Somewhere between the extremes of this debate, is the truth.
I love clickables - I have Black Shark, and it's convinced me of the utility and immersion of clickable cockpits. So much more efficient. Imagine simply "touching" the control on a gyro gunsight to increase/decrease the wingspan.
On the other hand, I can clearly see the level of complexity, in adding 10, 20 or 30 more variables to each cockpit.
Some folks seem to always want to drive discussion to extremes. It's obvious to the most casual observer that the objectives of Black Shark and Il2/SOW are very different.
With that said, clickables have been around for a long enough period that they would seem to be a "standard" feature.
Question is, did Oleg include clickables or not? If not, so be it, I'll live and fly SOW. If so, then he's figured out how to increase detail and features, while not compromising production too much. Great for him.
We in Il2, have been flying the same software package for about 8 years. We tend to be a bit more conservative about developments. At least, that's how I am.
Take LOMAC for instance - same developer, no clickables. If you've tried LOMAC after coming from Il2 - the first brick-wall you may have hit was the dramatic increase in assignable commands. No HOTAS has enough buttons to cover everything (no matter how many layers you assign), so you end up with more controllers or revert to a hoard of keyboard commands. That's really immersive, huh?
When I first setup BS before I became used to clickables, I actually mapped the Master Arm (switch is right in front of your face in the cockpit) to my Cougar. On my first flight, I noticed how dense I'd been and removed all of the commands from my Cougar from switches that were immediately within my normal cockpit view.
Cougar is much simpler now.
S~
Gunny
|