1.1 New Feature: Cutaway Interiors!

[Vanamonde]

Some of you really like this, and some of you really hate this. That's okay, but could you please not hate each other over it? This thread really needs to calm down and avoid getting so personal. 

[razark]

42 minutes ago, AlamoVampire said:

cherry pick much?

If you want to call it that, then yes.  I called out specific parts of your post for a reason.

 

42 minutes ago, AlamoVampire said:

Ignoring that line makes your statement make sense, however, NOT ignoring that line makes you sound like your cherry picking.

Regardless of that line, it's the tone of the parts I called out that got to me.  The hyperbolic vocabulary used, and the all caps is just a little bit more than I feel is called for.  I personally am not a big fan of this feature (if it is*), and will probably never use it.  However, I also note that it may be simply a failure of my imagination as to how I could even use it.  My reaction to the destructible buildings was much the same as yours to this.  However, once it was shown that it was framework for career mode progression stuff, it was easier to understand.  (Although, why they just couldn't have mentioned that instead of hyping a side effect of it, I don't know.)  Sit back for a bit, take a breath, and consider that there might actually be something you might like out of this, even if it's not going to be in 1.1.  Also, as much as you or I disagree with some of the choices the devs have made, it's already done, and it's not going to cost us much to see where this leads.  It's certainly unlikely that they'll reverse their decision, no matter how we voice our discontent.  (Especially at this late a time when it's already done.  The dev time is already spent, and removing it would only cost more time.  The time to complain was when this was on the drawing board, but now it's only possible to accept it and turn the option off.)

 

*To my knowledge, we haven't even gotten confirmation that this is a feature of 1.1 from an official source.  Until then, I'm not able to get too worked up about it.

[AlamoVampire]

34 minutes ago, Raptor9 said:

@AlamoVampire I'm not directing this at you, I'm bringing up this portion of what you said to offer a (hopefully neutral) observation of my own to this thread.

To everyone on both sides of what has apparently turned into a hot debate:  Can we please all chill out about the cutaway preview image.  Like what @AlamoVampire stated, we don't know the entire story, this all is only based on a few static images that were published shortly after the 1.1 update entered experimentals.  We have no context or explanation beyond these few images.  Since this is one of the very few previews we have seen, let's not loose our minds over it and incite flame wars on other forum users, when nobody has any accurate idea of what the whole of the update will be like.

I know I'm not a moderator, but I don't understand the drama over such a small little thing.

@Raptor9 I do not mind being the launching off point of something like your post. I like every other person here or anywhere, can only react base on what is known, not known or perceived. I like your expansion on my thought

[Frybert]

Stop.

Please stop.

Just stop.

Please, just stop.

Just stop, please.

 

[Mitchz95]

Well, I for one like this feature. Hopefully it'll pave the way for transparent windows.

[AlamoVampire]

5 minutes ago, razark said:

If you want to call it that, then yes.  I called out specific parts of your post for a reason.

 

Regardless of that line, it's the tone of the parts I called out that got to me.  The hyperbolic vocabulary used, and the all caps is just a little bit more than I feel is called for.  I personally am not a big fan of this feature (if it is*), and will probably never use it.  However, I also note that it may be simply a failure of my imagination as to how I could even use it.  My reaction to the destructible buildings was much the same as yours to this.  However, once it was shown that it was framework for career mode progression stuff, it was easier to understand.  (Although, why they just couldn't have mentioned that instead of hyping a side effect of it, I don't know.)  Sit back for a bit, take a breath, and consider that there might actually be something you might like out of this, even if it's not going to be in 1.1.  Also, as much as you or I disagree with some of the choices the devs have made, it's already done, and it's not going to cost us much to see where this leads.  It's certainly unlikely that they'll reverse their decision, no matter how we voice our discontent.  (Especially at this late a time when it's already done.  The dev time is already spent, and removing it would only cost more time.  The time to complain was when this was on the drawing board, but now it's only possible to accept it and turn the option off.)

 

*To my knowledge, we haven't even gotten confirmation that this is a feature of 1.1 from an official source.  Until then, I'm not able to get too worked up about it.

I think we are on a similar position, you are choosing to sit and wait, I am taking a slightly diff approach by being unnerved by what I am perceiving by a lack of any kind of official explanation and or confirmation. I am with you on the: wont use it. Happy flying, happy exploring. And yes, I do call it cherry picking for the record, because to me, it seemed you deliberately ignored the line I pointed out again. but again, Happy flying, happy exploring.

[Nightside]

12 hours ago, JedTech said:

Internal views and IVA's are not for me. I just want to fly rockets. I wish there was a mod that could unload all of these wasteful textures and graphics.

9 hours ago, Majorjim said:

Been reading this today and I agree with those who say that without navigable IVAs it is fluff, without merit. With it would be a nice feature. Now, If this causes lag I think I will have an aneurism though. The absolute LAST thing this game needs is a minor feature that causes lag.. It would be a serious mistake by Squad to lose performance for a pointless feature.

Some have said it would be the end of clipping, I disagree. If this feature even has navigable IVAs I most likely will use it once then not bother ever again. I would in fact ask some modders to work on a way to REMOVE this feature for the sake of performance.

 See-through windows and canopies would be awesome I just think the whole idea of seeing inside like that is pointless.

Your wishes have been answered. There is already a mod to do this: Module Manager.

Spoiler

//Remove internals and portraits
@PART[*]:HAS[@INTERNAL[*]]:FINAL
{
    !INTERNAL,* {}

I already use this to get rid of the cockpit Internal: so no IVA and no portrait, less lag for sad laptop players like me with an imaginary graphics card that struggles to animate every kerbal on board (not just the 3 pictured).

Personally I think this looks like a lot of fun and I hope the game runs well enough on my computer that I don't need to cut the internals in 1.1.

I think Squad has probably been planning to make this a part of the game for a long time and is finally taking advantage of game improvements to get it working.

 

[Dafni]

40 minutes ago, Nightside said:

 

Your wishes have been answered. There is already a mod to do this: Module Manager.

  Hide contents

//Remove internals and portraits
@PART[*]:HAS[@INTERNAL[*]]:FINAL
{
    !INTERNAL,* {}

 

That sounds great, I will have to look into this, for some of my mod heavy installs.

I have Module Manager installed, but apparently dont know how to use it properly. Always thought that thing just does its business in the background.

Your "hidden content" is not very helpful though, as I have no idea what to make of thins. I will read into it in the MM thread. Thanks for the pointer!

[pizzaoverhead]

16 hours ago, TeeGee said:

I don't understand why they keep adding useless features like this to the game..

14 hours ago, Malah said:

An useless feature which will just adds bug, why adds this and remove the communication/telemetries feature ...

14 hours ago, AlamoVampire said:

I honestly fail to see the utility of this "feature." Seems to me to be poorly thought out and implemented. We cannot move our kerbals around EVA style inside a crew module so that fact right there makes this "feature" utterly useless. Just my honest opinion.

12 hours ago, AlamoVampire said:

@JPLRepo Once kerbal mvmt in iva is a thing then it has a use. But until then its wasted dev time. With out additional functionality its pointless and useless. THATs my point

8 hours ago, AlamoVampire said:

Right now, this cutaway "feature" is 100% USELESS. 100% WASTE OF DEVELOPMENT TIME. This is a feature that, frankly has no worth what so bloody ever. It just shows that, in all honesty, their developmental priorities are SKEWED in the absolute WORST direction possible.

7 hours ago, HoloYolo said:

I'm no game developer but this is a pointless feature. 

A lot of you have missed the point here: This feature isn't for you, this is to speed up Squad's part development. It's a couple of lines of code, and has no effect on performance when disabled, but gives far more visibility on issues with part and IVA design. For example, here's one of the cockpits that was made before IVA overlays were available:

The IVA's scale and position don't match the part's well, but it was very difficult and time consuming to identify and fix this in-game. Compare this with the version of that part in the current game (ignore the white panels, I added them for testing):

Note that not only does the cockpit fit the part exactly now, extra use was able to be made of the space in the lower half of the part, meaning that the hatches on either end of it now make sense. Best of all, the new part IVA uses less memory than the old one. With one small code addition to toggle the IVA layer, part and in particular IVA development has been sped up. You will get your new updates more quickly as a result of this change.

 

14 hours ago, JedTech said:

Internal views and IVA's are not for me. I just want to fly rockets. I wish there was a mod that could unload all of these wasteful textures and graphics.

They're all sitting in the InternalSpaces folder. There's nothing stopping you from removing them

 

14 hours ago, JPLRepo said:

As I stated yesterday... would love to know if this means Squad has done away with the different orientations of the IVA layer.
Also, Raster Prop Monitor TransparentPods has given us transparent windows for a while now (for those mods that use it). And there is FreeIVA as mentioned above as well.

Setting up the toggle to overlay the IVAs is unrelated to the IVA layer orientation, so it's unlikely that they've changed the orientation unfortunately.

[jlcarneiro]

Liked it a LOT! Thanks Squad!

Dunno how often I'll use it (like the IVAs), but I like to know it's available.

Just hope it doesn't impact (much) on performance and framerate.

[Rocket In My Pocket]

3 hours ago, pizzaoverhead said:

A lot of you have missed the point here: This feature isn't for you, this is to speed up Squad's part development. It's a couple of lines of code, and has no effect on performance when disabled, but gives far more visibility on issues with part and IVA design.

Best of all, the new part IVA uses less memory than the old one. With one small code addition to toggle the IVA layer, part and in particular IVA development has been sped up. You will get your new updates more quickly as a result of this change.

They're all sitting in the InternalSpaces folder. There's nothing stopping you from removing them

I can't see how anyone could continue to complain about this feature given this information.

/thread.

You win 2 internets sir.

[Avatarium]

For a moment there I thought I was reading one of the American's Republican debate transcripts. jk. I for one will most likely use this to find my Kerbalnauts. Just because the map view will not tell me which hitchhikers can their in.

 I do not believe that this took much time to work on. Seems to work like the service can and fairings in the VAB. But, what do I know, lol I'm just a newb.

 

[Wemb]

13 hours ago, AlamoVampire said:

right now, IVA has no function at all ....

Not at all - with RasterPropMonitor installed, I have done orbital rendezvous and docking missions (post launch/orbital insertion) entirely from within the IVA as a challenge.  And much fun and satisfaction was had. Plus, where else do you see your radar altimeter?

Wemb

12 hours ago, Tourist said:

Exactly my friend, but you have not gone far enough. All the textures, colors, and graphic frivolities are completely unnecessary for gameplay. What we need is a simple wireframe model, operating in a simple wireframe representation of Kerbol. I mean, jeez, why are they wasting time on Kerbal expressions, suits, etc at all, when a stick figure would easily suffice. Please hand me one pitchfolk please.... but one of the simple two pronged ones... I'm not one of these big city dandies needing three prongs.  

Oh pish - talk about style over substance!  Did the crew of Apollo XI have 'wireframe graphics'? No they did not - they had the AGC and were happy with it.  15 push buttons, 22 7-segment LEDs and a few status lights was good enough for them - what more do you need to fly to the Mun?

Wemb

[Majorjim!]

11 hours ago, regex said:

Man, this thread got hilarious fast.

They frequently do these days.

 

4 hours ago, pizzaoverhead said:

A lot of you have missed the point here: This feature isn't for you, this is to speed up Squad's part development. It's a couple of lines of code, and has no effect on performance when disabled, but gives far more visibility on issues with part and IVA design. For example, here's one of the cockpits that was made before IVA overlays were available:

 

 

In fairness man who has pizza above his head, if it is not for us why was it touted as a 1.1 'feature'? If it is a development tool why show it at all?

 

Edited March 11, 2016 by Majorjim

[Red Iron Crown]

6 minutes ago, Majorjim said:

In fairness man who has pizza above his head, if it is not for us why was it touted as a 1.1 'feature'? If it is a development tool why show it at all?

Because it's neat? Kinda like the destructible buildings when they were added.

[Superfluous J]

10 hours ago, AlamoVampire said:

My dismay at the cutaway thing is based on squad deliberately not telling us the ENTIRE story around this one feature.

Wait, your post was NOT satire?

[John FX]

So yet another minor reveal ends up in angry posts and friction.

Can`t we all just get along and go "those images look nice and I`m not going to read too much into three static images and try to restrict the development of the game so I can run it on my potato at full settings instead of turning off some features and letting those with more powerful machines experience a better game and I won`t excessively complain even if I see that feature as pointless"

Now repeat that three times and go and have a lie down.

Edited March 11, 2016 by John FX
increased sense making

[Majorjim!]

Just now, Red Iron Crown said:

Because it's neat? Kinda like the destructible buildings when they were added.

Yeah I guess but that ignores the point I was challenging him over. The fact that it is a development tool. Why show it if it has no bearing on us the gamers? Again, just saying. Not wanting to start any more fires.

[Red Iron Crown]

5 minutes ago, Majorjim said:

Yeah I guess but that ignores the point I was challenging him over. The fact that it is a development tool. Why show it if it has no bearing on us the gamers? Again, just saying. Not wanting to start any more fires.

Because it's neat, and I guess it was thought some players would find it neat too. Can't please them all.

[Majorjim!]

Just now, Red Iron Crown said:

 Can't please them all.

Agreed, that is always an impossibility. Then the issue is a lack of information. Is this a feature? Is this an early look at a future feature? What is this? I highly doubt it is as you say though. I shall holds my tongue and await word from Squad on this.

[Columbia]

20 hours ago, Bloody_looser said:

 

Yep, throwing away communication relay and adding that 'feature' is really a poor choice.

They're not throwing communication relays away. They're putting this in the next update.

And I think it's understandable because something like this is really small if you compare it to how big a gamechanger the new comms system would be, and risks far more bugs and needs more bugtesting. Personally, It would look good, and would add another layer to seeing your ship and crew. I have nothing against the other features, it's that I personally think that it's understandable that Squad moved comms relays to 1.2 while they decided to code this in. 

and honestly, with that kind of thought Squad might as well delay everything else 'til a DV Calculator comes up stock.

[genbrien]

some here should really get a life....

[Warzouz]

Like many of you, I'm quite clueless with this new feature. There are far more useful stuff to do, like improving graphical immersion and sound design. But again, Squad may have tested a new Unity feature. I hope that wasn't time consuming.

We'll see if there is a meaning to that.

 

[cfds]

The explanation "development tool" seems unlikely: the better quality of IVA is probably "simply" achieved by designing interior and exterior together at the same time in an external modelling program. 'Stumbled upon Unity gimmick and an afternoon of playing around' sounds far more probable.

[Pthigrivi]

How about, for people not devoting their lives to developing this game, who have no real idea how time consuming this or that feature would be, no idea what memory requirements this or that feature actually place, that we don't get too judgy about where development time is spent? Just relax. Squad cares a lot about what the community thinks, but that doesn't mean we know more about how to direct it than they do.

Edited March 11, 2016 by Pthigrivi