Limit Theory Forums

And then there is the cool stuff like controller + mouse

With so many requests for various input methods, I think the best would be to use the lowest common denominator for of them all:
an X-BOX controller based menu, and flight mechanics.
The other input devices could be then somehow mapped to that.

Damocles wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 20, 2018 11:00 am

With so many requests for various input methods, I think the best would be to use the lowest common denominator for of them all:
an X-BOX controller based menu, and flight mechanics.
The other input devices could be then somehow mapped to that.

Personally, I strongly disagree. I find controller-based menus to be very cumbersome - especially with things that need the ability to have search fields, like Limit Theory will. Scrolling down through a massive list of things sorted in alphabetical order because you can't just hit search and type "Plasma Cannon" is not my idea of a good time.

As to the flight mechanics, Limit Theory is a PC-only game. The mechanics ought to be based around a PC mouse + keyboard, because more people will have keyboards and mice (100%) than the (much smaller) percentage that will have controllers.

Finally, seeing as Limit Theory is heavily inspired by Freelancer, it makes sense that the controls will be like they are there. Controllers should be optional, but I don't think the game should bend over backwards to cater to them - especially not at the expense of the experience of those that lack them.

((Note: the above is just my opinion. The flight model is (at least, in the PAX demo and LT Prototype) already based around mouse control, and I very strongly doubt that the menus will be anything different.))

Im just trying to tease Flatfingers here

I want to showcase, that trying to support several input methods cannot (economically) result in the best results for ALL of them.
Apart from the many console/PC games, thats also visible in pure flight simulators, wich are designed with a proper Joystick and multiple Monitors in mind.
(X-Plane, FSX). Controlling the plane with a mouse is mostly a terrible experience there.

And if there is a (complete) controller support, one cannot have drag-n-drop items interaction, or resizable windows (like in EvE). Thats why you never see that in dual PC/Console games, as it would require a completely different menu-system for the mouse controls. That would be a nightmare for QA and also modders.

Damocles wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 20, 2018 1:04 pm

Apart from the many console/PC games, thats also visible in pure flight simulators, wich are designed with a proper Joystick and multiple Monitors in mind.
(X-Plane, FSX). Controlling the plane with a mouse is mostly a terrible experience there.

Well, yes, but that's mostly because the direction of "up" matters very strongly in those games. In Freelancer, rolling made little difference in almost all situations, so it didn't really matter which way "up" was - all you needed was to be sure you were pointing in the appropriate direction, and the mouse was an excellent tool for that. How far the cursor was away from the center of the screen would affect your turning rate, giving you an experience similar to using a joystick, but without any menu difficulties: you were able to quickly switch from turning, to clicking HUD elements, and then back to turning. In addition, freelancer weapons were mildly turreted and would fire in the direction of your mouse (in 3d space of course), giving you more firing control than in a normal joystick-shooter. This particular selection of cases isn't very common for games, but it worked very well for Freelancer. I'm sure it'll work well for Limit Theory as well.

In other flight sims, "up" mattered, so instead of your mouse controlling where your plane faces, your mouse controls two axes... which is very suboptimal, especially when you can't even see where your mouse "is".

I dont doubt that a controller is very capable for the actual ship steering and combat. That works well for either mouse or controller (just in a different way, a mouse is better when shooting precisely at targets, and a controller is way better for ship-movement, than WASD).
The problem is more the menu interaction. Best example beeing moving items around. A controller is just not a pointing device.

I happen to have both a twinstick controller and a flight stick, and I've played a number of space games. My preferences regarding controls depend on the game in question. For instance, I like the mouselook system in Space Engineers, but Kerbal Space Program feels wrong with a mouse. I prefer keyboard in KSP, actually; the flight stick is somehow very difficult for me to use. The twinstick works well, though. Elite: Dangerous is the first game I've really enjoyed my flight stick.
I suppose the point is: It really depends on the game and flight model, at least for me. Every mode can work well in certain circumstances.

Damocles wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 20, 2018 1:04 pm

Im just trying to tease Flatfingers here

And taken as such.

Really, it's only because I can see the fun in Kingdom Come: Deliverance and InnerSpace -- it's why I backed them! -- that I take the time to gripe about the wall erected between me and that fun by their inexplicably mouse&keyboard-unfriendly input systems. I try not to lurch into Rant Mode too often. Thanks for putting up with this one.

As to whether I'm the only person perplexed by how much Warhorse seems to hate KCD's players....

Finally, it's up

Video Dev Log Review: https://youtu.be/3pdUd2vbN0M

New music (I REALLY like this music, stays out of the way and is calming. It's probably the winner). Hope you enjoy the whole video, tried a new way of showing forum clips and a few other small changes to make it easier to watch... I hope.

Distant wrote: ↑

Wed Feb 21, 2018 12:58 pm

Finally, it's up

Video Dev Log Review: https://youtu.be/3pdUd2vbN0M

I do love seeing that warp node eye-candy again; prompted me to indulge in a little Update 21 nostalgic chill-out.

I bounced off Adam's rather cerebral wall-of-text, but your carefully prepared video has made the jist of the log and thread discussion more accessible. Thanks.

Baile nam Fonn wrote: ↑

Wed Feb 21, 2018 1:30 pm

cerebral wall-of-text

You say this like it's a bad thing.

I certainly don't follow every detail myself. But it's nice to be trusted with the "guts" of how things work.

If we're going to evangelize development environments I'm going to have to give .Net Core a shout out. It's a super great platform and NuGet makes package management so easy. You can create your own local nuget repositories with a simple ftp server! It's also OSS and fully cross platform.

/evangelization

As far as input methods I'd like to throw in my two bits.

The Oblivion and Skyrim UIs were obviously designed with controllers in mind and are *horrible* with mouse and keyboard. This is made extra terrible because FPRPGs are objectively worse when handled with a controller.

On the other hand, I find flight sims (even non-newtonian ones like X-Rebirth) to be a frustrating mess with mouse and keyboard.

Damocles is right that it's pretty much impossible to design a single UI and control scheme that caters well to both controllers and M&K (not to mention such esoterics as HOTAS), but I think a not-abysmal middle ground can be found.

I'm also confident that quality UI and Input mods will pop up for LT within months of release.

AdamByrd wrote: ↑

Thu Feb 15, 2018 2:11 pm

bindings are doing doing actual

ended up split the input system

Hi Adam,
Quite happy you found the 3x typos in your wonderful wall of text.. maybe it's because I still love DOS Batch script (prototyping working solutions in DOS is second-nature for me now, I'm having difficulty in transitioning to Powershell).

Don't fret about these, I used to be called the "dick-tionary" in Eve Online because I kept correcting my team-mates in chat
I hope you don't mind me checking your writing.

D

AdamByrd wrote: ↑

Mon Feb 19, 2018 10:28 am

My ideal language would contain (at least):
...

Adam, your wish list strongly reminds me of Rust
I didn't know about Jai, it looks nice! Especially the automatic structure-of-arrays. But I have to disagree with that philosophy for any large project:

Programmers do make mistakes and cause crashes, perhaps even serious ones, but the argument is that the increase in productivity and reduction of friction when memory-safe mechanisms are absent more than make up for the time lost in tracking down errors, especially when good programmers tend to produce relatively few errors.

Seems like designing a computer language for "good programmers" is an excellent way to insure that it remains a niche boutique language.

Nothing wrong with that, unless one of your goals is a self-sustaining population of users.