blorgon

One day, and I doubt it'll be in KSP, but one day I'd like a space game that lets me land on a Europa-like planet and drill through the ice to take samples of the sea water. I'd also love to use submersibles on a Titan-like planet. Oh and taking samples at an Enceladus-style plume... Space is filled with water and other liquids. Sure, most of us probably don't feel the need to land a destroyer on a methane lake on Titan (not that there's anything wrong with that desire), but not including an underwater mechanic in a game about space makes for a pretty limiting experience. Plus, I mean....

Yeah, the hardest challenge of making this was that I wanted to minimize how video-gamey it looked, which meant minimizing how many closeups I used on the actual craft. I find it a little jarring going from this: To this: Because that first example, while not photorealistic by any means, is quite... cinematic, whereas the second shot immediately reminds you you're looking at a video game. I'm not sure how else to describe it. Anyway, what I'm trying to say is that I struggled with the idea of including closeups of the rover, because I didn't want it to look too gamey. The rover is actually moving in every scene but the last, during the Ike eclipse, but rovers move pretty dang slow so I guess it's pretty hard to tell. You mean this scene? That's my favorite scene too, although the color banding in the sky really really bothers me, lol.

I just wanna say that I appreciate you waiting till you could watch it on a proper screen, lol. Would love to hear what your sister has to say. My brother was a film student too, so I'm always looking out for constructive feedback.

Thanks! Jesus I thought those were storm clouds in the background at first. Nearly lost my excrements.

Yeah, I'm honestly not a big fan of those types of tracking shots, like the one he referenced in Build Fly Dream. I actually find them kind of tacky, lol. Even so, I actually filmed five scenes using that tracking/sweeping/widening shot style, and none of them made the cut. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Thanks for watching. I hope to have the next cinematic done by next month, since school is about to start back up.

I'm not sure I understand, lol. Are you talking about joint strength when physics loads? What do you mean by 'cheesing'?

Yeah I'm thinking subassembly welding is gonna be pretty necessary here. I'm super stoked for this though, even with inflated part counts.

I feel like you guys are forgetting about the R&D building! I'm pretty sure this is a wind tunnel on the right: Obviously it's just art, but since it's there, it would be nice to be able to use it. There'd probably need to be an extra building added for the rover proving ground which would be totally freaking awesome: It'd be sweet to select the rover proving ground and then get a prompt for the type of terrain you want to test your rover on. That would also open up research possibilities, since you'd need to send a probe/impactor to get some good science on the type of terrain on any given body you haven't been to yet in order to be able to replicate it in the "Mars yard". EDIT: I guess having different terrain types in the Mars yard would necessitate including different types of terrain in the actual game 8{

If I ever find myself in OH, which I doubt, I will absolutely go. Sounds great.

Hey, sorry, I didn't get a notification because you didn't quote or tag me! I used three songs, edited together in Audacity (and modified a bit too, with some effects and stuff, but mostly unharmed). Here they are in the order they play in the film: The Force Awakens, Trailer #1, John Samuel Hanson The Mole, Dunkirk OST, Hans Zimmer No Place On Earth, The Heart of Man, Tony Anderson

Wow thanks so much! Glad you enjoyed. Stay tuned for the Mun landing video. I'm working on the storyboard right now.

Super cool! Got any other pictures of the not-a-rocket stuff? Did they have any WWII fighters? Only air and space museum I've been to was the Udvar-Hazy annex of the Smithsonian. Amazing place.

Yeah I imagine it's probably quite a lot of work.

I reported that guy. What a douche.

Just wanted to stop by to say that I think this is an absolutely awesome idea for a mod. People have been kicking around the idea of procedural engines for a few years, but as far as I know, nobody has attempted to make a mod for them. This is an even better idea, getting to design our own engines piece by piece (well, more like small assemblies, since engines are made up of thousands of parts ). I'm assuming we'd just save the engines as subassemblies if we want to use them later, which would be great. What about once the engine is built—any plans on some sort of "welding" mechanic when loading the craft on the launchpad, so as to reduce part count? On a multi-stage rocket with large engine clusters, the part count could inflate pretty quickly. Subscribed, can't wait to see more progress on this.

Thank you, I really appreciate that! Thanks for watching!

What? What are you talking about? There's a 15 second long shot showing the 'stack' with the rover, the skycrane, the heatshield, and the parachutes. What context do you imagine you're missing? Okay. I think I know what the problem is. Did you watch this video on your phone, or some similarly small screen? Do you have poor eyesight? Did you watch the film in full screen? On a crappy internet connection? Nobody else has chimed up about these 'failures' you keep insisting the film is rife with. You sound ridiculously bitter. Thanks for excrementsting on my hard work though, you're a real charmer.

booooooooooooo

Get Jeb out to push with his EVA thruster pack.

I do plan on doing one for my kOS Mun landing soon, but I already have the music picked out! Thanks for watching!

It kind of sounds like you want an entirely different video than what I made. You linked to a tracking shot in the Build Fly Dream trailer that zooms out to show scale, but that's just one way to do it. The shot that I used from the skycrane as it decouples and flies off has a similar effect, and so do the wide shots that follow which intend to show the scale of the rover in its environment. Do you really not get a sense of scale from the wide shots in my cinematic? Because I have a hard time believing that. And as far as 'barely seeing Duna', did... did you watch the whole video? More than half of the video shows Duna in various shots—two wide shots showing the entire planet, two showing a significant portion of the planet's horizon, several shots during the descent that show the terrain, and then the last third of the video is all wide shots of Duna's terrain... The Curiosity mission animation is also a video solely focused on the technical aspects of the rover's landing and surface activities, something I had no intention of doing in my cinematic. And I don't see how the sequence at 3:20 shows any better sense of scale than any of my shots. There are plenty of both close-up and long-shots in my cinematic—something you imply isn't the case—so I don't see how you're having difficulty gleaning any context from them. Plenty of friends who have seen it—some of whom don't know squat about space and engineering but nonetheless know about the Curiosity landing—had no problems understanding what was happening in the video. Really? I haven't used any shots that provide any sense of scale? Not even that 'random shot of the horizon where you can barely see the rover' (which you yourself say provides scale)? Sounds like a failure of imagination to be honest. There's a booster separation at 0:23, a fairing jettison to expose the payload at 0:56, a transfer stage jettison at 1:01, aerocapture from 1:07-1:16, initial aerobreaking with drogue chutes from 1:17 to 1:36, heatshield jettison at 1:42, powered descent and landing at 1:53, and skycrane decoupling at 1:54. And you're saying you can't tell any of that from the video? Not that any of it is actually necessary to understand that I'm landing a rover on Duna, with which you only need the drogue chute shot and the touchdown at 1:53 to establish that. Again, this isn't supposed to be a technical video—I don't see any reason why a viewer would need more than what I show for them to understand that I'm landing a rover on Duna. None of your arguments are convincing. You contradict yourself when talking about the sense of scale, and then you say that other videos use a mix of close-up shots and long-shots to provide context, something my video does too. I hate to sound so rude in my reply but it honestly feels like you're just nitpicking for the sake of it.

I wrote a script to do a skycrane-style rover landing on Duna, and then decided to make a cinematic instead of my usual script-showcase-style videos. This is the first cinematic I've ever made, and I also intend to make one for my Mun landing soon! Music: The Force Awakens, Trailer #1, John Samuel Hanson The Mole, Dunkirk OST, Hans Zimmer No Place On Earth, The Heart of Man, Tony Anderson All scenes were filmed in KSP 1.3. Mods used: kOS Camera Tools Distant Object EVE FASA Hull Camera VDS Kopernicus KSPRC Planet Shine Reentry Particle Effect Scatterer Texture Replacer Replaced Real Plume ...and many, many config edits in Scatterer, EVE, KSPRC, and Real Plume Hats off to the modders that make this game bearable to look at (and film)! Thanks for watching!

It's not really about the vehicle though—it's about the emptiness of space and the desolation of Duna. My intention wasn't to show off the craft design or the skycrane mechanism or any of the 'rocket science' behind the mission. What specifically makes it difficult to tell what's happening? Thank you, much appreciated. The music is actually three different pieces that I edited together. Here they are in the order they are used: The Force Awakens, Trailer #1, John Samuel Hanson The Mole, Dunkirk OST, Hans Zimmer No Place On Earth, The Heart of Man, Tony Anderson

Finished work on my first cinematic ever! I wrote a kOS script for a skycrane-style rover delivery to Duna. I usually make script-showcase videos that are pretty boring, so I decided to do something new. I learned a lot about video editing and cinematics in general. It's a helluva lot of work. Looking forward to making more.