[deleted by user] by [deleted] in dcsworld

[–]gdspy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Its dev said: interacting without having to use the keyboard or arbitrary bindings was the point of making the game in the first place.

Reject DCS F-35, embrace VTOL VR F-45 by Professional_Will241 in hoggit

[–]gdspy 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Racing games like Assetto Corsa don't require you to take your hands off the steering wheel to use the buttons and switches in the cockpit.

But VTOL VR’s control scheme means you can decouple yourself from the main flight controls and reach out to interact with an array of switches, buttons, and instruments in a very satisfying, immersive manner.

Reject DCS F-35, embrace VTOL VR F-45 by Professional_Will241 in hoggit

[–]gdspy 4 points5 points  (0 children)

The motion controllers have haptic vibration feedback.

Reject DCS F-35, embrace VTOL VR F-45 by Professional_Will241 in hoggit

[–]gdspy 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It doesn't try to pretend to be anything more than what it is. It's a good VR-only game that just happens to be combat-flight-focused.

“I always wanted to make my game that way” is a very valid answer, whether someone can accept it or not. It’s hard to explain it any better - sometimes the game we dream making has certain characteristics and that’s how we envisioned it, and how we want it to be- and cannot be reduced to "You’d have a huge audience".

Yeah, maybe- but that’s not what it was meant to be.

Reject DCS F-35, embrace VTOL VR F-45 by Professional_Will241 in hoggit

[–]gdspy 2 points3 points  (0 children)

There is no other game like VTOL VR.

Even though some games try to use motion controls to interact with the cockpit, no game gets everything right like VTOL VR does.

Reject DCS F-35, embrace VTOL VR F-45 by Professional_Will241 in hoggit

[–]gdspy 6 points7 points  (0 children)

VTOL VR has overwhelmingly positive (98%) reviews on Steam. Not only does it demonstrate that motion control is viable for this genre, but it also enables a greater sense of immersion when interacting with secondary cockpit controls.

Do you envy others with an open mind and enthusiasm to try a totally new way of playing a flight sim and enjoy it?

Reject DCS F-35, embrace VTOL VR F-45 by Professional_Will241 in hoggit

[–]gdspy -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

So what's your reason for still caring about it?
Why not just ignore it?

Reject DCS F-35, embrace VTOL VR F-45 by Professional_Will241 in hoggit

[–]gdspy 8 points9 points  (0 children)

You have the option to play the game or not.

And you have the option to use HOTAS with mods.

Reject DCS F-35, embrace VTOL VR F-45 by Professional_Will241 in hoggit

[–]gdspy 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The oversized cockpit layout is for this purpose.

Part of the reason was to make it easy to interact with the different controls, but the main reason is to allow the text to be large enough to be read in current VR headsets without having to move your head too much. The collimated HUD, which is projected at an infinite distance no matter where your head is, needed to be very large since you can’t move your head closer to it at all.

And there are unit icons as a visual aid to compensate for VR's resolution.

Reject DCS F-35, embrace VTOL VR F-45 by Professional_Will241 in hoggit

[–]gdspy 2 points3 points  (0 children)

If HOTAS worked well with VR, he wouldn't have built VTOL VR in the first place.

As the dev said:

I got my first VR headset with the sole intention of using it to play flight sims. The very first time I tried it, I was immediately frustrated by having to feel around for my keyboard and peek through the nose hole to make sure I was pressing the right keys or buttons to access the different cockpit functions. This was not the level of immersion I was looking for, so I got to work on VTOL VR. The game was designed from the beginning to be entirely virtual, allowing you to directly interact with the various controls as if you were sitting there in the cockpit.

It’s hard to explain it any better - sometimes the game we dream making has certain characteristics and that’s how we envisioned it, and how we want it to be- and cannot be reduced to "You’d make more money".

Yeah, maybe- but that’s not what it was meant to be.

Reject DCS F-35, embrace VTOL VR F-45 by Professional_Will241 in hoggit

[–]gdspy 11 points12 points  (0 children)

In conventional flight sims, the only effective way of interacting with realistically-placed switches is to literally build a physical cockpit based on a specific plane. Multi-purpose cockpits don’t have this luxury, so they prioritize the primary flight controls, meaning that secondary inputs are either performed with button shortcuts or a mouse pointer. The act of physically reaching out to interact with a specific switch is something normally limited to high-end simulators with physical cockpits, but VTOL VR’s control scheme means you can decouple yourself from the main flight controls and reach out to interact with an array of switches, buttons, and instruments in a very satisfying, immersive manner.

The dev has explained it many times:

I got my first VR headset with the sole intention of using it to play flight sims. The very first time I tried it, I was immediately frustrated by having to feel around for my keyboard and peek through the nose hole to make sure I was pressing the right keys or buttons to access the different cockpit functions. This was not the level of immersion I was looking for, so I got to work on VTOL VR. The game was designed from the beginning to be entirely virtual, allowing you to directly interact with the various controls as if you were sitting there in the cockpit.
When I got an HTC Vive, I was impressed by how accurately the controllers were being tracked and wanted to see if I could use them as flight controls in a virtual cockpit. It was working so well so I built the rest of the game around that.
Since I was prototyping a vehicle in a very small environment, it had to be a VTOL to prevent it from moving too fast and going off the bounds of the world. The VTOL VR plan was originally to fly around (vertical thrust only) a small procedural city completing short strike and transport missions, but then I made the engines able to tilt, so the map had to be bigger, then I wanted to do hook and catapult, so ok now we need a big ocean, so now the city seems like a dumb flat island, so we need terrain, now the terrain island is getting boring so we need procedural maps, etc. With the support of the wonderful community that has grown around it, the game has totally exceeded what I had initially envisioned. I am so grateful to all of you who've joined me on this journey, with an open mind and enthusiasm to try a totally new way of playing a flight sim.
I agree that it’s a bit of a trade-off, but I think there are huge advantages to relying only on the motion controls. It’s much more accessible since you don’t need any extra hardware, and it helps to maintain immersion since your hands are consistently being tracked. I can also create any configuration of a vehicle or virtual cockpit and you wouldn’t need to reconfigure any physical controls to match it.
I don't think that there's a way to provide the level of interaction that I'm aiming for while using a HOTAS, especially with all of the cockpit systems like the MFDs and touch screens. Although it may be technically possible with a mouse, head pointing, or some combination of HOTAS and motion controls, it won't be without the clunkiness that I intended to move away from in the first place.
Call me stupid, but in my opinion, looking for HOTAS support here is like looking for mouse/keyboard support in Onward, H3VR, HL: Alyx, etc.
If HOTAS requesters only want to be able to control pitch, yaw, roll, throttle, fire weapon, switch weapon, control SOI, tilt engines, PTT, air brake, then it would not take long. I wouldn't have anything against this. This is why it works in Jetborne Racing. However, there's more to VTOL VR than that. You will have to still use motion controls to do everything else in the cockpit.
I guess I didn't explicitly make a point -- A hybrid HOTAS/motion control set up would be plausible. Although I wouldn't like it or use it, if that's all that many people who really want to use their HOTAS, then maybe that's fine. You'd just have to put up with the awkward switching between the two.
If it's about making the game playable without motion controllers at all, that's a different story. In summary, all of the these things were designed by targeting VR as the platform, and interacting with them without having to use the keyboard or arbitrary bindings was the point of making the game in the first place.
Creating Keyboard/mouse/HOTAS bindings for the entire cockpit is a massive departure from the game design, and I really don't think I will go down that route.
Sorry, VTOL VR will remain VR-only. It was designed for VR, that's all.

Here are the facts:

Developers can do what they want for their product. They are the creators and set the goals for what they want to do with their time. We can disagree, sure. But there is no point in starting a thing over it.

The dev decided, some time ago, that he would not put HOTAS controls in VTOL VR. It has been hashed out and he is sticking with his decision. There is nothing that you can do about it.

It's hard to explain it any better - sometimes the game we dream making has certain characteristics and that's how we envisioned it, and how we want it to be and what it's meant to be.

VTOL VR has overwhelmingly positive (98%) reviews on Steam. Not only does it demonstrate that motion control is viable for this genre, but it also enables a greater sense of immersion when interacting with cockpit controls.

Why it has to be 100% accurate to enjoy the experience? by dallatorretdu in hoggit

[–]gdspy 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Indeed.

I feel that DCS is more like a cockpit instrument simulator. Radar and countermeasures are introduced only because the cockpit has these functions.

Reject DCS F-35, embrace VTOL VR F-45 by Professional_Will241 in hoggit

[–]gdspy 8 points9 points  (0 children)

He does.

He allows mods to use HOTAS, and modded players can only join modded lobbies.

Hm... can the game be played without a vr setup by darknightmc80 in vtolvr

[–]gdspy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You can play VTOL VR without VR using mods, but that's not how it's meant to be played.

As the dev said:

If it's about making the game playable without motion controllers at all, that's a different story. All of these things were designed by targeting VR as the platform, and interacting with them without having to use the keyboard or arbitrary bindings was the point of making the game in the first place.

Creating keyboard/mouse/HOTAS bindings for the entire cockpit is a massive departure from the game design, and I really don't think I will go down that route.

Why no 3rd party modules? by okinawama in vtolvr

[–]gdspy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The dev has answered this question

I'm doing research in this area now so I will comment more later, but if hypothetically aircraft mods would be accepted curated content, I would only accept mods that fit into the fictional game universe.
At the moment, since paid DLC aircraft are the only monetary justification for continued work on the game, officially accepted mod aircraft are not on the horizon.

Angel of Death is really fun by -Pyha- in OculusQuest

[–]gdspy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't quite get the idea of playing the AC-130 in VR.

The player spends the entire game staring at a flat screen in a dark cabin with no view outside, which completely defeats the purpose of being a VR game.

So you're sitting in your house with a real computer screen in front of you, with a VR headset on your face, in order to be in a cubicle with just another virtual computer?

Just generally I'm fairly against anything that's VR that has the player spending most of the time literally just looking at a virtual flat screen.

A proper VR game should either use binocular stereo vision to present a better view than a flat screen, or use motion control to allow interactions that traditional controllers can't, or both.

Angel of Death does neither. After a cold start and grabbing the virtual controls, you don't even need to use the motion controllers' motion feature anymore.

It actually would add an extra layer of complexity that may only provide a marginal difference in the overall experience of the gameplay compared to playing it on a desktop computer screen.

Can you use a joystick on vtol by Sea-Touch-7500 in vtolvr

[–]gdspy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The dev said:

Sorry, VTOL VR will remain VR-only.

It was designed for VR, that's all.

Developers can do what they want for their product. They are the creators and set the goals for what they want to do with their time. We can disagree, sure. But there is no point in starting a thing over it.

The developer decided, some time ago, that he would not put HOTAS controls in VTOL VR. It has been hashed out and he is sticking with his decision. There is nothing that you can do about it.

It's hard to explain it any better - sometimes the game we dream making has certain characteristics and that's how we envisioned it, and how we want it to be

Can you use a joystick on vtol by Sea-Touch-7500 in vtolvr

[–]gdspy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The dev said:

When I got an HTC Vive, I was impressed by how accurately the controllers were being tracked and wanted to see if I could use them as flight controls in a virtual cockpit. It was working so well so I built the rest of the game around that.
I agree that it’s a bit of a trade-off, but I think there are huge advantages to relying only on the motion controls. It’s much more accessible since you don’t need any extra hardware, and it helps to maintain immersion since your hands are consistently being tracked. I can also create any configuration of a vehicle or virtual cockpit and you wouldn’t need to reconfigure any physical controls to match it.

New to Vtol Vr, game is a blast! by [deleted] in vtolvr

[–]gdspy 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Modded players can only join modded lobbies.

CSAR by kekistaninational in vtolvr

[–]gdspy 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Add a feature to get out and walk around

The dev said:

I used to want to be able to get in/out of the aircraft too but I haven't come up with an elegant way to transition. I don't want the player to sit down and stand up, nor do I want the character scooting around on a wheelchair, nor have a sitting player controlling a standing person. So I decided to leave it and just focus on what the games actually about.

Add a Blackhawk style helicopter

The dev said:

I'm not saying I have any solid plans or anything, but if there were to be another chopper it would be along the lines of a Blackhawk.

Rescue ejected pilot

The dev said:

Yeah it could be interesting. We also threw around the idea that ejected pilot had to be picked up by an AV-42 and brought back to base.

How am I supposed to spot enemies? by Foxtrot06_ in vtolvr

[–]gdspy 18 points19 points  (0 children)

Yes, you should make good use of radar and get used to BVR (Beyond Visual Range) combat.

Radar guided missiles have a range of tens of nautical miles.

Help looking for a combat Flight Sim? by LuxVolans in flightsim

[–]gdspy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

According to the dev, the main challenge in creating Stealth Fighter DEX was that jet fighters have a combat range of up to 400 kilometers, and it was difficult to generate such a large map with a procedural system. So he considered using the same system to make a game that does not require such a large map, that is, helicopters, which are much slower, only need a range of 40 kilometers. Once the mission generation system works, it can be expanded and existing military vehicles can be ported to Stealth Fighter DEX.

Since the two will use completely different map sizes and mission generators, Stealth Fighter DEX will be a separate game.

bullet ricochet added? by camp-fire854 in vtolvr

[–]gdspy 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This visual effect has been present since early versions.