CIG Please make flying a profession

K-C

Posts: 736

Posted:
Edited: by K-C
Posted: -
At present we have Star Marine, which while not earth shatteringly new at least fleshes out to a fair degree the profession of soldier/mercenary. We have been told of plans for other professions, medics, engineers miners etc etc. however, the current flight model and more specifically the manner in which we interact with the ships as the pilot is sadly lacking.

It currently consists of, press button to enter ship and starts for you. Take off, here there is some interaction but no skill at all. Combat using IM is a disaster and the worst it has been since I pledged in 2014. IM quite literally means that to be successful with IM you wave the mouse around the screen and shit blows up. You can set the throttle at full and never touch another flight control. This is NOT skill based.

Rotation rates are still not varied enough to make any meaningful difference. Damage does not effect ship handling at all in IM. Ship speed is marginally better in 2.6.1, however acceleration rates again mean that no thought is required, particularly in IM.

If I can be bothered I sometimes adjust a shield, but so rarely it is meaningless. The radar is useless tech as I have a great big arrow telling me where to go next. There is no need to manage any system at all.

My 14 year old niece will play Microsoft Flight Sim for hours because in her words, "it feels like I am flying" no combat, nothing more than an occasional simulated storm, but put her in an IM controlled ship in SC and ten minutes later she says "I'm bored, it's just moving the mouse".

I understand a need or desire to make the game accessible, but seriously just how dumbed down does it have to be??? If we apply this same level of design to SM we would be playing whack-a-mole, to mining it would be find a rock, press one button to collect ore. IM, the flight model and the lack of meaningful interaction with the ships is appallingly bad. You may as well remove it from the game altogether and simply have all ships be AI controlled and we can just select a target for them.

The major aspect of this game, piloting, has been so dumbed down it is virtually meaningless. Add in IM and it is completely meaningless to a degree a 14 year old is bored after ten minutes!

Seriously... fix this as a priority! You can add all the bells and whistles you like to planetary design and art, models and an economy, but if the single most important aspect of gameplay, (flight in case you somehow missed it) is so appalling bad that it can't hold the attention of a 14 year old then you may as well call it a day right now. IM and this lack of interaction with your ship will kill this game, the same way Freelancer did unless you find a way to incorporate skill into it.
  • Cedriloth

    Posts: 253

    Posted:
    Posted:
    IM debatte since 2014..
    https://forums.robertsspaceindustries.com/discussion/171914/katamari-mega-thread-controller-implementation-balance#latest

    "interactive ship interaction" is now being Developed.. (bit late imo)
  • PecosBob

    Posts: 3839

    Posted:
    Posted:
    I pretty much agree with your assessment, but I don't think there's anybody back there.

    0.jpg
    'Ya don't got to be Stonewall Jackson to know you don't want to fight in a basement.'
  • Coren747

    Posts: 4116

    Posted:
    Posted:
    Did you put SC with a HOTAS in her hands instead of a mouse ?

  • K-C

    Posts: 736

    Posted:
    Edited: by K-C
    Posted:
    Edited:
    [hide]

    Did you put SC with a HOTAS in her hands instead of a mouse ?

    About a year ago. She liked it a lot better but maintained it wasn't as much fun as Microsoft flight sim, a game that has no combat but where you actually fly the plane... this time around she was so pissed off she didn't even want to try it with stick lol... fair enough a 14 year old girl is probably not the target audience, but it wasn't for flight sim either!

    Edit: oh and btw she prefers using a mouse even in fsx.
  • Coren747

    Posts: 4116

    Posted:
    Posted:
    Kim | K-C said:
    [hide]

    [hide]

    Did you put SC with a HOTAS in her hands instead of a mouse ?

    About a year ago. She liked it a lot better but maintained it wasn't as much fun as Microsoft flight sim, a game that has no combat but where you actually fly the plane... this time around she was so pissed off she didn't even want to try it with stick lol... fair enough a 14 year old girl is probably not the target audience, but it wasn't for flight sim either!

    Edit: oh and btw she prefers using a mouse even in fsx.
    I never could fly with a mouse in any game. Glad she can feel like flying with it
  • Reiketsu

    Posts: 3599

    Posted:
    Posted:
    If they had said, "We are making Freelancer 2.0" they wouldn't have gotten a dime from me. In fact, they specifically said that it wouldn't be Freelancer 2.0. Yet that is exactly what we have now, only thing missing is the magic potions you can spam to repair your hull and shields.
  • Dunban

    Posts: 2967

    Posted:
    Edited: by Dunban
    Posted:
    Edited:
    IM puts aim first and flight second. In fact flight is just a byproduct. (The pilot becomes more of a gunner than actually a pilot.) Much of the things that have followed are just a consequence of that. I.e. I can't remember to have ever heard of a space ship game that needed aim assist (aka "ESP"), like your average Call of Duty, to make first-order control-methods (joystick, v-joy, etc) viable. It's quite telling actually.

    From an ergonomics point of view, it's grossly negligent to task the pilot with manually aiming gimballed weapons, when he already holds the flight responsibility (=> responsibility over ship and crew). That is why no lore explanation for pilot-aimed-gimbals makes any sense at all. It only "works" gameplay-wise because IM trivializes the whole notion of flight, pushing flight-gameplay towards the primitive nature of a shooter.

  • K-C

    Posts: 736

    Posted:
    Posted:
    Just to be clear...

    This not about controllers. It is completely about the total lack of pilot interaction particularly in IM, but also the lack of any strategy tactics or skill required in most other control modes as well
  • alienwar

    Posts: 6082

    Posted:
    Posted:
    Let's put combat aside. I think we need to look at flight just from a non-combat perspective. Just like your niece found fsx much more involved and interesting even without combat, so should SC be interesting even without another ship to dogfight against.

    We have a complex physics system, thrusters with impulse, ships with mass, gravity, even atmospheres. Yet, for all that potential depth, we stop and start on a dime, never have to worry about our thrusters, don't even notice gravity (people had to go to 3rd person to see the thrusters firing above a landing pad), never have to worry about mass, weight distribution, or any environmental factors. Our ships perfectly execute whatever we want to the point that it feels more like cinematic camera controls than flight.

    Just on those grounds alone, we have a fairly shallow experience.

    But the thing is, add in combat....and there's not much more. Missiles are "face your target, lock, fire". Shields and system management is nonexistent (okay, item 2.0). Shooting boils down to arcade fps where you've swapped aiming at a target to PIPs (if anything that is less visceral). IM somehow manages to dumb that down even more.

    People will tell you "but strafe control". Great, but digital strafing is nearly nonexistent. And tbh, it's not that big of a deal.

    QD is even more shallow. JP are so far out they might as not be considered part of the game. Cruise/AB is in a state of Flux with barely a sense of purpose.

    The game is skill-based like Tribes or Quake is skill-based. Not like fsx or Gran Turismo is skill-based. In other words, it is not a vehicle game....it is a shooter.
    CpG0fXM.jpg
  • MrEffe

    Posts: 1352

    Posted:
    Couldn't have said better myself, flying should be accessible, but not something that doesn't require any thought, effort or any interaction at all. I think K-C has made a perfect sum of everything wrong with this game and its gameplay design.

    And yes, it needs to be seen first and foremost from a non-combat perespective, because it's there that we can see how shallow the experience is. The life of an explorer will be hop on a ship, QD somewhere, golf-swing your scanners onto something, -or in the best case scenario, you are required to perform a little EVA- QD back to the starport, collect reward. Great fun, yeah.

    HFmUZG1.gif
  • Capt_Space_Ghost

    Posts: 6283

    Posted:
    Posted:
    It's as shallow as it gets ..

    Complete disappointment

    I'm starting to think the only way I'll enjoy star citizen is to get away from my sim / gaming rig and stream it onto my HTPC rig, which is dedicated for casual arcade games and party apps...
  • Ibly1

    Posts: 3346

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    It's as shallow as it gets ..

    Complete disappointment

    I'm starting to think the only way I'll enjoy star citizen is to get away from my sim / gaming rig and stream it onto my HTPC rig, which is dedicated for casual arcade games and party apps...

    Why not? I'm would work perfectly with a wii controller. I'm not being sarcastic either
  • Capt_Space_Ghost

    Posts: 6283

    Posted:
    Posted:
    Sims primarily are NOT twitch / reflex focus.. There is an element of reflex, but it's more about strategy and knowledge of the craft you are flying and the craft you are up against.. A game of cat and mouse and will against limitations of your ship.

    Its why older farts like me whose reflexes are nowhere near like when we were 20 love them.. Its more an action strategy game where we still need skill, there's still cool explosions but it's a different skill set to button smashing shooters

    Turning this sim into a twitch shooter puts a giant middle finger at sim fans who weren't born to "180 no scope"

    Focus on aim screams of console pedigree of many of the devs and is completely misplaced in a sim.. Its further highlighted by flight being nothing more than getting in ship and hitting strafe up then throttling forward.

    Let's make flight important cig. Aim can be part of fps sure, but these awesome ships need to be flown, not pointed and aimed
  • SimpleSimon

    Posts: 1891

    Posted:
    Edited: by SimpleSimon
    Posted:
    Edited:
    Agree 100% with OP.
    Your own impatience can be your greatest enemy.
  • alienwar

    Posts: 6082

    Posted:
    Posted:
    Going through my video list, it becomes very apparent how SC is different than all the sims, while comparable to all the space shooters. It's kind of fun having such direct, clear evidence of the problem.

    Of course, you kind of have to know where to look....and that might be the biggest problem.

    :(
    CpG0fXM.jpg
  • Ibly1

    Posts: 3346

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    Going through my video list, it becomes very apparent how SC is different than all the sims, while comparable to all the space shooters. It's kind of fun having such direct, clear evidence of the problem.

    Of course, you kind of have to know where to look....and that might be the biggest problem.

    :(

    Can you give me a link to the videos? I can't remember which thread they were in.
  • MrEffe

    Posts: 1352

    Posted:
    [hide]

    [hide]

    Going through my video list, it becomes very apparent how SC is different than all the sims, while comparable to all the space shooters. It's kind of fun having such direct, clear evidence of the problem.

    Of course, you kind of have to know where to look....and that might be the biggest problem.

    :(

    Can you give me a link to the videos? I can't remember which thread they were in.
    In our beloved Katamari of course!

    https://forums.robertsspaceindustries.com/discussion/comment/7521465/#Comment_7521465
    HFmUZG1.gif
  • RobertKerenski

    Posts: 1369

    Posted:
    Posted:
    OP hit the nail on the head.

    A sense and importance of flight should be the #1 priority and foundation for this game.
    --> Jarus' Target Locking Gimbals <--
    We want a SPACE SIM not a SPACE SHOOTER!
  • Valdrin

    Posts: 524

    Posted:
    Posted:
    Kim | K-C said:
    [hide]

    At present we have Star Marine, which while not earth shatteringly new at least fleshes out to a fair degree the profession of soldier/mercenary. We have been told of plans for other professions, medics, engineers miners etc etc. however, the current flight model and more specifically the manner in which we interact with the ships as the pilot is sadly lacking.

    It currently consists of, press button to enter ship and starts for you. Take off, here there is some interaction but no skill at all. Combat using IM is a disaster and the worst it has been since I pledged in 2014. IM quite literally means that to be successful with IM you wave the mouse around the screen and shit blows up. You can set the throttle at full and never touch another flight control. This is NOT skill based.

    Rotation rates are still not varied enough to make any meaningful difference. Damage does not effect ship handling at all in IM. Ship speed is marginally better in 2.6.1, however acceleration rates again mean that no thought is required, particularly in IM.

    If I can be bothered I sometimes adjust a shield, but so rarely it is meaningless. The radar is useless tech as I have a great big arrow telling me where to go next. There is no need to manage any system at all.

    My 14 year old niece will play Microsoft Flight Sim for hours because in her words, "it feels like I am flying" no combat, nothing more than an occasional simulated storm, but put her in an IM controlled ship in SC and ten minutes later she says "I'm bored, it's just moving the mouse".

    I understand a need or desire to make the game accessible, but seriously just how dumbed down does it have to be??? If we apply this same level of design to SM we would be playing whack-a-mole, to mining it would be find a rock, press one button to collect ore. IM, the flight model and the lack of meaningful interaction with the ships is appallingly bad. You may as well remove it from the game altogether and simply have all ships be AI controlled and we can just select a target for them.

    The major aspect of this game, piloting, has been so dumbed down it is virtually meaningless. Add in IM and it is completely meaningless to a degree a 14 year old is bored after ten minutes!

    Seriously... fix this as a priority! You can add all the bells and whistles you like to planetary design and art, models and an economy, but if the single most important aspect of gameplay, (flight in case you somehow missed it) is so appalling bad that it can't hold the attention of a 14 year old then you may as well call it a day right now. IM and this lack of interaction with your ship will kill this game, the same way Freelancer did unless you find a way to incorporate skill into it.


    A lot of the ship interaction features do not work yet or have no benefit as of yet.

    Controlling signatures, power, shields, turning things on and off, groupings for example will have a benefit. For now there isn't much to them. Countermeasures can be tuned as well, even mechanics as flying through them after they drop has affects on your ship but appear to be buggy right now.

    You shouldn't expect a full flight seem however because a flight sim looks to replicate flight with almost everything they can where a space game like SC tries to balance complex mechanics and making sure they can have a lot of the audience players still able to fly.
  • Adian_Jaakul

    Posts: 914

    Posted:
    Posted:
    To really make it work. It being SC. Flying should not be accessible. That's right NOT accessible. That's the way the promise of the game holds together. Everything breaks down without a high skill flight sim style game. SC cannot work both ways. An accessible flight model will trickle down into everything else until the game becomes a standard MMO amusement park without any meaning to any action.
    I lived side by side with the sons of glassblowers fishermen and smugglers. Stories they told were shaper satires about the hypocrisy of authority and the middle classes the two-facedness of teachers and lawyers and politicians. I was born politicized.
  • Ibly1

    Posts: 3346

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    To really make it work. It being SC. Flying should not be accessible. That's right NOT accessible. That's the way the promise of the game holds together. Everything breaks down without a high skill flight sim style game. SC cannot work both ways. An accessible flight model will trickle down into everything else until the game becomes a standard MMO amusement park without any meaning to any action.

    I disagree, if the ships in the game were capable of manuevering in such a way it actually mattered then it could be very deep. Ships having the ability to pitch and yaw faster than any ship can manuever renders moot the very idea of manuevering. If you make the ships faster you increase the aiming skill obviously but flight stays irrelevant until it means something to be able to put your nose on target.
  • PhotonPulse

    Posts: 488

    Posted:
    Posted:
    +42 to OP
    This was suposed to be a flight game.

    I recently reinstalled elite dangerous. A friend from star citizen heard me saying that on our org TS and decided to try it too.
    One of his first comments after trying elite was: "Why didn't the SC devs simply copy the flight model from this game? it works so well!"

    It is also worth noting this friend bought a joystick for star citizen and quickly discarded it because: (quoting him again) "it is impossible to aim anything effectivly with a joystick!". So he was feeling he had wasted money and kept on playing SC with mouse IM. He played with the joystick right away in ED, killed wanted NPCs on his first play, and he loves it.

    Personnaly I would not want a pure copy of ED flight model, but you can't argue: the flight model in elite is solid and the controler mode is truly agnostic, which is not the case in SC.

    At least we got changes about the flight model, I mean they are trying new things. Unfortunatly nothing about the controler modes. As if the curent situation was close to be good. I guess just like VR, this is not a critical feature, it can wait one more year... or two.

    Recently I heard a dev commenting the speed changes of 2.6.1 as one more step from an iterative process. I am sorry but just when a good part of the community was starting to think the flight model was OKish, the devs kicked the hornet nest and halved all the speeds because after a year of "iterating" the "flight model 2.0", it suddenly felt not cinematic enough or noob-friendly enough. That is not smooth at all, it is like if you want to balance a weapon that makes a bit too much damage you would half its effective DPS, that is not iterating, that is nerfing stuff to the ground. But you ve done that too. lol. several times :' [

    Anyway, now that 2.6 reminded us nothing is final, can we try more things?

  • Dizzy_Dalek

    Posts: 2306

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    OP hit the nail on the head.

    A sense and importance of flight should be the #1 priority and foundation for this game.

    So true. CIG don't seem to agree, unfortunately.
    j5gamtiq5/sig_sabre_small.jpg
    Space is a dangerous place, Kevin.
  • Adian_Jaakul

    Posts: 914

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    [hide]

    To really make it work. It being SC. Flying should not be accessible. That's right NOT accessible. That's the way the promise of the game holds together. Everything breaks down without a high skill flight sim style game. SC cannot work both ways. An accessible flight model will trickle down into everything else until the game becomes a standard MMO amusement park without any meaning to any action.

    I disagree, if the ships in the game were capable of manuevering in such a way it actually mattered then it could be very deep. Ships having the ability to pitch and yaw faster than any ship can manuever renders moot the very idea of manuevering. If you make the ships faster you increase the aiming skill obviously but flight stays irrelevant until it means something to be able to put your nose on target.
    I'm thinking of flight outside of dogfighting. It's about making roles useful. The only way that a career as a turret operator is useful is if not everyone has an aptitude for it. There is no reason I would even hire a transport pilot if I can simply fly myself. It's the "team" aspect that really isn't there. Most MMOs are afraid to allow a player to experience something they can't do. When you can do everything on your own, then you don't need anyone, and the teamplay is not really that. It's just hanging out playing a single player game next to other people playing a single player game.

    Remember career as an airline pilot? Not much there without a complex flight model. How about the teamwork required to run a mining ship? With our current flight model it would be as in depth as George Jetson's job. Why would a merc group hire a pilot to transport them into an area. They can just fly themselves. The profession's themselves don't have a need and that changes how players interact with each other. The reason survival games are shoot on site majority of the time is because you never need the other player to survive, so why risk it? It would be a different experience is you actually needed other players to accomplish things.

    I don't disagree with what you are saying, but looking at the game world as a whole, flying needs to be difficult. You said you disagree, but it doesn't sound like it to me.
    I lived side by side with the sons of glassblowers fishermen and smugglers. Stories they told were shaper satires about the hypocrisy of authority and the middle classes the two-facedness of teachers and lawyers and politicians. I was born politicized.
  • Pikas62

    Posts: 69

    Posted:
    Edited: by Pikas62
    Posted:
    Edited:
    Totally agree with OP. Flight model and ship interaction definitively shouldn´t be like DCS but more in that direction (Il2 Cliffs of Dover like ?). Particularly ships should have much more different characteristics. So as in real life if you have mastered to fly one ship that means not that you can also fly another ship as well.
    Gemini|Crucible|Aquila|Warden|Cutlass_Black|Prospector|Sabre|Super_Hornet|Ghost|Buccaneer|Herald|Titan|Merlin|85x|Dragonfly
  • Flak

    Posts: 214

    Posted:
    Posted:
    @K-C While I agree with your cause, the statement "can't hold the attention of a 14 year old" should be changed to "can't hold the attention of your 14 year old". You have a pool of one user in your argument. CIG is to design a game based on the opinions of 1 14 yr old who is most likely influence by your personal opinions?

    I hear the term flight sim a lot, but SC is not a flight sim it is a space sim and if anyone takes the time to go look at Chris Roberts older games like Wing Commander etc. the flight model plan would be clear from the beginning.

    I'm a dual joystick user so I understand your plight against IM, what I am not is a game designer I just play games I leave the designing to others and I would prefer if the designing was not based on random peoples 14 year old children.

    Microsoft Flight Sim has no combat and it most certainly does not have the same rhythm of gameplay needed for an arcade space sim with combat, boarding, multi-crew etc. I don't think the 2 should be compared.

    Cheers and happy gaming!
  • Ibly1

    Posts: 3346

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    @K-C While I agree with your cause, the statement "can't hold the attention of a 14 year old" should be changed to "can't hold the attention of your 14 year old". You have a pool of one user in your argument. CIG is to design a game based on the opinions of 1 14 yr old who is most likely influence by your personal opinions?

    I hear the term flight sim a lot, but SC is not a flight sim it is a space sim and if anyone takes the time to go look at Chris Roberts older games like Wing Commander etc. the flight model plan would be clear from the beginning.

    I'm a dual joystick user so I understand your plight against IM, what I am not is a game designer I just play games I leave the designing to others and I would prefer if the designing was not based on random peoples 14 year old children.

    Microsoft Flight Sim has no combat and it most certainly does not have the same rhythm of gameplay needed for an arcade space sim with combat, boarding, multi-crew etc. I don't think the 2 should be compared.

    Cheers and happy gaming!

    I agree with the space sim argument but it's not that. With mouse IM with gimbals it's not wing commander either. You just aim your guns and the ship follows.
  • Solgarmr

    Posts: 97

    Posted:
    Posted:
    I sort of agree there, flight should not be to easy, well maybe with some amount of flight assists that heavily limits the ships potential
    Wrarr
  • Wolfang

    Posts: 257

    Posted:
    Posted:
    If you don't like IM Mouse with Gimbals take the gimbals off the ship and/or lock them forward. Problem solved. You then fly normally.

    I also agree that your one person sample size of a fourteen year old not wanting to play the game doesn't mean all that much. Most fourteen year olds would walk away from a serious flight sim in a minute as well, as they bore most people to tears - hence why they're a niche market.

    The game behaves like Wing Commander if you choose to tweak your settings to make it do that. Nobody forces you to use easy-mode. Complaining about its existence denies people with no desire to learn deep controls the possibility to experience enough of the finished game to have fun, and then WANT to learn the deep controls.

    If you're advanced enough, and have the desire, simply don't use IM and Gimbals. You'll end up a better pilot.

    I still don't understand the issue, unless it's "I don't want to lose to people who play differently than me". If it's not a competitive thing, I just don't get it- but the bottom line is you can get good enough to beat any IM user with Joysticks if you want to. If you're complaining that the experience is too bland, well, I don't think you're putting enough effort in to learning all your options.

    I don't understand the comments that you can just fly around on full throttle and never touch it again, only using the mouse, for instance. That's a recipe for smacking into something and dying. I've never been able to fly like that. I'm curious how others are accomplishing it, unless it's just hyperbole. Take a fight into some asteroids and show me proof you can fly infinitely on full throttle and accomplish anything. I'd love to see it.

    I feel like 90% of the people on these forums complaining barely play the damned game.
    Grand Admiral Taren Avalis
    Black Star Initiative Mercenary
    - Origin 325A Canis Minor - Aegis Sabre Bladesong -
    - Anvil Gladiator Foxfire - Anvil F7C-M Super Hornet Alphabeast -
    - RSI Polaris Corvette Liberator -
  • Flak

    Posts: 214

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    [hide]

    @K-C While I agree with your cause, the statement "can't hold the attention of a 14 year old" should be changed to "can't hold the attention of your 14 year old". You have a pool of one user in your argument. CIG is to design a game based on the opinions of 1 14 yr old who is most likely influence by your personal opinions?

    I hear the term flight sim a lot, but SC is not a flight sim it is a space sim and if anyone takes the time to go look at Chris Roberts older games like Wing Commander etc. the flight model plan would be clear from the beginning.

    I'm a dual joystick user so I understand your plight against IM, what I am not is a game designer I just play games I leave the designing to others and I would prefer if the designing was not based on random peoples 14 year old children.

    Microsoft Flight Sim has no combat and it most certainly does not have the same rhythm of gameplay needed for an arcade space sim with combat, boarding, multi-crew etc. I don't think the 2 should be compared.

    Cheers and happy gaming!

    I agree with the space sim argument but it's not that. With mouse IM with gimbals it's not wing commander either. You just aim your guns and the ship follows.
    No I totally agree is something is not fun or unbalanced it should be fixed. I state in my original comment I support OP. What I do not support OP's delivery method.
Sign In or Register to comment.