DUST Search - Please stop asking for simplified vehicle controls

All Channels

General Discussions

Please stop asking for simplified vehicle controls

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Garrett Blacknova Codex Troopers 1849	Posted - 2012.08.20 11:05:00 - [1] - Quote Honestly, the controls for LAVs feel MUCH better this build than they were last time around, but I'd prefer having accelerator and brake/reverse on the triggers (which are pressure-sensitive, so you don't lose anything by not using the stick's analog functionality) rather than using the analog stick for both movement and steering - it's more awkward than it should be. And for the record, it took several tries in the previous build for me to realise I wasn't going to be able to manage LAV driving, and it only took about 5 mins of derping around driving a (hacked enemy) LAV around the map before I had the hang of things well enough to feel confident driving if I need to.
Garrett Blacknova Codex Troopers 1849	Posted - 2012.08.20 11:48:00 - [2] - Quote Grit Breather wrote: Dust is based on the same motiff as EVE. Sharp learning curve and ultra hardcore. While I do realise this is just my opinion and not fact, I believe in it. I don't see much point to people argueing for realistic hit detection, weapon range and firing cone (scatter) but on the other hand asking for simplified vehicles. A hardcore game means you specialize. Just because you're an amazing sniper and can't drive for **** doesn't mean vehicles should be simplified. It means you should find a good driver for your squad. Arguing realism is an argument IN FAVOUR of changing the controls. You don't get your car speeding forward faster than intended because you're turning the wheel sharply, do you? NO. In this, hard cornering is near-impossible without affecting movement speed as well. Movement and steering should be separate functions. The reason that works for racing sims (NOT just karting games) is because it's ... say it with me... MORE REALISTIC. TRIGGERS (as I mentioned before, also pressure-sensitive, and therefore appropriate to allow variable acceleration) for accelerator and brake/reverse. Left stick for TURNING ONLY.
Garrett Blacknova Codex Troopers 1849	Posted - 2012.08.20 12:15:00 - [3] - Quote Grit Breather wrote: Before flaming me, please read my OP. Thank you. I do point out that the turning mechanism is flawed ATM and have also suggested a solution. I originally wanted to go with L1/L2 for forward/reverse but as someone pointed out, that would've broken the HAV. I'm not flaming you, I read the OP, this was my second post in the thread. And you may not have noticed, but there are separate "wheeled vehicle" (LAV) and "tracked vehicle" (HAV) controls. HAVs, imo, handle fine (I suck with them), and LAVs aren't too bad (I'm better with them, but find the control scheme more awkward). All I'm saying is that it would make more sense NOT to use the current control scheme for LAVs, both from the perspective of realism AND fun factor. You mentioned in several comments that using buttons doesn't work as well for realism because you can't vary the speed as fluidly - I'm pointing out that with the triggers, you CAN.
Garrett Blacknova Codex Troopers 1849	Posted - 2012.08.20 12:48:00 - [4] - Quote Grit Breather wrote: I'll clarify. The controls may need tweaking (especially sharp turns with throttle) but in general the physics model of the vehicles in Dust is perfect. They behave as they should as I see it. The holy grail for the new physics model for it is the dropship. I'm completely in awe with CCP for accomplishing this. It almost seems like they built a dynamic vehicle force engine and allowed the controls to just map to that. For a new vehicle they just define its vectors and let it loose. No special control mapping, just the dynamic engine. In that case, as far as I can comment (haven't personally flown a Dropship yet, and was never too good with them beforehand), I agree with you. My only negative comment is towards the LAV control scheme specifically, and I find that the handling in the new build is (as mentioned in my first post in the thread) better than the previous build. From what I've seen, everything is working as it should, and can be made to work well in the right hands. Dropships take a lot to get used to, but there's nothing wrong with that. I hope there is some form of "simulator" we can use to learn the handling of different weapons, vehicles, etc. though.
Garrett Blacknova Codex Troopers 1849	Posted - 2012.08.20 15:51:00 - [5] - Quote If you're in open sky with nothing to quickly duck behind as a Dropship pilot, you're doing it wrong. If you're not, you can dodge missiles just fine if you're good with the controls. If you're NOT good at flying yet, then you're pretty much dead before you take off. That's not a problem, it's a learning curve.
Garrett Blacknova Codex Troopers 1849	Posted - 2012.08.20 16:38:00 - [6] - Quote TEBOW BAGGINS wrote: Garrett Blacknova wrote: If you're in open sky with nothing to quickly duck behind as a Dropship pilot, you're doing it wrong. If you're not, you can dodge missiles just fine if you're good with the controls. If you're NOT good at flying yet, then you're pretty much dead before you take off. That's not a problem, it's a learning curve. ok well thanks for the insight. which is i posted correct me if i'm wrong, and which is why i dont plant to fly them on plateaus anymore.. so ducking behind a tower or something will break the missle lock? because on last build it did not the only thing that dodge the missile was out running it Ducking behind a tower early enough, or far and fast enough when you're doing it late, will cause the missiles to hit the tower instead of you. They're nowhere near as good at dodging obstacles now as they used to be.
Garrett Blacknova Codex Troopers 1849	Posted - 2012.08.20 19:25:00 - [7] - Quote Sergeant Wiznowski wrote: Grit I think you idea to follow infantry key mapping is wrong in my opinion. Whole R2 wheel idea is not met with positive reactions because it is not working swiftly as it should. Switch from primary to secondary should be fast and reliable e.g triangle. L2 and R2 are perfect for every vehicle controls due to their design - long movement and feel. I am usually tank ho in every fps but driving in Dust is lacking precision. Honestly, with R2 weapon selection, all they need to do is make the default selection shift when you bring up the wheel (I made a thread about it in the feedback forum a couple of days ago) and that should fix most weapon-switch problems. Hopefully, when we can remap the controls, this will also fix things, but it's possible the non-responsiveness will still cause issues.

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.