Elite / Frontier The Space Game Control Debate!

[Karl]

First post here. Glad to see the forum is picking up after so many years of quiteness. Where is the Elite specific forum btw? Oh well, better answer this post as it cought my attention as something I have strong opinions about.

I had to choose old-school, because I feel the discussion is not about how you control how the craft changes attitude, but where the craft goes. It's like a discussion about newtonian physics (Elite II Frontier) vs arcade physics (X like games).

I strongly tend to prefer the strict newtonian flight model. However, I believe the "where the ship points" input should derive from classic FPS games. I would expect fly-by-wire in future spaceships instead of direct aileron and elevator control, which also doesn't make much sense in space due to lack of airflow over the control surfaces. With computerized control, it feels more natural to tell the computer which attitude you want (FPS; pitch, yaw) instead of telling it how to achieve it (Old-school; pitch, roll).

If the discussion is actually about attitude control (indepandantly of movement directions), I would say letter pilot decide; mode 1 has pitch and roll with "rudder thrusters", mode 2 has pitch and yaw with "aileron thrusters". As long as these control attitude only in a strict newtonian way, enemy behaviour should not be an issue.

Bigger ships have more inertia but also stronger engines, but should feel more or less heavier on the controls anyway. But no way even a light fighter can quickly change to the opposite direction of flight simply by changing his direction of view, if the initial speed was 10km/sec in forward direction.

I'll even be as blunt as going for retroburns for braking (aerobraking anyone? ), and fuel restrictions by shutting down engines after a certain speed had been accomplished.

I never played Elite, but Frontier was/is the best computer game ever comprehended. On minimal storage available, it had a full galaxy with named systems, political and economic setups. It was pretty realistic in terms of scientific value. The game is to "blame" for getting me seriously interrested in space in real life. I mean, a lot of systems are pretty correctly named compared to star databases found today. And those random ones, well they feel quite natural as well. Distances varies a little though but no biggie.

I have played Freelancer, X2, and X3 too. Although I really like their complexity in terms of trading, fabric building, and ship management, their completely unrealistic flying modes keeps putting me off. Add in overly colored systems with loads and loads of floating asteroids and "fog" (?), jumpgates in mostly four corners of the "systems", weird distances, unlandable planets, "exploration" done on the internet in a couple of days, and no suprices, makes these games a real disaster for me. Yet, I do play them... They are sort of entertaining but there is no wisdom to be gained, compared to all that stuff you can potensially learn from Frontier (like myself).

No, give me proper sense of exploration, with visuals added in as surprises instead of standards. Give me landable planets. Give me slingshotting. Give me fuel scooping when far away. Give me orbiting planets and moons. Give me scientific accuracy. Give me need to figure out stuff on the net (without going to a game site); naah, no way there could be something special going on in Cygnus X1 Give me gorgeous graphics, but only quite rarely as space is a very dark dark place. Give me a realistic flight model and control system. Give it all in Elite 4

Oh and keep the classical tunes as well (mp3's though) -- they simply rock!

Yep, post became a little longer than anticipated... Oh well.

 

[Bounder]

I don't see why E4 should show deference to any prior conceptions of 'traditional' space combat. A laser is aimed by tuning small mirrors and lenses, not by using gyroscopes and retro thrusters to adjust the attitude of an entire 200 tonne hull. The target shouldn't even have to be within optical range.

As well as Elite I used to play Crammond's "Aviator" and "Chocks Away!". It's obvious that biplanes can only fire straight ahead and with limited range - a machine gun is a projectile weapon and so subject to the vagaries of classical mechanics, drag and turbulance etc.

However I would be disapointed if, in a space shooter set a thousand years or more in the future, I had to line up my entire ship with a target, and close within visual range, before I could attack it.

I'd rather have longer-range offensive and defensive systems, exotic energy weapons and imaginative sci-fi. We already have 20-year old weapons systems that out perform those in Elite in every concievable way. Why would weapons technologies not evolve in line with scientific progress?

Sure, aeronautical dogfighting is a hoot. But does that mean realistic space combat can never be fun, or that Jameson should just be a glorified Biggles? Even Frontier had long range scanners that apparently circumvented the defraction limit. Please don't make E4 another Wing Commander clone.

 

[Kipper]

Realistically, combat in space is likely to turn out to be a very sterile, long range, non-adrenaline affair if anything, due to missiles, turrets, so on and so forth.

That just wouldn't be a game though would it?

 

[Fost]

That just wouldn't be a game though would it?

It could be fun I think - just totally different. I think I used the ana׀ogy of sub hunting games - it's fun at a higher strategic level. Problem is that star wars et al have old made us think space battles should be like jetplane dogfighting! I have to admit, I'm firmly in that camp too.

In some respects, Frontier moved a little this way with its Newtonian space-jousting combat. Like you say, the 'reality' of space combat would probably all be about stealth and remaining hidden/detecting the enemy, as once detected you'd probably be killed pretty swiftly by missile or laser. Sounds like you'd have to be very patient...

 

[Kipper]

I think a 'sub sim' type game set in space, done correctly COULD work. I'm just not sure if it could work in Elite though, part of the game was all about being ambushed by pirates and having to deal with them.

In the star wars X-Wing series, (I keep mentioning it because it was so good) - you felt sufficiently different to a standard flight sim, because you had to tackle the fighters, and you also had to keep an eye out on the movements of capital ships with their turrets - even got to take down capital ships by concentrating your firepower.

Now that was pure adrenaline pumping fun!!

I think you could take that, add a 'pinch' of newtonian physics so that the ships did suffer some slight inertial drag as they turned (which would look cool on a replay too) and you'd have an engrossing combat sim.

How often would a ship travelling at 500,000 kmh or whatever be able to come under attack? The calculations required in making a perfect interception would be insane (I enjoy Silent Hunter, and thats bad enough and its only in 2 dimensions!). Thats the sort of thing I could see happening in a strategic sim, but in a pilotting sim not so much so. For me, the combat would happen in and around places where ships are travelling slowly, planets, moons, bases, etc, around the 'jump' areas at the edge of the solar systems (the computer puts you a safe distance from all astronomical bodies to prevent accidents with misjumps) ...

Small, nippy, fighter craft would be able to work up their speed and head towards their target, wheras larger lumbering craft might not be able to (though technically size doesnt matter in zero g, artistic licence!)

For a game, you sometimes have to forget reality, to encourage playability.

 

[ToadMan]

Personally I'd like to see physics based on a Newtonian model a'la Frontier/FE.

All we need to make combat more insteresting is some extra automation. After all let's take the current crop of games like X/BC/Freelancer etc. Their combat is basically using the mouse to put your crosshair on a target - not much in the way of dogfighting. The speeds of the ships are all relative to the same baseline, so you can control the relative speed with your throttle.

The only difference with Frontier/FE was that the speeds of two ships were independent and (probably) relative to different things. That meant you got the continual yo-yo and extreme distances involved as it was difficult to match speeds or slow down enough to dogfight.

All we need then, is some simulated device which will match the relative speed of two ships - once that's done, any manoeuvering will be like dogfighting in X/BC/Freelancer or even elite, expect that both ships are also moving relative to the plentary system.....

You could for example, say that in a system, all ships must fly at speeds relative to the same object in the system, and provide an auto pilot mode that will automatically match speeds. In addition provide some engines that, on smaller fighter craft, have very high acceleration, and it shuold be possible to match relative speeds and then dogfight as normal from there.


As for the actual control method, while I think the elite had a nice feeling "atmospheric" flight model (even though it was in space), projecting forward and given the possibilities for space travel, I suspect that there would in fact be a more refined control mechanism probably akin to FPS style control.

As a result, I think the elite style control might feel a little too restrictive....


Either way, let's hope these conversation actually end with the arrival of Elite 4!!!

Toad.

 

[VictorT]

Personally I'd like to see physics based on a Newtonian model a'la Frontier/FE.

Yea, me too.. i already said that augh! /me punches self.

The only difference with Frontier/FE was that the speeds of two ships were independent and (probably) relative to different things. That meant you got the continual yo-yo and extreme distances involved as it was difficult to match speeds or slow down enough to dogfight.

All we need then, is some simulated device which will match the relative speed of two ships - once that's done, any manoeuvering will be like dogfighting in X/BC/Freelancer or even elite, expect that both ships are also moving relative to the plentary system.....

You could for example, say that in a system, all ships must fly at speeds relative to the same object in the system, and provide an auto pilot mode that will automatically match speeds. In addition provide some engines that, on smaller fighter craft, have very high acceleration, and it shuold be possible to match relative speeds and then dogfight as normal from there.

I was thinking the same thing; have something like in terminus where you can have an onboard guidance system which will velocity-match your target.. THAT was useful. Because all the computer did was make sure your target was your velocity reference point, then you could approach it or retreat from it [or escort it] accordingly.

Maybe have some kind-of short-range velocity matching plug-in for the autopilot for combat. Or maybe as a feature of a combat computer. The combat computer could certainly use target leading bead on the HUD a la X2 while we're at it.

this and the Physics Realism slider, and we've enhanced the game for spacers and atmoers alike!

two more cents.

 

[I_am_Jon]

I think the combat needs to follow the Newtonian model of FFE.

There has to be a YAW mouse controlled system, possibly with an option to switch to ROLL as in FFE. With additional flight controls via keyboard e.g. ROLL, left, right, up, and down thrusters as found in the JJFFE mod. It would be nice to also have the option of using a flight joystick.

The dog fighting with lasers in FFE isn't realistic of the weaponry that will be available in a thousand years time, but it is part of the elite universe and it makes for a great game.

 

[Steve O B Have]

I think the combat needs to follow the Newtonian model of FFE.

There has to be a YAW mouse controlled system, possibly with an option to switch to ROLL as in FFE. With additional flight controls via keyboard e.g. ROLL, left, right, up, and down thrusters as found in the JJFFE mod. It would be nice to also have the option of using a flight joystick.

The dog fighting with lasers in FFE isn't realistic of the weaponry that will be available in a thousand years time, but it is part of the elite universe and it makes for a great game.

Yeah, I agree - there is something that the Newtonian physics adds to the feel of Elite that gives it more of a technical feel without losing the playability.

 

[MisterHalt]

Er, I'm not sure what my preference is, but I prefer it the way I remember it in Wing Commander 4 (Moving joystick left or right moved the ship left or right, but I think there was a bit of rolling involved). Frontier and Freelancer have my favorite type of control (using the mouse meaning best accuracy for me) I tried Oolite last night and didn't like the plain rolling that happened when I tried to turn.

 

[DraQ]

Newtonian system, with yaw as primary and roll acessible somewhere on the keyboard. Of course, directional thrusters should be there as well.

If I wanted to play WWI flight sim, I'd get one.

Rolling doesn't make much sense in space, and, for most of the ships in Frontier, wouldn't make sense in the atmosphere either, as they are about as aerodynamic as a brick.

 

[Raven]

depends on what you've flown really.
i'd agree they'd be bricks, but even bricks witht he right fly-by-wire system would fly quite well. as long as those computers are doing their thang then yo'd be cushty.

i think space works best with roll, because it's 360 rather than 180 degres of movement; but then again that would deped on the local gravity body.
that could screw everything up

 

[DraQ]

depends on what you've flown really.
i'd agree they'd be bricks, but even bricks witht he right fly-by-wire system would fly quite well. as long as those computers are doing their thang then yo'd be cushty.

How can a brick, even with finest fly-by-wire system benefit from banking?

Most of the ships in Frontier simply lack aerodynamic qualities to make banking worthwhile, so they rely on their powerful thrusters to fling them around.

i think space works best with roll, because it's 360 rather than 180 degres of movement; but then again that would deped on the local gravity body.
that could screw everything up

I think, scratch that, know that you're wrong.

In space, far from planetary surface there is no need for particular orientation relative to your ship's main axis. It doesn't matter a didly squat as there is no up and down, therefore, there is no need to rotate your ship along it's main axis, except for when you're aligning yourself with another object, for example to dock.
As for combat maneuvers, with pitch+yaw controls I can quickly rotate my ship to point in any direction I may desire, while with pitch and roll I need to align my ship first, so that my target is either below or above me, at which point the target finishes burning through my shields and turns my ship into a quickly dispersing cloud of hot gas and shrapnel.

Yaw VS Roll
1 : 0

 

[Steve O B Have]

Yeah, but then there is that playability versus simulation situation. With all due respect I have no desire for Elite to be a strictly simulation based game - if you want to be a stickler for absolute real physics then go play a space shuttle simulator.

This is a game and it needs to have more than just a science based physics appeal. If you make it too much like a simulation then you run a very strong risk of alienating the majority of your gamer user base. IMO a very poor decision.

More to the point why not have both control options - we work in a 3D world, it's rediculous to suggest that we only need to operate on a planar control situation.

So as offensive as it may be - Yaw vs Roll - 1:1

 

[DraQ]

Yeah, but then there is that playability versus simulation situation.

Normally I'd agree, but lack of direct yaw control is nothing, but artificial limitation. If you're in dogfight, you want to aim your ship as quickly as possible (either to bring your forward firing weapons to bear, or to accelerate in chosen direction as quickly as possible using your main thruster). The only reason for jets to bank when turning is their reliance on aerodynamic forces.
I don't want to have to rely on nonexistant aerodynamic forces when flying my brick shaped ship, 5AU from the nearest planet, even if I'm shooting pirates with oddly visible laser. Especially, when I know that I could do it in a simple way.

With all due respect I have no desire for Elite to be a strictly simulation based game - if you want to be a stickler for absolute real physics then go play a space shuttle simulator.

This is a game and it needs to have more than just a science based physics appeal. If you make it too much like a simulation then you run a very strong risk of alienating the majority of your gamer user base. IMO a very poor decision.

I'd argue that both Frontier games hit the sweet spot between arcade and simulation.
Both games have you flying a ridiculously powerful craft with idiotically simple controls that almost ensure that you won't die dumb, astounding thrust in all directions - even Lifter has thrust/weight ratio (on Earth) equal 4, 2 for retros (for comparison, in today's fighter jets it rarely exceeds 1), delta-v budget allowing you to visit your aunt on Columbus without even bothering about transfer orbits to conserve fuel, and nearly self sufficient autopilot.
In other words, a craft from a wet-dream of every SF geek on this little blue planet.

Now, in FE2 and FFE we are allowed to fly this dream craft in realistic manner through realistic planetary systems and shoot pirates with colorful beams.

In short, the best of both worlds.

More to the point why not have both control options - we work in a 3D world, it's rediculous to suggest that we only need to operate on a planar control situation.

With this and fully customizable controls I wholeheartedly agree.

So as offensive as it may be - Yaw vs Roll - 1:1

2:1

 

[caol]

... even if I'm shooting pirates with oddly visible laser...

You know it never occurred to me how unrealistic seeing the lasers are! Guess I never really stopped and thought about it. It did however occur to me that hearing laser sound from the other ships wouldn't happen in reality. I think these are definitely cases of game-playability wins over realism (as it should most of the time I guess).

Anyway - back to the YAW VS ROLL debate...

I personally much prefer the YAW control method and agree with everything DraQ has said. Still, I'm almost certain there will be both control methods in Elite IV, just like in FE2 and FFE so it doesn't matter too much - everyone will be happy and it could make for some interesting dogfights in the multi-player version...

 

[syndrome]

^ the way I see it, the humans are built to comprehend sounds separately from the visual signals. That said, some way of additional s(t)imulation during combat is very much needed, if not required.

It is acceptable to have a simulated sound during the dogfights, although it would be nice to lose that feature once the character is outside of the cockpit, for example.

The similar thing can be applied to the laser 'visibility'. Maybe it's the HUD translating the dissipated gamma spectrum for you? Or, if that's scientifically incorrect, maybe it is a simulated photon trajectory based on the laser origin and the time of photon emission.

Generally, I never actually believed in space combat that relies on a visible light spectrum vision.
That's highly implausible.

@Karl at post #21
I couldn't agree more on everything you said.

And about the roll/yaw opinion, the roll is pretty much illogical to anyone confined in the spaceship, and DraQ already stated why.

To aim for something you would only need linear simultaneous pitch/yaw rotation, but the pitch/roll approach require you to undertake a non-linear sequential roll/pitch rotation (in other words, you cannot roll while you change pitch).

However, the ship needs the roll function to align itself appropriately (for example, the pilot wants to set it's frame of reference so the nearest planet goes "down" for the purpose of easier orientation after some difficult combat maneuvering, or it has to go through a narrow passage, maneuver the asteroid field, or to land on a surface, etc). I cannot see the slightest reason why it shouldn't have the controls to roll. Spacecrafts have more freedom than aircrafts, and still the latter ones have all three degrees of rotational freedom (even commercial airplanes use rudder control, which is effectively the yaw angle control), regardless of the fact that only two of them are really needed.

Moreover, the flight controls in the future should be much more sophisticated, ruling out both mouse and joystick control (which are obsolete as we speak, btw). The future pilot should be able to position his craft in a threedimensional space and to do so, imo he shouldn't think of any constraints such as pitch/yaw/roll at all, mainly because he's lacking the frame of reference while in the midst of nothing.

 

[Steve O B Have]

Moreover, the flight controls in the future should be much more sophisticated, ruling out both mouse and joystick control (which are obsolete as we speak, btw). The future pilot should be able to position his craft in a threedimensional space and to do so, imo he shouldn't think of any constraints such as pitch/yaw/roll at all, mainly because he's lacking the frame of reference while in the midst of nothing.

There I'm not so sure. A pilot is almost always going to be going somewhere and as such that would be the frame of reference as a result he/she will always have to take such things as pitch/yaw/roll into account. Being in space doesn't immediately make spacial relativity any different to an airplane flying through the air.

Personally I don't see any point in making yaw and roll mutually exclusive.

 

[Moriarity]

Hi.

Chalk one up for the old style roll

There is another option though. Make the autopilot more involved. When flying you could plot a series of waypoints in space or on planets to move your ship. In combat you could use your autopilot to track/evade the enemy while you manualy aim/fire your lasers.In X3 I remember you had combat autos you could fit, and Eve Online uses the auto pilot most of the time, and although you cant manualy control your ship it works well. I believe a compromise between roll and autopilot would be cool. Some crave the realism of a newtonian method but in reality most of your ship would ultimatly be controlled by autopilots and computers.




Moriarity

 

[The Space Pirate]

That's exactly it - I think any developer would not likely support any method other than mouselook for a space sim these days, because then there's a good chance that a lot of PC users can just pick it up. I actually saw a recent video interview with one space sim developer on gamespot, where they were saying how great it was you could use a mouse and how the joystick was dead.

I completely respect that view - developers have to make money, it's just a bit sad for people like me who miss that old dogfighting feeling that Elite had (as long as you didn't just use the 'cheat' of flying away and shooting them with a rear laser!).

The obvious answer is to support both, but I don't think that works - the elite ships moved in a particular way that was great with pitch/roll, but with modern FPD twitch controls you'd just blow them away.

In any case, it's kind of moot - I'm sure Elite IV would follow on from the Frontier series in it's controls, and this would make sense for ease of use for the majority of modern PC players, I just wondered if I there was anyone else out there in my pitch/roll club

Anything like the X-Wing control method will do me!