forums.naturalpoint.com

(first of all: I apologize in case I've posted in the wrong forum)

hi,
I'm a very satisfied user of TrackIr4, mostly in FSX, obviously interested in new T-Ir5

now I am (satisfactorily) playing with T-Ir4 in Arma2 too, and these are my two questions, still unanswered, although I did some research in the last two days:

should I really benefit by upgrading to TrackIR 5, because - albeit better advertised benchmarks - I did not understand whether in my real (virtual ) world it would make a real different gaming experience

is Track IR 5 capable of 6DOF in Arma2? , because Tir4 works only with yaw and pitch (in that game, FSX is ok) ... I suspect it's a game shortcoming...

thanks

The TrackIR 4 should have 4 DOF support within ArmA 2 same as the TrackIR 5.

Yaw, Pitch, x, and Z

Hi mgabb,

In my own opinion, and based on my own experiences, the difference between TrackIR 4 and 5 can be most significantly appreciated in ArmA 2--particularly when playing as dismounted infantry. If you use TrackIR to look around corners, check your flank, etc. when you're playing as infantry, TrackIR 5 is tremendously more stable. Because it requires far less smoothing to be stable, you can perform these kinds of controls much more quickly and intuitively. I enjoyed TrackIR 4 in ArmA. TrackIR 5 in ArmA 2 is on another level. At least, that's been my experience. I've read multiple user accounts that reflect the same. I've even read comments from users that refused to use TrackIR 4 as infantry in ArmA, because they found it too disorienting, and now are finding the same type of control indispensable.

For non-NaturalPoint perspective on this, I'd definitely recommend checking out the TrackIR 5 thread on the BIS forums. It's massive, so you might be best to just chime in with a request for feedback on the end of the thread. But, if you have the time to wade through it, it has lots of great feedback.

You can also read my interview with SimHQ , in which I discuss the importance of the new hardware at length, if you'd like more of my own perspective.

The same accuracy, responsiveness, wider field of view, etc. will translate to FSX, but obviously FSX is less of a "life or death" sort of sim. So, perhaps from a competitive advantage or self-preservation standpoint the distinction is less significant. But, for my own purposes, I just can't get enough of the difference in performance. Even if I'm only looking around my cockpit or checking out the scenery below me.

ArmA 2, like ArmA before it, has 4 DOF TrackIR support. This is the same for TrackIR 3, 4, and 5 users. Upgrading to 6 DOF is something that only BIS can integrate.

Ah, Vincent beat me to the punch again!

Mgabb, I've only had a morning of flying with the TIR5 after flying most of the evening and last couple of years with the TIR4 Pro. The response really is night and day on my limited testing. The TIR5 is so much more responsive, so much smoother (I no longer need to add the same level of smoothing). Looking around the cockpit and interacting with its avionics was noticeably different today. I've not tried it with FSX yet as I'm a Falcon junkie, but from a hardcore simmer's perspective, this is a significant and welcome improvement.

Cheers

Nutty

Hi James,
if the improvement is just like the digital conversion it was made long time ago on your Foxy's "child" (HOTAS TM system), then it is huuugely worth

Marco "Tozzifan" Gabbrielli

thanks for your "support"...BTW ... I've just purchased it

Well I hope you find it as good as I'm finding it. I continue to be impressed with the mush improved responsiveness I'm experiencing in Falcon.

Cheers!

Nutty