Integrate voice commands to AI as standard

[WelshZeCorgi]

I know that Viacom Voice attack is a thing and stuff, but I always wondered why modern flight sims still default to menus and stuff like that to communicate orders to wingmen, sections, etc. when it has been proven that voice commands are reliable (given the proper setup and environment) way to interact with the sim. I guess the question is why it's not the default standard, but rather relies on 3rd parties to provide that level of interaction. 

 

The use of a mouse and keyboard in order to communicate feels so antiquated and antithetical to the experience of aerial combat. You can't spend 10 seconds in WVR combat to click and navigate through a wingman order menu to get it to behave appropriately because that's time your hands are off HOTAS and SA starts to dive through the floor. Even with AAR, by the time you've clicked through the menu to clear contact, you're so out of position that he denies you and you have get back in position to try it all over again. Even in BVR, with such high closure rates for modern fighters, it becomes difficult to properly communicate with AI and with the upgrade to AI on the horizon, it doesn't make sense for DCS to still revolve its future implementations around keyboard/mouse as the default. 

 

I get that click and keyboard menus might still serve a function. Whether that be because the simmer doesn't want to buy a microphone for whatever reason or other. And I agree that it should be a secondary or backup of sorts to voice commands, but to update the AI, ATC, Carrier comms then revolve the entire design of those upgrades around click and keyboard menus instead of voice commands seems like putting old Model T wheels on your new Porsche. 

Edited April 21, 2021 by WelshZeCorgi

[SharpeXB]

It would be cool if there was this “Siri” level of voice recognition where you could just say “cover me” or “request clearance” etc. maybe someday that technology will become so commonplace it will be an easy add. 

[Johnny Dioxin]

I've been saying this for years - I think it's really appalling that no flight sims offer any kind of voice interaction despite it having been a reliable part of Windows for over 10 years, though all of them have 3rd party add-on voice commands and/or interaction.

 

I'm guessing an excuse would be that non-English or non-native speakers may not be understood, but I don't think that's really a valid one. Paul Endersby put something together years ago that was simplicity itself (I made a few posts showing people how to use it for DCS World and uploaded examples to user files) so it can be done with minimal cost and effort and would massively benefit those who want to take advantage of such a function, as well as increasing the immersion.

 

Maybe in 10 years time?

[Nomatic]

+1

[Mars Exulte]

On 4/19/2021 at 2:40 PM, Johnny Dioxin (Brixmis) said:

I'm guessing an excuse would be that non-English or non-native speakers may not be understood, but I don't think that's really a valid one.

  It is, and it's not even about just English. A Scotsman and an American sound absolutely nothing alike, even though they may both be speaking ''English''. Windows works with ''American English'', being an American developer basically, but even then you have to spend a fair piece of time ''training'' it to your voice. I'm an American, speaking American English, but I found out immediately as a Texan, it was different enough it couldn't reliably understand me.

 

 Developers love to cut corners, and spending this much time on something 90% of people aren't going to set up properly and then flood their forums with complaints is probably not most companies' idea of a good investment of time.

 

  Vaicomm ''works'' because it requires enough effort to set up that only somebody really dedicated gets that far, and the DCS custom voice pack does all of the footwork for you.

 

  Besides, what's the issue with using Vaicomm? We have 3rd party aircraft, 3rd party terrains, TacView is a 3rd party utility. Why is Vaicomm somehow ''not good enough''? It's an externally developed plugin that does the job quite perfectly. It's not going to ''benefit'' much from ED developing their own solution, in the way that ED's replacement for SRS is likely to streamline and improve functionality and features.