A Closer Look At The AimTrak (with video goodness)

[Neverending Project]

I made a few videos with hopes to show everyone what the device is like in real use. I should give a little background information on my setup, so you can compare if you need. My AimTrak is installed in an Act Labs gun, with the camera PCB right at the tip of the gun barrel. My screen is a 29" VGA monitor (running at 800x600) in a stand-up arcade cabinet, and the LED board is mounted in the cardboard bezel an inch or two above the top edge of the screen. For normal lightgun use, I would stand about 5 feet back from the screen. I am running Windows XP x64, SP2.

Here is a short description of the videos:
Chapter 1: Software
This is a quick look at my test rig and the configuration utility that Ultimarc provides, with a focus on how to change the button assignments of the AimTrak. In reality, I needed to set these, so I thought I would capture it on video.


Chapter 2: Calibration
This video shows the calibration routine, preformed in Windows at the desktop with no other software running. My goal here is to show the simple process of calibrating the AimTrak. You will need a cursor visible (which excludes calibrating with MAME on pause, or in a front-end unless it has been modified) and if you have the AimTrak buttons set to Mouse buttons, this may click your desktop while you are calibrating.


Chapter 3: Accuracy
In this video I take a look at moving around after the gun has been calibrated at the center of the screen, but without re-calibrating in each position. I take a look at how the calibration (and hence, accuracy) changes as the gun changes positions.


I hope this helps. Let me know if there are other things you want to see.

[ammitz]

 
Great videos, specially video nr 3!

Looking forward to the sequels

[Xiaou2]

Thanks for the Vids.

 Very sorry to see... but not surprised...  that the accuracy is poor.
Basically, you can shoot most things in the center fine.  But anything on the edges
and you will be off Over an entire CM!  Heck, I think I saw over an inch off in the vids.
   
 Sorry.. but thats just unacceptable to me. I actually like to do well in the games I play.

[RandyT]

This is an opinion based on what you are showing in your videos.  I don't have one of these (yet), so your videos (and Syph's) are what I am commenting upon.

I'm impressed with the great job you did on these!  My only criticism is that you tend to use the phrase "a liiiittle bit" where I would probably find "a country mile" to be more appropriate .  To each his own.

On the bright side, it looks to be very accurate at the center and top center, which is encouraging, and the tracking seems very smooth and fast.  Additional firmware tweaking could solve some of these issues.  Possibly through a change to the calibration process and the way the data is used.  The thing that is difficult is that the gun probably can't tell with any great precision if the shooter is holding the gun in the center and pivoting it around the X and Y-axis, or if the shooter has physically changed the position of the gun in the X and Y (and Z)....or a little of both.  It looks to me like the camera sees the markers the same way at 90 degrees to the screen as it does at a different angle, regardless of the fact that the tip is actually pointing at a different location on the screen when at that different angle.  This seems to be confirmed by the fact that accuracy is better when pointing at the side of the screen the gun is offset toward.  With only one set of markers, it may not be possible to do much better as averaging and checking for distance changes between marker sets, and any other trick associated with multiple markers situated at opposite sides of the screen, isn't possible.




The above video on YouTube from Syph007 shows it in action.  It seems fine toward the center of the screen, but at around 1:20 on the video, you can see that he misses nearly every target at the edge of the screen.  It's perfectly understandable as to why; he became very good at shooting the targets in the middle of the screen, because his brain was learning and connecting that logical extension of his arm to the target.  When he went to the edge of the screen, things changed enough so that what his brain learned in the center of the screen, no longer applied.  Even with the cursor enabled, he was apparently unable to compensate.  This aspect is the area of greatest concern to me.  Hopefully a new version of the firmware will have some new tricks to address these issues by the time I get to play with one.

RandyT

[AndyWarne]

Thanks for the Vids.

 Very sorry to see... but not surprised...  that the accuracy is poor.
Basically, you can shoot most things in the center fine.  But anything on the edges
and you will be off Over an entire CM!  Heck, I think I saw over an inch off in the vids.
   
 Sorry.. but thats just unacceptable to me. I actually like to do well in the games I play.

The videos show the effects of moving standing position which will affect the accuracy if not calibrated. But I am concerned about the first section of the accuracy video. This gives the impression that the gun is not accurate at the outset, towards the edges. It is. So something is not correct with the calibration. If the gun is not accurate then the calibration would need to be repeated, because it should be.

One issue might be screen overscan. When using an LCD monitor, the edges of the screen are the true edges of the picture so this is not an issue. On a CRT monitor with overscan it might be necessary to aim the gun outside of the screen edge when calibrating. It should be a very quick process to try some calibration cycles and get an impression of the best place to aim.

[syph007]

I've improved since I took that first video, but I still hold the conclusion that the gun isnt really usable without onscreen cursor.  I now hold the gun a tad below my line of site and soley rely on the onscreen crosshair, but I'm hitting what I'm trying to.  Guests that have tried have had alot of fun with it, so its for sure a fun addition.  Now if your expectations are greater than mine, then you might be disappointed, but it does what I expect, which is really to act as a gun like mouse.   I dont have any more trouble hitting the edges of the screen though than the center, I was just not trying as much at that point in the vid.  I'll take another to show you better.  The only thing I'm personally disapointed in is that I cant use dual guns to play house of the dead PC version, only one works.  Thats not the guns fault I know, but at least dual guns works in MAME.

[Neverending Project]

This is an opinion based on what you are showing in your videos.  I don't have one of these (yet), so your videos (and Syph's) are what I am commenting upon.

Thanks for the disclaimer.  Guess I jumped a little too much in the last thread. Sorry.

One issue might be screen overscan. When using an LCD monitor, the edges of the screen are the true edges of the picture so this is not an issue. On a CRT monitor with overscan it might be necessary to aim the gun outside of the screen edge when calibrating. It should be a very quick process to try some calibration cycles and get an impression of the best place to aim.

The other thing I was thinking about this morning is that my laser pointer is a half inch or more (that's 1-2cm for you other folk) above the camera lens. This means when the laser pointer is in the top-corner of the screen, the camera lens is actually just slightly inside the corner. Likewise on the bottom, the camera lens is actually pointing just slightly below the screen edge. I tried to adjust it as best as I can so it converges at the point the camera focus and laser pointer dot would hit the screen, but it is only a toy laser pointer taped to the gun so there's only so much I could do.

I will make some more attempts to get a better calibration.

The other thing I was thinking about was the fact that this Act Labs gun is designed as a toy and the sight is very wide. Even taking my time, steadying my shot and taking my best aim I am not going to be very accurate with the sight alone. The gun barrel is over an inch wide! I think that is what i was eluding to before... when I play arcade games I go more by feel, since that is going to give me the best results anyway. If the gun hits where I feel I am aiming but I miss my shot, I move slightly to correct.

[RandyT]

But I am concerned about the first section of the accuracy video. This gives the impression that the gun is not accurate at the outset, towards the edges. It is. So something is not correct with the calibration. If the gun is not accurate then the calibration would need to be repeated, because it should be.

One issue might be screen overscan. When using an LCD monitor, the edges of the screen are the true edges of the picture so this is not an issue. On a CRT monitor with overscan it might be necessary to aim the gun outside of the screen edge when calibrating. It should be a very quick process to try some calibration cycles and get an impression of the best place to aim.

It looks to me like there is something amiss with the calibration routines.  If you look at the video, when the calibration routines are being performed, the mouse cursor goes right to the corner and is visible the entire time.  The "start" button is also fully in view at the XP desktop, so I'm not sure why you would come to the conclusion that "overscan" was the issue.  If it were, neither of these two things would be true.  "The best place to aim" should be the locations where the arrows are pointing, no?

The other thing I was thinking about this morning is that my laser pointer is a half inch or more (that's 1-2cm for you other folk) above the camera lens. This means when the laser pointer is in the top-corner of the screen, the camera lens is actually just slightly inside the corner. Likewise on the bottom, the camera lens is actually pointing just slightly below the screen edge. I tried to adjust it as best as I can so it converges at the point the camera focus and laser pointer dot would hit the screen, but it is only a toy laser pointer taped to the gun so there's only so much I could do.

While something else might be amiss, something like this shouldn't be a problem.  It's simply an offset difference and should easily be accounted for.  It's no different than having the camera located a little lower in the barrel of the gun, or having the LED's a little higher (or both).  That's the purpose of the calibration routines.....it's supposed to make sense of these variables and adjust accordingly.  And it is pretty accurate in the center and top center, so if the laser sight placement was going to be an issue, it would be an issue there as well and it doesn't seem to be.

RandyT

[FrizzleFried]

Thanks for the Vids.

 Very sorry to see... but not surprised...  that the accuracy is poor.
Basically, you can shoot most things in the center fine.  But anything on the edges
and you will be off Over an entire CM!  Heck, I think I saw over an inch off in the vids.
   
 Sorry.. but thats just unacceptable to me. I actually like to do well in the games I play.

Looks like you won't be buying then.  Oh well.  Thanks for the input.

[Endaar]

Great videos.

Andy, if for whatever reason the edge tracking is off, could this be something that could be compensated for via software? In other words, if after calibration the user sees that the gun is tracking 1/2 inch to one side of the cursor, have the software adjust for that. Something like the mapping utlity on the U360, where a manual adjustment could be entered for each portion of the screen.

Hopefully that makes sense.

Endaar

[AndyWarne]

The calibration assumes that the 4096x4096 screen map for the device is exactly fitting the screen, and that when you point into the corner, you are actually pointing at screen location 0,0 for example.

The video shows horizontal overscan and that is the reason for the error, although its a small overscan.

There is a way around this. I could change the calibration so that the mouse cursor moves to a known position near the corner or edge and stays static, and you aim at the pointer instead of aiming at the screen edge. This would eliminate this issue but I am not sure if its really necessary. The downside of this would be on some screens the mouse pointer might be difficult to see if static. On others with a very large overscan it might be off the screen.

I will think about this, but in fact its really quite easy to allow for this. Afetr a couple of calibrations you get the idea of where to aim when calibrating. It can easily be seen whether you need to re-calibrate by looking along the sight after calibration to check it against the pointer.

Of course if the gun does not have a proper sight then all bets are off and you dont then need it to be calibrated accurately at all since the sight would not be any use anyway in gameplay, you are just shooting blind.

[Drakin]

The calibration assumes that the 4096x4096 screen map for the device is exactly fitting the screen, and that when you point into the corner, you are actually pointing at screen location 0,0 for example.

The video shows horizontal overscan and that is the reason for the error, although its a small overscan.

There is a way around this. I could change the calibration so that the mouse cursor moves to a known position near the corner or edge and stays static, and you aim at the pointer instead of aiming at the screen edge. This would eliminate this issue but I am not sure if its really necessary. The downside of this would be on some screens the mouse pointer might be difficult to see if static. On others with a very large overscan it might be off the screen.

I will think about this, but in fact its really quite easy to allow for this. Afetr a couple of calibrations you get the idea of where to aim when calibrating. It can easily be seen whether you need to re-calibrate by looking along the sight after calibration to check it against the pointer.

Of course if the gun does not have a proper sight then all bets are off and you dont then need it to be calibrated accurately at all since the sight would not be any use anyway in gameplay, you are just shooting blind.

I opt for it to stay the way it is...or somehow allow for both types of calibration.

[Xiaou2]

Of course if the gun does not have a proper sight then all bets are off and you dont then need it to be calibrated accurately at all since the sight would not be any use anyway in gameplay, you are just shooting blind.

 Maybe Im not interpreting this correctly... but this sounds Incorrect.

 As an artist, I can tell you that I have a very good eye and feeling for
angles.  My aim, is thus very good.. without the need for looking down
a sight.
 
 In fact, plenty of good gun shooters (real guns) do not use the sights,
and have incredible accuracy.  And no... that is not because they Saw
where the first bullet landed.

 Sorry, but the Shooting Blind / Accuracy comment are not applicable
to all people.

Looks like you won't be buying then.  Oh well.  Thanks for the input.

 Ohh, thank you for your concern Frizzel.   You are correct at this
point in time, as I do not buy Prototypes.  I buy fully functional and fully
tested equipment, that works as I expect it to work.

 If I wanted to play with something with poor accuracy, Id use the
CrapLabs guns I have.  Instead, Ill stick with the Topguns until
a prototype can or should I say "IF" accuracy can be shown true.

 Standing back a little further isnt so bad as having missed shots because
things are not accurate.

 Im all for a good working and accurate gun that is able to track at
closer range...   Ill keep waiting till I see it...  And if it comes, I may buy
a few of them.  Until then, Ill make my disappointment known.  Im not
the only one interested in an accurate solution.

[RandyT]

The video shows horizontal overscan and that is the reason for the error, although its a small overscan.

For overscan to be the issue causing the gross deviation at the bottom of the screen, the vertical overscan would need to be very large.  Even then, one would expect that a similar deviation would be seen at the top, or center, based on the screen mapping.  Something else seems to be awry. 

There is a way around this. I could change the calibration so that the mouse cursor moves to a known position near the corner or edge and stays static, and you aim at the pointer instead of aiming at the screen edge. This would eliminate this issue but I am not sure if its really necessary. The downside of this would be on some screens the mouse pointer might be difficult to see if static. On others with a very large overscan it might be off the screen.

Move the cursor in a small box pattern with the center of the box inset from the edge of the screen by 10%.  Get the resulting distance between the calibration shots, representing 80% of the screen distance, and add 1/8th of that distance to each side to intelligently guess where the actual screen edge is.  This will account for overscan and therefore increase the effectiveness of the calibration step...at least horizontally.  Vertically, you have a greater challenge.  The error does not appear to be linear, which is likely due to to the curve of the lens in the camera.  The further off-axis the camera lens is to the LED markers, the more likely it is that optical distortion will become a factor.  Without a second set of markers to use as a reference, the only alternative is somewhat complex and time consuming math (or a factor table) to attempt to correct for it.  The effectiveness of this is also somewhat questionable without the gun knowing, with very good accuracy, the physical size of the screen and / or  or the distance between screen and shooter.

Of course if the gun does not have a proper sight then all bets are off and you dont then need it to be calibrated accurately at all since the sight would not be any use anyway in gameplay, you are just shooting blind.

I'm not sure what you mean by "proper sights" (a definition of that would probably be helpful), but with real guns, a "proper sight" is sometimes nothing more than a ball bearing centered on the end of the barrel that can be aligned with the center of the barrel width when looking down the length of it.  In reality, a "proper sight" is any static protrusion or physical feature on the gun that a shooter can use as a reference.  So long as the shots always deviate the same way, the shooter can compensate.  It's when the deviation varies based on location of aim that compensation becomes nearly impossible.

RandyT

[ammitz]

As an artist, I can tell you that I have a very good eye and feeling for
angles.  My aim, is thus very good.. without the need for looking down
a sight.

 

[Dartful Dodger]

As an artist, I can tell you that I have a very good eye and feeling for
angles.  My aim, is thus very good.. without the need for looking down
a sight.

 

I've heard that some autistic people don't even look at their targets when they shoot.

[ammitz]

As an artist, I can tell you that I have a very good eye and feeling for
angles.  My aim, is thus very good.. without the need for looking down
a sight.

 

I've heard that some autistic people don't even look at their targets when they shoot.

I think I saw that trick in an old Ninja movie from the start of the 80's  
The Warrior and the Blind Swordsman


Sorry for this totally offtopic post, I'll keep my mouth shut for now  

[RandyT]

As much fun as you folks seem to be having, there are people so good with a gun that they can have someone throw a quarter in the air and they will shoot it out of the sky.  These folks have simply mastered the ability to use the weapon as a logical extension of their arm.  The same way you can point at something in the distance with your finger, they can hit it with a bullet, and with similar ease.

I'm not saying that an arcade gun needs to have that level of capability, but it shouldn't effectively work against the skills of the user either.

RandyT

[swamprat96]

I don't know if this is relevant but the technique andy mentions calibrating off screen works with Topguns as well. I had to calibrate a replacement gun yesterday and I used this method where I actually aimed about 1 inch of each corner of the screen. After some trial and error it was spot on. So I think this method is acceptable for aim trak. I will be buying some shortly- just collecting bits for the next cab currently

[Minwah]

I don't know if this is relevant but the technique andy mentions calibrating off screen works with Topguns as well. I had to calibrate a replacement gun yesterday and I used this method where I actually aimed about 1 inch of each corner of the screen. After some trial and error it was spot on. So I think this method is acceptable for aim trak. I will be buying some shortly- just collecting bits for the next cab currently

I had another go with my AimTrak tonight and noticed after calibrating the cursor was moving slightly faster than my aim towards the right of the screen. So similar to the video with the target above, the shots were an inch or so off (I have a 21" screen). So I calibrated again and tried pointing about an inch to the right top corner at the 'top-right' point of calibration. It took me two attempts and then the cursor was tracking excellently.

I had a go on Operation Wolf and on one credit got to the jungle round, second time around (I think that's equalled the furthest I've got before). You can afford to fire off some extra rounds in this game but I like to be pretty sparing unless there is a bunch of guys next to each other for example. I was looking through the sights the whole time and it seemed that most shots went where intended...

I then played a few other games (all without crosshairs) and again very pleasing. I even did pretty well in Clay Pigeon (which I don't think I've played before with a gun) and seemed to hit much more than I missed. In this game the targets are pretty small so it's probably fair to say most if not all misses were my fault.

One thing worth a mention is that after a good calibration, I did not re-calibrate for particular games. I checked now and again with the crosshair and it remained good.

I think it's true (& perhaps obvious) to say once you get a spot on calibration you will have no problem in game. To Neverending Project, and others finding the calibration going out towards the egde of the screen, I would suggest aiming slightly outside the screen during calibration. If you aim too far outside the screen (as I did the first time), you will get the opposite problem (the cursor will track slower than the gun towards the edge). So with a few goes you should be able to get it right on.

Maybe I will try to do a video of some gameplay if I can get someone to film it (& if my camera picture is good enough).

Finally, I've shot the apple off the mans head, shot the coin, shot the cowboy hat and the UFO with one shot (each) every time 

[FrizzleFried]

Looks like you won't be buying then.  Oh well.  Thanks for the input.

 Ohh, thank you for your concern Frizzel.   You are correct at this
point in time, as I do not buy Prototypes.  I buy fully functional and fully
tested equipment, that works as I expect it to work.

 If I wanted to play with something with poor accuracy, Id use the
CrapLabs guns I have.  Instead, Ill stick with the Topguns until
a prototype can or should I say "IF" accuracy can be shown true.

 Standing back a little further isnt so bad as having missed shots because
things are not accurate.

 Im all for a good working and accurate gun that is able to track at
closer range...   Ill keep waiting till I see it...  And if it comes, I may buy
a few of them.  Until then, Ill make my disappointment known.  Im not
the only one interested in an accurate solution.

Well...Looks like you won't be buying then.  Oh well.  Thanks for the input.

[Ginsu Victim]

Adding an option to change the way the calibration routine works would be nice. I have zero overscan, but the moving arrow was a pain at times.

[Neverending Project]

Adding an option to change the way the calibration routine works would be nice. I have zero overscan, but the moving arrow was a pain at times.

When calibrating on the Windows desktop I would set the trigger to a button (rather than a mouse) because leaving it as a mouse click would click my desktop icons and quick launch icons every time I calibrated. Since the pointer was moving it would drag the icons off of the quick launch bar to the desktop.

[smalltownguy]

Adding an option to change the way the calibration routine works would be nice. I have zero overscan, but the moving arrow was a pain at times.

When calibrating on the Windows desktop I would set the trigger to a button (rather than a mouse) because leaving it as a mouse click would click my desktop icons and quick launch icons every time I calibrated. Since the pointer was moving it would drag the icons off of the quick launch bar to the desktop.

Yeah, big +1 on THAT statement. Moved my icons all over the screen during calibration.

On the plus side, I did finally finish installing my AimTrak in my Sega Light Phaser, with an Atari Volcano swich added to the back of the gun for the 'aux' button. Tracks perfectly in T2, and my 'hammer button' fires grenades for me. Sweet! 

Guess I better get over to my thread and update the rest of it.

[ammitz]

Guess I better get over to my thread and update the rest of it.

+1

[AndyWarne]

The error does not appear to be linear, which is likely due to to the curve of the lens in the camera. 

The error you are referring to is much more likely to be caused by incorrect adjustment of the vertical linearity of the monitor screen because its not there on my screen... I think it would be good if you would not incorrectly theorise about what could be wrong with the design.

I'm not sure what you mean by "proper sights"

What I mean is like the sights on a Guncon. A small V shaped notch at the top rear of the gun and a projection on the front top, which you line up into the V.

[vartech]

I am currently looking at the Aimtrak for my arcade.  What I see alot of is people comparing it to a real gun.  "A real gun expert can hit with out sights can shoot from instinct."  Well I saw show on tv about shooting experts and they all had custom guns and lots and lots of practice.  they would have to comensate for different guns, But they could do it faster than the average person.  So if the AimTrak is off an 1/2 inch then a pro would compensate and be dead on.  I doubt we have expert marksmen using the AimTrak.  I would like to hear the comments of someone who owns a real arcade gun game and have them compair the two.  I think that would be a good measure of the gun.  I see people wanting dead on accuracy I very much doubt that the orginals were dead on taking into account the tech on them.  Now would LEDs around the whole screen make it better maybe but how much more better? Sorry for the rant but I am looking for arcade experience and was never a expert marksman and I do not expect to be with the AimTrak.  Thats like the parents who buy there kids 5000 golf clubs and expect them to play like tiger woods.  So are the issues that people are having user interface errors or ID10T errors?

[RayB]

If the offset is consistent, then a simple fix to this would be an option to rturn on an "offset multiplier" in the drivers. At the most you'd need 4 offset multipliers, one for top, bottom, right, and left. Since center is so accurate, that will fix the problem (until the player changes position too much?)

[ammitz]

I am currently looking at the Aimtrak for my arcade.  What I see alot of is people comparing it to a real gun.  "A real gun expert can hit with out sights can shoot from instinct."  Well I saw show on tv about shooting experts and they all had custom guns and lots and lots of practice.  they would have to comensate for different guns, But they could do it faster than the average person.  So if the AimTrak is off an 1/2 inch then a pro would compensate and be dead on.  I doubt we have expert marksmen using the AimTrak.  I would like to hear the comments of someone who owns a real arcade gun game and have them compair the two.  I think that would be a good measure of the gun.  I see people wanting dead on accuracy I very much doubt that the orginals were dead on taking into account the tech on them.  Now would LEDs around the whole screen make it better maybe but how much more better? Sorry for the rant but I am looking for arcade experience and was never a expert marksman and I do not expect to be with the AimTrak.  Thats like the parents who buy there kids 5000 golf clubs and expect them to play like tiger woods.  So are the issues that people are having user interface errors or ID10T errors?

+2

[PsychoAU]

It sounds more and more like Randy is, in fact, trying to tear down the competition.  Randy, if you want a light gun to behave like a real gun, make sure to factor that in to the GroovyGameGear light gun module...  oh wait, you aren't making one.  

Randy:

[Ginsu Victim]

I am currently looking at the Aimtrak for my arcade.  What I see alot of is people comparing it to a real gun.  "A real gun expert can hit with out sights can shoot from instinct."  Well I saw show on tv about shooting experts and they all had custom guns and lots and lots of practice.  they would have to comensate for different guns, But they could do it faster than the average person.  So if the AimTrak is off an 1/2 inch then a pro would compensate and be dead on.  I doubt we have expert marksmen using the AimTrak.  I would like to hear the comments of someone who owns a real arcade gun game and have them compair the two.  I think that would be a good measure of the gun.  I see people wanting dead on accuracy I very much doubt that the orginals were dead on taking into account the tech on them.  Now would LEDs around the whole screen make it better maybe but how much more better? Sorry for the rant but I am looking for arcade experience and was never a expert marksman and I do not expect to be with the AimTrak.  Thats like the parents who buy there kids 5000 golf clubs and expect them to play like tiger woods.  So are the issues that people are having user interface errors or ID10T errors?

+2

+2?

Really?

I actually had to stop myself from posting a reply because it was too harsh.

[RandyT]

The error you are referring to is much more likely to be caused by incorrect adjustment of the vertical linearity of the monitor screen because its not there on my screen... I think it would be good if you would not incorrectly theorise about what could be wrong with the design.

The calibration is off by an inch on the video.  That's a serious "linearity" problem.

BTW, a good way to stop people from theorizing what the problems are would be to offer some reasons that make sense to explain them.

What I mean is like the sights on a Guncon. A small V shaped notch at the top rear of the gun and a projection on the front top, which you line up into the V.

So, a laser is less accurate?

I am currently looking at the Aimtrak for my arcade.  What I see alot of is people comparing it to a real gun.  "A real gun expert can hit with out sights can shoot from instinct."  Well I saw show on tv about shooting experts and they all had custom guns and lots and lots of practice.  they would have to comensate for different guns, But they could do it faster than the average person.  So if the AimTrak is off an 1/2 inch then a pro would compensate and be dead on.  I doubt we have expert marksmen using the AimTrak.

Well, I'm a little rusty with the real ones, but my military qualifications with firearms was "Expert".  I was qualified with M-16's, M-60, Grenade Launchers, Light Anti-Tank, Claymore Mines and hand grenades.  I have also fired and done well with military .45's and .38 caliber pistols.

I have played virtually every gun game ever offered in the arcade....many times.

I also have a dedicated gun rig set up with a 37" RGB monitor and a PS2 connected through true RGB with 2 Guncon2's and a couple of GunCon1's.  This setup is about as close to the arcade as it gets.

I also own the LCDTopGun, multiple guns for XBOX, Playstation1, Dreamcast, Genesis, NES and SEGA MasterSystem.  I also hacked SMS guns to work with an Amiga and have played around with the Wiimotes I own.

Is that enough to qualify me as an "educated enthusiast" for this type of technology?

Trust me, if this is a good solution, I'll be here with bells on to let everyone know.  Mine should be here in a few days, so all I can do at the moment is comment on the videos and comments of others.  But you should probably read what I wrote earlier about being able to compensate for a constant error.  Yes, it can be done, and is often required on weapons with fixed sights.  When I was a young kid, my cheap BB rifle always shot low and to the right.  Once I compensated for that fact, I was very accurate with that thing.  But you cannot compensate for a variable deviation that is based on where you are aiming.  

RandyT

[HaRuMaN]

 

[Ginsu Victim]

Don't encourage it. We've already been down this road before, but I guess it's too late to change it. Might as well sit back and enjoy the show.

[HaRuMaN]

I'm not encouraging.  Just grabbin' the popcorn and sitting back....

[RandyT]

It sounds more and more like Randy is, in fact, trying to tear down the competition.  Randy, if you want a light gun to behave like a real gun, make sure to factor that in to the GroovyGameGear light gun module...  oh wait, you aren't making one.  

Randy:

Like others, I too have to work hard for my $50.  I also want a good working gun solution for my machine, as others here do.  And as a member of the community, I get concerned when people start throwing around words like "incredible" to describe something when there is so much conflict of opinion, and demonstrations of functionality don't seem to back it up.

I feel like I wasted my money on the LCDTopGun because it sits in a box.  It was a neat gizmo to play with, but ultimately had no long term value due to the limitations it has.  Folks who are overly enamored by a product because it sort of lets them play, could be leading others to blow $50 they might not be able to spare on a neat gizmo that ultimately doesn't get used due to it's limitations.

Understand?

BTW, I have one on the way, and I will be able to be more thorough with it.  It's not the first Ultimarc product I have purchased, of a type which I don't build myself.

RandyT

[syph007]

I posted this before in my mini review, but maybe I should mention it again.  I noticed the non linear x tracking as well, but I noticed it only happened when i moved the gun by rotating my body.  If i kept the gun as the pivot point, the cursor and sites always lined up.   I would expect you'd need some kind of tweak to compensate for the gun rotating about a fixed point (the player) a fixed distance from that point.   Possibly a modified calibration routine could take this into account.

[smalltownguy]

Vartech: Don't sweat getting the AimTrak. I'm a regular joe shmoe guy, and I was able to use it with minimal effort. The fact that I chose to fit it in a gun housing that presented its own unique challenges (Sega Light Phaser) was my own doing, and even THAT didn't take too much effort to overcome. The end result for me was a light gun that does what I want it to do -- constant tracking, and shoot stuff. I don't care if the tracking is going to fade a bit towards the edges because

1. Andy will undoubtedly correct this with a firmware update (not that I need it, b/c)
2. My aim is much worse than any change in the tracking.

I play for fun, not for marksmanship.

[vartech]

Well, I'm a little rusty with the real ones, but my military qualifications with firearms was "Expert".  I was qualified with M-16's, M-60, Grenade Launchers, Light Anti-Tank, Claymore Mines and hand grenades.  I have also fired and done well with military .45's and .38 caliber pistols.

I have played virtually every gun game ever offered in the arcade....many times.

I also have a dedicated gun rig set up with a 37" RGB monitor and a PS2 connected through true RGB with 2 Guncon2's and a couple of GunCon1's. This setup is about as close to the arcade as it gets.

I also own the LCDTopGun, multiple guns for XBOX, Playstation1, Dreamcast, Genesis, NES and SEGA MasterSystem.  I also hacked SMS guns to work with an Amiga and have played around with the Wiimotes I own.

Is that enough to qualify me as an "educated enthusiast" for this type of technology?

Trust me, if this is a good solution, I'll be here with bells on to let everyone know.  Mine should be here in a few days, so all I can do at the moment is comment on the videos and comments of others.  But you should probably read what I wrote earlier about being able to compensate for a constant error.  Yes, it can be done, and is often required on weapons with fixed sights.  When I was a young kid, my cheap BB rifle always shot low and to the right.  Once I compensated for that fact, I was very accurate with that thing.  But you cannot compensate for a variable deviation that is based on where you are aiming.  

RandyT

how accurate are the setups you have? Are they consistent with shots?  I am not trying to be rude I want someones honest opinion on the setups they have and if they are dead on all the time?  Also when you compare them to the AimTrak please do so to other arcade/video products past and presents.  No real guns they kind of kill the fun after the first shot.

[RandyT]

how accurate are the setups you have? Are they consistent with shots?  I am not trying to be rude I want someones honest opinion on the setups they have and if they are dead on all the time?  Also when you compare them to the AimTrak please do so to other arcade/video products past and presents.  No real guns they kind of kill the fun after the first shot.

The GunCon2's (and 1's) are the "gold standard" for me.  They are consistently the most accurate, which is why I chose to build a dedicated shooting setup around them.  Like all raster based guns, they have a little jitter at the extreme edges (right where the tube meets the bezel), but overall are very consistent and accurate.  If the Aimtrak can be tweaked to be as good as these, even if it means "trick" calibration, you can bet I will be sounding the "buy" bell.

RandyT

[Loafmeister]

I don't have a problem with people being a bit picky and wanting a gun to work as they see fit. Let's face it, we all have our preferences for joysticks, trackball, spinners, etc., and all our reasons for prefering our babies are valid, because the decision is based on what's important to us.  So why should this be different because its a light gun?

However, I do take objection with using real world examples to validate whether this is a good product.  I have a friend who was a pretty good shot for hunting.  Amazingly, he was also AWESOME playing those old target games, you know the ones that used some robotics for animals, targets that moved/lighted up to indicate to shoot it (not a video game, I can't remember what these were called).  Anyway, he was great at them.  One day, he tries either time crisis or Virtua Cop (can't remember) and sucked totally.  Something about it being presented on a 2d plain just messed him up.  Maybe because it's a totally different skillset that's required?  I don't know.

Anyway my point is, I think it's cool to see a comment that states "hey compared to my guncon on my PS2, this gun isn't very accurate" or "I've got a problem when I rotate". Those are good points and need to be brought up so that either tweaks can be done at his/her end to fix the issues, or to allow Andy to improve the product via a patch.  No one is asking for detractors to do any "glad handing" towards Andy.  However, since we're not the friggin' engineers of this product, what is the point of bring this into the debate?  It's cool to comment on what others have said but the words used hint at a position of knowledge as far as THIS SOLUTION is concerned and this isn't the case.  If one hasn't even tried it yet, that shouldn't be the stand taken, IMHO anyway.

Randy, I don't doubt the quality of your products, but hammering at engineering points, considering you haven't even tried it yet may reflect poorly on yourself. Again, not saying to shut up but withholding the judgmental tone until you'd tried it yourself might be a good idea.

It's all down to expectations of course.  All I want is to have the gun be as accurate as possible but I understand it may not be perfect. When I used to use my Amiga Lightgun (still have it ), it was weak on corners a bit but I adjusted.  When I had a super scope for my SNES, it wasn't always bang on, but I adjusted.

Relevant to this thread, with my LCD Topgun's, I had to learn that for the guns to be accurate, I had to calibrate them differently from the top of the screen compared to the bottom (top left corner, aim at the corner, top right corner, aim about half an inch to the right. Bottom right corner, aim about half an inch lower and 1/4 of an inch to the right and finally for the bottom left corner, 1 inch lower and half an inch to the right.  Once this was done, I found the guns to be very accurate with my setup, with the laser pointer being "close enough" on just about everything. No it wasn't 100% accurate, but it seemed pretty similar to the accuracy I got by playing Time Crisis in the arcades and that's just fine for me.

I should be getting my own aimtrak modded guns later this week. Because it uses a similar technology, I'm fully expecting to have to tweak the calibration similar as I did with the LCD Topguns' and that's a freakin ok for me.  I'll post my informed comments on the quality of the gun then.

[Loafmeister]

how accurate are the setups you have? Are they consistent with shots?  I am not trying to be rude I want someones honest opinion on the setups they have and if they are dead on all the time?  Also when you compare them to the AimTrak please do so to other arcade/video products past and presents.  No real guns they kind of kill the fun after the first shot.

The GunCon2's (and 1's) are the "gold standard" for me.  They are consistently the most accurate, which is why I chose to build a dedicated shooting setup around them.  Like all raster based guns, they have a little jitter at the extreme edges (right where the tube meets the bezel), but overall are very consistent and accurate.  If the Aimtrak can be tweaked to be as good as these, even if it means "trick" calibration, you can bet I will be sounding the "buy" bell.

RandyT

That's good to hear and fair.

[Ginsu Victim]

Loafmeister:
If the Aimtrak calibration works out for you with the adjustments you mentioned, be sure to let us know exactly where you're aiming. I'd love to try it out.

[Loafmeister]

Ginsu: Will do. All I can say is it was trial and error for the LCD Top Guns but it definitely helped to find the sweet spot (distance was also part of the sweet spot - unfortunately for the LCD Topgun's, I just find I have to be a little too far). If I get it to work, I'll post a vid!

[Neverending Project]

I was just thinking about the typical use that these guns will get on my machine, and it will most likely require recalibration - not necessarily between every game, but in between game sessions. If I am playing, I will stand in the middle of the screen. If I am playing two-player, I will definitely be off to one side by a couple of feet. I also imagine if my kids play, they will not be standing on a ladder.

So this brings me to my point. If calibration is mostly dependent on the current position of the gun relative to the sensor, maybe we can request that the AimTrak is able to store several calibration setups. Maybe they can be called with a special button press. Then once we hit the sweet spot for calibration, it is saved in spot 1. We hit the sweet spot for the left side and it can be stored in sport 2, etc. Then when you switch positions you just call up the saved calibration, rather than recalibrate.

I'm not sure it is really saving that much work, but just thinking out loud.

[Ginsu Victim]

Ginsu: Will do. All I can say is it was trial and error for the LCD Top Guns but it definitely helped to find the sweet spot (distance was also part of the sweet spot - unfortunately for the LCD Topgun's, I just find I have to be a little too far). If I get it to work, I'll post a vid!

Luckily distance isn't a problem. My gun is about 2 1/2 ft away and I sit on a stool. With a 19" monitor, I can't get too far away anyway.

[TheShanMan]

I was just thinking about the typical use that these guns will get on my machine, and it will most likely require recalibration - not necessarily between every game, but in between game sessions. If I am playing, I will stand in the middle of the screen. If I am playing two-player, I will definitely be off to one side by a couple of feet. I also imagine if my kids play, they will not be standing on a ladder.

So this brings me to my point. If calibration is mostly dependent on the current position of the gun relative to the sensor, maybe we can request that the AimTrak is able to store several calibration setups. Maybe they can be called with a special button press. Then once we hit the sweet spot for calibration, it is saved in spot 1. We hit the sweet spot for the left side and it can be stored in sport 2, etc. Then when you switch positions you just call up the saved calibration, rather than recalibrate.

I'm not sure it is really saving that much work, but just thinking out loud.

I share your concern about 1 vs. 2 players and kid vs. adult. Seems like a pretty good idea for a solution if there is an inherent inaccuracy that comes from holding the gun in different locations, which can't be overcome with firmware updates or whatever.

[RandyT]

However, I do take objection with using real world examples to validate whether this is a good product.  

Unfortunately, (fortunately?) this type of control is different than a joystick, or a spinner, or a pushbutton.  This one actually has a real-world analog.  So while you may not think it's appropriate to compare the two, it is, to the same extent that a comparison between a real car steering wheel and one used in a video game is appropriate.  The steering wheel example is a good one, because even though many wheels only roughly approximate a real car steering wheel in that they provide the user with the ability to steer a simulated device to the extent allowed by the game, no-one really expects to be thrown to one side of the room, or smell burning rubber when it's turned too hard .  Likewise, a gun control should allow one to accurately "shoot" something within the software's ability to sense that something is being "hit" by that shot.  If the software is limited by the control, then the control falls short of what the software expects, and user skill has little to do with it, unless the control also unnaturally limits the users interaction with that control.

If one hasn't even tried it yet, that shouldn't be the stand taken, IMHO anyway.

Are you new around here?  Look at any of the new products I announce and find me one where this hasn't happened en masse.  It can't be ok because it only happens to me (can it?)

Randy, I don't doubt the quality of your products, but hammering at engineering points, considering you haven't even tried it yet may reflect poorly on yourself. Again, not saying to shut up but withholding the judgmental tone until you'd tried it yourself might be a good idea.

The videos are pretty clear, and to be honest, unless you understand the well-known and widely used principle of these systems, I'm not sure why you are finding fit to pass judgment on my comments.  Andy stated that the current calibration method did not account for overscan, and I offered a very simple and effective way to help calibrate for it.  If he has a different idea, then that's fine too.  It was an honest attempt to help make the one I end up with better as well.  My statements about lens distortion come from over 7 years of optical fabrication experience, and experience with the injection molded lenses used with these little mass-produced camera modules.  But if that's not the cause, then that's great too, as it means it's probably an easier situation to correct.  But I threw it out there in case it wasn't considered.

It's all down to expectations of course.  All I want is to have the gun be as accurate as possible but I understand it may not be perfect. When I used to use my Amiga Lightgun (still have it ), it was weak on corners a bit but I adjusted.  When I had a super scope for my SNES, it wasn't always bang on, but I adjusted.

If that's as high as your expectations are, then you have nothing to worry about.  They were poor compared to any of the newer stuff, and in that light, the games helped to cover that by being less demanding accuracy-wise than more recent titles.

Relevant to this thread, with my LCD Topgun's, I had to learn that for the guns to be accurate, I had to calibrate them differently from the top of the screen compared to the bottom (top left corner, aim at the corner, top right corner, aim about half an inch to the right.

While this was indeed a pain, it was the distance that made the LCDTopGuns a non-starter for me.  The gun tip needed to be back 10' from a 36" monitor to be just within operating parameters.  And even with all that, the accuracy wasn't incredible, just passable.  It's also a bit finicky about how one moves the gun.  I was able to get through HODIII with it, but it seemed like a chore.  Not at all an "arcade experience".  My expectations are admittedly higher for this one, due in no small part to the claims made by the manufacturer.

RandyT

[aljupy]

Hello:
I´m a big fan of lightguns. And.... like RandyT  I have lots of Guncon1, guncon2, Zappers, Dreamcast, Xbox lightguns..etc..etc...

While this was indeed a pain, it was the distance that made the LCDTopGuns a non-starter for me.  The gun tip needed to be back 10' from a 36" monitor to be just within operating parameters.

That is solved with a Wide angle lens

And even with all that, the accuracy wasn't incredible, just passable.  It's also a bit finicky about how one moves the gun.  I was able to get through HODIII with it, but it seemed like a chore.  Not at all an "arcade experience".  My expectations are admittedly higher for this one, due in no small part to the claims made by the manufacturer.

I agree that. Guncon2 is Excellent for CRT. But Topgun beats it, and it is for All screens. I´m very sorry for people that got a defective model.

See my vids

[RayB]

Useless bickering for a "1.0" product. Even Microsoft never gets it right on the first iteration. Cut Ultimarc some slack and wait for the 1.1 fix. (I'm pretty confident a solution exists like what I suggested above, but my post probably flew over the heads of most).

[Loafmeister]

aljupy: I've seen your vids. I was never able to get the eyetoy wide angle lens but looks like it worked great for you!

[aljupy]

aljupy: I've seen your vids. I was never able to get the eyetoy wide angle lens but looks like it worked great for you!

Many Thanks.
Most wide angle lens should work for it. They are very cheap.

I do not want to do OffTopic. I wish the best for AIMTRACK lightgun, and I will love to see that lightguns for Pc are a growing market.
Also I wish that people that get dissapointed with TOPGUN gets a nice experience now.

I just posted that vids because I read that RandyT has a Topgun inbox thinking that is not accurate like a guncon2

-Bet Regards

[RandyT]

I just posted that vids because I read that RandyT has a Topgun inbox thinking that is not accurate like a guncon2

I think a lot of that had to do with the distance and the space between the bars.  Being able to get that close to them gets you a much brighter reference.

The accuracy you are showing is very impressive, but your video brought back to me something that I had forgotten about.....lag.  It's not horrible,  but it was something I noticed while playing.  The AimTrak definitely looks better in that department, and the GunCons are pretty much "real time" in contrast.

Still, a very cool mod you did with the lens.  There was a lot of speculation as to whether that would work and it's neat to see that someone succeeded with it.  Makes me want to find one and re-visit the hardware.

RandyT

[BamBam]

Useless bickering for a "1.0" product. Even Microsoft never gets it right on the first iteration. Cut Ultimarc some slack and wait for the 1.1 fix. (I'm pretty confident a solution exists like what I suggested above, but my post probably flew over the heads of most).

I second that.  It was getting a bit nasty. 
Patience folks.  Now everyone back to their room for a timeout 

[TheShanMan]

Useless bickering for a "1.0" product. Even Microsoft never gets it right on the first iteration. Cut Ultimarc some slack and wait for the 1.1 fix. (I'm pretty confident a solution exists like what I suggested above, but my post probably flew over the heads of most).

Third'ed. Randy, I think it's fine for you to try to help Andy and your motives may be 100% pure, but diving into the engineering implementation details adds no value to this thread because that's only relevant to you and Andy. I think it would be better to take up that discussion with him via PM. I know it sucks, but as a competitor you need to tread very lightly when it comes to questioning/critiquing a competitor's product, even if you don't have a similar product and have no plans for one. Right or wrong, it's just way too easy for you to come across as a jerk, as evidenced by some of the reactions you've gotten.

Seems like this isn't the first time this issue has come up (I could be thinking of something else though). Hopefully you can find a good balance on that tightrope you're on. I hope you take this as an attempt to be helpful because I am not angry or trying to jump on you.

[Ginsu Victim]

Seems like this isn't the first time this issue has come up (I could be thinking of something else though).

Spinner argument. It got ugly. If I recall, Saint had to lock it while he was gone for the weekend.

[RandyT]

Useless bickering for a "1.0" product. Even Microsoft never gets it right on the first iteration. Cut Ultimarc some slack and wait for the 1.1 fix. (I'm pretty confident a solution exists like what I suggested above, but my post probably flew over the heads of most).

Third'ed. Randy, I think it's fine for you to try to help Andy and your motives may be 100% pure, but diving into the engineering implementation details adds no value to this thread because that's only relevant to you and Andy. I think it would be better to take up that discussion with him via PM. I know it sucks, but as a competitor you need to tread very lightly when it comes to questioning/critiquing a competitor's product, even if you don't have a similar product and have no plans for one. Right or wrong, it's just way too easy for you to come across as a jerk, as evidenced by some of the reactions you've gotten.

Well, just to keep the record straight, the solution offered up by RayB (the one he refers to in the quote you quoted) is the very same one I offered before he made that post.  He calls it a "multiplier", whereas I refer to it as a "factor table".  It makes no sense to me that anyone would see RayB as being "helpful" and me as being "derogatory" unless that individual has already "taken a side".  And if that's truly the case, there's really no reason for me to be concerned about what they think about what I say.  There is a difference, though; I have already given Andy my money.

I think it would be better to take up that discussion with him via PM.

This isn't a joint development.  I am interacting here as any other member would, and is, as evidenced by RayB's earlier comment.  

I don't take offense at your comments, and others shouldn't take offense to mine.  One of two things will ultimately happen as a result of them.  Either the product will improve to a level beyond what is shown in the videos, or prospective buyers won't have overly high expectations from the product.  Both outcomes benefit everyone in the community.

RandyT

[bkenobi]

I disagree.  I think it's good to hear different opinions about the hardware.  Randy doesn't have a competing product and is asking the same questions that I'm interested in having answers for.  Maybe there's only 2 of use, but before I spend my money on a pair of AimTrak's, I want to know that they will outperform my GunCon2 setup.  Ehhh, whatever.  

[Hoopz]

One of two things will ultimately happen as a result of them.  Either the product will improve to a level beyond what is shown in the videos, or prospective buyers won't have overly high expectations from the product.  Both outcomes benefit everyone in the community.

RandyT

Two outcomes based off the assumption that the videos are the end all, be all of how it operates.  It's one user's experience and may not be the same for everyone/anyone else.  I'm not saying it's perfect as I haven't had a chance to fiddle with mine yet.

[AndyWarne]

 I offered a very simple and effective way to help calibrate for it.  If he has a different idea, then that's fine too.  

I think you will find that you repeated my idea, ie to position the cursor a known distance from the edge and have the gun aim at this rather than the edge of the screen. Maybe read the posts again...

Have you used a reasonable mobile phone camera recently? I dont think you will find any noticeable picture distortion.

[AndyWarne]

I posted this before in my mini review, but maybe I should mention it again.  I noticed the non linear x tracking as well, but I noticed it only happened when i moved the gun by rotating my body.  If i kept the gun as the pivot point, the cursor and sites always lined up.   I would expect you'd need some kind of tweak to compensate for the gun rotating about a fixed point (the player) a fixed distance from that point.   Possibly a modified calibration routine could take this into account.

It would actually be possible to completely compensate for this. But, this would introduce an error when moving physically back or towards the screen. So the present firmware (which is not the one being shipped as I want to add some more tweaks) gives a happy medium between side to side and front to back body movement.

[RandyT]

Two outcomes based off the assumption that the videos are the end all, be all of how it operates.  It's one user's experience and may not be the same for everyone/anyone else.  I'm not saying it's perfect as I haven't had a chance to fiddle with mine yet.

I'm not basing everything on just the videos.   Most are saying that the difficulties are similar.  Whether or not they are concerned about it seems to be the variable.  FWIW, I'm hoping my experience is different as well, and if it is, I will be the first to tell the OP to send their unit back for a good one, or try it on an LCD screen (which he should do anyway, if he has one available to him).

I think you will find that you repeated my idea, ie to position the cursor a known distance from the edge and have the gun aim at this rather than the edge of the screen. Maybe read the posts again...

Actually, I did read your post.  Mine was in response to it.  You were concerned about the static cursor image being hard to see or being off screen.  Moving it in a box formation 10% in (which should accommodate any overscan situation) should address both of those concerns, without a negative impact on accuracy.  A quickly moving mouse cursor forming a small box is also a better target to aim at for calibration purposes.

Have you used a reasonable mobile phone camera recently? I dont think you will find any noticeable picture distortion.

As I said, I put it out for consideration.  In a mobile phone application, a little edge distortion is no big deal.  In an application like this, where you might be using a small section of the CCD at the very periphery of  the lens, not for simple "artistic imaging" but for coordinate use, and it could be.  But some scrutiny of the raw data will flesh that out.  If that's not the problem, be happy

RandyT

[RandyT]

Anyone want to hear my impressions of this thing, or am I going to be accused of being a jerk?

[HaRuMaN]

Anyone want to hear my impressions of this thing, or am I going to be accused of being a jerk?

dew it...

[Loafmeister]

Got my 2 aimtrack modified guncons today, looks pretty sweet! The following are my INITIAL thoughts on this, some issues I've come up with, without having put much time in troubleshooting them. I suspect these issues will work themselves out.

#1 - poor calibration:
Issue: the gun was not very accurate and I was having issues trying to calibrate it. For example, it was having difficulty registering the trigger for the top right corner.

Solution: I was concerned that my 19" LCD at about a 70 degree tilt was the culprit. First, I turned off all external lights (in case of a leak heat source) but that didn't help.  I then proceeded to check out the Ultimarc website and remembered that the LED pins need to be pointing at the gun.  As my monitor is not at a 90degree angle, I needed to bend the LED's towards the gun (as documented).  So I did so, bent them pretty much as far as they could go, tried it out and ...  SUCCESS!  I was able to do the calibration and right from the get-go, I'm super impressed with the accuracy.  Can I say it's perfect?  No, but I’m not getting the half-inch error rate that was mentioned before and that’s with the stock firmware (I think it was mentioned there was improvement in this area?)

#2 - buttons not responsive:
I tried Operation Wolf, it tracks near perfect, but the trigger sometimes won't respond, sometimes the bottom button (under the handle) will work as the grenade button (whatever it is) most of the time it won't. I had trouble getting OpWolf to recognize that button in the menu (had to hold it a while).

Solution: None yet but I believe I might know the cause

#3 - the aimtrack config utility says the gun is not connected (but the mouse cursor is moving, controlled by the gun!).  I also get a similar message when trying to use the firmware utility.

Solution: None yet but I believe this is tied to #2.

What I believe is happening is the gun I am using is plugged into a USB extension cable, which is plugged into a USB hub, which itself, is plugged into a USB cable extension, which itself is then plugged into one of the ports. Because of the type of USB hub I’m using, I HAVE to use a USB extension cable, but maybe the one I’m using is too long. I’ll experiment and will try and plug in the USB hub directly into the USB port (just letting it hang there for a bit won’t cause damage).
 
Anyway, I've already got ANOTHER USB hub inside the cab because of the use of U360’s, the USB trackball and the USB Spinner so maybe I'm pushing it a bit with a second hub, though it's never been an issue before when I was using the

Whatever the case, I'm pretty sure the guns are fine, I'll also try the other gun. I think someone mentioned an issue with the LCD Topgun driver, so I will also remove that, just in case its interfering.

Whatever the case, initial impressions are very good, tracking wise I was accuracy on par with the LCD TopGun’s (which I got good success) but at half the distance!  It’s true though, you really have to keep the gun within a certain distance from where you calibrated but this is no surprise and is a non-issue for me.

I'll have to hunt down some arcade gun holders that I can attach to the side of my CP so that they could be holstered when I don't use them.  Anyone know if there are some that will fit well with the guncon’s?

More comments coming…

edit:  Just thinking about accuracy and the "half-inch" mentioned before. It's true that I'm using a 19" monitor so if there are some accuracy issues that come up, it's possible they will be lessened because of the smaller sized monitor I am using.  Whatever the case, works for me so far.

[Loafmeister]

Anyone want to hear my impressions of this thing, or am I going to be accused of being a jerk?

That seems to be a loaded question .  Assuming you have any issues, if you bring them up and say "what can be done to fix this?", how can anyone take that as being a jerk?

[Neverending Project]

Anyone want to hear my impressions of this thing, or am I going to be accused of being a jerk?

You're wife thinks you're a jerk, and you still give her your opinions, right? 

For the record, I am KIDDING! I know I don't you well... I am just joking on a comment you made a while ago. You can't always trust that the sarcasm font is rendered on everyone's computer.

[smalltownguy]

Anyone want to hear my impressions of this thing, or am I going to be accused of being a jerk?

Unlike some other predisposed mindsets, I for one would like to hear your impressions, Randy. It would be nice to hear from another enthusiast. I don't care if you sell stuff. I want to hear what you think.

[TPB]

I think it would be better to take up that discussion with him via PM.

If you're conducting a Beta testing program, then sure, keep the communication confidential and discreet.

But that's not the case here.  Andy is not seeking Beta testers.

The AimTrak is on sale to the general public.  As such, it's open to scrutiny.  People are making purchase decisions about whether they part with their hard-earned cash.  They deserve to know the truth about the AimTrak, warts and all.

When problems were found with the LCD TopGun (the distance problem, and the lack of MAME drivers when initially released), no-one curtailed their criticism, despite the TopGun also being a 1.0 product at the time.  And that's fair enough.  It was on sale to the general public, so it was open to scrutiny.

The same principle applies here.

Of course, Ultimarc have an impeccable reputation for excellence, so there's little doubt the problems will be ironed out by Andy over the course of time, whether through firmware updates or the next version of the product.

In the meantime, the version that's currently on sale, is open to scrutiny.

Andy wouldn't want it any other way.  I'm sure he's happy to accept feedback presented in a constructive manner.  I doubt he'd expect to be afforded "special treatment" in any way.

[Loafmeister]

Hmmm, I'm going to have to read up on this.  With the configuration applet, I noticed sometimes the device id keeps rotating through each of the device numbers, like it's confused, one can also see the green bar flip to red, than to green, etc.  This has happened with both guns, both were not plugged in at the same time too.

[RandyT]

That seems to be a loaded question .  Assuming you have any issues, if you bring them up and say "what can be done to fix this?", how can anyone take that as being a jerk?

If there's a way, it will be found.  Trust me.

I just spent 3 hours with it, and did some comparisons with Guncons on a PS2.

First of all, no software tweaks or firmware upgrade.  My machine is a 98SE based unit and the supplied software requires .NET to run.  I've never been able to get it to take on this machine for some reason, so everything is "out of the box" as far as settings are concerned.

My machine has a 27" tube and a piece of dark tinted plexi (invisible to IR) for the front window.  If I put the LEDs on top, it would be behind the bezel, so I used a chunk of 3M automotive double sticky and stuck it on the screen just above the active part.  Advice: if you have a large screen, get the LED's as close to the active part as possible.  I then took a look from the side of the machine and bent the LED's so they were straight out toward the front.

Like everyone else, I started out by holding the unit in my hand.  It moved the cursor.  So far so good.   Next I taped a laser pointer to the board, and tried to calibrate.  Crazy problems.  Basically the same type of issues shown in the video.  I was able to get close a couple of times, but there always seemed to be a significant error in some part of the screen.  Advice: Don't do this.  It's way too easy to tilt the unit when it's in your hand, and tilting is not something you want to do while calibrating.

So I gave up playing and committed myself to at least getting the board mounted in the GunCon2 shell (bad ebay seller experience, made good by ebay...ended up being free ).  Whittled away a little chunk of plastic inside the barrel and hot melted the board into place, making sure it was as square and level to the barrel as possible.  Initially I was concerned that the camera board was not square to the rest of the unit, but it appears to be intentional.  I used the main board as my reference.

Immediately, I saw an improvement.  The gun grip provides a much better reference to keep things in a consistent orientation from calibration through to use.  But even so, I was still seeing problems.  It seemed like no matter what I did, I couldn't get a good calibration at 3' from the monitor face, even though the camera could technically, "see" the lights.  

I was getting a little frustrated so I decided to go out and play with the GunCon2 on the PS2.  The simplicity of setting up these can really be appreciated after what I was dealing with, but you can't use a GunCon2 on an LCD, and the LCDTopGuns are no walk in the part to set up and use either, so that's no knock specifically against the AimTrak.  My GunCon2s are on a 37" monitor, so keep that in mind when I talk about deviation.  What sounds large on this screen would be quite small on more average sized screens.  OK, one shot in the center of the screen from about 5' back and the the cursor was following the sights from between dead-on in the center to about 1/4" off (remember the scale) toward the corners.  Extreme edges with the GunCon2's are pretty much out of the question.  The top is pretty good, the bottom is rough (can only accurately get within 3/4" of the frame), and the sides are so-so, with one being good right to the edge and the other giving up about 3/8" from the edge.  Tracking is silky smooth with the GunCons, and lag is minimal.  Compared to the AimTrak, lag is about the same, but cursor movement appears to be smoother (on my machines.)

Ok, back to playing with the AimTrak. Two more attempts at calibration and then decided to drop back a foot.  There was an unquestionable improvement.  Advice: Don't push the distance thing.  Move back to the furthest point you will be happy with, and start there.  So I "trick" calibrated about 3 more times, using the best skillz I acquired from the LCDTopGun, and watched the cursor track my sights to within about 1/4" (again, remember the 27" screen size) from 4' away.  The bottom is still a little sketchy, but no worse than with the GunCon2's on the PS2.  Advice: Once you find a spot where you can get good calibration, remember it, mark it, do whatever you need to do to make sure you play from that point the next time.

Finally happy that things were looking good, I decided to try T2.  The cursor seemed choppy, so I disabled the mouse support and left lightgun enabled.  Still choppy.  Rebooted the system and tried again.  This time, the cursor was running smooth and I was able to pop robots without paying attention to the cursor, even though the trigger switch was on a wire in my left hand and the gun case wasn't even screwed together.  I think I might have actually smiled at that point in time.  The wet blanket came 5 minutes into the game when I forgot to let off on the fire button before the 5 seconds was up and it went into calibration mode.  Advice to Andy:  Default the hardware to go into calibration mode when the trigger is held off-screen for 10 seconds.  Much less likely to happen by mistake.

I'll close this terribly long post with some observations:

Just having the light from the LED's strike the CCD does not seem to be enough for good calibration to be possible.  There seems to be a "sweet spot" that is based on the distance between the LED's and the center of the screen, the distance between LED's and camera, and the elevation difference.  It's my opinion that the OP's videos were showing an attempt to use the gun outside of this sweet spot, either too close or at a poor elevation relationship between camera and LEDs.

If GunCon2 performance on the PC is anything like GunCon2 performance on the PS2, and one is using a tube based monitor, I can't come up with a compelling reason to switch to an AimTrak. There are more limitations inherent in the technology it uses, and the accuracy is about the same when well calibrated.

The calibration routines as they are currently need help.  Pointing at a location where screen meets bezel is never as good as pointing at an on-screen target.  It also leaves tube users at a disadvantage, as some overscan is almost always present.  And because tube screens are not nearly as geometrically perfect as LCD or plasma screens, a 3 point calibration may not be enough with this type of technology. "Trick calibration" is a mostly unintuitive process and shouldn't be required of the user.  This was also a shortcoming of the LCDTopGun.

The accuracy shown in the LCDTopGun videos in this thread probably aren't going to be achieved by the AimTrak.  But the AimTrak has less lag, and when properly calibrated, enough accuracy to be a better solution in actual use.

I wish the software didn't need .NET to run.  Probably not a big deal for most.  Was for me.

Conclusion:

If you have an non-tube display that isn't huge, don't mind being back maybe just a hair farther than you would otherwise like to be, and have a specific shooting stance you will always use, then you would be crazy not to give this a shot.  Within it's limitations, it seems to work well.  You just need to understand what the limitations are, and patiently adjust.

If you have a tube display (especially a larger one) and you want to get closer to it, you might want to look at the GunCon2 and PC drivers first.  Even if the distance doesn't bother you (it's pretty acceptable, even with a 27") you may still want to hold off a bit until the calibration routines take tubes into consideration a little better.  If you are used to "trick calibration" techniques from using LCDTopGuns, then it might not be a big deal for you.  If not, you might end up really frustrated, really quickly.

Personally, I'm happy I purchased it and am looking forward to revisiting some of the old titles with the new toy.

RandyT

[TheShanMan]

Seems like a very fair review, Randy. It's much easier to put aside the fact that you compete with Andy on other products once you've actually used the device and have clearly tried to be fair in your review rather than just focusing on the negatives. Let's hope feedback like this will lead to an improved product from Andy - I'm sure it will!

I'm glad I'm way too busy right now to buy. There are obviously some kinks and/or unoptimized user experience to be worked out. Hopefully when I'm ready to buy it'll be a much smoother setup process.

[AndyWarne]

A very fair review.

I will think about the "sweet spot" issue, as I am not totally sure what this is about. The config utility may be useful here because it displays the actual X-Y location and if this is not making sense then there is something not right in the positioning. Being too close is going to be a problem but the isue is how close is too close?
One possibility is to make a change which introduces a complete cut-off when too close rather than attempting to work but not accurately.
Changing the calibration to start only when aiming off-screen is a good idea and I will make that change.
Also will change to optionally calibrate using pointer at a known distance from the edge.

[severdhed]

thanks randy, nice review.  i personally am very excited about this product, and im sure that will all of the feedback that is coming in, that Andy will get these things working great.  my hope is that the bugs are worked out and ready to go by the time my birthday rolls around in February

[Cananas]

One possibility is to make a change which introduces a complete cut-off when too close rather than attempting to work but not accurately.

Yes. I think it's better a cut-off when too close, like LCDTopGun do.

[Ginsu Victim]

Very nice write-up, Randy. You made some great points and I'm glad to see Andy agrees (I sure as hell liked your ideas). I knew you would be fair and you were.

[bkenobi]

Thanks Randy!  I am currently using GunCon2's with the PC driver (as I've mentioned before), so I'm looking for an improvement in setup and capability.  Your review is EXACTLY what I needed to know.  Right now, it looks like I will be staying with my current configuration.  HOWEVER, as soon as some of these calibration issues are dealt with (or my CRT TV dies), I'll be looking to upgrade.

[Loafmeister]

Great review Randy, lots of good info there too and a great recommendation for the off-screen calibration.

[vartech]

That seems to be a loaded question .  Assuming you have any issues, if you bring them up and say "what can be done to fix this?", how can anyone take that as being a jerk?

If you have a tube display (especially a larger one) and you want to get closer to it, you might want to look at the GunCon2 and PC drivers first.  Even if the distance doesn't bother you (it's pretty acceptable, even with a 27") you may still want to hold off a bit until the calibration routines take tubes into consideration a little better.  If you are used to "trick calibration" techniques from using LCDTopGuns, then it might not be a big deal for you.  If not, you might end up really frustrated, really quickly.

Personally, I'm happy I purchased it and am looking forward to revisiting some of the old titles with the new toy.

RandyT

How would I connect a GunCon 2 to an arcade monitor using a arcadevga?

[Lilwolf]

btw, has anyone tried the wide angle lense from a door peephole trick yet?  I hear they are about 5-10 bucks and will come with a decent end that could be added to a gun.  (I hear you want the 160degree, not the 200).  But I'm not sure if will help with the distance... or if the aimtrack already has a wide angle lense on the end)

[PsychoAU]

So what was the final verdict on what the best settings were in regard to off-screen reloading?  I have only tried Lethal Enforcers and Area 51 so far, but Area 51 works fine for off-screen reloading, but LE does not.

I have it set for the trigger to be gamepad button 1 for both on and off screen and the second button is gamepad 2 for both on and off screen.

Is there a good general setting that will work for most games?  I think we should compile a list of which games need which settings to work.  I know that some behave differently than others.

[Ginsu Victim]

Off-screen in LE works. I had my trigger set to the same button for the on-screen and off-screen. Worked fine.

[DJ_Izumi]

Are you sure the LASER was accurate in this test?

The laser is mounted BELOW the optical sensor, so for the laser point to hit the center where the optical sensor is aiming, the laser has to be angled upward to hit the same point.  If you stepped farther back, instead of hitting the same point it would hit higher.  If closer, it would hit lower.  The laser itself would need to be readjusted every time you chance stance.  With light guns with laser sights, I've found that matching the laser to 'iron sight' of the gun, this match even changes as you reposition, like crouch or step back.

But all this testing at different angles seems silly to me anyway.  I find that even a Guncon will become inaccurate if you shoot from a different position than that you calibrated it at.  You should be standing or sitting in your playing position and calibrating for that position.

[RandyT]

Are you sure the LASER was accurate in this test?

The laser is mounted BELOW the optical sensor, so for the laser point to hit the center where the optical sensor is aiming, the laser has to be angled upward to hit the same point.  If you stepped farther back, instead of hitting the same point it would hit higher.  If closer, it would hit lower.  The laser itself would need to be readjusted every time you chance stance.  With light guns with laser sights, I've found that matching the laser to 'iron sight' of the gun, this match even changes as you reposition, like crouch or step back.

There are a couple of problems with what you are saying here.  The first is that even if the laser was mounted so that it was emanating 1 inch below the "iron sight", plus or minus 1 foot would yield an error of plus or minus 1/4".  And the error would be very uniform and in a very specific direction based on the angle created by the intersection of the laser and the sight.  This is not what is happening in the video.

The other thing is that this type of system is 100% relative to the IR markers, not specifically the "iron sights".  In this case, the laser becomes the sight.  So as long as the laser beam is parallel to the PCB, the system should perform in exactly the same manner as if one were using the hard sight which is aligned to the barrel (provided that the PCB is mounted parallel to the barrel as well.)  The calibration routines should make the necessary corrective offsets.

But all this testing at different angles seems silly to me anyway.

The reason to look at this makes sense, as folks are concerned about friends or family members of different heights being able to use the gun without recalibrating.  For me, it's not really important, as I will likely be the only one to use it.

I find that even a Guncon will become inaccurate if you shoot from a different position than that you calibrated it at.  You should be standing or sitting in your playing position and calibrating for that position.

This is true, but to a smaller degree over the same amount of deviation.  

RandyT

[huygens]

btw, has anyone tried the wide angle lense from a door peephole trick yet?

I was thinking about this too. I think a wide angle lens would mess up accuracy if the firmware wasn't changed. A wide angle lens distorts the camera image. You'd have to account for this distortion to get accurate postional information. It seems like it would make it possible to stand closer to the screen though.

[Ragtag83]

Long time reader first time poster...always wanted to say that. First off, you guys are great and this is such a wonderful forum. Thanks for sharing all the great info I've been able to take away. Keeps me entertained into the wee hours of the night. Second off, I've got a question regarding the extra pins for extra buttons on the AimTrak. I am wiring up GunCon 2s and can get the trigger and aux working right off the bat but the P1-P5 connections are being a pain. I got P3-P5 to work on my first gun and none of them on the second gun.  I have checked an rechecked my wiring and it's starting to drive me a little nuts. Anyone else having any issues with them? Any info or insight would be appreciated 

[Lilwolf]

I never thought about it, but this is what aljupy did on the first page (but with a different gun, and a different wide angle lense).  But since we have to hack these into our own gun, it seemed perfect for it. 

I've also been looking around for the eye toy wide angle lense.  It seems like they only came out in with one game (fitness game?).  And they are going for 30+ bucks each on ebay.  If it was perfect, I would consider getting one to try...  But was hoping for another source.

Anyone know of a good source for wide angle lenses that might work?

btw, has anyone tried the wide angle lense from a door peephole trick yet?

I was thinking about this too. I think a wide angle lens would mess up accuracy if the firmware wasn't changed. A wide angle lens distorts the camera image. You'd have to account for this distortion to get accurate postional information. It seems like it would make it possible to stand closer to the screen though.

[ammitz]

Good review Randy 

[shmokes]

there are people so good with a gun that they can have someone throw a quarter in the air and they will shoot it out of the sky. 

No there aren't.

[RandyT]

there are people so good with a gun that they can have someone throw a quarter in the air and they will shoot it out of the sky. 

No there aren't.

Uh-Huh.

[Ginsu Victim]

here's a guy doing it using a paintball gun. (frame by frame you can see this isn't a fake -- but, as with most videos online, it could be)

[bkenobi]

Annie Oakley did.

http://coins.about.com/od/famousrarecoinprofiles/qt/annie_oakley.htm

[ammitz]

And some of these guys do it

http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/f48/shooting-coins-2273/

[PsychoAU]

There was a special on the History channel a few months ago that showed a guy shooting a bullet through the eye of a small, metal washer. 

But the big question is, how do I get my Aimtrak that accurate?

[shmokes]

http://rstvideo.com/trailer/lucky-luke/

This is as close as you'll get.  If you spend all day tossing a coin in the air and shooting at it you will eventually sometimes hit it.  But that is, of course, not what we're talking about.

[ammitz]

This guy knows how to do it, Tom knapp, he's the one from the history channel.

http://www.tomknapp.net/about/sharpShooters.php

[Ragtag83]

I got more pins workings, yay. FYI to those that may struggle as I did, the config utility is a pain.  I am not sure if my computer has issues with it or what, but it keeps crashing and doesn't always like to send the new button setup though it tells me that it has. A few restarts of my computer and the config utility, and a bit of stubbornness on my part seems to have done the trick...

[brandon]

http://rstvideo.com/trailer/lucky-luke/

This is as close as you'll get.  If you spend all day tossing a coin in the air and shooting at it you will eventually sometimes hit it.  But that is, of course, not what we're talking about.

"Tidernas snabbaste cowboy, Lucky Luke, får i uppdrag att rensa upp bland bovar och banditer i Daisy Town. "  ?  

umm.. my thought exactly... 

[ammitz]

"Tidernas snabbaste cowboy, Lucky Luke, får i uppdrag att rensa upp bland bovar och banditer i Daisy Town. "  ?  

umm.. my thought exactly... 

In case you don't understand, it's swedish 

[brandon]

"Tidernas snabbaste cowboy, Lucky Luke, får i uppdrag att rensa upp bland bovar och banditer i Daisy Town. "  ? 

umm.. my thought exactly... 

In case you don't understand, it's swedish 

yeah.. my Swedish is a little rusty (ie. non existent)  

I'd be eager to learn though...



Swedish Bikini Team

[ammitz]

You would rather want to learn danish instead (very similiar) , take a look a some danish girls from a commercial....

[MaximRecoil]

there are people so good with a gun that they can have someone throw a quarter in the air and they will shoot it out of the sky. 

No there aren't.

http://rstvideo.com/trailer/lucky-luke/

This is as close as you'll get.  If you spend all day tossing a coin in the air and shooting at it you will eventually sometimes hit it.  But that is, of course, not what we're talking about.

Ed McGivern (probably the best who ever lived) could shoot dimes out of the air, among other amazing feats, with a revolver. Walter Groff could shoot dimes out of the air as well:



It is obviously easier to hit quarters or especially half-dollars.

[PsychoAU]

It is obviously easier to hit quarters or especially half-dollars.

Or women.

[brandon]

It is obviously easier to hit quarters or especially half-dollars.

Or women.

yeah.. just don't lead em as much

[Turnarcades]

Finally, I've shot the apple off the mans head, shot the coin, shot the cowboy hat and the UFO with one shot (each) every time 

Silly as it sounds, this is the only thing that is important to me in a light gun as Point Blank is the major reason I want a light gun - there is no finer gun game for fun, pace and challenge.

As Randy said, some develop a natural feel for a gun as an extension of their arm. Gun nuts us Brits ain't, but in the arcades I could hammer through Point Blank hardly missing anything, justby instinctively aiming in the right place without looking through a sight. This translated over to the PS1 version too when I had my G-Cons originally back in the day, and hitting those UFO's on 'VERY HARD' level was instinctive and accurate nearly every time. I'm hoping I can do this with the AimTrak at some point so I get that feeling back.

Calibrating by shooting off-screen was something I found worked on the LCD Crapguns, but though this helped accuracy towards all edges of the screen, the problem with these guns for me was always IR interference and poor tracking. This meant grouping shots towards a screen edge (or even in the centre) was great for a few shots, but then it would randomly jump across the screen. For example in Point Blank on the stages where you got 6 shots and a point-graded target (like the police firing range stages), I'd keep my gun dead centre but two of the six shots would register somewhere on the other side of the screen - very annoying.

For anyone testing gun accuracy, I believe Point Blank is actually the best game to test it on, as the 'cardboard cut-out tin can alley' style play has no kind of bias system (grouping shots based on first shot), excellent collision detection and the perfect mix of shooting tests (pure accuracy on some stages, rapid fire on others and rythym grouping on others). I'm still 50/50 on this product so even if someone can find a silly way to calibrate far from as instructed, but it can be saved and works considtently, I'm in for definite.

[brandon]

Point Blank is one of THE lightgun games that all other games should be judged by!  Much more challenging and fun that most rail shooters.  My brother in law and I practically destroyed a brand new guncon1 playing Point Blank 3.  I had to replace the trigger switch because we wore it out.

[bigster]

Thanks for the videos.  The third one is really helpful.  I currently have two LCD Topguns but I cannot ever get them to stay calibrate for more than 1 game, and doing so takes forever.  I am considering switching to aimtrack. 
My concern looking at the video is the height differences.  I am 6'5 and most of the people who play the arcade with me are shorter 5'10 and under.  Will each person have to recalibrate every use?  Like if we are playing buck hunter (PC edition of course) 4 players with one gun, that would require recalibration after each turn....

[Neverending Project]

Thanks for the videos.  The third one is really helpful.  I currently have two LCD Topguns but I cannot ever get them to stay calibrate for more than 1 game, and doing so takes forever.  I am considering switching to aimtrack. 
My concern looking at the video is the height differences.  I am 6'5 and most of the people who play the arcade with me are shorter 5'10 and under.  Will each person have to recalibrate every use?  Like if we are playing buck hunter (PC edition of course) 4 players with one gun, that would require recalibration after each turn....

From my initial assessment it does appear that you will want to recalibrate every time the gun moves more than a foot or so from the point it was initially calibrated. That of course depends on the size of monitor, the player, and style of play, but for the most part it looks like the "aim" will be off when the height changes significantly.

I believe Andy is working on a new firmware revision which will have updated calibration techniques. And I think this update will find a compromise between changing gun height and distance after calibration. I hope to get some new videos done when/if he updates the firmware.

[smalltownguy]

I believe Andy is working on a new firmware revision which will have updated calibration techniques. And I think this update will find a compromise between changing gun height and distance after calibration. I hope to get some new videos done when/if he updates the firmware.

Here is what I propose:

• Offscreen calibration, for sure (looks like Andy's already implementing this)
• A 'stacked' calibration delay. Meaning:
• Hold down the trigger for a longer period of time to initiate the 'full calibration'
• Hold down the trigger for a lesser period of time to do a 'mini' calibration, which will tweak the main calibration settings.

The idea here is that the main calibration will put in place all of the adjustments to dial in the gun for edges, tracking compensation, etc for the screen in use. But the 'mini' calibration would allow for a quick tweak when a new user grabs the gun. Maybe the mini would entail shooting at a few strategically placed cursors to help the gun adjust for height, etc.

Example: I calibrate my AimTrak on my own using the 'main' calibration, before I have any friends over. Then I mark the distance the calibration was completed at (tape on the floor, visual reference, whatever). Later, when all my friends are playing, each one of them does the 'mini' calibration in between turns.

This might not work on some games, depending on the length of time between player turns. Any thoughts?

[drventure]

I'm probably WAY oversimplifying here so if I am, flame away 

But, once you've calibrated the gun at a specific distance, could it not, more or less recalibrate automatically just by comparing the old distance between the farthest left and right LED's that it sees and adjusting the scale accordingly?

Maybe that's what it already does internally, but I'm just guessing.

Ages ago, I worked on a GIS app that allowed users to pick points on a scanned map with no geolocation, and the same point on a digital map and create a mathematical "profile" of the scanned map that would allow the system to accurately determine the LAT LON of any point on it via just a few known points.

Seems like this problem is very similar.

I'm watching the product progression closely!

[bkenobi]

If a second LED bar were used on the bottom of the screen, would these problems be reduced?  What if the LED's were located at the 4 corners of the screen?  I don't know how the algorithms work explicitly, but the goal should be to have the gun work from any location as accurate as possible IMO.  If more LED's are needed, add them!

[syph007]

I suspect its a tradeoff between number of led, and distance from screen.  Remember the board is already aimed upwards.  If there was a bar at the bottom as well, the eye would have to aim forward, and we'd have to stand back alot further.

I'm happy with the current setup.

[bkenobi]

Hmmm, that's probably true.  Good point.

[swamprat96]

Yes ok but- modern arcade guns use sensors all around the screen - and you can stand close. So whats different?

[RandyT]

If there was a bar at the bottom as well, the eye would have to aim forward, and we'd have to stand back alot further.

That's not true.  The camera doesn't always have to have a second set of markers in view simply because they are there.

The logic would go something like:

See both: Average position
See top only: aim is below
See bottom only: aim is above.

Obviously it's more involved at code time, but that would be the starting point.  This, BTW, is why you can get closer in the arcades.

RandyT

[syph007]

If there was a bar at the bottom as well, the eye would have to aim forward, and we'd have to stand back alot further.

That's not true.  The camera doesn't always have to have a second set of markers in view simply because they are there.

The logic would go something like:

See both: Average position
See top only: aim is below
See bottom only: aim is above.

Obviously it's more involved at code time, but that would be the starting point.  This, BTW, is why you can get closer in the arcades.

RandyT

Yes but if it can only see top or bottom for part of the time, then how during that time is it anymore accurate than the current setup.

Edit: I suppose it woudl be somewhere in the middle of a 1 bar system and a 2 bar system (that the camera could always see).

[RandyT]

If there was a bar at the bottom as well, the eye would have to aim forward, and we'd have to stand back alot further.

Yes but if it can only see top or bottom for part of the time, then how during that time is it anymore accurate than the current setup.

Accuracy wasn't the issue you brought up.  You were concerned with distance.

[AndyWarne]

Yes ok but- modern arcade guns use sensors all around the screen - and you can stand close. So whats different?

The Sega system which uses LEDs around the screen works on an entirely different principle. The LEDs are controlled by the game board. Its not a very accurate system, at least on the CRT Naomi cabs. Maybe better on later LCD.

[brandon]

If there was a bar at the bottom as well, the eye would have to aim forward, and we'd have to stand back alot further.

That's not true.  The camera doesn't always have to have a second set of markers in view simply because they are there.

The logic would go something like:

See both: Average position
See top only: aim is below
See bottom only: aim is above.

Obviously it's more involved at code time, but that would be the starting point.  This, BTW, is why you can get closer in the arcades.

RandyT

Do you think that perhaps the LEDs in arcades also blink at different frequencies so that if the camera can only see one it know which one it is based on timing?  Sort of like a lightgun and CRT?  or maybe some of the "lightguns" in arcades are ultrasonic sort of like the Power Glove...

[AndyWarne]

Do you think that perhaps the LEDs in arcades also blink at different frequencies so that if the camera can only see one it know which one it is based on timing?  Sort of like a lightgun and CRT?  or maybe some of the "lightguns" in arcades are ultrasonic sort of like the Power Glove...

Yes. If larger numbers of LEDs were used, they would need to be controlled by the gun logic so the gun would know which LED(s) it is looking at. This means the simplicity of the design is lost because a controller board would be needed and/or a PC application to control everything, plus more wiring, driver circuitry etc.

[Ginsu Victim]

Speaking of PC applications, any word on a new version of the AimTrak software?

[RandyT]

Yes. If larger numbers of LEDs were used, they would need to be controlled by the gun logic so the gun would know which LED(s) it is looking at. This means the simplicity of the design is lost because a controller board would be needed and/or a PC application to control everything, plus more wiring, driver circuitry etc.

No, that's not entirely accurate.  It could also simply reverse the orientation.  To use the Aimtrak as an example, it has a row of LEDs forming a line to left and a single one on the right.  If one were to add another bar, it could have 3 evenly spaced LED's, or the line of LED's to the right instead of the left.  All of this can still be handled in firmware, without any intelligence in the lighting.

Of course, it really isn't important to know which is which, unless one needed to fire off-screen to the bottom or top.  It would simply see the LED's below the calibrated centerline and provide coordinate information as though it were the other bar.  This would be a small tradeoff if it allowed one to get closer to the screen, as a left and right "offscreen reload shot" is still possible.

RandyT

[RayB]

Does this device see "rotation" too?

[KissMyWookie]

Do you think that perhaps the LEDs in arcades also blink at different frequencies so that if the camera can only see one it know which one it is based on timing?  Sort of like a lightgun and CRT?  or maybe some of the "lightguns" in arcades are ultrasonic sort of like the Power Glove...

Yes. If larger numbers of LEDs were used, they would need to be controlled by the gun logic so the gun would know which LED(s) it is looking at. This means the simplicity of the design is lost because a controller board would be needed and/or a PC application to control everything, plus more wiring, driver circuitry etc.

If there were 4 IR emitter boards, each identical and "L" shaped. They could be placed around each corner of the monitor and the gun firmware would know exactly which corner it was looking at by the orientation of the "L".

If it was done this way, distance would no longer be a factor providing at least one corner was visible. Auto calibration and linearity would be possible too.

Of course, this is too late to implement now, but might be useful in the future.

Steve

[brandon]

Do you think that perhaps the LEDs in arcades also blink at different frequencies so that if the camera can only see one it know which one it is based on timing?  Sort of like a lightgun and CRT?  or maybe some of the "lightguns" in arcades are ultrasonic sort of like the Power Glove...

Yes. If larger numbers of LEDs were used, they would need to be controlled by the gun logic so the gun would know which LED(s) it is looking at. This means the simplicity of the design is lost because a controller board would be needed and/or a PC application to control everything, plus more wiring, driver circuitry etc.

If there were 4 IR emitter boards, each identical and "L" shaped. They could be placed around each corner of the monitor and the gun firmware would know exactly which corner it was looking at by the orientation of the "L".

If it was done this way, distance would no longer be a factor providing at least one corner was visible. Auto calibration and linearity would be possible too.

Of course, this is too late to implement now, but might be useful in the future.

Steve

wow.. that makes way too much sense! why didn't I think of that :)how about for the ultimate add a second sensor at the back of the gun either near the "hammer" or under the "clip"  Then you could pivot the gun in place or move in perpendicular to the screen and it would always know its angle and position in 3D space buy comparing the data from two points in space. Thats getting overly complicated I know

[KissMyWookie]

wow.. that makes way too much sense! why didn't I think of that :)how about for the ultimate add a second sensor at the back of the gun either near the "hammer" or under the "clip"  Then you could pivot the gun in place or move in perpendicular to the screen and it would always know its angle and position in 3D space buy comparing the data from two points in space. Thats getting overly complicated I know

My point was that it is possible to match the ease of use (distance/calibration/accuracy) of the newer arcade lightguns, without having special driver circuitry or complex synchronization between each corner emitter. The emitters would be statically lit IR LED's, with only power going to them and the aiming calculations would be performed "in gun", as they are on the Aimtrak now.

[Ginsu Victim]

If there were 4 IR emitter boards, each identical and "L" shaped. They could be placed around each corner of the monitor and the gun firmware would know exactly which corner it was looking at by the orientation of the "L".

Damn, that sounds like it might work. I don't know the technical side of it, but it does make some sort of sense.

[brandon]

If there were 4 IR emitter boards, each identical and "L" shaped. They could be placed around each corner of the monitor and the gun firmware would know exactly which corner it was looking at by the orientation of the "L".

Damn, that sounds like it might work. I don't know the technical side of it, but it does make some sort of sense.

unless you tilt the gun "gangsta style" lol  Then your upper left corner becomes your upper right, etc. Personally I never do that so...  I guess you could add a gyro sensor

[Neverending Project]

Does this device see "rotation" too?

By "rotation" do you mean if you were to extend a line out of the gun barrel and pivot the gun around that line? If so, then yes, to a small degree. There is a setting in the AimTrak software to compensate for this called Tilt/Z Correction. You can turn it off (smooth mouse movement but goes uncalibrated when you tilt the gun), Intelligent (it applies correction intermittently, so if you hide the cursor you won't notice) or Continuous (jittery mouse cursor, but continuously applied correction).

I played with it a little, and it certainly makes a difference, although it does not allow you to use the gun sideways (gangsta style?), ,nor would I recommend tilting the gun excessively in any normal gameplay if you want to keep where you aim. If you use the crosshair, then it may be fine.

[AndyWarne]

If there were 4 IR emitter boards, each identical and "L" shaped. They could be placed around each corner of the monitor and the gun firmware would know exactly which corner it was looking at by the orientation of the "L".

Damn, that sounds like it might work. I don't know the technical side of it, but it does make some sort of sense.

The problem with that is if the gun were able to see all four corners that would be simply too many LEDs for the image processing logic to handle. The problem with these kinds of approaches is the gun has to be accurate whether it can see one, two, three or four of the groups of LEDs.

[Ginsu Victim]

See, I told you I didn't know the technical side.

[AndyWarne]

Of course, it really isn't important to know which is which, unless one needed to fire off-screen to the bottom or top. 

It is necessary to know which one its looking at. It is a pre-requisite that the gun needs to work even if it can only see one of the groups of LEDs, otherwise the field of view of the device is greatly reduced, which means you have to be much further away. This is the problem with the Topgun.
Actually I have tried something like this as part of the development, having two LED bars, and making an educated guess which one it could see, if it could see only one. There are two problems, firstly it gets the guess wrong in certain movements such as moving off screen, around the edge and back on screen again, and also there is a jump when it transitions from referring to the first, both, or second bar, which cant be fully eliminated.
I spent 9 months researching the raw sensing solution and I believe I covered all options.
If the min distance limitation is taken out of the requirements, all kinds of options are possible.

[bkenobi]

I'm intrigued by the wide angle lens mod for the Topgun.  Would something like that work for this camera?  Most guncons that people are looking at have a lens to start with, so would using that (or more likely a better lens) to see more of the screen from closer up help?  I know it would distort the camera's image so a firmware upgrade might be needed (or not if the calibration somehow worked like in the case of the Topgun).

[RandyT]

*edit*  I'm going to pull back on this until I can flesh this out some more with some diagrams.  I think I see what the issue is based on the way this is designed.

RandyT

[KissMyWookie]

Of course, it really isn't important to know which is which, unless one needed to fire off-screen to the bottom or top. 

It is necessary to know which one its looking at. It is a pre-requisite that the gun needs to work even if it can only see one of the groups of LEDs, otherwise the field of view of the device is greatly reduced, which means you have to be much further away. This is the problem with the Topgun.
Actually I have tried something like this as part of the development, having two LED bars, and making an educated guess which one it could see, if it could see only one. There are two problems, firstly it gets the guess wrong in certain movements such as moving off screen, around the edge and back on screen again, and also there is a jump when it transitions from referring to the first, both, or second bar, which cant be fully eliminated.
I spent 9 months researching the raw sensing solution and I believe I covered all options.
If the min distance limitation is taken out of the requirements, all kinds of options are possible.

Sorry, I assumed that with 4 "L" shaped emitters, the LEDS's on each corner emitter would be a fixed distance apart. The gun logic would calculate the pointer position based on the distance between the LED's on the visible corner and not the distance between all 4 corners... think of it as enhancing the way the Aimtrak currently works by adding extra emitters (and so letting the position be calculated if the top of the screen is not necessarily visible, but can work with just one corner visible).

[RandyT]

I took down my earlier post, because I assumed after the fact that the CMOS sensor was unable to ever see two emitter boards at once, unless it was a good distance from the screen.  When aimed at the center of the screen, the CMOS sensor would absolutely need to have more than one set of emitters in frame for any of the advanced stuff related to multiple emitters to be done.

I think there's not enough information about the hardware available, specifically the field-of-view of the CMOS sensor / lens, to know whether this system can be improved at all.  Andy mentioned something about a cell phone camera earlier, so I did some testing with my (t)rusty old Motorola Q.  One thing that is very interesting is that I can get the entire monitor in frame, with some extra space above and below for emitters from about 27" in front of the emitters.  This is about 2' closer than where I need to use the Aimtrak for it to work well, so I am going to have to make the assumption that the camera on the Q cell phone has a bit of a wide angle lens.  I suspect that such a lens would be very undesirable on the Aimtrak, due to the distortion inherent with inexpensive wide angle lenses, so it probably has a much narrower field of view, which provides a more uniform image.

If this isn't the case, however, I'm having a hard time understanding why a second set of emitters, with a reversed pattern (i.e. same board, flipped) or not, wouldn't allow one to get quite a bit closer than is currently possible.  

RandyT

[AndyWarne]

I took down my earlier post, because I assumed after the fact that the CMOS sensor was unable to ever see two emitter boards at once, unless it was a good distance from the screen.  When aimed at the center of the screen, the CMOS sensor would absolutely need to have more than one set of emitters in frame for any of the advanced stuff related to multiple emitters to be done.

I think there's not enough information about the hardware available, specifically the field-of-view of the CMOS sensor / lens, to know whether this system can be improved at all.  Andy mentioned something about a cell phone camera earlier, so I did some testing with my (t)rusty old Motorola Q.  One thing that is very interesting is that I can get the entire monitor in frame, with some extra space above and below for emitters from about 27" in front of the emitters.  This is about 2' closer than where I need to use the Aimtrak for it to work well, so I am going to have to make the assumption that the camera on the Q cell phone has a bit of a wide angle lens.  I suspect that such a lens would be very undesirable on the Aimtrak, due to the distortion inherent with inexpensive wide angle lenses, so it probably has a much narrower field of view, which provides a more uniform image.

If this isn't the case, however, I'm having a hard time understanding why a second set of emitters, with a reversed pattern (i.e. same board, flipped) or not, wouldn't allow one to get quite a bit closer than is currently possible.  

RandyT

You said that you can get all four corners on the screen at a distance of 27in.
Now imagine a line drawn from the phones center axis, to the screen (or even fit a laser pointer to the phone). Move the phone until the pointer reaches the edge of the screen. You will not be able to see all four corners on the camera picture.
Now move back until you are able to get the pointer to hit all four corners while still being able to see the opposite corner on the picture...
Actually you will need to move back twice the distance.

If the sensor can work using one LED, at least for part of its field, then the disctance does not have to be doubled. Adding another board below the screen might increase the vertical field of view if the sensor could use either the top or botom board, but would not affect the horizontal field of view. Its true that the lower sensor might provide more information, at least when the camera can see both boards. But its not practical because at certain locations of the pointer, the camera will only be able to see one LED (ie one of the four LED groups) and would not know which one its looking at unless there is active control of each LED as in the Sega system.

[brandon]

I took down my earlier post, because I assumed after the fact that the CMOS sensor was unable to ever see two emitter boards at once, unless it was a good distance from the screen.  When aimed at the center of the screen, the CMOS sensor would absolutely need to have more than one set of emitters in frame for any of the advanced stuff related to multiple emitters to be done.

I think there's not enough information about the hardware available, specifically the field-of-view of the CMOS sensor / lens, to know whether this system can be improved at all.  Andy mentioned something about a cell phone camera earlier, so I did some testing with my (t)rusty old Motorola Q.  One thing that is very interesting is that I can get the entire monitor in frame, with some extra space above and below for emitters from about 27" in front of the emitters.  This is about 2' closer than where I need to use the Aimtrak for it to work well, so I am going to have to make the assumption that the camera on the Q cell phone has a bit of a wide angle lens.  I suspect that such a lens would be very undesirable on the Aimtrak, due to the distortion inherent with inexpensive wide angle lenses, so it probably has a much narrower field of view, which provides a more uniform image.

If this isn't the case, however, I'm having a hard time understanding why a second set of emitters, with a reversed pattern (i.e. same board, flipped) or not, wouldn't allow one to get quite a bit closer than is currently possible. 

RandyT

You said that you can get all four corners on the screen at a distance of 27in.
Now imagine a line drawn from the phones center axis, to the screen (or even fit a laser pointer to the phone). Move the phone until the pointer reaches the edge of the screen. You will not be able to see all four corners on the camera picture.
Now move back until you are able to get the pointer to hit all four corners while still being able to see the opposite corner on the picture...
Actually you will need to move back twice the distance.

If the sensor can work using one LED, at least for part of its field, then the disctance does not have to be doubled. Adding another board below the screen might increase the vertical field of view if the sensor could use either the top or botom board, but would not affect the horizontal field of view. Its true that the lower sensor might provide more information, at least when the camera can see both boards. But its not practical because at certain locations of the pointer, the camera will only be able to see one LED (ie one of the four LED groups) and would not know which one its looking at unless there is active control of each LED as in the Sega system.

I wonder if the Sega system has all LEDs "steady on" but strobes them when its unsure which LED its looking at... Because if the sensor can only refresh at, say 60hz then each corner would only be updated every 15hz and that would cause noticeable lag.  I know that's not really helpful in regard to the AimTrak but I'm curious

[RandyT]

You said that you can get all four corners on the screen at a distance of 27in.
Now imagine a line drawn from the phones center axis, to the screen (or even fit a laser pointer to the phone). Move the phone until the pointer reaches the edge of the screen. You will not be able to see all four corners on the camera picture.

Obviously. but I can still see the center area where the emitters are positioned, which is really the only thing that's important. 

But its not practical because at certain locations of the pointer, the camera will only be able to see one LED (ie one of the four LED groups) and would not know which one its looking at unless there is active control of each LED as in the Sega system.

I'm not suggesting the more complex implementation as others are.  There is middle ground that I'm not sure you are seeing, so I'll give you a scenario and a question;

Given the notion that the center screen position of the camera shows an emitter at very near the top of the image and one at very near the bottom of the image, at what point could the gun not be able to accurately determine the current emitter if the logic were :

Two Emitters = Don't Care
Above Emitter = Lower Emitter
Below Emitter = Upper Emitter

given the limitation of left to right off-screen reload shots only?

[AndyWarne]

Obviously. but I can still see the center area where the emitters are positioned, which is really the only thing that's important. 

I'm not suggesting the more complex implementation as others are.  There is middle ground that I'm not sure you are seeing, so I'll give you a scenario and a question;

Given the notion that the center screen position of the camera shows an emitter at very near the top of the image and one at very near the bottom of the image, at what point could the gun not be able to accurately determine the current emitter if the logic were :

Two Emitters = Don't Care
Above Emitter = Lower Emitter
Below Emitter = Upper Emitter

given the limitation of left to right off-screen reload shots only?

Dont understand at all. The camera cant always see the center area, it moving with the gun...If its pointing at the top of the screen it loses the bottom emitter and vice versa. The cameran can only see both when the gun is aimed near the center of the screen.

[KissMyWookie]

... But its not practical because at certain locations of the pointer, the camera will only be able to see one LED (ie one of the four LED groups) and would not know which one its looking at unless there is active control of each LED as in the Sega system.

Or if each LED group had a different visible configuration, which is possible with the rotated L-shaped emitter clusters I previously mentioned.

[brandon]

Just ask Johnny Lee  




BTW, What if you had an extra AimTrak facing the user that tracked the GUN?  add an IR LED to the gun that was in a position that could only be seen by the AimTrak facing the users and wouldnt interfere with the sensors in the gun.. 

[KissMyWookie]

BTW, What if you had an extra AimTrak facing the user that tracked the GUN?  add an IR LED to the gun that was in a position that could only be seen by the AimTrak facing the users and wouldnt interfere with the sensors in the gun.. 

That wouldn't work, because it would only see the position of the gun and not where it was pointing.

[brandon]

BTW, What if you had an extra AimTrak facing the user that tracked the GUN?  add an IR LED to the gun that was in a position that could only be seen by the AimTrak facing the users and wouldnt interfere with the sensors in the gun..  

That wouldn't work, because it would only see the position of the gun and not where it was pointing.

I said in addition to the one already IN the gun.  Then it know where the gun was pointing and where from.  Thus you could move or hand the gun to your short little brother.

[KissMyWookie]

BTW, What if you had an extra AimTrak facing the user that tracked the GUN?  add an IR LED to the gun that was in a position that could only be seen by the AimTrak facing the users and wouldnt interfere with the sensors in the gun..  

That wouldn't work, because it would only see the position of the gun and not where it was pointing.

I said in addition to the one already IN the gun.  Then it know where the gun was pointing and where from.  Thus you could move or hand the gun to your short little brother.

Okay, I see what you mean - but I see another problem in that approach...
The CCD would not be able to distinguish between depth and height, as holding the gun lower would look the same to the sensor as being closer to the screen (this is assuming the CCD is absolutely perpendicular to your floor and not tilted even 1degree).

[brandon]

You guys may find this interesting..  

http://muonics.net/blog/index.php?postid=26




a webcam tracking a laser pointer.

[RandyT]

Dont understand at all. The camera cant always see the center area, it moving with the gun...If its pointing at the top of the screen it loses the bottom emitter and vice versa. The cameran can only see both when the gun is aimed near the center of the screen.

Correct.  Right now, the system works pretty well with only one emitter in view.  The only time it would ever see two is of the camera were pointed somewhere in the middle of the screen.

The reason one needs to be so far back is because a single top mounted emitter gets lost, at close distances, as soon as one starts moving downward.  This wouldn't matter with a dual emitter system, because the gun would have switched over to the bottom emitter by time the upper one was lost off image, and vice versa.

With some calibration tricks, this arrangement would not only let one get closer, but should be more accurate, as each half of the screen has a reference which is more local to the actual position of the gun.

RandyT

[AndyWarne]

Dont understand at all. The camera cant always see the center area, it moving with the gun...If its pointing at the top of the screen it loses the bottom emitter and vice versa. The cameran can only see both when the gun is aimed near the center of the screen.

Correct.  Right now, the system works pretty well with only one emitter in view.  The only time it would ever see two is of the camera were pointed somewhere in the middle of the screen.

The reason one needs to be so far back is because a single top mounted emitter gets lost, at close distances, as soon as one starts moving downward.  This wouldn't matter with a dual emitter system, because the gun would have switched over to the bottom emitter by time the upper one was lost off image, and vice versa.

With some calibration tricks, this arrangement would not only let one get closer, but should be more accurate, as each half of the screen has a reference which is more local to the actual position of the gun.

RandyT

The sensor is angled upwards so that there is approx the same amount of leeway top and bottom.
If the gun needs to work with either a top or bottom LED bar, it needs to know which one its looking at. You mentioned reversing the lower one. Determining which bar is which, using the reversal, means that both the left and right hand LED group of each bar needs to be visible at all times. This means the horizontal field of view would be worse than at present because in the current design only one LED needs to be visible and this one LED is located approx in the center of the overall field of view. The other led is used only when it can be seen, and is not used for the main X-Y tracking but only for correction purposes.

[Endaar]

I have to say all this back and forth on the technical workings of a system like this and the considerations that go into a product's design are fascinating.

[bkenobi]

BTW, What if you had an extra AimTrak facing the user that tracked the GUN?  add an IR LED to the gun that was in a position that could only be seen by the AimTrak facing the users and wouldnt interfere with the sensors in the gun.. 

If I understand your suggestion, there is already a gun that does this.  I don't think it was received well though.  I can't remember what it was called, but it basically had a web cab sitting on the monitor and the gun had a big growth on the top.  I think there was an LED in the tip of the gun and another in the tumor.  Supposedly, it could work with multiple guns.  I just wish I could find a link.

[brandon]

BTW, What if you had an extra AimTrak facing the user that tracked the GUN?  add an IR LED to the gun that was in a position that could only be seen by the AimTrak facing the users and wouldnt interfere with the sensors in the gun.. 

If I understand your suggestion, there is already a gun that does this.  I don't think it was received well though.  I can't remember what it was called, but it basically had a web cab sitting on the monitor and the gun had a big growth on the top.  I think there was an LED in the tip of the gun and another in the tumor.  Supposedly, it could work with multiple guns.  I just wish I could find a link.

just do it like this

[Turnarcades]

Just ask Johnny Lee

Saw this guy's first Wiimote videos on youtube time ago. I really wish he'd extend this concept and get a game design around that pseudo-3D idea.

[extendedplayarcade]

I am just posting so I can subscribe to this thread. 

[Neverending Project]

So last night I cam across a game called One Shot One Kill. Anyone ever try it or hear of it? It's a lightgun game, and is not particularly difficult. But it's the content that I found amusing. Ginsu - where are you on your alphabetical tour?

The challenges are things like shooting the people who jump the turnstiles in the subway, but not the people who pay. Or shooting kids as they run away from home, so they will turn around and go back. Or on a subway shooting the hands of creeps who are reaching toward a young girl in a miniskirt and schoolgirl outfit.

I just found the whole thing to be amusing.

[Ginsu Victim]

So last night I cam across a game called One Shot One Kill. Anyone ever try it or hear of it? It's a lightgun game, and is not particularly difficult. But it's the content that I found amusing. Ginsu - where are you on your alphabetical tour?

Haven't played anything in a while since my gun is out of order, so I'm still in the N's (Ninja Baseball Batman!).

The challenges are things like shooting the people who jump the turnstiles in the subway, but not the people who pay. Or shooting kids as they run away from home, so they will turn around and go back. Or on a subway shooting the hands of creeps who are reaching toward a young girl in a miniskirt and schoolgirl outfit.

I just found the whole thing to be amusing.

Sounds awesome. I've gotta fix my gun and try it.

[thatitalian]

 

[Silas (son of Silas)]

+ 1

[AndyWarne]

Speaking of PC applications, any word on a new version of the AimTrak software?

Just an update: Still working on the new version and also new firmware. There are quite a few changes so its taking a while. Will be ready as soon as possible.

Andy

[Ginsu Victim]

Thanks for the update

[jlfreund]

Although curvature of the CRT may be responsible for some of the inaccuracy at the left/right of the monitor, it seems like the accuracy is best inside a "V" from the center to the top two corners of the screen.  Ie, nearest the top sensor bar.

I'm wondering if it should be possible to duplicate that accuracy in the other quadrants just by using 4 sensor bars?  It seems like it should be easy from an algorithmic point of view to just report the location from the nearest sensor bar and ignore the rest of the sensors.

Since the sensor bar hardware is relatively cheap, I would expect the improvement would be worthwhile with respect to a $200 dual gun setup.