Experiment on a possible Flight HUD Redesign (Result)

[beik]

Hello folks!
Based on the warm response of my last Experiment on a possible Tweakables Redesign (Result) , I decided to take another take on a bigger experiment!

The idea was to redesign the Flight HUD, by polishing existing UI and respecting the original project (aka: don't reinvent everything).

 

My approach was:

• Adjust the balance between skeuomorphism and flat design, adding a bit of texture but removing overused bevels effects.
• Improve usability by working on clear affordance. If you can drag, press, toggle... Differentiate it in a consistent way.
• More consistent iconography
• Easier learning curve for critical controls (staging as button, keyboard hints for throttle/roll/yaw/pitch)
• Add some small quality of live improvements (toggle solar panels/antenna, warp to next node)
• Better color mapping. Blue to delta-v, orange arrow for direct input, white arrow for readouts

 

Flight HUD redesign

 

In the end this looked like a very conservative approach, by keeping a lot of things in the same place... But boy, what a challenge! I had no idea that it would be that complex to redraw everything

Things that I would like to improve:

• The action parts buttons could be better integrated, they feel a bit "meh"
• The app button could be better solved. I would love to see in the future something more iOSish, with a mix of mini-hud/modal/sidebar solution for the apps.
• I messed up with the font size. The raster version looks awful.
• Anyone uses the HDG reading? I hesitated to replace it with orbital info multiple times. I would love to add a "time to:" that adapt to hit ground/leave orbit/next maneuver  

 

Check the hi-resolution in vector format: https://www.figma.com/file/09xWDTa5XQJy140q7sCyPX/Kerbal-–-Design-experiments?node-id=33%3A134


What do you think?

[Stone Blue]

Sorry, @CobaltWolf .. taking *first*

Man, this looks awesomesauce, Beik!

Only one problem: nao all the UI mods out there will have to update to match lol

Edited August 12, 2019 by Stone Blue

[razark]

1 hour ago, beik said:

Anyone uses the HDG reading?

I do use it sometimes.

 

1 hour ago, beik said:

What do you think?

Overall, I like it.  It looks cleaner to me.

The one thing I noticed was the keys on the pitch/roll/yaw and throttle displays.  Since the controls are remappable, it's conceivable that someone might not have those keys assigned.

[klgraham1013]

This is pleasing to me!

[beik]

3 hours ago, razark said:

The one thing I noticed was the keys on the pitch/roll/yaw and throttle displays.  Since the controls are remappable, it's conceivable that someone might not have those keys assigned.

I can picture a extremely sad designer having to generate bitmap asset with every possible key. lol

 

yeah, you are right. It have to represent the actual keys somehow... but still, I like the idea to easy the process of teaching all possible keyboard keys

[Wjolcz]

This looks really nice

[KerbolExplorer]

Is this done with photoshop? if its done in game with a mod you made can you please put a download

 

Overall its really good!

[beik]

2 hours ago, KerbolExplorer said:

Is this done with photoshop? if its done in game with a mod you made can you please put a download

 

Overall its really good!

I used Figma for this, it's kind of a online Adobe Illustrator made for UI work.
You can even see the actual source in a webview: https://www.figma.com/file/09xWDTa5XQJy140q7sCyPX/Kerbal-–-Design-experiments?node-id=33%3A134

I would love to put out this as a mod, but I have no idea if that is even possible... I have only basic dev skills 

[Cheif Operations Director]

18 hours ago, beik said:

Hello folks!
Based on the warm response of my last Experiment on a possible Tweakables Redesign (Result) , I decided to take another take on a bigger experiment!

The idea was to redesign the Flight HUD, by polishing existing UI and respecting the original project (aka: don't reinvent everything).

 

My approach was:

• Adjust the balance between skeuomorphism and flat design, adding a bit of texture but removing overused bevels effects.
• Improve usability by working on clear affordance. If you can drag, press, toggle... Differentiate it in a consistent way.
• More consistent iconography
• Easier learning curve for critical controls (staging as button, keyboard hints for throttle/roll/yaw/pitch)
• Add some small quality of live improvements (toggle solar panels/antenna, warp to next node)
• Better color mapping. Blue to delta-v, orange arrow for direct input, white arrow for readouts

 

Flight HUD redesign

 

In the end this looked like a very conservative approach, by keeping a lot of things in the same place... But boy, what a challenge! I had no idea that it would be that complex to redraw everything

Things that I would like to improve:

• The action parts buttons could be better integrated, they feel a bit "meh"
• The app button could be better solved. I would love to see in the future something more iOSish, with a mix of mini-hud/modal/sidebar solution for the apps.
• I messed up with the font size. The raster version looks awful.
• Anyone uses the HDG reading? I hesitated to replace it with orbital info multiple times. I would love to add a "time to:" that adapt to hit ground/leave orbit/next maneuver  

 

Check the hi-resolution in vector format: https://www.figma.com/file/09xWDTa5XQJy140q7sCyPX/Kerbal-–-Design-experiments?node-id=33%3A134


What do you think?

two things

 

@SQUAD Hire this man. 

 

Two everything here looks great but the staging look needs a bit more. Perhaps if it slightly clearer. and seems less stretched  out. Perhaps a number with the delta-v adjusted for the current altitude as well, but that is just an idea

[Kerbinchaser]

Slick, modern, beautiful. I like it. I like it a lot. 

[Thiagobs]

Really nice!!

I have just a teeeny bit of criticism, if you allow me..

The stage-specific delta v looks a bit small, hard to read at a quick glance..

Otherwise, it's perfect, just like your PAW/Tweakables redesign!

[beik]

2 minutes ago, Thiagobs said:

Really nice!!

I have just a teeeny bit of criticism, if you allow me..

The stage-specific delta v looks a bit small, hard to read at a quick glance..

Otherwise, it's perfect, just like your PAW/Tweakables redesign!

Nice catch! The idea was to reduce the stage-specific delta-v importance, to keep this as a readout for advanced players... but you are right, I totally overshot on this one.
 

Thanks 

 

[mattinoz]

On 8/13/2019 at 7:35 AM, beik said:

The idea was to redesign the Flight HUD, by polishing existing UI and respecting the original project (aka: don't reinvent everything).

All really good again but to play Devils advocate but why not go a bit harder and do some reorganising of where the parts are?

Current layout has lots of both eye-tracking and mouse-tracking while doing similar things. Would be nice to reduce by rethinking the layout.

[Noir]

 

It looks great! But I feel that if the devs were to update the UI, the time would be better spent redesigning where UI elements are instead. This is more directed at the devs, and not you. Your work looks greats. But this is coming from someone who has spent many many many years playing this game. While also watching new UI elements added awkwardly into already occupied space.

 Semi-long list of possible changes and an example picture in the spoiler:

Spoiler

 

I personally hate how the recently added “Maneuver Mode” tab is hidden behind the flight controls. I’d rather see craft information/readout displayed to the right of the flight controls and left of the nav ball. In the empty space between the two. No clicking between tabs, no opening new tabs and covering other stuff. It’s one of the things KER still does better than stock, allowing information to be visible at all times. Plus, it’s free real estate.

Likewise, the altimeter toggle is annoying to use. Keep the sea level distance where it is but put terrain distance into a separate readout. Again, similar to how KER does it. Stops it being annoying toggle button, and again, allowing information to be visible at all times.

With the staging numbers in the stage menu: either remove, move, or make them smaller. So much of that list is taken up by the stage numbers. Staging on the whole needs to be redesigned, beyond just UI, but that’s something else entirely. Furthermore, I have no idea if that STAGE button does anything normally. At least, it never used to. Removing that, along with the giant stage number would free up more space.

The vertical speed display (or whatever it is call), next to the height readout, is very big where it currently is. I feel it would work better if it was made slightly bigger (somewhat ironic I know) and moved to the right (or left) of the nav ball. Shaped in such a way so the circular nav ball and circular vertical speed display flow nicely together, like a bubble. Not like how I currently have it overlapping each other. This would also mean your vertical speed and horizontal/orbital speed are closer together. Even though I never really us the vertical speed display… but whatever. Also, move the G Force meter to the right of the Kerbal/crew portraits (the ugly red line). This would help free up more space. Reuse the current design, but just straight instead of curved. Or reshape the G Force meter to fit between the nav ball and vertical speed display. Point is, put the circle stuff with the circle stuff, the not circle stuff with the not circle stuff, and make the top of the screen more open.

The Kerbal/crew portraits don’t really need to be that big. This was fine back 7 years ago when there was only a single crew pod and only 3 Kerbals. I feel it might work better if the portraits were roughly 1/4^th their current size and stacked vertically, similar to the staging menu on the left. This would also help with UI symmetry. Ditch their last names, since they are all the same, and add in their specialisation (pilot, scientist, etc.). My example picture is ugly and rushed, but it gives you a rough idea. While more than 3 Kerbals can be displayed currently (max of 4?), you need to click a button to do so, and 3 is the default. This new design could be stackable allowing for roughly 6 Kerbals to be displayed at one time. The Kerbal’s individual G meters could be displayed via a faint shading effect to their entire portrait, opposed to the green line I am (and the game is) currently using. I don't have the skill to example it using Paint.net. 

Make the time readout (top left) smaller.

Centre the sea level height readout to the middle, and place half of the buttons (breaks, lights, landing gear) on each side. Breaks and landing gear on the left, lights and comms (??) on the right. Breaks and landing gear should stay together, since they are normally used together. Move the abort button to below the height readout/atmosphere reading.

Add oxidiser to the staging list (when used), as well as electricity and air when needed. Why isn’t this a thing yet?

The W S, Q E, and A D, make the flight controls look a little cluttered. I’d rather see the trim levels added. A mod already does this so it is possible. And as others have said, the controls are rebindable. which would be an issue. Plus, some people (including console users) use a gamepad or flight stick. I feel that the flight controls could be redesigned to better represent what each does. Maybe make the roll into a circle, with pitch and yaw in the middle of it. Similar to a turn coordinator, but in the existing style. Simulating what you might find in a cockpit. Or just don’t change it at all.

I’m guessing that’s a pause button under the nav ball? A way to pause the game without bringing up the menu would be great. Parts could be activated/deactivated while in flight without having to fight the crafts movement.

 

All of this is just examples of how the UI could be redesigned. The UI works, but could be better. Just feel that since there is already discussion on the UI, now would be a good time to discuss updating and redesigning it.

 

 

 

 

[beik]

@mattinoz  I started divided by the idea to just reskin or make radical changes. So I started redrawing everything so I could have the visual elements to play around. Everytime I decide to go for a change, it always had a number of implication in the UI and some lack of knowledge on my side (5yr playing Kerbal, had to google what that small triangle does in the altimeter). In the end I was too tired and decide to share it like this.

To be honest, most of the people here have so much more knowledge than me that now it even feels silly for me trying to redesign this.

---

@Noir What an amazing work! I will make a another version based on your vision <3

Let me comment some of your ideas, but feel free to trash me.

15 hours ago, Noir said:

I personally hate how the recently added “Maneuver Mode”

Yes, I have a love/hate relationship with them. It makes sense in a way that it doesn't touch too much the rest of the UI... And that's is key to delivering changes that actual happen. For me it's tricky to "fix" because the "Maneuver mode" lies between flight/map mode, so it's not a Mode at all. Maybe it makes way more sense to group node with time, and split reading info from input change.

 

15 hours ago, Noir said:

It’s one of the things KER still does better than stock, allowing information to be visible at all times.

Agreed, but the downside with KER approach is to scary new players. My girlfriend closed KSP after I told that the success for a good launch is to understanding what delta-v is.

 

15 hours ago, Noir said:

Likewise, the altimeter toggle is annoying to use. Keep the sea level distance where it is but put terrain distance into a separate readout.

I found hard to decide this. The toggle feels hacky, so I just tried to improve the affordance. My UX background tells me that this should be adaptive. You don't need to know the ground distance from the space, and you don't have to know the sea level if you are going to crash. This logic probably doesn't work for everyone, most notable for the airplane lovers.

 

15 hours ago, Noir said:

With the staging numbers in the stage menu: either remove, move, or make them smaller. So much of that list is taken up by the stage numbers. (...) I have no idea if that STAGE button does anything normally. At least, it never used to. Removing that, along with the giant stage number would free up more space.

You are right, the number aren't that important. I decide to keep it a bit big, so you still could have a place to drag it around... But a better solution would be to have a handle on hover event. The STAGE button doesn't exist, I added for the newbies! So people can have first-time fun without knowing any keyboard key.

 

15 hours ago, Noir said:

Even though I never really us the vertical speed display

Does anyone use it? It feels like a totally legacy readout. For me it worked like a "you messed up" meter when I was learning how to fly.
The only justification for something that big is that it adds a lot to the vintage physical interface style of KSP.

 

15 hours ago, Noir said:

move the G Force meter to the right of the Kerbal/crew portraits

I don't remember if the G force can affect individually passengers, if not, a single readout close to the portraits would make more sense. The only justification I see to keep it next to the navball, is because it relates to the amount of throttle.

 

15 hours ago, Noir said:

The Kerbal/crew portraits don’t really need to be that big. (...) if the portraits were roughly 1/4^th their current size and stacked vertically, similar to the staging menu on the left. (...) add in their specialisation (pilot, scientist, etc.)(.. ) The Kerbal’s individual G meters could be displayed via a faint shading effect to their entire portrait, opposed to the green line I am (and the game is) currently using.

There's a funny thing in humans, that after you see a good ideia, is impossible to unsee it. Moving the Kerbals to a vertical stack with proper info is definitely one of them. 

 

15 hours ago, Noir said:

Make the time readout (top left) smaller.

Not sure why.. but yeah, how relevant is to look at the time all the time? (turumtumtrum tsss) To be honest, the time display could be better integrated with the warp. The way it is right now, it's mainly used by me as the Kraken notification display.

 

15 hours ago, Noir said:

Centre the sea level height readout to the middle, and place half of the buttons (breaks, lights, landing gear) on each side. Breaks and landing gear on the left, lights and comms (??) on the right. Breaks and landing gear should stay together, since they are normally used together. Move the abort button to below the height readout/atmosphere reading.

How relevant is to have a shortcut for lights? Of course they look cool, but compared to Brake and Gears it feels silly. Agreed with everything, but the abort button. Moving to below the panel could risk it being clicked by accident, no?

 

15 hours ago, Noir said:

Add oxidiser to the staging list (when used), as well as electricity and air when needed. Why isn’t this a thing yet?

¯\_(ツ)_/¯
 

 

15 hours ago, Noir said:

The W S, Q E, and A D, make the flight controls look a little cluttered. I’d rather see the trim levels added. A mod already does this so it is possible. And as others have said, the controls are rebindable. which would be an issue. Plus, some people (including console users) use a gamepad or flight stick. I feel that the flight controls could be redesigned to better represent what each does. Maybe make the roll into a circle, with pitch and yaw in the middle of it. Similar to a turn coordinator, but in the existing style. Simulating what you might find in a cockpit. Or just don’t change it at all.

The keyboard keys look cluttered, but I still feel like it have to be there somehow. It should draw the actual key/control on top, or some clever tooltips that disappear after some movement. But the catch is that KSP is pretty hard to memorize all the keyboard keys, and pretty unforgiving to let you press everything to see what it does during a flight. Yes, I'm talking to your RCS.

When to you usually use trim levels? For planes or something hacky as ascend maneuvers?

I did a quick research on how roll/pitch/yaw are represented near navballs, and ended at these:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attitude_indicator
https://www.google.com/search?q=Flight+Director+Attitude+Indicator&tbm=isch&source=iu&ictx=1&fir=x16XYppmOJDzyM%3A%2CAeB7wtqxMbSQJM%2C_&vet=1&usg=AI4_-kR1RtB_CikdFVSQSR9nHSJfFkGw4Q&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiV9NDboYPkAhVWHbkGHVMfDlgQ9QEwAHoECAIQAw#imgrc=x16XYppmOJDzyM:
(edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_instruments )
(edit 2: https://rocketry.wordpress.com/2012/08/21/manned-spaceflight-instrument-panels/ <- this! )

So the KSP solution isn't that off. But of course that doesn't mean that it can't be improved.

 

So, let me know if you have more ideias stocked, I will try to work on this in the next week. Thanks again for the quality answer!

Edited August 14, 2019 by beik

[EchoLima]

Somewhat tangentially related, here's how I would recommend re-ordering the orbital information panel to better display the info:

Spoiler

forum post

 

Edited August 15, 2019 by EchoLima

[Cheif Operations Director]

2 hours ago, beik said:

There's a funny thing in humans, that after you see a good ideia, is impossible to unsee it. Moving the Kerbals to a vertical stack with proper info is definitely one of them. 

Sure but make sure the boxes do not interfere with the the mod boxes, also replacing that space with some orbital info or perhaps how long it will take your orbit to decay etc might be cool, Perhaps a science collected or craft in your sphere of influence so you can find abort to orbit locations better. Just as much info as possible BUT allow it to be minimized, 

[theJesuit]

That's amazing, and I like @Noir's suggestions too but I'd go further...

I'd put the staging across the top, or on the bottom with the fuel levels hanging below or rising above.  You could then pop the maneuver node and bottom left stuff underneath that so that info is in one place on the screen. Either that or running across the bottom bewteen the navball and the newly position portrait stack.

It makes more sense to have the kerbals stack on the bottom right, and keep stacking them up, although their gee-meters should be thinner/ not as wide.  I'd also put the icons there as well.

I'd also have the toolbar across the top rather than down the right side (like it used to be).  The altimeter could be positioned moved/shunted along if necessary to make room for the toolbar icons.

I like have a wide screen

Peace.

[Loskene]

2 hours ago, beik said:

I found hard to decide this. The toggle feels hacky, so I just tried to improve the affordance. My UX background tells me that this should be adaptive. You don't need to know the ground distance from the space, and you don't have to know the sea level if you are going to crash. This logic probably doesn't work for everyone, most notable for the airplane lovers.

Does anyone use it? It feels like a totally legacy readout. For me it worked like a "you messed up" meter when I was learning how to fly.
The only justification for something that big is that it adds a lot to the vintage physical interface style of KSP.

I don't remember if the G force can affect individually passengers, if not, a single readout close to the portraits would make more sense. The only justification I see to keep it next to the navball, is because it relates to the amount of throttle.

How relevant is to have a shortcut for lights? Of course they look cool, but compared to Brake and Gears it feels silly. Agreed with everything, but the abort button. Moving to below the panel could risk it being clicked by accident, no?

When to you usually use trim levels? For planes or something hacky as ascend maneuvers?

Some points I noticed here I might be able to add to.

For the ASL/AGL toggle, I remember saying in the original design thread it should be contextual, and tied to the surface/orbit speed indicator. The game automatically switches from surface to orbit mode and I said the altimeter should do the same for the same reasons. So yeah, good idea 

Can only speak for myself on this one but I use the vspd display a lot flying planes. Having a swinging needle there I actually find far more useful to glance at while maintaining level flight (which can be a twitchy affair since I like to fly manually) rather than the KER numerical readout.

G-force meters are passenger-specific, their GLOC threshold determined by Kerbal stats. The main G-meter for the whole craft is useful when launching rockets to manage your G-loads on ascent, mainly for reducing losses from wasted overthrust in dense atmo, though it could probably be capped to 10G instead of 15 for greater clarity. Rarely does anyone peak the meter for long enough to look at it, and it's generally not helpful information anyway since that's most commonly during harsh re-entries.

The lights shortcut, just for lights, probably not all that necessary. I do use that action group for solar panels, antennae, radiators etc. in conjunction with lights for a single use "power on!" button, though even then I generally press the key for it. Give or take, though I do like having an indicator for fixed action groups like that and the brakes.

Trim is for planes yes. It's actually kind of bothersome to not have any display for it.

[Noir]

4 hours ago, beik said:

Yes, I have a love/hate relationship with them. It makes sense in a way that it doesn't touch too much the rest of the UI... And that's is key to delivering changes that actual happen. For me it's tricky to "fix" because the "Maneuver mode" lies between flight/map mode, so it's not a Mode at all. Maybe it makes way more sense to group node with time, and split reading info from input change.

No idea if it's really called "Maneuver mode". That's just what the devs called it during a KSPLoading. EchoLima just called it a orbital information panel, which makes more sense.

Just feel that the mode would be more useful if it wasn't hidden away by the flight controls. UI should not be hidden behind UI, unless it's only used for a short period like the resource tab. I just don't like having to chose between the flight controls or useful information. The terrain height could be in the orbital information panel, like how KER does it. The sea level altimeter is normally used to gauge how high up you are, and I don't think anyone uses it as a 100% perfect value. I mainly just use it as a guide line. Knowing that you are roughly 2km off the ground when flying is great, even if you are only 1.5km up. But being told you are 500m off the ground while trying to land on the 76m high runway isn't great.

4 hours ago, beik said:

I don't remember if the G force can affect individually passengers, if not, a single readout close to the portraits would make more sense. The only justification I see to keep it next to the navball, is because it relates to the amount of throttle.

Kerbal G limits can be turned on in the settings. But it isn't a 1:1 between Kerbal Gs and craft Gs, since different Kerbals have different tolerances, as Loskene said. However, G forces don't effect the craft beyond stress overload, but that's normally when a sudden changes happens. In real life, some parts might have a G limit before they break. So G forces don't really do anything unless you have Kerbal G limits on, and if the Gs are effecting your craft, the game will tell you when your wing falls off.

4 hours ago, beik said:

How relevant is to have a shortcut for lights? Of course they look cool, but compared to Brake and Gears it feels silly. Agreed with everything, but the abort button. Moving to below the panel could risk it being clicked by accident, no?

Lights are good for landing and not running into things. Having the UI change slightly is useful in knowing if the lights (or breaks) are in a on or off stage, since lights can be turned on and off independently. Worth pointing out that the UI button for breaks is a toggle, while the shortcut is a hold button. The abort button slides out when hovered over, so the same system could apply? Either way, backspace is the keyboard shortcut and is easier to hit.

4 hours ago, beik said:

When to you usually use trim levels? For planes or something hacky as ascend maneuvers?

Normally when using aircraft with FAR. The tiniest bit of trim along with SAS turned off works really well with FAR (and a good design). But it would be nice to know where the trim level is. It would also be nice to set some control surfaces to pitch, and another to only trim, like a real aircraft... But ya know... I guess robotics can do that..

4 hours ago, beik said:

My girlfriend closed KSP after I told that the success for a good launch is to understanding what delta-v is.

An interesting thing about that is the original devs didn't want that to be the case. They just wanted a wacky rocket launching game that used semi real physics. They wanted players to rely on trail and error. This would also explain the vertical speed display. As Loskene said, I also do use the vertical speed display, but only to see if I am slowly gain altitude or losing it. And that's only with aircraft and FAR. I think it would be fine if they just moved it next to the nav ball. But they could always get rid of it and replace it with a more basic indicator on whether you are gaining or losing altitude.

But as I said, if the devs were to redo the UI, they should consider redesigning elements of it opposed to just changing the styling of it. That doesn't mean they couldn't use your new style of cause.

[beik]

@Noir My feeling based on what I learn from the replies is that a catch-all instrumentation is the real problem.

I will try to draft a new concept that split the UI in these blocks:

Control mode (based on actual task)

Space mode – Similar to the default solution

• Navball: The one we have today
• Secondary instruments: Small adaptations based on Atmospheric navigation, Vacuum navigation, Vessel encounter and Landing

Air/Surface mode – Adaptation for Airplanes and Rovers

• Navball: Slight changed to reflect more vessel direction and roll compared to the surface
• Secondary instruments: More focus on waypoint navigation than orbit, Trim for planes, and Acc hold for rovers, Maintaining altitude

Docking mode – Like the modsss

• Navball: Change to docking port camera, with proper port alignment
• Secondary instruments: Focus on an easier to understand WASD+IJKL maneuver, Monoprop resource

 

Map, planning and resources

Group things that are used for mission planning or critical for long term success, like:

• Settings targets
• Adding maneuver nodes (and refining it)
• Estimating resources and necessary delta-v
• Mission control communication

 

Maneuver execution

Group things that are related to time-sensitive actions:

• Pointing vessel to the right direction
• Warping to the right time
• Executing the burn for the right time
• Working antenna

 

Crew, science and scans
Group things relate to the Kerbals and activities (manned and unmanned):

• Manned – Dramatic portrait, Specialization, G Force and Start EVA
• Unmanned – Scan as "portrait"
• Crew/Sounding report, Science collected

 

Apps and toolbar

Group all apps by these modes: Simple button, Simple dropdown, Mini-hud, Modal overlay and Sidebar overlay (combinable)

 

Actions/Readouts app (mini-hud and modal overlay)

• Customizable app that manage action parts
• Customizable readout, KER style

 

Message app

Group textual messages related more to the game aspect than the simulation.

• Game messages
• Contract information
• Mission log

 

Help app

Combination of learning resources

• KSPedia
• Contextual information, keyboard keys
• Real world knowledge

 

Generic app (and mods)

...

 

---

 

This is still a work in progress, but let me know if it sparks any new ideas

Edited August 15, 2019 by beik

[klgraham1013]

On 8/14/2019 at 4:10 PM, beik said:

Does anyone use it? It feels like a totally legacy readout. For me it worked like a "you messed up" meter when I was learning how to fly.
The only justification for something that big is that it adds a lot to the vintage physical interface style of KSP.

I would not at all be mad if that analog indicator was removed.  So much space that could be used to display so much more information.

On 8/14/2019 at 4:10 PM, beik said:

My girlfriend closed KSP after I told that the success for a good launch is to understanding what delta-v is.

...and that's okay.  Not every game is for everyone.  As a designer, it's not always wise to focus on making things for those who might use your product, over making things for those who will use your product.

[beik]

As promised, some WIP based on the discussion in this thread

Wireframing the main idea on a flight HUD revamp

 

 

Slowing adding the details of each section

[EnderKid2]

Me likey.

 

We also need to think of where panels from mods could go. So either leave gaps, or even better, possibly, let mods integrate into the HUD.

Edited August 22, 2019 by EnderKid2

[beik]

2 hours ago, EnderKid2 said:

Me likey.

 

We also need to think of where panels from mods could go. So either leave gaps, or even better, possibly, let mods integrate into the HUD.

I will finish a new wireframe tonight!

I'm leaving a lot of space for mod tabs and customization