I've just been playing Freelancer and I'll echo the suggestion that it has an excellent mouse control system. Having not played Sector 13, I can't compare it but if you can get FreeLancer style mouse control it should be a good thing.

I own a joystick, but I don't use it. As far as I'm concerned joysticks are indeed dead. Kinda weird since I grew up using joystick-based games.

begin rant
Flight and space sims(particularly the shooter variety) are just better with a joystick. When I got my joystick, I felt as if owning one was practically a requirement for gaming. When did that change?

Has anyone found another reason for gamers refusing to get another input device? Mid-range devices cost half as much as new games. If a game needs a certain device and you want to play that game then the solution should be obvious. I think Amadeus is right, the problem is that developers don't provide device support. Not surprising since not just flight and space sims but vehicular games as well have all but died(as well as 2d shooters with which you just can't do complex maneuvers with a keyboard-I bought a gamepad cause I kept dying in Raiden II).

Also, joysticks suck as input for fps games. The types of movement are too dissimilar, this is also why robot tele-operators need hours of training to move a robot arm(and the 2d screen, of course). This is also why that Assault level in space in UT2k4 is unplayable with a mouse(for me, anyway).

About UT2k4, you need a gamepad with two axes and even then you'll need to do some work to get it operating correctly or just put your other hand back on the WASD(or EADF for me).

Woe be unto gamers who play my action games without a joystick or gamepad. If they don't want to buy one, then they're not really serious about my game(I know that sounds like a piss poor attitude, but if they're not serious about my game they won't be buying sequels nor renewing subscriptions nor buying other titles-I prefer a solid following rather than a flash in the pan soon forgotten title competing against people with much larger market shares and much deeper pockets).

Crap, when did I get all righteous and stuff?
end rant

I would have to say that requiring a joystick would be a mistake, as even flight simulators support other devices too, even if the level of control is less precise without one.

Personally, I might purchase a new control device to make it easier to control a game I already own and play, but I wouldn't buy one to allow me to play one I hadn't at least tried first.

I don't currently own a modern joystick, as it's been a while since I've played a flight sim or driving game on my own PC, but I have done so in the past, and I have friends and relatives who do, and I use one when playing that type of game on their machines.

I still have a Quickshot joystick that I used to use with my 386 and 486 machines, but I'm not even sure if my current PC has a suitable port, as most joysticks use USB these days.

For the record, I'd like to state the controls I used in Descent 2. You'll find kinda awkward, but worked. Maybe it'll give you ideas, dunno.

Arrow keys: direct nose (turn left / right, pitch up/down)
A/Z: go foward / backward
S/X: strafe up/down
D/C: Switch weapons
Keypad0/RControl: strafe left / right
Shift: Afterburner
LAlt: Missles
LCtrl: Mines
Spacebar: Lasers

The rest I didn' cared.

In D3 I used the mouse, but never to drive. When I needed to travel or run away, I used the arrows. When I needed to play sniper, I used the mouse. And I did a lot of moving.

Sorry, I didn't read all the posts here, but I remember reading about the next version of windows about a year ago, Microsoft mentioned that they plan to have a standard design for the joystick that other parties could use, and make it easier to make a control scheme that everyone could use (and probably to have another way of getting more money from licensing =oD). Basically, like a console system.

I was writing this post while chatting. I started to write it an hour ago, or so. I'm not sure if I made sense now, but I hope you get the idea =oP

From a bio-mechanical point of view, a joystick and mouse suit completely different functionalities. The mouse is designed for small distance, fine motor control of a pointer device, with feedback via the cursor (typically). This forms a closed loop control system with your brain allowing for very precise spatial control of the pointer. A joystick, on the other hand, is designed as an output filter for gross motor function to enable mapping of said functions to servo controllers (or in the case of games, whatever control mechanisms are built into the avatar (vehicle, creature, etc). The response time of the end system is typically much longer than that of a pointer device, allowing for adjustments to be made in gross motor output to refine the command.

Fine motor control normally requires either low velocities in the hand or limited duration, high velocities over very short distances. It is certainly suitable for 'twitch and shoot' games such as FPS. A joystick though is designed as a reasonable mapping input of spatial information. The velocity is less important (although typically lower than a mouse) than the value of spatial input variables relative to each other.

Taking this into account, one can certainly design a mouse-as-joystick input system that is useable and even fun, however you must essentially turn the mouse into a multi-dimensional spatial mapping tool. Additionally, you need to build in your own functionality to replace some of the physical features of a joystick; like the fact that a joystick is controlled by your gross motor functions (try playing a flight sim with a joystick and your fingertips only), or the fact that the joystick has a spring-driven auto-centering function.

So, map these into an abstract layer between the mouse and the game. Utilise just 8 directions in the horizontal table-top plane and map mouse movements to deflections in these directions. These directions map to different mixing ratios of the two control variables that map to the two spatial dimensions.

Consider now what the mouse maps to: either a point on the screen (not necessarily visibile) or a control surface/servo of a vehicle/creature/etc (in other words, some set of control variables). I'm going to call all of these by the label 'control point', since the mouse basically maps to a point in a control space.

Add a virtual spring between the (calibrated) origin of the control space and the control point, which is activated by a user defineable button/keystroke press. When in action (key/button depressed or state toggled), this spring

a) dampens the deflection of the control point for large mouse deflections; and,
b) causes the control point to auto-centre at a rate determined by the spring constant (which could also be user set calibrated).

When not activated, the mouse functions as a normal pointer device (but maybe still mapped to only 8 directions or 16 directions).

Furthermore, allow the player to determine which input device each control variable is mapped to (mouse, keyboard, etc). Perhaps even permit different control modes, so that the functionality of the mouse changes between modes. Mode switches could be key-defined.

Permit in-game recalibration of the origin of the control space mapped to the mouse. You could even automate this with the spring above. When the spring is deactivated, if the rate of change of the mean deflected position is close to zero over a given time interval, then remap the current mouse position to the origin point of the control space.

Finally, give the player some feedback on the screen about mouse position. If this is a space combat game, then provide either a panel instrument, or a HUD indicator that indicates the current deflection of the mouse. You could certainly justify this in game terms as the resultant thrust vector or something similar. Or tie the mouse movement into the targeting system by showing the targeted point on the screen. It's motion will typically be opposite in sign and magnitude to the mouse motion.

Feel free to use any of these ideas or discard them at will! Good luck.

Cheers,

Timkin

I'll post, as a very, very avid Flight/Space Sim/Shooter player.

I've owned over 100 different titles, and played about 100 more, thereabouts - just on PC.

Joystick Controls are what you NEED to be a good pilot, period. Where the mouse comes in is for those who don't CARE abotu the flying - they want the aim.

Mouse aim is ever, ever so much better than joystick. I've seen that in so many shooters, it makes me sick. It was that way in Tachyon:The Fringe, Jumpgate, Allegiance, and a host of others.

Where it became a problem, was where mouse accuracy became such a big deal, that joystick users were actually at a *disadvantage*. Sure, they could fly circles around the mousers, but their *accuracy* was so high, it *didn't matter*. They dealt so much more damage to the other target, that it either evened out (best? case), or overwhelmed the stick pilots.

The mousers I know use a Strategic Commander, or the like, to supplement their mouse accuracy. When they do, it's *all over* for a joystick pilot. They can now map the majority of the flight characteristics to the strategic commander, or the like, but still use their mouse in one hand for aim only.

Many sim/shooter craft are controlled by throttle or other characteristics as much as they are the "vector" the craft is moving along. (Jumpgate comes to mind) When you have some OTHER peripheral to add to the mouse, it brings the "level" up to that of a joystick, because you no longer have so many ungainly keys.

That's my thoughts on it. Make *sure* you don't give mousers an edge over stick pilots too much - or the "pure flight" people will get frustrated at the inequality. Tachyon was like that, just fyi. If you want, I can test and see how well a mouse + SC works, comapred to *just* a joystick. But I'd keep that in mind, personally. In a game that allows multiple input devices at once, or can be tricked into it, the mouse becomes an almost overpowering advantage, if aim is anywhere important to the "win".

The crossover between FPS and Space sim is a very, very hard one to make, and there are people who refuse to use the mouse, and those who refuse to use the joystick. Like the previous respondent said, they are two VERY different control systems, and for very, very different roles. The best I could say is give the mousers as close as you can get to "good", and let'em go. But then, I've owned 12 different joysticks since "back in the day"... so I may be a bit biased :D

Problem:
Mouse = angular position
Joystick = angular velocity.

They're for diffrent things. A mouse only subsitutes for a joystick in games where you have nigh-unlimited angular velocity (FPS games where you can do a quick 180).

Keyboard is no good - not enough granularity of control. So joystick is necessary? Problem: joysticks suck. I got burned buying like 5 of the damn things in the 90s. They wear out, they break, and games designed for joysticks tend to be stupid, overcomplex sim games. No more joysticks, nobody wants them. I still have one for the few top-notch forgotten underdogs, but most don't.

Solution: work with the mouse. I recommend following StarLancer's approach (I think that was the one) - you let the player aim within the screen (or a portion of it) and your ship rotates to keep up. Battlezone was more direct - you can use the mouse as a joystick. Kinda sucks, but it works, and the game had a slow max-rotation-rate so you weren't at a huge disadvantage. Still worked well enough to be fun.

A mouse is not a joystick, as has been trumpeted over and over. That's why I have two gamepads for my PC (I don't play flight sims, but I do prefer console-style experiences). The problem? PC developers are, in a word, morons. Do you know how irritating it is to be able - barely - to use your gamepad to play the actual game, but to be forced back to the mouse and/or keyboard for all the menu screens?

That's why I bought an Xbox. That and not having to upgrade incessantly.

EOR

I was thinking something rather stupid there :
what if you had something like a virtual joystick and you used the mouse to move it about ? You know, click and drag the stick around as if you actually used your hand.
I can see a problem with screen real estate, but hey, it's just a random idea :)

The joystick would appear wherever you are pressing the mouse, giving you visual feedback on what you are doing.
Say I press the right mouse button anywhere and suddendly this little joystick shows up in transparence, and as I drag the mouse left right up down, the virtual joystick moves about; when I release the mouse the virtual joystick starts moving back to it's zero position (while fading out, for good measure).
If you press again before the joystick has totally dissapeared the wiggling resumes at whatever angle you were.

Does that make sense ? With the high resolutions we have nowadays, and with translucency, I don't think this would eat up much screen real estate, while providing a much better feedback for the mouse user.

Waddaya think ?