-blown VR arcades that popped up for a while in the 90's. And it's a fantastic addition to a Simulation gamer's awesome $8,000, 5-monitor, full joystick and flightpedal rig, etc. And you'll notice that most of the games that support that cater to that type of gamer.

But you'll also notice that those games don't do very well at expanding beyond that target market. Because the guy with 1/5th the FOV, trying to fly with his mouse and keyboard, and without a surround sound setup tries it out, gets absolutely plastered by the hardcore guys with the advantages their awesome, expensive setup gives them, and tells his friends "yeah, don't bother. You need to drop thousands of dollars to be competitive."

I don't want PS2 to be that game, so I don't think building in compatibility for those features is a good idea. Joystick support and perhaps support for a UI-only second monitor is as far as I think the game should go, since dual monitor is common enough, and budget joysticks can be had for ~$20.

It's not that the features aren't cool, it's that I don't want PS2 to have a barrier to entry. That's the entire point of going Free to Play, is to make it so there's no excuse not to be able to play, and keep those world populations up.

You are absolutely wrong when it comes to your presumption that the hardcore gamers (or usually more accurately, simmers) with endless pockets and fancy rig setups are the ones who will dominate. I have been a HARDCORE simulation player for over a decade. Mostly flight combat sims, but also racing and FPS simulators like the ARMA series. I just recently finished acquiring all the little toys that make these games so immersive. But before that, I still kicked ass on the multiplayer servers for IL2 and World War II Online. The only thing all the gadgets do are add to the immersion. If you are good at air combat, you will be good even without those toys. Some of the most impressive flying I have seen on youtube videos were by guys that were using the hatswitch of their joystick to move their view around. Moving your head is just more natural and therefore immersive. It still takes practice to get good with it just like it takes practice to get good with a hatswitch. They both allow you to adjust your view and maintain situational awareness so it's impossible for one to have an advantage over the other. I know that im still gonna get a couple of know-it-alls who will argue this, but its fine. I actually know what im talking about due to LOTS of experience and they most likely do not.

[AvacadoEight]

This is the way I feel about it. They can implement it if they want and people can use it, I don't mind. But, if it starts getting to where it's obvious there's an advantage for people using these devices, then I'll have a problem. Other than that, just as long as I have a choice to use it or not to use it, i'm okay. with it.

[maradine]

I actually agree with your main point, namely that immersive gadgetry does not necessarily translate into a more competitive player. However, your logic is aggressively argumentative and charmingly fallacious, so yet get drug out on the carpet:

Originally Posted by ccrumley

They both allow you to adjust your view and maintain situational awareness so it's impossible for one to have an advantage over the other.

• Automatic and manual transmissions both allow you to keep an engine inside its powerband for a given speed, so it's impossible for one to have an advantage over the other.
• Wacom tablets and mice both allow you to manipulate a pointer over a 2D surface, so it's impossible for one to have an advantage over the other.
• Stripper clips and detachable box magazines both allow you to reload a weapon in one action, so it's impossible for one to have an advantage over the other.

Head tracking is effectively instant, analog, and doesn't take one of your digits out of the cockpit workload management game to thumb around the screen. I cite these as your allegedly impossible advantages. They are offset by a number of disadvantages, such as cost, complexity, mandatory immobility of the head, and the need to re-center after standing up and sitting down. For some, the equation will go one way, for others, the other.

Originally Posted by ccrumley

I know that im still gonna get a couple of know-it-alls who will argue this, but its fine. I actually know what im talking about due to LOTS of experience and they most likely do not.

This looks shopped. I can tell by some of the pixels and from seeing quite a few shops in my time. Appealing to authority in a forum full of graybeards is not likely to yield your desired result.

[The Kush]

This is dead last on the priority list and I mean dead last. Cool idea but absolutely not needed at all. In other words, doubt it will ever be implemented in this game. There is a lot more important stuff that could be worked on instead, like new content.

[kaffis]

The last three posters lie quite in line with my own thoughts.

[Conq]

I feel the same, as long as it doesn't provide too much of an advantage I don't care.

I have to say though, I don't know who spends thousands on this stuff, I felt retarded just spending a hundred bucks on a gaming mouse and keyboard. You flight simmers should spend that money on training for a pilot's license and rent a Cessna on the weekends.

[ccrumley]

I was speaking more to the fact that everyone has the same capability as far as moving the view of the camera. It's no different in flight sims or games like ARMA. If you want the convenience of head tracking, buy the device, if not use the button and mouse combo. It adds no real advantage. And I was simply stating that I am speaking from a position of vast first hand experience and knowledge, not trying to tout myself as an absolute authority.

@conq Can't really blow Cesnas out of the sky with a hail of lead or believe me, I would have like a million hours of flight time!

[maradine]

Screw head tracking, I want drink tracking.

[ccrumley]

Freelook is absolutely necessary! Being able to keep track of air contacts while simultaneously maneuvering your aircraft is the single most important aspect of air combat. You must know how your opponent is maneuvering in order to counter him and countering maneuvers is rarely accomplished by pointing at your opponent. In PS1, it was really not an issue because the physics were practically non-existent and the flight model was extremely simplistic. Not the case in PS2

[Kaos]

Those of us interesting in flying in PS2 and those of us who do actual real world flying will take PS2 flight aspects much more seriously and with more excitement.

I am crossing my fingers they implement TrackIR support as it will drastically improve my play experience.

[maradine]

Even if they don't specifically implement it, if there's freelook, we can make it work. Will just require a custom profile and keymap, and I'm sure no one here would be kind enough to build and publish one . . .

edit: sarcasm aside - I'll build one.