Pitch control returning to neutral when flying with keyboard

[85th_Maverick]

Hi,

 

       As the time has passed and many features have been optimized, corrected and accepted through people's requests, why not also make it possible to have the elevator controls behave exactly as they already do for rudder and aileron control? That is..., to return to a neutral position (according to the trim, exactly as it works for the other two inputs) once the pitch up or down key has been released. Besides having the pitch control only act when a pitch control key is pressed, if we could also have a "MISC" option in which to also adjust a pitch/roll/yaw control rate would also be a further benefit, but more important than all, is to have the pitch controls start moving from neutral to full as long as the corresponding keys are pressed and return to neutral once they are released. I don't know if this would generate a great effort to implement (even without control rate adjustments), but I find it very important in order to fly better, for those who either don't have a stick at some moment or don't have one at all.

Thanks!

[SharpeXB]

I don’t really understand why there are keyboard commands for the flight surfaces at all. Trying to fly with a keyboard would be so difficult and frustrating why even bother? it’s not worthwhile for ED to put any effort into how these key commands work because the idea is bonkers to begin with. 
Seriously... just get a joystick...

[randomTOTEN]

Flight simulators have had keyboard flight control support since they first started. I see no reason they shouldn't stop now. We are aware of at least one user who was very skilled in the A-10C using just M+KB.

I'll have to check, but I was under the impression the pitch and roll behavior were identical.

Edited May 4, 2021 by randomTOTEN

[SharpeXB]

40 minutes ago, randomTOTEN said:

Flight simulators have had keyboard flight control support since they first started. 

Yeah in 1980... a joystick costs less than a DCS module y’know

The keyboard commands make sense to have in order for somebody to try out the free game but beyond that they would be too awkward. I could see tapping the rudder keys for players just trying to taxi the modern jets which otherwise don’t use them. But for pitch and roll? There are easier ways to torture yourself... a gamepad controller would be better. 

Edited May 4, 2021 by SharpeXB

[randomTOTEN]

18 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Yeah in 1980... a joystick costs less than a DCS module y’know

so what?

the interface has been established for 40 years now, basically requires no maintenance, and allows anybody to use the program even without a joystick. and there are users that actually use it.

there's no benefit to removing it, and it looks bad to do so.

keep in mind we are in the midst of a computer hardware crunch, and there are people in the world who are having difficulty finding joysticks

18 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

but beyond that they would be too awkward. I could see tapping the rudder keys for players just trying to taxi the modern jets which otherwise don’t use them. But for pitch and roll?

so you approach this issue from a position of ignorance?

 

 

to get back to OP, you're right the roll and yaw self centers, but the pitch does not. If you had pitch self centering the aircraft would porpoise during every input, because of pitch stability. Is that what you want? The current system appears to combine pitch and trim to a single command (elevator position) so that trimming is not required.

Edited May 4, 2021 by randomTOTEN

[SharpeXB]

20 minutes ago, randomTOTEN said:

the interface has been established for 40 years now, basically requires no maintenance, and allows anybody to use the program even without a joystick. and there are users that actually use it.

Whatever... I just don’t see the point in ED spending any effort on further development of a prehistoric controller scheme. There are many more important things for them to work on. 

[SharpeXB]

38 minutes ago, randomTOTEN said:

 

keep in mind we are in the midst of a computer hardware crunch, and there are people in the world who are having difficulty finding joysticks

In stock

https://www.logitechg.com/en-us/products/space/extreme-3d-pro-joystick.963290-0403.html

Edited May 4, 2021 by SharpeXB

[randomTOTEN]

33 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

I just don’t see the point in ED spending any effort on further development of a prehistoric controller scheme.

I think it's still perfectly valid despite your protests to the contrary

23 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

In stock

Wow, and cheaper than newegg by a lot! I know where I'm going to shop for my next one, thanks...

[85th_Maverick]

On 5/4/2021 at 6:59 PM, SharpeXB said:

I don’t really understand why there are keyboard commands for the flight surfaces at all. Trying to fly with a keyboard would be so difficult and frustrating why even bother? it’s not worthwhile for ED to put any effort into how these key commands work because the idea is bonkers to begin with. 
Seriously... just get a joystick...

Oh really?

If you want I'm going to show you how I even fly upside down with many fighters using just keyboard, not to mention about landing on aircraft carrier. Where did you come up with having it very difficult with keyboard?? NO! It's not difficult at all and I personally like it. All I wanted (and there's many other who do) was to have all the controls get back to neutral and at a faster constant rate (no acceleration / deceleration).

Huh? Time consuming? Doohhh! Man that takes very freaking little effort. If it's your imagination that it's hard, it's only yours! THANK GOD that DEKA IRONWORKS have foreseen this need and had done exactly what I'm talking about with the JF-17 and it's just superb to fly using keyboard. The controls don't have any accelerations, but just a constant decent speed which makes controlling the plane more accurate (at least in pitch) and easier to fly overall. So what are you talking about and why don't you even read it all before replying nonsense?

On 5/4/2021 at 9:35 PM, randomTOTEN said:

Flight simulators have had keyboard flight control support since they first started. I see no reason they shouldn't stop now. We are aware of at least one user who was very skilled in the A-10C using just M+KB.

I'll have to check, but I was under the impression the pitch and roll behavior were identical.

 

There you go..., at least someone with a better quality thinking! Cheers!

[85th_Maverick]

On 5/4/2021 at 10:55 PM, SharpeXB said:

Whatever... I just don’t see the point in ED spending any effort on further development of a prehistoric controller scheme. There are many more important things for them to work on. 

Bro..., are you working for ED or are you hired to improve it in any way? If yes, then you should help us obtain what is otherwise easy to be done instead of giving disgusting and unconstructive replies through mockery! OK? If not..., then stop talking about things that don't bother you, seriously! We want all of the planes and helos in DCS to have the controls return to neutral as they are already perfectly fine implemented on the JF-17 and that's it! This shouldn't be time consuming in any way as the only thing needed to be done is to change some parameters in the coding.

[SharpeXB]

31 minutes ago, 85th_Maverick said:

If you want I'm going to show you how I even fly upside down with many fighters using just keyboard,

To each their own. That just doesn’t seem fun at all.

Edited August 3, 2022 by SharpeXB

[85th_Maverick]

27 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

To each their own. That just doesn’t seem fun at all, more like torture. 

To you maybe...! It's just fun for me, sorry to not be on your side with this...! The only thing I'm asking for is to have it even easier by having the damn pitch control turn to it's neutral which again..., isn't that hard in any way. Take the F-14 from Heatblur as well, if DEKA's JF-17 is not enough. They have tweaked (which I guess it didn't take more than 10 minutes all in all to code down) the roll input to have a high rate when the roll control is applied and instantly (infinite speed if you will) return to neutral when the roll input is released. They have exaggerated the roll input rate for both the input apply and input release (which is something like a 0.0000001 seconds time to return to neutral)! It is indeed ideal that a higher rate would be for returning the input than for applying it, but it looks ugly to see it snap in the middle like that, but even so..., having a higher control rate makes it much more precise and easier to fly. That's like a rule! Funny it is that on the other hand "they have thought that it would be good for the player" (which was actually a wrong thing) on the other hand to have the pitch control rate as lazy and as sluggish as ever seen making it very difficult to even takeoff without either overspeeding or over pitching up after takeoff.

Just like others do..., they "thought that it would be better this way or that way" probably without actually testing at all or enough to make sure they are OK!

So, there are just some simple constants within the keyboard input control lines in the code that have to be rewrote. I guess this would be the easiest and least time consuming correction ever compared to all the big lists of work that we see quite often being done at every update which proves a very high implication from everyone involving DCS and everytime I see so many corrections being done I wonder if these people even have time to sleep! What I'm asking for is actually easy!

Edited August 3, 2022 by 85th_Maverick

[85th_Maverick]

On 5/4/2021 at 10:55 PM, SharpeXB said:

Whatever... I just don’t see the point in ED spending any effort on further development of a prehistoric controller scheme. There are many more important things for them to work on. 

When you just said about how much effort it takes for what I was saying and how much it actually took someone, compared to what I was saying it would logically take...:

Have a look:

 

[cfrag]

On 5/4/2021 at 5:59 PM, SharpeXB said:

I don’t really understand why there are keyboard commands for the flight surfaces at all. Trying to fly with a keyboard would be so difficult and frustrating why even bother?

Agreed. And same with Flat Screens. Why would anyone want to afflict themselves with that? Why bother with screens when we have VR? Drop flat screen support, this is not 1980 anymore - when my first flight sim (SubLogic's A2-FS1) already was using a flat screen and keyboard. 

Wait, you don't agree?

[SharpeXB]

1 hour ago, cfrag said:

Agreed. And same with Flat Screens. Why would anyone want to afflict themselves with that? Why bother with screens when we have VR? Drop flat screen support, this is not 1980 anymore - when my first flight sim (SubLogic's A2-FS1) already was using a flat screen and keyboard. 

Wait, you don't agree?

I think a lot more people use monitors in DCS than keyboards for flying. It’s fine that this mapping is available for flight controls but the vast majority of people doing this are likely just trying out the free game. Putting further development into this doesn’t seem worthwhile. 

[SharpeXB]

3 hours ago, 85th_Maverick said:

When you just said about how much effort it takes for what I was saying and how much it actually took someone

So putting several days of development time for something only one player wants doesn’t seem like a good use of resources.

Edited August 6, 2022 by SharpeXB

[cfrag]

Just now, SharpeXB said:

Putting further development into this doesn’t seem worthwhile. 

On the contrary. What is the one thing people are guaranteed to have connected to their PC when they start DCS? A keyboard. 

More importantly, it's what people are guaranteed to have when they FIRST TRY DCS. People MUST have a good first-time experience when they try DCS, or they won't get hooked. You and I want them to get hooked. ED wants them to get hooked. Since DCS is a free-to-download game, it makes incredibly much business sense to put great thought into a minimal setup. And that is great support for keyboard/mouse flying neophytes and incoming future fellow flyers. People like you and I, who are already on the hook may have long since ascended to Virpil Controllers and VR Headsets. But that Su-25T must have great keyboard control, and since there are free 14 day trials, there better be good keyboard support for all the others. 

You and I don't need it. DCS needs it to be as attractive as possible to potential new players. 

[SharpeXB]

8 minutes ago, cfrag said:

What is the one thing people are guaranteed to have connected to their PC when they start DCS? A keyboard. 

Sure, having this control option is fine. The only real use for it is for new players who don’t have anything else. This is a free game after all. But adding more advanced options to it doesn’t make much sense. And I still doubt many new players even try the keyboard. Many people have Gamepads after all.

Edited August 6, 2022 by SharpeXB

[arb65912]

Sure, you can fly with keyboard if that is your preference, you can eat soup with fork as well. 

But since I believe that DCS is meant for more realistic way of flying, I agree that adding more advanced options for keyboard flying is a waste of resources.

There are tons of things ED is trying to address to make the simulation even better and they are doing a great job in my opinion.

Someone wants to try with keyboard, sure, have fun and see.

I also have a feeling that this thread will be locked soon.

 

[cfrag]

4 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

The only real use for it is for new players who don’t have anything else

... or who are put off by DCS's imposing, user-hating, non default-devicing Controller Setup UI. DCS is already at a great disadvantage when it comes to UI, so it makes a lot of sense to make the keyboard/mouse UX as good as possible, not an afterthought. The thought is that "if ED can't even make that work, the rest must be rubbish as well, bye!" - so DCS must put it's best foot forward, even if its the one least used. Keyboard support must be *stellar*, it must make you want more, not feel the need to change to a potentially expensive device.

And then there is this official ED video, where under the "top 10 things you should know about DCS World" the very first is headlined "You don't need a HOTAS" and the narrator says (and I quote) "You may think that you should own a Hands-On Throttle And Stick (or HOTAS) setup when flying DCS World, although you can play with just a mouse and keyboard" [emphasis mine]. This sets up the expectation, even if the narrator goes on to recommend a joystick just a second later. The assertion has been made, and it better be met. Well met.  

Keyboard support must be best-of-class. It is now, and it should stay that way. 

[SharpeXB]

3 minutes ago, cfrag said:

or who are put off by DCS's imposing, user-hating, non default-devicing Controller Setup UI. DCS is already at a great disadvantage when it comes to UI,

As far as I can tell the DCS UI is on par with other PC games. If that’s confusing to people maybe this isn’t the game for them. If they can’t get past that how are they going to deal with the 600 page manual for the aircraft? 

[cfrag]

Just now, SharpeXB said:

If that’s confusing to people maybe this isn’t the game for them

That kind of thinking will lead to failure. Let's say you want to sell a software product that you have made. If people don't buy your product, it's smart to assume that it is your fault, not the customer's. It's also your chance to improve. Try to make the product better; don't blame the customer (who has no control over your product but all the say in the purchase decision) for your failure to meet their desire. They have already downloaded your game. Now make it stick. That's your challenge, not the customer's. 

5 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

As far as I can tell the DCS UI is on par with other PC games

It's definitely not on par (look at some FS that shall not be named here, and how other non-FS games auto-detect changing controllers without having to modally select one). And even if it was on par, that would make a terrible argument. Being "as bad as the rest", or "just good enough" never was a good strategy. "Being better" definitely is. Remember the iPhone and all the cell phones that came before? "Bad" met "so much better", and was utterly obliterated. Nokia and Blackberry went from best-of-class to selling off their business within a few years.

But we aren't discussing DCS's Controller UX soo I'm stepping off that soap box I suddenly find myself standing on. Sorry for rambling  

 

[SharpeXB]

18 minutes ago, cfrag said:

That kind of thinking will lead to failure. Let's say you want to sell a software product that you have made. If people don't buy your product,

But this is a complex PC simulator and not a simple console arcade game. That much is inherent to the product and indeed attracts a certain audience. ED is actually creating Modern Air Combat as the more simple version of this game for that type of customer. 
Honestly I think far from making anything easy or accessible, the bewildering array of keyboard assignments in DCS would tend to scare off new players. The modules are vastly easier to learn with a HOTAS and head tracking. 

Edited August 6, 2022 by SharpeXB

[cfrag]

9 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

But this is a complex PC simulator and not a simple console arcade game.

Let's not confuse complexity with sophistication. Just because something is complex does not mean that it must have a complex interface. Good apps make complex tasks more accessible. The task itself still remains complex. The HOTAS as a design idea is a good example. It reduces the effort required of the human in a complex task. That task has not become easier (no-one would ever tell a Hog driver that their last deployment was just an arcade game because of their HOTAS), the interface merely became better, relieving the human. Same with other UX. Just because it's a complex task for a developer to manage a multitude of devices it does not mean that the user has to suffer similarly. We can and do expect to be shielded from unnecessary complexity. That is the hallmark of good design. I have seen much better UX than what we have, and suffered through hours of brutal UX feedback/refinement sessions for products I was involved with myself to know the difference. Good design is hard. Look at ME's left-side Icon bar and tell me that you, in all honesty, think that we are looking at good design <snicker>. Very little thought has gone into that (for me essential) interface, and it shows. A good mission editor does not have to be that difficult to use, and neither does a good device config manager. 

[SharpeXB]

13 minutes ago, cfrag said:

Let's not confuse complexity with sophistication. Just because something is complex does not mean that it must have a complex interface. Good apps make complex tasks more accessible. The task itself still remains complex. The HOTAS as a design idea is a good example. It reduces the effort required of the human in a complex task. That task has not become easier (no-one would ever tell a Hog driver that their last deployment was just an arcade game because of their HOTAS), the interface merely became better, relieving the human. Same with other UX. Just because it's a complex task for a developer to manage a multitude of devices it does not mean that the user has to suffer similarly. We can and do expect to be shielded from unnecessary complexity. That is the hallmark of good design. I have seen much better UX than what we have, and suffered through hours of brutal UX feedback/refinement sessions for products I was involved with myself to know the difference. Good design is hard. Look at ME's left-side Icon bar and tell me that you, in all honesty, think that we are looking at good design <snicker>. Very little thought has gone into that (for me essential) interface, and it shows. A good mission editor does not have to be that difficult to use, and neither does a good device config manager. 

I think you’re veering off topic here…