#4414214 - 04/01/18 09:07 PM
Re: Control mapping
[Re: - Ice]
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 284
Haukka81
Member
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 284
Kemij�rvi,Finland
|
Clearly we have different experiences and different attitudes. Yours are based on one aircraft module dating back to 2010, our are based on the full fleet of available modules, terrains and let-downs from 2008 to present. The narrow view is very funny. DCS runs great in my system therefore it is great and all others who are complaining are liars! I only have one module and runs great therefore DCS knows what they're doing and all other who are complaining are bitter, burned customers! I am having so much fun in this MP server and there are a lot of scripted stuff that makes the theatre come alive therefore DCS is awesome because this theatre was like this out of the box! Now you try to be fun .. no wonder that you got banned even BMS forums :/
Last edited by Haukka81; 04/01/18 09:07 PM.
I5 8400 , 16gb , GTX 1070 oc , Win10 64bit . Virpil T-50 27" monitor with 2560x1440 rez ... DCS + Oculus CV1 + Samsung Odyssey . (odyssey is better for flight sims)
|
|
#4414216 - 04/01/18 09:39 PM
Re: Control mapping
[Re: bisher]
|
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,922
Paradaz
Senior Member
|
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,922
UK
|
How can I discuss, what I havent experienced? You want me to agree with you, based only on what you say......whats the point? I have no problem with seeing things from a different perspective, you dont have to agree with me, that's OK, but dont expect me to agree with you, we dont have to agree! Doesnt mean I feel the necessity to bash, everything you say to a pulp! I expect the same courtesy from you!
I agree with this poster No-one is saying everyone has to agree with each other.....only that defending ED on a very limited knowledge set based on the A10 module will not go far when discussing their incompetence. It's not rocket science. The 2.5 open beta and lack of 'release' version 2 months after they stated would be 1-2 weeks is an easy example to make....however 'Slippery_Rat' obviously won't be taking this into account because it's not 3-4 years old, settled with plenty of bug fixes in place. Unfortunately, this isn't what competency is measured against.
On the Eighth day God created Paratroopers and the Devil stood to attention.
|
|
#4414217 - 04/01/18 09:51 PM
Re: Control mapping
[Re: Haukka81]
|
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 871
Winfield
model citizen
|
model citizen
Member
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 871
QLD
|
lots of things need work sure but nothing too serious. Just my 2cents quote from the 2.5 thread. would you say control mapping is one of those things that are 'nothing too serious'? no wonder that you got banned even BMS forums :/ what does that have to do with control mapping?
|
|
#4414222 - 04/01/18 11:09 PM
Re: Control mapping
[Re: bisher]
|
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
- Ice
Veteran
|
Veteran
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
Philippines / North East UK
|
You used to have a really good attitude, but lately, at least in this forum seem quite bitter....too bad! Your positive, comments and assistance have been appreciated by many, me included. My 1st sentence was an observation, or my interpretation of what you have been saying, not a criticism. Trolling is your interpretation of what was said certainly not my intention. My 2nd sentence certainly couldnt be construed as trolling!! From Wilipedia: In Internet slang, a troll (/troʊl, trɒl/) is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting quarrels or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory,[1] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[2] or of otherwise disrupting normal, on-topic discussion,[3] often for the troll's amusement. It's not from what you say but rather from what you've done. You ask about a topic not to learn about it and make up your mind, you ask to draw people out and then make fun of them. Did you really participate in a discussion about your initial questions? Or did you just want a response that you can throw half-assed comments at? with the intent of provoking readers into an [emotional] responseYou just wanted to start something and were not really interested in a true discussion. Troll. Here's a much closer definition: Source - read the 2nd one. How can I discuss, what I havent experienced? You want me to agree with you, based only on what you say......whats the point? I have no problem with seeing things from a different perspective, you dont have to agree with me, that's OK, but dont expect me to agree with you, we dont have to agree! Doesnt mean I feel the necessity to bash, everything you say to a pulp! I expect the same courtesy from you! Are you only really limited to discussing what you've experienced first-hand? If so, then you DO have a problem seeing things from a different perspective. It's called empathy. You don't have to agree with me, but if you disagree, say so and say why. We've asked you multiple times to state your reasons for calling ED competent. Now you either believe ED to be incompetent and thus agree with us, or you believe ED to be competent, at which point you'll have to state your reasons. Otherwise, this whole exercise was just trolling from your part. I answered your questions in a detailed manner; I expect the same courtesy from you. Let's see if you can see my perspective on this matter. no wonder that you got banned even BMS forums :/ what does that have to do with control mapping? Nothing at all, but they have to grasp at SOMETHING, don't they? Find any counterpoints? Nope, but let's go ahead and take a personal jab at someone! Classic! This is a personal attack? Pull up your pants man! Then explain to me how that statement had anything to do with discussion regarding ED? Betcha can't! It's quite interesting to see how people hide when you are discussing a topic of substance, but then they come out of the woodwork and take a shot once things get down to the "attack the poster" level. They have nothing to say about the issue being discussed, but they have a lot to say about the one doing the discussion. Trolls.
- Ice
|
|
#4414232 - 04/02/18 12:06 AM
Re: Control mapping
[Re: Winfield]
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 284
Haukka81
Member
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 284
Kemij�rvi,Finland
|
lots of things need work sure but nothing too serious. Just my 2cents quote from the 2.5 thread. would you say control mapping is one of those things that are 'nothing too serious It works just fine, it wont take many seconds to clear default settings. (There is clear column button) Then i just map my own in. Its same in BMS and many other games , dcs is not only one. I have custom Suncom F-15 Throttle and Virpil T-50 , custom made pedals. How would any game know how to set up commands to like i would like to have em ? So yes. From my point , dcs control setups is good. Easy to use and easy to customize axes , make sift buttons etc.. , there is many biger problems than control setup in dcs.
Last edited by Haukka81; 04/02/18 12:07 AM.
I5 8400 , 16gb , GTX 1070 oc , Win10 64bit . Virpil T-50 27" monitor with 2560x1440 rez ... DCS + Oculus CV1 + Samsung Odyssey . (odyssey is better for flight sims)
|
|
#4414245 - 04/02/18 05:57 AM
Re: Control mapping
[Re: Frederf]
|
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 871
Winfield
model citizen
|
model citizen
Member
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 871
QLD
|
But seriously, what does the "general" section of the control mapping do? ED put that in to create colorful discussions in threads such as this one. Other than that I can not see a reason for it
|
|
#4414246 - 04/02/18 05:58 AM
Re: Control mapping
[Re: Haukka81]
|
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 871
Winfield
model citizen
|
model citizen
Member
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 871
QLD
|
lots of things need work sure but nothing too serious. Just my 2cents quote from the 2.5 thread. would you say control mapping is one of those things that are 'nothing too serious It works just fine, it wont take many seconds to clear default settings. (There is clear column button) Then i just map my own in. Its same in BMS and many other games , dcs is not only one. I have custom Suncom F-15 Throttle and Virpil T-50 , custom made pedals. How would any game know how to set up commands to like i would like to have em ? So yes. From my point , dcs control setups is good. Easy to use and easy to customize axes , make sift buttons etc.. , there is many biger problems than control setup in dcs. Ah, you can stay on topic after all.
|
|
#4414256 - 04/02/18 09:35 AM
Re: Control mapping
[Re: - Ice]
|
Joined: May 2015
Posts: 174
Slippery_Rat
Member
|
Member
Joined: May 2015
Posts: 174
|
Getting back to what the OP initially proposed in this thread, I feel the irritation of how ED implements module control a very minor issue.
In defense of ED's approach, it allows for great flexibility, something some users appreciate. To me, more flexibility is preferable to lack there-of.
Last edited by Slippery_Rat; 04/02/18 09:44 AM. Reason: ooops
|
|
#4414276 - 04/02/18 11:56 AM
Re: Control mapping
[Re: Slippery_Rat]
|
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
- Ice
Veteran
|
Veteran
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
Philippines / North East UK
|
Its same in BMS and many other games , dcs is not only one. Oh? BMS maps pitch/yaw/roll/thrust into the joystick, throttle and rudder? I don't think so. So yes. From my point , dcs control setups is good. Easy to use and easy to customize axes , make sift buttons etc.. , there is many biger problems than control setup in dcs. So since the deficiencies of ED can be fixed by the end-user, then it isn't a problem? What about ED fixes their deficiencies so that the end-user doesn't have to? Getting back to what the OP initially proposed in this thread, I feel the irritation of how ED implements module control a very minor issue.
In defense of ED's approach, it allows for great flexibility, something some users appreciate. To me, more flexibility is preferable to lack there-of. How is mapping the same thing three times over and over (and more if you have more aircraft) considered flexible? Do you use your X axis for roll in one aircraft and use it for pitch in another aircraft? Maybe use the throttle for engine control in one aircraft and use it as rudder control in another aircraft? If so, flexible, yes. Makes sense, no. There should be one UNIVERSAL setup for core controls like this, which under common sense would be GENERAL settings, and then just have overrides for specific aircraft just in case.... but again, for core controls like pitch/yaw/roll/thrust, I don't see how it'll differ from one aircraft to the next, whether you're in a P-51 or a Hornet.
- Ice
|
|
#4414601 - 04/04/18 10:00 AM
Re: Control mapping
[Re: - Ice]
|
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
- Ice
Veteran
|
Veteran
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
Philippines / North East UK
|
Complaining about camera controls and complaining about control mappings are two different topics altogether. I wonder what XP11 issues (esp. for camera control) have to do with DCS?
- Ice
|
|
#4414605 - 04/04/18 10:15 AM
Re: Control mapping
[Re: - Ice]
|
Joined: May 2015
Posts: 174
Slippery_Rat
Member
|
Member
Joined: May 2015
Posts: 174
|
Are they!
Its all about mapping controls, software doesn't differentiate the purpose.
What about competency?
The flexibility to set controls is something I appreciate, maybe not you.
So why not, accept that some appreciate this feature, but you do not, and leave it at that.
I'm sure ED have bigger concerns, and are happy to let users resolve this for themselves. It's not an issue which determine whether someone will purchase the software and while maybe a irritation to some, many will see it as insignificant.
Given the potential of tasks at hand, hardly a priority or concern!
Would you be happy to see ED go bankrupt? No further development?
I suspect not!, as those purchasing newer modules, are truly the losers!
I also suspect they are acutely aware of their predicament better than you, consider your options. Either way, it wont effect me.
|
|
#4414607 - 04/04/18 10:41 AM
Re: Control mapping
[Re: Slippery_Rat]
|
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
- Ice
Veteran
|
Veteran
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
Philippines / North East UK
|
Sorry, I'm here to enjoy flight simulation, not making screenshots or videos. Complaining about XP11 camera controls in a discussion about DCS flight controls? Are you just trying to find excuses for DCS? How about this --- how many times do you have to map pitch/roll/yaw/thrust in XP11? Do you have to do it separately for the Cessna then again for the Beechcraft Baron? Do you have to do it for the 737 then again for the 747 then again for the MD-82? How about this --- does XP11 map pitch/roll/yaw/thrust to the rudder, throttle and joystick? Flexibility in setting controls is != stupid control assignments. If you appreciate stupid control assignments, if you appreciate having to un-bind controls on each aircraft, then just say so and I'll leave it at that. I'm sure ED have bigger concerns, and are happy to let users resolve this for themselves. It's not an issue which determine whether someone will purchase the software and while maybe a irritation to some, many will see it as insignificant. Well, let's just say that if ED cannot even fix a minor concern like this one, I wish them all the best with their bigger concerns. Given the potential of tasks at hand, hardly a priority or concern! Imagine you are ED. You have 5 big bugs that will take you months to squash and you have 20 small bugs that will take a week. Do you ignore the small bugs? In ED's case, yes, and that's why we're here. Would you be happy to see ED go bankrupt? No further development? And in what way would I be responsible if ED were to go bankrupt? I'm not the one making silly decisions. I'm not the one who is unable to meet deadlines. To be honest, maybe it's better if they do go bankrupt. All these silly unfinished modules and perpetual betas, the heavy-handed moderation and censorship in their forum, the silly prices they're now starting to charge for modules, I can't see any of these being good signs for flight simulation as a hobby. Please don't even think of going down the "if ED goes under, who will make modern-aircraft flight simulation??" excuse. If there's a gap in the market, I'm sure someone would fill it and given ED's performance, I'm sure they won't have trouble surpassing the bar that ED has set. I suspect not!, as those purchasing newer modules, are truly the losers! Way to go insulting the rest of ED's customer base! I also suspect they are acutely aware of their predicament better than you, consider your options. Either way, it wont effect me. So what? They're aware of their issues, they're aware of their financial situation, they're in control of the decisions they make. Yet they still make a fool of themselves. 2.5 release was a prime opportunity to show us what they can really, REALLY do, what they can deliver. They fumbled on that one really bad. "1-2 weeks from beta to release?" Where is that now? Just goes to show that ED still haven't learned of their past mistakes. Also goes to show that ED themselves aren't aware of their own issues. If they were, they'd know that their software is far from a 1-2 week beta-to-release timeframe. So they either knew their software was far from release status yet still said "1-2 weeks" or they didn't have a clue about their software's release status and just made a "1-2 weeks" statement. Take your pick. So are they REALLY aware of their predicament? Or are they living in la-la land? I can show you how it seems like they live in la-la land. Can you show me how ED is aware of their situation?
- Ice
|
|
#4414616 - 04/04/18 11:51 AM
Re: Control mapping
[Re: Slippery_Rat]
|
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 871
Winfield
model citizen
|
model citizen
Member
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 871
QLD
|
I'm sure ED have bigger concerns, and are happy to let users resolve this for themselves. No doubt a user will come up with the fix for the memory leak as the focus on live streams of the F-18 takes priority
|
|
|
|