Trackir and VR?

#1

Is trackir and VR going to be supported?

#2

They mentioned that they want to do that after launch if the game sells well enough. Right now none of that is supported or going to be supported anytime soon.

1 Like
#3

A while ago, iirc Flavien did have a prototype going with the Oculus.

However, that was quite a while ago, with lots of engine upgrades and other things changing.

The biggest issue with VR right now is that supporting it means a whole lot more work in the UI and engine department, which is not high on the priorities right now.

1 Like
#4

thank you for reply, i’m sure game will succeed on it’s release and we’ll reach trackir and vr support

#5

Basic head tracking should involve just replacing mouse look in the game with a separate axis so there might be a way to get that set up already. eg. ED Tracker.

VR is a more complex scenario AFAIK.

#6

ED Tracker

It would be good if the devs could at least make sure the current ED tracker works with I:B. @INovaeKeith

ED tracker is such a low cost way to have head tracking and now comes in a great little kit either pre built with all cables or self assemble.

PS. Has anyone tried using the ED tracker with I:B yet??

#7

trackir or some other head tracking device would be much easier to implement than VR, there was some guy from star citizen community that did it by himself, so yeah headtracking devices would be a good start and later when game reaches good sales give support to VR.
Just an advice to devs; majority of flight and space sims players use headtracking device and consider it vital feature.
i too play sims like il2 and elite and it would be weird without trackir, it gives such immersion that’s why i’m considering to buy Rift.
As i heard headtracking isn’t hard to implement since it’s tied with just freelook, i know there is 6points of freedom movement and that can be more work but for a start just tied it to a mouse freelook.
Word of battlescape is already spreaded across internet and gaming community so i’m sure game will succeed!

#8

We raised minimum Kickstarter guys we can’t promise we’ll support these things. That being said after the game ships to retail we’ll certainly look into it.

6 Likes
#9

i understand Keith! don’t get me wrong, i know game will succeed and things will come.
You know your plans the best, and want them to succeed…hopefully one day you wont have to answer directly to us mortals:stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:
thing that game will be out next year is wow, rest of it will come as dlc’s or minor updates.
cheers!

#10

Basic headtracking seems like a matter of axis assignment.
I remember experimenting with it some time ago.
By setting headtracker to work as a regular axis.

But game did not recognized more then few basic axis…so it did not assigned it.

But that shared axis for flight controls and head look will be issue now to think about it.
If separate then i have a feeling it might be possible.

…or perhaps its more complicated then that :slight_smile:

#11

The XML currently allows for quite ellaborate setups.

Here’s the Headlook part:

<!-- Head orientation in cockpit mode -->
	<Input Event = "HeadPitch" Keys = "MouseButtonRight + MouseAxisY" Type = "Axis" />
	<Input Event = "HeadYaw" Keys = "MouseButtonRight + MouseAxisX" Type = "Axis" />
	<Input Event = "HeadReset" Keys = "MouseButtonRight" DoubleTap="true" />

Problem here is that Headlook is a relative input and not an absolute one. That’s the biggest issue I would imagine. It may work though.

2 Likes
#12

HEUREKA
Yup got it working you are absolutely right it needs to be absolute. This would brake my neck :slight_smile:
another issue is still that game for some reason ignores system controller device number assignment and just renames them for her/its internal use.
example:
If your head look yaw axis in system is device 3 axis 2.
You need to select this device in launcher as your control method for it to even work.
In Launcher it will show by its system name - example virtual joystick 1 or Cobra Defender M5…you get the idea.
So now when selected as a “controller” game considers it to be joystick 0 axis 2

… yeah this is a mess since you cant really know what other device numbers are now.
So you could use a hotas setup also.

It seems like over complicated method…but i guess is is just a placeholder for now.

EDIT
sigh this would be so easier if it would be possible to change this either in game or if load times weren’t 10minutes just to try it.

edit 2

6 Likes
#13

At the moment there’s only a selector for Joystick0.

I actually like that the game has a seperate numbering system. I have an extensive number of devices connected to this machine and I don’t like to have to reconfigure every game when I unplug one.

For a workarround try vJoy and UJR to combine multiple devices into one.

#14

Continuing the discussion from the backer-only 0.2.7.1 Feedback topic as this seems the most appropriate topic for it:

NaturalPoint have finally decided in my favour:

I haven’t signed yet as part of the licence agreement kinda precludes creating what I plan to create (details of which I had previously explained to them), so I’m getting clarification on that and potentially an addendum to the licence agreement.

I’ll keep everyone updated.

Ultimately however, it would be best if TrackIR support was implemented natively in Battlescape.

5 Likes
#15

Still waiting on NaturalPoint but I found this can already be achieved with FreePIE (http://andersmalmgren.github.io/FreePIE/) and vJoy.
See here:

Here’s my script for FreePIE:

def update():
    yaw = trackIR.yaw
    pitch = trackIR.pitch
    vJoy[1].x = yaw * (16382 / 180)
    vJoy[1].y = pitch * -(16382 / 180)

if starting:
    trackIR.update += update
2 Likes
[Critical] Combat, Control and Controllers
#16

How did you fix the track ir lag?

seems a bit spongy.

not as sharp/responsive as trackir tool.

#17

I didn’t experience any lagginess.
And responding to your PM, I didn’t have any issues with re-center either.

1 Like