Poll: Interactive Cockpits

[Roy]

imho a waste of time considering that the most accurate modelling would be through key strokes and axes... for the users that'd feel like making a simpit with all the buttons, switches and levers.

[choctaw111]

I think it would be nice to be familiar with the startup procedures from a historical point of view, however very much time would be needed to implement such a feature to each aircraft, and Oleg knows that even if the clickable pits were wanted by the user, they would only be used a time or two and never again. Oleg has already stated that it simply is not a good use of time given the many other things he is working on right now.

[jasonbirder]

I think its unfortunate that the poll has been worded to refer to clickable cockpits...
In terms of both immersion and ergonomics mouse clickable cockpits (particularly in 3D cockpits) can sometimes leave something to be desired...where bindable keystroke combinations or other input devices can sometimes be prefered.

I think it would have been better to have phrased the question in terms of would you like to see realistically modelled flight, engine, fuel and systems management in this Combat Flight Simulation or would your rather see grossly homogonized and simplified systems implemented?

That way those who want to see the BOB-SOW as yet another Sim Lite at least have to say so...rather than hide behind the smokescreen of saying using a mouse isn't an effective input device.

[SlipBall]

Originally Posted by jasonbirder

I think its unfortunate that the poll has been worded to refer to clickable cockpits...
In terms of both immersion and ergonomics mouse clickable cockpits (particularly in 3D cockpits) can sometimes leave something to be desired...where bindable keystroke combinations or other input devices can sometimes be prefered.

I think it would have been better to have phrased the question in terms of would you like to see realistically modelled flight, engine, fuel and systems management in this Combat Flight Simulation or would your rather see grossly homogonized and simplified systems implemented?

That way those who want to see the BOB-SOW as yet another Sim Lite at least have to say so...rather than hide behind the smokescreen of saying using a mouse isn't an effective input device.

Great post! and I agree most responders are stuck on the word "clickable"...the wording of the poll question could have been better. Or maybe most IL-2 pilots only care for the furball aspect. A shame considering what those pilot's had to learn and master back then, I want that challenge, I want to plan, feel, and execute proper aircraft management decishions

[Antoninus]

Originally Posted by jasonbirder

I think its unfortunate that the poll has been worded to refer to clickable cockpits...
In terms of both immersion and ergonomics mouse clickable cockpits (particularly in 3D cockpits) can sometimes leave something to be desired...where bindable keystroke combinations or other input devices can sometimes be prefered.

I think it would have been better to have phrased the question in terms of would you like to see realistically modelled flight, engine, fuel and systems management in this Combat Flight Simulation or would your rather see grossly homogonized and simplified systems implemented?

That way those who want to see the BOB-SOW as yet another Sim Lite at least have to say so...rather than hide behind the smokescreen of saying using a mouse isn't an effective input device.

The whole poll is based on the assumption that many of the more complex features will already be available in SOW, if only in 3rd party aircraft. See Oleg's posts in the "Answers" thread quoted above, also linked in the initial post:

Originally Posted by Oleg Maddox

Third party would do it I think. Models of aircraft has all features that to program it. ..

As I have understood this, 3rd party modelers can implement complex start up procedures, fuel tanks management etc. in their aircraft, just Maddox Games isn't doing it because they lack the resources.

I've made the mistake that I did not consider that anybody could believe a clickpit would be anything else than another option to control the aircraft. Also I was surprised that most of the more hardcore fans, who visit this forum regularly, seems to be just interested in playing air Quake, thus I did not formulate the poll questions to incorporate such thoughts.

Originally Posted by csThor

TIR or HOTAS support is essentially a "do-once" thing and does not need to be redone each time a new aircraft is introduced. Oleg said the fundament is there for a complete startup procedure and clickpits - Maddox Games just does not see these additions as economically viable for them. I'd have liked full startups, but I do understand where MG is coming from so it's no dealbreaker for me.

Clickpits seem to be a "do-once" thing too. The feature has to be programmed only once just as any other control method and than modelers can assign functions while building the cockpit.

Originally Posted by TX-EcoDragon

I've built plenty of cockpits within MSFS and X-plane and I just assign a function to a particular clickspot on the panel. . .for all subsequent panels it takes a few minutes to do. If they are already planning on animating toggles and levers in cockpit, that seems like the bulk of the challenge is already going to be done.

[Rama]

Originally Posted by Antoninus

Clickpits seem to be a "do-once" thing too. The feature has to be programmed only once just as any other control method and than modelers can assign functions while building the cockpit.

Which is an extra work for M:1C cockpit modelers...
And I don't think it's that easy to built 3D "click" area that must move with the different commands (like pitch lever for example) with different kind of assignable fonctions. It probably would take some non-negligible programmers time (once) + extra work for cockpit modelers.

In any case, when playing FSX, players use the mouse to control the command mostly on 2D-panels, and rarelly with the 3D-"virtual"-pits (just because it's a pain in the ass with the 3D-pits...; I know, I tried).... and you must remember that neither IL2, nor SoW have 2D-panels...

For myself and a lot of other IL2 players that will play BoB, We use the TIR from the start to the end, just like a "natural feature".... and imagine using the mouse to click commands in a 3D-pit which is constantly moving... a real nightmare...

I hav found the perfect solution for myself, which only need keyboard commands (interfaced with a virtual keyboard)....



Of course, it would be even better with a direct access to the commands and parameters through and improved "devicelink"

P.S. I forgot.... I also use a Hotas + rudders + TIR to handle everything without needing to type anything on the keyboard...

[Antoninus]

A hardware solution is surely ideal, but the problem is it's extraordinary price. Such a panel costs several hundred €, not everybody can or wants to spend that amount of money for his hobby.

In FSX the clickable VC works very well for me, I use it almost exclusively. I change view just with my joysticks hat-switch. Hitting the buttons is usually no problem, they are not that small. Most aircraft have additional pre defined fixed views available, that give me quick access to all relevant parts of the cockpit. By default the A key switches between them, if you're in the VC. No problem to start an engine in less than a minute. However I mostly fly classical single or small twin engine prop. planes, more advanced airliner cockpits might be something different.

[Supah]

Originally Posted by Former_Older

wha?!

No, no it would not be a single key press to start the engines. It would be a single key press to use each system or flip each switch. You need to stop thinking in the box here. Your logic says:

'in il2 a single keypress was used, so that means a non-clickable cockpit always uses a single key press'


This is just not so

And how does a clickable cockpit ensure "accuracy for essential systems", while a keypress interface destroys that accuracy?

Personally? I see many of the 'click cockpit' proponents as Puritans who can't conceive of any other way to do it. I have a flippin HOTAS, and touchbuddy exists. I also have a seperate USB numpad that I map plane functions to. In my opinion, forcing a click cockpit severely limits a combat flight sim becasue now precise mouse control is the end-all and be-all of ACM

If you guys like it, great for you. I would never suggest having the clickpit as anything other than an option

What do you think is easier? Remembering Ctrl + Alt + E to switch on the batteries or just remembering where the switch is? I can tell you now that remembering where the switch is in the cockpit is much easier. And that would just be activating the electrical system. Then you would need to remember and use another awkward key-combo to activate the fuelpump, hydraulics and starter. I'd much rather use the click pit. I can have falcon 4's F-16 running (outside having to wait for the INS to spool up) in seconds.

On certain aircraft the systems are essential to operating it as a fighting machine, say the mustang and its fuel balance problems. Have fun draining the wingtanks first instead of the tank behind the pilot! To people saying that it will only be awkward in combat, do you think real pilot's went "Now that I am chasing this 109 at low level I think it is a good time to change my radio frequency and mess with my hydraulic system!" No ofcourse not, those things are set at the beginning of the flight and once you are airborne and especially in combat you should not have to fiddle with this. If you do have to you messed up and should have set your plane up for flight and fight better, that is part of being a fighter pilot.

Saying just because you might not like it it shouldn't be done, I probably will never play this online, perhaps on my LAN with some friends. With your logic Oleg shouldn't waste his time on making an online game engine, I won't use it so neither should others be able to do so right?

To the people who think this is a nice reason to talk negative about FSX, I do not want a shallow point an shoot game, if I did I'd buy Unreal Tournament. I want a simulator featuring ww2 aircraft. These planes had quite complex systems for their time, those systems were critical for the planes function and often a factor in succes of failure. Having only a simplified version of them leaves out a lot of the experience.