How Heavy is Impact on Control Bindings for New Release (beta)?

[Sylow]

The point, which I've made twice now, is simply that I don't like to re-use primary controls for secondary functions.

.
No. First you tried to make a point how things are in fighter jets. Which I find a bit flawed, as few of us have a full sized fighter jet cockpit at home.
.
Now that you say that you don't like it: that's perfectly valid. Preferences are different. But other people seem to be perfectly fine with that and, as already mentioned, other simulators out there also allow you to use the joystick in menus. It's a convenience feature. Nobody is forced to use it, it's just acknowledging that it's a game or simulator.
.

 

[babelfisch]

.
Only true for three functions: night vision, mode switch and FSS. And you are right, these three indeed need to be handled separately. This is because they are not inside the new sections, but actually new entries in already existing sections.
.
But that's three bindings among a long list of new bindings. But there's the whole new controls for FSS and DSS. In the beta you had to build them up from scratch if you had custom key bindings. As they are exclusively for the two new "screens" we have, they do not collide with the existing bindings at all, but exist in parallel. For the release, they should be filled with default settings, even if you run a custom setup. It will make things much easier for people who just jump into the game and want to try the new things.
.

People who just jump in the game maybe should simply use the default bindings, they are pretty good. Overwriting your custom settings could cause all kinds of issues and I'd rather want FDEV not to touch them.

 

[Gaarp Kobayashi]

While there's a huge number of new bindings, most of them are specific to the FSS and DSS mode. They do not collide with the existing bindings. So you can just bind them without any problems.
.
There are only two exceptions:
- Switching between combat mode and analysis mode. You definitely want to bind a button to that.
- Activating the FSS is a new key binding.
.
So actually you have to squeeze two new buttons into your setup. The rest, while being plenty, are in their own world and don't collide with your existing key bindings.
.

Very useful info. Thank you! +1

 

[BDelacroix]

I'm taking the opportunity to build a proper little "button box" (using one of Leo Bodnar's joystick boards) which'll have a mini-joystick, a couple of rotaries and a variety of buttons all dedicated to the FSS/DSS, provide controls for navigating the maps and provide a bunch of dedicated secondary controls such as lights, NV, gear, cargo scoop etc too.

I am interested to know how this works out. Having found that the G13 keypad (with analog stick) is no longer being made and everyone wants a kidney to get ahold of one that is out there, I've not been able to find a less pricey keypad that also has an ANALOG stick (they all have 8 position switches).

 

[BDelacroix]

Never mind. Tired and my point was meandering.

 

[VerticalBlank]

There are plenty of sample bindings up on EDRefcard, including the revised default schemes.

 

[Sylow]

People who just jump in the game maybe should simply use the default bindings, they are pretty good. Overwriting your custom settings could cause all kinds of issues and I'd rather want FDEV not to touch them.

.
Somehow I seem to fail to communicate my point. Nothing I say is about replacing any settings or bindings. All I say is that it would be good if the -blanks- on -not yet converted- bindings were filled automatically.
.

 

[Stealthie]

I am interested to know how this works out. Having found that the G13 keypad (with analog stick) is no longer being made and everyone wants a kidney to get ahold of one that is out there, I've not been able to find a less pricey keypad that also has an ANALOG stick (they all have 8 position switches).

FWIW, I have a G13, tried it withe the new stuff in ED and I wasn't impressed with how it worked.
Can't recall exactly what the problem was but I wanted to configure the G13's analog stick to "look around" in the FSS and DSS and I just couldn't get it to work.
Dunno if it was a configuration problem with the G13 or with ED but I just couldn't get the game to recognise movement of the G13 stick as being analog inputs.

I was trying to figure out how the FSS worked and I had an old USB gamepad lying around so I just plugged that in and used it instead.

I've got all the switches, buttons, pot's and mini-joysticks I need to build my box but it's one of those things where the more I play with it, the more stuff I want to do with it.
I mean, it's got 8 analog inputs and 36 buttons available so there's plenty of scope for building a modest little "ED control box" without getting too ambitious but the design is still evolving.
As a matter of fact, I literally, have a CAD drawing of the box open on my PC as I write this.
I'll probably have a stab at getting it built when I get some time over xmas.

 

[Wyldwiisel]

There are plenty of sample bindings up on EDRefcard, including the revised default schemes.

You can have as many ref cards as you like but many people have had the same bindings for 4 years if frontier can't at least suggest where they think new stuff should go then it's a fail from me having to guess where fss tuning should go without knowing what it is ,is just a recepe for disaster and the poor guys on console where are they going to get nearly 20 new binds
It could have been done so easy have the module in a firegroup so changing nothing and when you select it it then uses flight controls or menu controls to move about tune and select stuff
All stuff that was allready bound no new bindings no new HUD modes

 

[VerticalBlank]

Fun fact: I find it easier to understand people who can write in sentences.

 

[babelfisch]

.
Somehow I seem to fail to communicate my point. Nothing I say is about replacing any settings or bindings. All I say is that it would be good if the -blanks- on -not yet converted- bindings were filled automatically.
.

Don't worry, I get your point. I just don't believe it would work, unless not with a lot of unnecessary work and unwanted results. It may seem simple but it really isn't. I've noticed small differences in the structure between the various default bindings for example, depending on which default binding you based your custom configuration on. I found that out when I wanted to copy & paste gamepad bindings into my X52 config. What you suggest is not impossible but it would probably require rewriting the bindings system which would delete all custom binds anyway. Or it would be way to complex involving all sorts of errors and problems.

 

[Sylow]

Don't worry, I get your point. I just don't believe it would work, unless not with a lot of unnecessary work and unwanted results. It may seem simple but it really isn't. I've noticed small differences in the structure between the various default bindings for example, depending on which default binding you based your custom configuration on. I found that out when I wanted to copy & paste gamepad bindings into my X52 config. What you suggest is not impossible but it would probably require rewriting the bindings system which would delete all custom binds anyway. Or it would be way to complex involving all sorts of errors and problems.

.
Hmm, i see. I worked directly on it when trying some tricky stuff for my X-56. And there the structure was all fine and solid. I wasn't aware that there would be differences for different controllers. And there should not be. If what you say is true, they actually have an unnecessary mess there. But yes, in that case filling up the blanks could be more problematic.
.
Still, unless it's really a herculean coding effort, it might be worth it. It's all about player retention and giving those who play less and just want to get going an easier time. So while this effort won't help people like us, who already did their binding and are fine, it's really an aspect to consider for player retention. (No, people won't just quit for this alone, but things add up and this patch already has some people on the edge... we're loosing some luxury and lazy-people-features in favour of new game mechanics, after all. )
.

 

[babelfisch]

.
Hmm, i see. I worked directly on it when trying some tricky stuff for my X-56. And there the structure was all fine and solid. I wasn't aware that there would be differences for different controllers. And there should not be. If what you say is true, they actually have an unnecessary mess there. But yes, in that case filling up the blanks could be more problematic.
.
Still, unless it's really a herculean coding effort, it might be worth it. It's all about player retention and giving those who play less and just want to get going an easier time. So while this effort won't help people like us, who already did their binding and are fine, it's really an aspect to consider for player retention. (No, people won't just quit for this alone, but things add up and this patch already has some people on the edge... we're loosing some luxury and lazy-people-features in favour of new game mechanics, after all. )
.

Well it's certainly not just flicking a switch to make it happen. I'd probably start by creating a script that makes a copy of your custom bindings, creates a backup and replace it with a new file which includes the new bindings in case something goes wrong. Next would be to somehow find out your main input device in case you use more than one and add the right bindings (gamepad, keyboard, joystick, HOTAS). Create a script to check for conflicts and leave conflicting bindings blank. That would probably work, with lots of room for errors and lots of effort just because some people don't want to bind 10 buttons themselves although they decided to use a custom config. And that's assuming that all files are structured the same.