MikeMikeJuliet

Especially when some toutorials don't clearly label the switches in text, like the MiG-21 startup tutorial. If you have an idea of the cockpit layout and someone says a switch to flick, you can find it... but when the tutorial tells you movie references to try to find the switches...

I guess the point of this whole thread is to peak the interest of forum users shed some light to the general issues with software developement, since so many people here are talking about "this and that" feature being easy to implement when they actually have no idea. And because this thread probably has no value to the developers it is here, in the chit-chat section. People can discuss and wonder about things, right?

Also, wishlists seem to ge flooded with unrealistic expectations on what can be made even optimistically. That, and or a useless collection of "I want THIS version of F-16". We should just for once be happy that this sim even exists in the first place. A ton of interesting aircraft coming in the future.

Yes! That is going to remove so much unnecessary fiddling.

The more options, the better users can tailor the sim to their liking, and to run properly on their PC. I hate to say it, but DCS has a rather poor graphics options menu altogether.

Right! I need to do some more fine tuning. I got my new GPU yesterday and it runs like a dream. I tried the pixel density on DCS just before I got it, and it works (albeit not with a good framerate). Now I need to get working on getting it to actually run since I now have the horsepower for it. I'll see if enabling the reprojection helps. Thanks again. The whole pixel density has improved my user experience of the device SO much!

Indeed.

Great idea. And at the same time get rid of the zoom-out that happens in the beginning of a flight.

I love it how this conversations seems to veer off topic slowly :D I've split my controls on the FC3 aircraft so, that the three main layers (UMD) available for Warthog programming control wether I'm in AA, NAV or AG... or in the case of F-15, AA, NAV and FLOOD. Then I control the submodes with the MIC switch that is on your thumb on the throttle. That way I reduce the need to remember every button by associating each function to a primary mode... so I only really have to remember what I have available for that mode instead of trying to remember all controls all the time. For example I only have canopy and gear controls with nav modes, so I sort of "forget" them for the flight, only to remember them back at landing pattern in NAV mode. Associating controls to a mode or scheme may increase the pilot capasity by not associating irrelevant commands with combat, and vice versa. Human brain is curious.

A few points that the consol-developement can use to get away with (apart from not needing to actually simulate details) are that a console generation has a constant hardware setup, meanin the developers can optimise the games to the extreme. This can't be done on pc for the reason alone that as many pc:s as possible ahould be able to run a game, so long they are at or above minimum specs. Then again at the same time pc games usually don't require such optimization due to the excess power available. Secondly, many console games (especially FPS:s) are very limited in field of view, which reduces the amount of items needed to be rendered at any given instant. Many times further optimisation is achieved by enlargement of gun models. The advantage of running on a TV at a distance, is that the field of view doesn't need to be large for the game to feel good. Pc has a monitor quite close to the eyes, asking for a wider field of view to feel natural to the player. Both systems have advantages, and such optimisation is indeed marvellous to see. Take any console's lifecycle and compare the earliest games to the latest ones, and you will see a huge improvement. Sadly for flight sims, it is a nieche for us consumers, and probably even more so for developers. I highly doubt all the super talented individuals end up here, and as there are few of us in this playspace to begin with the talent required to create the most complex entertainment softwares (and professional training tools!) in the market simply falls to the hands of those willing, not necessarily those best qualified. Do NOT get me wrong here! Each developer is a professional and very skillful, but I feel such complexity would require ALL the best developer minds for us to actually get "The Perfect Simulator". These were my thoughts and a little analysis os why we see what you showed us. Humble regards, MikeMikeJuliet

Also worth noting that many older planes have their weapon system controls on the front dash. F course, as this is a sim you can always map the controls to your liking. Having every weapon system control on HOTAS helps a lot and speeds up your actions, but I actually like the idea of fiddling with switches and knobs in the cockpit. Much akin to the MiG-21's armament systems. It might not be that practical, but having an authentic feel is half the fun. Yesterday I flew Warthinder and I got my Vive on so tight that the nosegap sealed completely. My nose JUST fits the gap... any larger and I'd feel uncomfortable. :D Problem there is that I really can't see anything even if I want to.

Wouldn't work with the Vive at least not with my nose. I can just about see a slither of light through the nose gap. I've heard the Oculus has more space there... although I personally rather keep my eyes fully enclosed in the headset. One way to do things would also be to mold the switches to different shapes as to easier remember which was which.

The extra command is what I'd recommend to be added. If ED were to change the existing command to a single press only, I believe a lot of people would just get annoyed at the amount of accidental ejections. Not necessarily with the keyboard, but picture having the current command mapped to your stick, and you unintentionally hit it... So long as the control is strictly out of your way its no problem, but if it is amidst frequently used controls, there is a real danger of many accidental ejections... In these kind of cases with DCS we need OPTIONS, so that those who want to use the current type of control can still do so, while giving others the possibility to do things another way. Regards, MikeMikeJuliet

There are also a multitude of VR-controllers in developement. I don't remember which it was, but there are haptic exo-skeleton VR-gloves in developement. Basically the idea is, that when you try to squeeze a virtual object, the exo-skeleton resists you, so your fingers don't get closer to eachother than the virtual object allows... Something along those lines would be great for virtual cockpits... The one strange thing about your OP is, that why do you want your hands tracked in the cockpit, if you don't want to have a clickable cockpit?! I don't understand this. If you have your hands in there, they are there for a reason = to use the switches. And before you say that it's an immersion thing, and that I might not understand it yet... I own the Vive and use that to fly. Regards, MikeMikeJuliet

Hi. Overwing vapour, as it is called, is already in the works by ED. No timetable for that, but it is one of the effects they hope to bring to DCS:W 2.5. Cheers, MikeMikeJuliet

Yep, it's great that we can come up with all kinds of solutions to the problems, but this is one of those that A) should be an easy fix by ED and B) if it can be fixed within the game, that's always better than fiddling around with anything else. PS. you go sniped :D

This is exactly why I'd like to see all three options. Because probably for someone else the current method works... Personal preference. Also, there is the option to slave your mouse to the center of your VR FOV, but that requires even more precision, and can be very annoying especially on something like the A-10C CDU, or some switches at awkward physical positions where you really have to stretch your neck to even see... More options is NEVER bad, so long as they are OPTIONAL. :)

I don't think adding civilian air traffic should at all be a priority... there are so many other aspects of the sim that needs to be resolved before that... BUT Considering no-fly-zones. You realize that not a whole map is a no-fly-zone? Take Caucasus as an example. It could just be that South-Ossetia is a NFZ... Or the whole Georgia, but not the whole map. Fighters flying to the combat area may pass through area of civilian traffic. The aircraft may start from, or end their flight to an airfield that is used by civilians. Or not. Might be the combat is so widespread on an area that every airfield is under the risk of an airstrike. Regards to the OP. Having more civilian GROUND units might give us way more interesting scenarios when you need to be sure of what you are going to blow up. Regards, MikeMikeJuliet

Great idea. In my opinion we should have both options. Or in fact, All options. As the mouse is now, cockpit-centric free mouse AND sticky mouse. Then you can choose it to YOUR liking. On a side note, at the moment the mouse already exists in the 3D plane thet it hovers over, so no worries, the mouse depth perseption works! I would like the mouse cursor "hitbox" to be just a little bigger though (or respectively have each cockpit switch and lever have a slightly larger hitbox) to make hitting them easier. Third: There is an easy solution to the "where my mouse at" problem. When you move your mouse, it becomes visible, right? So make it work like target markers and FPM on the hud! When the mouse is beyond your field of view, it flashes in that direction (edge of your screen) to show where it is. Nothing complicated in that. And when you leave the mouse alone for a while it goes invisible again to make sure it doesn't make you go crazy. Regards, MikeMikeJuliet

Heres hoping for haptic feedback gloves for interacting with the cockpit... and FC3 aircraft converted to DCS standards. Though I bet the haptic, tracked gloves will be here firsr by a country mile ;) Exciting times.

Sounds like a pretty nice setup. Problem with VR is ofcourse not being able to see the controls... so you still need to remember all the switches. Less items to remember per switch, but more switches. I sat down to think about the problem when I did my scripts for the stick, and I found two solutions. 1) keep similar controls on the same switches... so for example I have all defensive controls (RWR controls included) on the grey 4-way + button... so that I really only need to remember that whenever I need to defend, its all there. 2) I try to keep controls consistent throughout all FC3 aircraft. So, even though the radar works different on the F-15 and the Su-27, I still keep all radar controls on the same buttons... Works for me at least. Though I would really like to have a dial and a couple of switches and buttons still. Some controls are just simply better off-the-stick.

Well, given that you can have 3 main layers, 2 secondary layers, and two functions on each button (so 12 functions per button in theory) you really do have space where to put everything if you really want... But I do agree that takes ages to remember everything, especially if you fly more than 1 or 2 planes. I'm using the Vive, and since the chaperone lighthouses are a few meters away from my PC, I need to carry all the controls to the middle of my livingroom to play, so it's really inconvenient to have any extra controllers falling from my lap. Thus I personally try to map all possible keys to my stick and throttle... though a a simple switch-box would help to map non-critical controls. Are you building it on Arduino or something else?

This would indeed be handy. Though a "previous mode" button would also be needed. Otherwise, when you accidentally scroll through the modes to find what you need and you accidentally skip the right mode, you have to go around through the modes again. At least the A-10A seems to have a knob on tve front dash for all the modes on the aircraft. Would be handy to have it so that you could change the modes in the same order as they appear in ghe cockpit controls. Btw, which controllers are you using. I know Warthog has the ability to map multiple keys on a single buttons, so I can have all modes required on a single hatswitch. Short press for one mode, long press for another mode... that way you can map 2 keys to a single button. Regards, MikeMikeJuliet

Also, it helps to see "landmarks" and help you position yourself visually. A giant black smoke-tower tends to be a good reference point :D unless there are dozens of them.

Agreed. This should come automatically and be added to the kneeboard too, so you could always check the info in the sir without trying to derive it from the kneeboard maps... much less from F10 view...