Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
No, you don't, because boost is a different button.
It doesn't. It does, however, cause you to boosted-up-thrust while on the ground, which is a bit like jumping, but it consumes a lot of fuel, so it would be better if it was possible to do a regular jump, and only do the boosted-up-thrust only if you hit the button a second time.
(Without a space suit, you still can't jump.)
Every single game I've played that features a jetpack has it on the same key as jump, and it works great.
Did those games start them out as separate keys? There aren't very many 6DOF jetpack in simulated physics games that I'm aware of
You can't bind forward and jump to the same key and expect it to add auto-vault-over-walls by magic, just because there are other games that feature it. Context sensitivity has to be there by design.
No one expects it to "work by magic". It very obviously doesn't, since we're here asking for an additional feature to match what every other game does for jetpacks: jump if you're standing, jetpack if you're airborne. The number of independent keybinds and degrees of freedom are completely irrelevant.
Every single comment here has been expecting it to work because you rebound the keys. Not requesting a feature, expecting it and all the context sensitivity it would require to already be there and somehow reachable by conflicting keybindings on purpose.
No game works that way.
Accomodating more than the default control scheme is not an unreasonable request. It's why games allow rebinding keys in the first place.
Especially note that the game already allows binding multiple actions to the same key (in which case only the binding which makes sense in the current context is used), and, the game already allows performing different actions depending on whether the player character is grounded (Walk Forward or Forward Thrust).
Yet again: they are different buttons that do different things. Of course they can conflict.
Can you jump without thrusting? Yes
Can you thrust without jumping? Yes
The result is different whether you thrust with no jump, jump with no thrust, thrust at the start of the jump, thrust at the end of the jump, or anywhere between. Combine with the fact you have different jump strengths and different gravity, combine with whether or not you use the boost on top.
It may be the case you're happy to live without the possibilities, that is a far cry from them not existing.
As I just pointed out, not a single comment here has made such a request. None. No one is going to object to requesting a feature, but it is ridiculous it is to have EXPECTED that rebinding to work.
I think you are reading too much into the wording. But, yes, it would be nice if this "just worked", as the other similar settings and binding combinations do, so if the developers find the time to implement this combination, that would be appreciated by players used to similar control schemes.
By that logic no feature would ever be requested, because no one would expect anything outside of what's already implemented.
Yes, we would have expected that the game provide the standard jetpack controls that we're used to from every other game, especially once it let us bind both controls to the same key and we've seen the optional auto-boost work that way.
Yes, we're aware that this control scheme prevents thrusting from the ground and jumping in mid-air, and we're fine with that because we don't care about the former, we can't perform the latter anyway, and we find impractical to spam press-release-hold cycles on two keys for a basic action when a tap-and-hold would do just as fine as it ever has.
And yes, we understand that if it doesn't actually work that way for now then it's missing a feature and not a chunk of magic. People are not that dumb, you know.
Do you ask for coffee by demanding to know why you don't already have it? That's the only possible way the world can work?
It's not "standard", it's not "in every other game", you don't go to every other game and immediately rebind conflicts into your controls. I ask again, where are all these 6DOF jetpack in simulated physics games you're apparently playing?
"there is no conflict."
"Here's this option to change how the controls work, I'm going to assume there are more features like that but not in this same options panel, you must have to unlock them by conflicting keybindings!"
You should be able to understand that "don't care" is not a basis for changing control systems. Actual thought needs to go into the process, what functionality is lost, where might it be important, does it change the difficulty of the game if you lose that fine control, does it change how much fuel you will use.
Just the fact that keyboards aren't analogue controls prompted "this game is best with a controller" and are part of why a certain puzzle works the way it does.
You rebound the key assuming that "jump" wouldn't show up much in a game with full freedom of physics. You are hardly in a position to make informed decisions on whether this change is immediately viable.
So yes, when you expected the keybinding to work, you were expecting magic. If you put in a request, actually make it a request. If accepted someone will have to put a lot of work in, with code, context sensitivity, testing, balancing, to make it happen, it isn't an ON/OFF feature, and they deserve more respect than you're giving.