Poll: Interactive Cockpits

[proton45]

Originally Posted by Supah

If Microsoft comes out with a combat version of FSX I would rather give it a serious try before judging it.

I would probably wait till the reviews where in...

I think the problem I have had with FSX is that it cost too much to get the good scenery...and the good airplanes, and everything else. Right out of the box it don't look that great (at least on my computer it didn't)...

maybe cost is a stupid reason to feel bias (I'm will to admit it...)

[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

[Blackdog_kt]

Originally Posted by csThor

a) SoW is first and foremost a military flight simulation. Maddox Games doesn't need to reinvent the wheel with it - they have a fundament both of experiences and technical solutions laid with Il-2 as well as input from the community and other "external sources".
b) Oleg doesn't need to cater to the civilian pilots in detail, because Maddox Games sure won't be able to do it all on its own. They will give external developers an interface to work with as well as tools to create/import the stuff they make. But that's about it - Maddox Games is a small company and needs to concentrate on the core business (if anything they have an issue with spending ressources on useless projects in the military part) and can't be spit-polishing the ground for the 3rd Party Projects.
c) The simulation aspect of civil and military flight sims couldn't be more different. Civil simmers are - IMO - procedure simmers first and foremost while "us" military types like to shoot holes into each other's planes. That's a drastic difference and sets completely different envelopes for the basic engine. I'd prefer Oleg did the military part right and doesn't try to be the jack of all trades. Because such is also the master of none.

Bottom line - clickable cockpits are a waste of time for a combat sim. If the SoW engine allows for 3rd Party Devs to add them for their own A/C then that is the maximum of what we can expect.

I think the conclusion you are looking for is "dwelling too much on procedures like detailed engine startup is a waste of time".
Clickable cockpits are an extra control method (extra not primary).

In that regard, i certainly don't consider them any more waste of time than support for other control methods implemented in most sims today, like native TrackIR support and the ability to work with a wide array of HOTAS sets, gaming keypads and other peripherals that give you more options in how you interface with the game. The difference and the main reason i'm advocating clickpits is that not everyone can buy all those peripherals, but every PC comes with a mouse. Let's use it.

[csThor]

The problem with your approach is that you miss the essential flaw in your logic - for a single release (say "Release and be forgotten") clickpits might be a viable feature for a team as small as Maddox Games. However SoW is planned to encompass (hopefully) all theaters of WW2 air combat one day - and that means trainloads of different aircraft. Right now Maddox Games assumes production time for a single cockpit to be at around 6 months for an experienced modeller who knows the procedures and hurdles - add how much for a clickpit?

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 econimically 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.

[robtek]

I´d like to remark that NO clickpit and real complex engine- and flight- management don´t exclude each other.

[SlipBall]

Maddox Games just does not see these additions as econimically viable for them (quote)



Would not sales double, triple, quadruple? I think that they would

[Supah]

Originally Posted by csThor

I haven't spent any time in civil sims. My conclusions come from several visits to flight sim conventions. Of course that may have contorted the picture.

So basically you are knocking something you have no idea about as you have never actually tried it seriously. Atleast I've tried both, maybe more people in this community should. I agree with your previous point about there being a lot of work to be done on the offline campaign, its been almost ten years since the release of falcon 4 but still no flightsim has ever come close to it's campaign system. However I got the impression we are going to get even more scripted campaigns with BoB which doesn't bode well for offline players. I often find scripted campaigns have zero replay value.

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.

Very Well put!The furball people have nothing to worry about as the difficulty level is fully scalable.

[csThor]

Originally Posted by Supah

So basically you are knocking something you have no idea about as you have never actually tried it seriously. Atleast I've tried both, maybe more people in this community should. I agree with your previous point about there being a lot of work to be done on the offline campaign, its been almost ten years since the release of falcon 4 but still no flightsim has ever come close to it's campaign system. However I got the impression we are going to get even more scripted campaigns with BoB which doesn't bode well for offline players. I often find scripted campaigns have zero replay value.

I did not knock civil flight sims and simmers - I said they're after a vastly different experiences. All I am doing is doubting that a team as small as Maddox Games can do both worlds justice in one attempt without overtaxing their ressources, without sacrificing details for foul compromises.
And regarding Falcon 4's campaign engine - In my view it was a nice project that stopped halfway down the road (too technocratic presentation, too soul-less, unimmersive GUI), never worked convincingly until after 7 years of fiddling and ultimately broke the back of its creators.