Jump to content

Standardized Control Types / Scheme

Recommended Posts

After another session of updating controls I had some thoughts. Some of them seemed productive. One of the less helpful ones was my realization that I've probably spent more time in the controls screen configuring bindings than flying. One of the more helpful thoughts seemed to be how it'd nice if the different control types, and how we set them up, were standardized a bit more.


Instead of the controls page listing "Example Switch Up", "Example Switch Down", "Example Switch Off", "Example Switch Position 1", "Example Switch Position 2".. there would be one listing of "Example Switch", and a separate column of Type that would have "3-way switch".


In the controls UI, that 3-way switch control could be it's own accordion (+/- expand close) to expose the Up/Down/P1/P2, or pop up a modal that would then have the options to set Up/Down, or to set controls specifically for Position 1/Position 2.


An analog/inspiration for this is iRacing. Configuring some controls, like rotaries, will launch a popup to set the next/prev buttons for that control.




A) It'd streamline the controls list.


B) Helps devs, where instead of having to consider Up/Down/P1/P2, or possibly be inconsistent with how those options are presented, they designate a control as a type (Button, Level, x-way Switch/Dial/Etc). I have to imagine the engine already works this way at some level.


B Tangent) I was excited to try the C101 after having a lot of fun in the L39, only to immediately be put off by how some of the controls are reversed from what I thought was a DCS standard (specifically in this case, right = up, left = down).


If I were able to define my modifiers a little more too, like Right Shift = Up / Left Shift = Down, then time could be saved as well. I could go to define a control for a dial, and assign a key, and it automatically map the Up/Down based on my defined modifiers for Up/Down.


Thoughts? Apologies if this has been brought up before, as I'm kind of expecting it to have been.


PS/Bonus Tangent - Another thought from my iRacing is how I'd be willing to pay a monthly subscription for some enhanced DCS portal/online experience if that meant additional revenue available for better development of the core engine + more frequent updates of older or less popular planes. also it'd be cool to have a pilot log / squadron / etc stuff all commonly tracked online (like iRacing with profiles and teams and such). More of a DCS.. World. The genesis of this is me wondering "How can ED be incentivized to devote more resources to core stuff like AI?".

Edited by Monkwolf
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Create New...