PlayStation controler.

[Stugbit]

Guys, I'm looking for a joystick to play Il-2. Do you think the PS controler could be used to play this game?

Best Regards.

[Stinger]

This game accepts lots of stuff. Be glad.

The PS3(?) controller, while not recommended, can be used.
Just know you'll be CONSTANTLY moving your hand back and forth from your controller and keyboard if you do that. It ain't Ace Combat.

[Stugbit]

I see. Anyway, I'm used to play Rise of Flight with PS3 controler, so I think Il-2 would not be that hard to play.

The only problem is that in ROF it was possible to set the right analog stick as the pilots head movement, which was quite convenient. In this game I think its not possible.

[PROEISHAN]

For me, and XBOX 360 controller works just fine if you used the Big Picture mode on steam. However, you have to constanty move your hands from the stick to the keyboard. Hard when your right-handed, because you have your right hand on the stick, and you have to your left hand to rapidly press buttons. Also, if you want to look around, you need the mouse, so, 3 tasks with 2 hands at the same time is no bueno. Best regards.

[Stinger]

You don't necessarilly need the mouse to look around.

Just try to map the right stick to looking.


But, yeah. You'd need an XB360 controller extension to fit all the important keys.

[Stugbit]

I tried to map with the right stick, Stinger, but the options didn't allowed me.

Some keys are not a problem using the keyboard, such the i for starting the engine or g to raise the landing gears, but for looking around its quite a problem because you have to use it all the time for reaching your enemys in a dogfight.

[Stinger]

Hmm.

F6! F6! F6!

F6=Padlock!

[Stugbit]

Yeah. Good idea! I'll try this. It's not exatcly the same thing but I think it would help.

Ty Stinger.

[TheLesserWeevil]

Any controller can work. Nothing will ever replace a joystick though. I used a Xbox 360 controller for a while, but eventually bought a joystick as it allows you to make much smaller/finer movements.

[Stinger]

Originally posted by 'Raep Train' Conductor:

I used a Xbox 360 controller for a while, but eventually bought a joystick as it allows you to make much smaller/finer movements has WAY more buttons to do stuff.

Fixed.
Precision, while harder with a gamepad, is not impossible. You just need a particular gamepad affinity.
But, yes. Joys are better.

[Stugbit]

I miss the old Aces Over Europe... Back then they focused not in making a super ultra realistic flying simulation but rather in air combat tatics and strategics game. And it still was not the dump thing like Aces Combat.

[Stinger]

ANOTHER GUY WHO JUST PASSES AWAY THE COMPLEX UNIVERSE OF ACE COMBAT LIKE IT'S A ROTTEN PILE OF SENTIENT TRASH.

Urgh, it sickens me straight to the core.

Why EVERYONE has to try bashing on it, I don't know. Honestly.
At this point I'll just make a Belka-Osea campaign. JUST to piss you guys off. :P

[Stugbit]

Easy, pal. I have a problem with games with jets.

Anyway, don't matter if we're talking about Aces Combat, Il-2 or ROF, for me, all of them are just very unrealistic in many aspects for different reasons. As most of the games nowadays are, by the way.

[Stinger]

Ah. Well. I can live with that more easilly. Not everyone loves those absurdly fast monsters.

And correct! Everything is unrealistic, in at least ONE way or another.

AC is Unrealistic because.. *list redacted* (Though the references to IRL history in that are quite there, and I love the research they do)
IL-2 is clearly unrealistic with how toned down the engine management is, and how biased Russia can be sometimes in the stock game.
ROF is quite so too, but I cannot think of a reason.


ALL are unrealistic in one common way, though. The player does not actually feel precisely what it's like in the cockpit. They don't feel G-forces, the adrenaline, the fear.. none of that. They're just flying via an emotionless avatar that won't react to anything.

The only remaining step of realism, is to go all-out and FLY for yourself. And that's expensive as all bloody hell, so, we simulator.

Now.
Sorry for lashing out. I am VERY sensitive after seeing every sim player in existance bash on AC because of unrealism alone, as, well, OF COURSE IT'S UNREALISTIC, IT'S A FLIGHT ACTION GAME NOT A SIMULATOR. Those guys need to research what they're bashing before they continue.

I hope you can forgive my stupidity. :P

[Stugbit]

Exactly, Stinger. Very well explanation. I agree completely.

Most of the developers today are focused on simulate the flight to make things more realistic. It's their priority. And by simulation, they put whatever "aircraft stuff" they can find. So there's a endless list of effects, aircraft little specificities of all kinds, etc. simulated. But, as you explained, much of the very important aspects of a flight can't be simulated in a computer yet. Like the "feeling", which took a very important part of managing the aircraft commands.
This tendency of simulation is broad today, even in big air companies such as Air-France, as they are reducing the budget training pilots most only in simulators. Do you know the Air France Flight 447 crash? The two crewman flying the aircraft failed to understand that their aircraft was falling.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_447

In my opinion, in the game world at least, rather than simulating, it would be better if they "emulate" or "translate" the flight characteristics, as the older flight simulators usually did in the past. I don't know if you know Aces Over Europe, it's a very old simulator, with the pixels the size of grape fruits. Despite the graphics, the old AOE was quite realistic many times, prioritizing "translating" some of the aircraft aspects of the flight. And the ME-109, for example, which was a light aircraft, usually climbed faster than the allied respective counter-parts. Or the FW-190, which had it's stability problems in low speed and usually stalled suddenly. Or the P-47 poor maneuverability and fast speed in the high altitudes. So, the general characteristics of the aircraft were all there, but the minucius ones were somehow translated, compensated by the simulator, and you could focus on the flight combat itself.

I don't know if I make my ideas clear. Hope you understand me.

And there's notting to forgive, its nice to discuss things.

Best regards!

PS- I have another doubt about IL-2. When you start a pilot carrer, the missions they give us are randomly generated or it follows the same path all the time?

[Stinger]

Hmm. I understand.

And AF447, WOW. I GUESS PEOPLE BETTER START DOING IN-COCKPIT TRAINING AGAIN.

And well, I never played AOE, but that sounds pretty nice. The 109 being light.. but was it maneuverable? If so, they failed.
The 190's instability sounds brilliantly done.
The P-47 trashcan also sounds correctly done.


And I'm fairly sure, in the stock DC (Dynamic Campaigns, aka Pilot Careers), you start out on the same mission every time, then your actions shape the future. So kill the nazi tonks, there are no nazi tonks/fewer nazi tonks next time. fail to kill em all, a good few nazi tonks are there next time. And etc.