Jump to content

VAB interface components


Vl3d
 Share

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

1 : switch VAB / SPH.. seems like we would not switch buildings, only vertical / horizontal orientation

2 : undo

3 : redo

4 : symmetry number

5 : symmetry type (radial / mirrored)

6, 7, 8, 9 : subassemblies stacks? select, move, reorder stack.. staging?

10, 11, 12 : aerodynamic, thrust, weight center points

13 : radiation / heat center? wow..

A, B : have no clue

C : general search for category or part or type of fuel ?

D, E, F : sort by size, mass, type

G : filter / more sorting options

H : favorite parts

I : command pods, probes here or at S?

J : tanks

K : engines

L : structural (first thoughts: slushing, fuel separators ? does this mean we will have procedural tanks?)

M : decouplers

N : payload / cargo

O : aerodynamics / wings

P : wheels

Q : heat related parts

R : batteries and electrics

S : communications: antennas, remote control ? maybe probe parts moved here?

T : science parts

U : utility / various .. not sure about that symbol

V : toggle / hide parts menu / back ?

W : delete / recycle bin to drop part

~ : project craft name

! : new craft

@ : save craft

# : open craft

$ : check list .. or missions? (or engineers report, vessel stats)

% : staging view - wow it's separate, where?

^ : colors / paint

& : action groups ?

+ : fuel types and amount

/ : journey planner, delta-v budget? wow

\ : undo previous version .. of what? go back in time? or alarm clock?

= : toggle launch button? show / hide options?

< : select launchpad (multiplayer option?)

> : LAUNCH

I see we also have toggles to show/hide part size categories, starting with extra small.

Also we can select blueprint mode from the XYZ view?

Where are: command & control, robotics, smart parts?

Very interesting!

Edited by Vl3d
clarified some ideas
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A and B are where you're told which VAB you're working in. So are those UI elements in this shot just not working yet? Or did they cover them up to not give something away?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 is probably toggle radial vs mirrored
6 is probably pick/place part,
7 is probably offset/translate part, 
8 Im guessing is pick/place subassembly
9 Is maybe pick/move entire vessel

L is structural 
S is communications

$ is probably engineers report, vessel stats
& might be action groups, Im not seeing that anywhere else
/ Is the mission planner, sounds like a great feature
\ Is probably alarm clock

I see command and structural, but not robotics, ISRU, habitation, LS, so those either aren't in scope or are together under U. Im also curious how crew assignments will work. We'll probably have a lot more dudes to manage. 


 

Edited by Pthigrivi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Cargo icon disappeared from lower right (was probably the resource manager and was replaced by fuel idk), also that X / V checklist icon from orange rocket image lower middle.

There was also a rocket icon on the lower left - last in menu (orange rocket).

Have no idea where are robotics, smart parts, ISRU, life support, crew assignment.. like @Pthigrivi said.

Also where are the rotation angle / root tools?

Edited by Vl3d
Link to comment
Share on other sites

thanks for posting these, and the older ones too. it's nice to get a closer look at a feature, and a sense of progress over time for once.

i'm kinda surprised at how so many parts are... exactly the same as KSP parts. and overall the editor is almost exactly the same as well, aside from the expanded sub-panel next to the parts list. though, considering how secretive the development has been, it's likely their intent to only show us stuff that we would already recognise... and difficult to draw any conclusions from this. i imagine every frame of these videos being pored over by a panel multiple times before getting approved for general showing.

i like how they've grouped parts by size / bulkhead profile within the panel, but i definitely prefer the original UI over this cartoony-style.

idk. after so many delays i'd expect more than just KSP with new graphics and near-future parts. everything is clearly still separated by cross-sectional / bulkhead profile, including different engines for each, which is disappointing... after all this time they should be trying something new, like tweakscale implemented in stock - customisable parts per type that can be freely scaled. i mean what's the point if modders will have to add the exact same features that the community has shown great interest in?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What didn't you like about the old VAB? I like the new feature of designing multiple craft inside a single project - not having to search for saves to merge and not having ghost sub-assemblies. And I hate how hard it is to align centers of mass / thrust / aero sometimes.

What I would really like would be a better way to manage craft families, to evolve versions of craft, have more incentive to reuse complex projects.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can't help but notice the group of people always crying foul that everything still says "Pre-Alpha Capture" aren't talking about how the last image doesn't.

Edited by Ahres
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/30/2022 at 11:27 AM, Vl3d said:

I'm really starting to feel like this game is more highly classified than the Manhattan Project. And that's a bad thing.

I mean, the only thing it tells me is that they're probably working under some sort of NDA that limits what they can release to the public.

Industry standard practice in the video gaming industry these days, you don't want overly enthused video game developers releasing information about your game too early, lest you get a whole lot of community hype when the game's still.... two... years... out.. Hey wait a dang second! Isn't that exactly what happened with this game (for an entirely different reason)? :confused:

Doesn't mean anything bad's happening behind the scenes. We keep telling you this, and you still jump to these kinds of conclusions. Now, depending on your age this might be hard to do, but put your emotions aside for a second, and think.

Would they really want to make the same mistake TWICE, even for different reasons? Generating too much hype for KSP 2 before it is anywhere near release would be potentially disasterous for the sales figures of the game, and if you're anything like me you want the game to sell very well, especially to people who haven't played KSP 1 (and trust me, I know what this is all like, I've been playing KSP since before there were even any other planets to go to in the Kerbol system, it was just Kerbin, the Mun, and (just added when I started playing) Minmus!). The game's no longer in the same league as it once was, and I can only hope that KSP 2 has a similarly long life-span.

But for KSP 2 to have a long life-span, it has to sell well, and/or be developed by dedicated fans who love the game (which as far as I can tell is the case). Trust me, if Intercept Games or even Take-Two Interactive went belly-up tomorrow (not really even remotely likely), I STILL don't think that would be enough to kill off KSP 2.
And even if it was enough to kill off this iteration, it would just mean that some MORE KSP fans (of which there are more than enough to do the job) would pick up the reigns and make another game that plays very similarly even if the art and the lore is all "different-enough-to-avoid-copyright-issues".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Basically KSP2 devs are doing Feature Creep -> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feature_creep

Can't they do something simple that works, instead of a big, complicated 314-Gigabytes thing with maybe bugs but at least lots of complicated things that are practically useless?

That's like the graphics: why do they have to do huge meshes for their simple (cylindric) parts instead of simple, 12-sided cylinders?

That's beyond me.

For me, the goal of a video game is to be fun and simple, not to impress the players with huge and CPU-consuming complicated useless stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Nazalassa said:

Basically KSP2 devs are doing Feature Creep -> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feature_creep

Can't they do something simple that works, instead of a big, complicated 314-Gigabytes thing with maybe bugs but at least lots of complicated things that are practically useless?

That's like the graphics: why do they have to do huge meshes for their simple (cylindric) parts instead of simple, 12-sided cylinders?

That's beyond me.

For me, the goal of a video game is to be fun and simple, not to impress the players with huge and CPU-consuming complicated useless stuff.

I understand your computer is underpowered and out of date like you mentioned in another thread, but you have to realize you're in the minority, and it's naïve to want developers to try to cater to decades-old hardware. You could make exactly the same argument, but taking it even further. "Why do they have to do 12 sides for their cylinders, when a 2D quadrilateral would work as well? Why do they need to make games over 700 megabytes? If it can't fit on a CD, it's too complicated. "

I'm just confused about what you're mad about. If you're looking for a game that can run well on hardware from 2007, there are hundreds of thousands of existing options, but you must see that most people enjoy when new games take advantage of new hardware. Why would you insist that any new game that does that is simply experiencing feature creep? Suppose you were in 2007; would you have said the same for a new game taking advantage of, for example, an ATI Radeon HD 3870 and a new Athlon 64 X2, while you're still stuck using an Amiga?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, whatsEJstandfor said:

still stuck using an Amiga?

Back in my Amiga days, people would get so mad they would write in to complain to all the Amiga mags if anyone even hinted at releasing a piece of software that wouldn't run on a bog standard A500. They wanted the new-fangled 3D games, but "it requires a 68030 accelerator and 2 MB RAM expansion, are you kidding me?" 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...