Yeah, the joystick locomotion was put in to satisfy one customer asking for it years ago, I've never liked using joysticks in Climbey not because of some motionsickness concern, come on man have you seen Climbey?

I've improved joystick locomotion in an upcoming release, you can switch to it via the beta branch tab right now.

As for why both joysticks rotate you, just change your bindings inside SteamVR. It's what the system is there for. (Settings > Controllers > Manage bindings I think.)

Note that I'd still recommend you learn how to use the default (Grip on most controllers or A buttons on Index) walking locomotion as it's still faster and gives you precise control over your speed while also letting you get some momentum off ledges too.

Originally posted by ShadowBrain:

Yeah, the joystick locomotion was put in to satisfy one customer asking for it years ago, I've never liked using joysticks in Climbey not because of some motionsickness concern, come on man have you seen Climbey?

I've improved joystick locomotion in an upcoming release, you can switch to it via the beta branch tab right now.

As for why both joysticks rotate you, just change your bindings inside SteamVR. It's what the system is there for.

Note that I'd still recommend you learn how to use the default (Grip on most controllers or A buttons on Index) walking locomotion as it's still faster and gives you precise control over your speed while also letting you get some momentum off ledges too.

Thanks, and I understand that it may not be the most "efficient" way to gain speed or whatever, but I'm not playing Climbey in a competitive sense in any capacity, I just want to play it in a way that's familiar and comfortable to me, like using unified controls that's consistent across other games.

I don't like turning physically in games either; my place space isn't that big and I was originally an Oculus Rift user (which originally only supported front facing) so all of their games were built from the ground up to support full rotation like traditional games even after room scale was introduced.

Also I disagree with the Steam bindings comment. I believe that system is great for very specific tailoring, or for when developers are no longer updating their games and is great for backwards compatibility, but I don't think the user should ever be expected to use it to fix something. I think its bad practice that many older VR devs have either relied on the Steambinding system for users to configure their own controls, and or they've allowed the SteamVR automatic translated controls to dictate how the Index should play converted from the Wands directly and just left it at that. There are so many games on the Oculus store that are actually configured properly with the touch controllers but when I play their steam equivalent they play awfully, where ironically I'll get a smoother experience with the Index using Revive and emulating an Oculus, and I don't think the user should be the one who has to fix up their bindings to try and replicate things.

Originally posted by Kurtino:

Thanks, and I understand that it may not be the most "efficient" way to gain speed or whatever, but I'm not playing Climbey in a competitive sense in any capacity, I just want to play it in a way that's familiar and comfortable to me, like using unified controls that's consistent across other games.

I don't like turning physically in games either; my place space isn't that big and I was originally an Oculus Rift user (which originally only supported front facing) so all of their games were built from the ground up to support full rotation like traditional games even after room scale was introduced.

Also I disagree with the Steam bindings comment. I believe that system is great for very specific tailoring, or for when developers are no longer updating their games and is great for backwards compatibility, but I don't think the user should ever be expected to use it to fix something. I think its bad practice that many older VR devs have either relied on the Steambinding system for users to configure their own controls, and or they've allowed the SteamVR automatic translated controls to dictate how the Index should play converted from the Wands directly and just left it at that. There are so many games on the Oculus store that are actually configured properly with the touch controllers but when I play their steam equivalent they play awfully, where ironically I'll get a smoother experience with the Index using Revive and emulating an Oculus, and I don't think the user should be the one who has to fix up their bindings to try and replicate things.

Cool, but Climbey is only on Steam so I don't see how roping Oculus into this is relevant haha.

I was considering adding multiple other binding for users to select that change the way joysticks are handled, since I can't just automatically assume people are right-handed and set the joystick rotating to right joystick and walking to left joystick, but haven't gotten around to that yet.

Would still need to pop into the controller binding interface though, which by the way is specifically designed to put control scheme configuration into the end user's hands instead of developer's hands, but you seem to be allergic to pressing a few buttons after messing with a game's ingame control settings...

You're complaining about a non-issue to me, default state of the game caters best to the default state of the ingame control settings, if you're gonna change them, be prepared to change more.

Originally posted by ShadowBrain:

Cool, but Climbey is only on Steam so I don't see how roping Oculus into this is relevant haha.

I was considering adding multiple other binding for users to select that change the way joysticks are handled, since I can't just automatically assume people are right-handed and set the joystick rotating to right joystick and walking to left joystick, but haven't gotten around to that yet.

Would still need to pop into the controller binding interface though, which by the way is specifically designed to put control scheme configuration into the end user's hands instead of developer's hands, but you seem to be allergic to pressing a few buttons after messing with a game's ingame control settings...

You're complaining about a non-issue to me, default state of the game caters best to the default state of the ingame control settings, if you're gonna change them, be prepared to change more.

Well Oculus users have access to the Steam store so developers often either have a Oculus SDK and Steam SDK version, or just a Steam one and try to unify things. My point was that games that had to be specifically configured to the Oculus controllers had better compatibility than the automated Index conversion, but I suppose it's less relevant to you if your game doesn't do anything particular for Oculus users, it was more of an example of how things designed work better than auto-translated or just relied on the user making their own controls.

(It's also important to acknowledge Oculus anyway, since last they checked they have the highest amount of market share and VR users compared to competitors, so a lot of Oculus users with default expectations will be playing a lot of Steam games that may not have considered their platform)

Not to nitpick, but you can safely assume the defaults for the largest population of users (more people are right handed, almost every joystick game since the 1990's assumed right stick rotation, so we can stick with what people are familiar with) then add a secondary tick box for the less usual options (inverted look, inverted joysticks, etc).

I just think it's poor practice is all. You design for the standard, add a few options extra for common swap arounds (the more the better), then you add the ability to change any detail from the ground up for things that will be wanted, but are uncommon. I think relying on the user to make changes isn't great, and as a user I don't want to sit there tweaking my controls for every single game I play that hasn't added proper support for the Index. You may think its lazy, sure, but I haven't needed to sit tweaking controls for gaming over the past 25 years, and it's not a standard thing to expect in the industry. There are games that also allow ini modifications via things like the unreal engine, but I'd think it's poor practice if a game didn't add a settings page and expected you to do modifications externally, for example; the more options you give in-game the better.

This is just the perspective I have coming from someone who researches and designs for accessibility, disability, and HCI. For example in web pages we design things to reach a standard level of familiarity and usability for the biggest percentage of people, give compatibility options for lesser percentages, then make sure everything is designed so we don't lock anyone out from the smallest margins. It would be poor practice for us to just make a web page then assume users will use third-party external tools to be able to fix our web page to their needs, but we also can't target every need, so you at least make sure you're doing a minimum level.

Not to accuse you of anything, and I mean no disrespect and I think it's great that you're adding these options in beta branches and will get round to doing them, it's just I think it's more important than you're acknowledging and I think relying on the end-user to make (what I would consider) basic configurations externally from the game is poor practice. Granted, I've also gone through a few VR game forums of games that haven't implemented basic Index control support (touch pads still being used to move things instead of analogue sticks) 6 months past the headset coming out, and none of them have even responded or bothered, so at least you're here making changes.