What do you think will be shown off on Friday?

[Missingno200]

Well, another round of our regularly scheduled Friday showcase is coming up in 4 days. What do you think will be shown off this Friday? I personally think, with the current track record, that we're probably get something related to the visual effects, or maybe a new engine. On my wishlist, I'd like to see Multiplayer, but that's just a distant hope.

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, Missingno200 said:

Well, another round of our regularly scheduled Friday showcase is coming up in 4 days. What do you think will be shown off this Friday? I personally think, with the current track record, that we're probably get something related to the visual effects, or maybe a new engine. On my wishlist, I'd like to see Multiplayer, but that's just a distant hope.

Multiplayer is def. a nope. They said that there is a major announcement on that soon. Planets also probably not after reaction from last time with people not wanting to be spoiled. Probably a new part or something technical TBH.

[Missingno200]

20 minutes ago, The Doodling Astronaut said:

Multiplayer is def. a nope. They said that there is a major announcement on that soon. Planets also probably not after reaction from last time with people not wanting to be spoiled. Probably a new part or something technical TBH.

I mean, that all depends on HOW you define a major announcement.

I'm aware planets aren't, they flat out said the only planets they'll be showing off here on out are those shown in the trailer and Kerbol planets.

[shdwlrd]

I wouldn't mind seeing a random spot on Kerbin with full details. 

[theleg]

How do you know if the video will be released this friday? Because for the previous 2-3 weeks, no showcase has been released....am I missing something out?

6 hours ago, Missingno200 said:

Well, another round of our regularly scheduled Friday showcase is coming up in 4 days. What do you think will be shown off this Friday? I personally think, with the current track record, that we're probably get something related to the visual effects, or maybe a new engine. On my wishlist, I'd like to see Multiplayer, but that's just a distant hope.

 

[MechBFP]

Another 3d model, probably vehicle related.

[Missingno200]

1 hour ago, theleg said:

How do you know if the video will be released this friday? Because for the previous 2-3 weeks, no showcase has been released....am I missing something out?

Yeah, you definitely did miss something. Every other Friday, there's a showcase released here.

[theleg]

1 hour ago, Missingno200 said:

Yeah, you definitely did miss something. Every other Friday, there's a showcase released here.

Oh ok, thanks!

[Missingno200]

3 minutes ago, theleg said:

Oh ok, thanks!

No problem! Glad I was of help.

[Ahres]

19 hours ago, The Doodling Astronaut said:

Multiplayer is def. a nope. They said that there is a major announcement on that soon. Planets also probably not after reaction from last time with people not wanting to be spoiled. Probably a new part or something technical TBH.

I’m not sure they’ve actually said “soon”. I’d be happy if you prove me wrong though, DA. 

[Francois424]

Honestly I wouldn't mind a Friday updates about rovers, flying rovers, hopper... you know, stuff you make to move around on a planet.

Just saying because that is the core of my KSP gameplay

[modus]

Yeah I agree. I want to see basic stuff, if possible in action.

Which is not so trivial because they'd have to show UI's, the navball, and other stuff that would make us all go nuts. So I get why they don't show stuff like that 

[shdwlrd]

13 minutes ago, modus said:

Which is not so trivial because they'd have to show UI's, the navball, and other stuff that would make us all go nuts. So I get why they don't show stuff like that 

I would have to guess because of the complaints they get. The flight UI is different from KSP1 and people don't like it. (They can call it WIP, and people still complain. )

[Missingno200]

1 hour ago, shdwlrd said:

I would have to guess because of the complaints they get. The flight UI is different from KSP1 and people don't like it. (They can call it WIP, and people still complain. )

In defense of the "outrage", most of that goes down to the fact that we're used to KSP 1's nice, glossy, and frankly pretty flawed UI. Giving us something that really just looks like a modern-day corporate logo for a UI, no matter how much of an improvement it actually is in terms of design, doesn't look great, and given that it looks like a modern-day corporate logo for a UI, even if it's WIP, that's concerning to those who liked skeuomorphism.

[LHACK4142]

1 hour ago, Missingno200 said:

skeuomorphism

I searched this and basically it's referring to the fact that the KSP1 navball looked like an actual artificial horizon and so on. Basically something on a UI designed to look like its real-world counterpart. Hope I saved you a search.

[FlywheelsGroove]

3 hours ago, Francois424 said:

Honestly I wouldn't mind a Friday updates about rovers, flying rovers, hopper... you know, stuff you make to move around on a planet.

Just saying because that is the core of my KSP gameplay

I just thought about this earlier, I kind of want to do long haul flights carrying cargo/resources around other planets! 

If resources are decentralized, you'll need multiple bases for different resources. I super want to have one main colony for all the refining/building and smaller extraction outposts. Fly food out to the outposts, fly raw material back. 

[MKI]

3 hours ago, Missingno200 said:

that's concerning to those who liked skeuomorphism.

Today, skeuomorphism makes something look rather "old", as its a design from a decade or so ago, with the original iphone's design.

I'm not surprised the current released UI looks much more "flat" and more digital, which is more inline with todays design standards than the designs of old. 

Its less about "corporate logo" and more just what most modern designs look like, and yes its very much trendy. Furthermore KSP 2 seems to provide more information to the player in its UI, which is an accomplishment in itself (and more what I care about) without getting to clutered

On 7/21/2021 at 1:34 PM, Missingno200 said:

Well, another round of our regularly scheduled Friday showcase is coming up in 4 days. What do you think will be shown off this Friday? I personally think, with the current track record, that we're probably get something related to the visual effects, or maybe a new engine. On my wishlist, I'd like to see Multiplayer, but that's just a distant hope.

My money is on more 3D models parts. There's a lot of them that can be shown off, and its easy to show them off rather than any fancy gameplay -like footage. 

 

 

 

Edited July 22, 2021 by MKI

[shdwlrd]

12 minutes ago, MKI said:

My money is on more 3D models parts. There's a lot of them that can be shown off, and its easy to show them off rather than any fancy like gameplay footage.

Good possibility. There were a bunch of parts that didn't look like stock parts in KSP1 or USI themed parts.

[Missingno200]

39 minutes ago, MKI said:

Today, skeuomorphism makes something look rather "old", as its a design from a decade or so ago, with the original iphone's design.

...

... Furthermore KSP 2 seems to provide more information to the player in its UI, which is an accomplishment in itself (and more what I care about) without getting

The thing about skeuomorphism is that people seem to forget why it was adopted. There's been several studies on this, but I'm a lazy bugger so take my words with a grain of salt here:Skeumorphic designs were adopted in the past because it is a lot easier to quickly navigate a program/website where there is intuitive UI designs drawing your attention. It doesn't matter that it's considered old design, which frankly most people here probably LIKE over the new things anyways, regardless of benefit. Regardless, something that looks like a rectangle won't draw your attention like something that looks like a proper button. Someone once compared a skeuomorphic reskin of an existing website(I believe it was Facebook), and found that navigation, on average when tested with about 50 people, was 66% faster with the skeuomorphic reskin. Keep in mind that the layout was IDENTICAL, which means the only difference between the two was that one was using the standard CSS and image set, and one was using a modified CSS and image set which did skeuomorphism.

In short, the reason why I'm concerned personally about it is that skeuomorphic designs are a lot easier to gleam information off of, and are much quicker to navigate, both exceptionally crucial when doing a fair more complex operation like landing a spacecraft. I'm not asking for something gaudy, I'm asking for something functional.

46 minutes ago, MKI said:

My money is on more 3D models parts. There's a lot of them that can be shown off, and its easy to show them off rather than any fancy like gameplay footage. 

Yeah, unfortunately. I'm not a fan of that theory, but I suspect you're right. However, I think they may not want to show off too many new parts. The reason for this is that they have a bunch of "safe crafts" which they use to prevent the accidental announcement of new parts. It's a loose theory but it's my only hope because I don't just want new parts.

[MKI]

2 minutes ago, Missingno200 said:

In short, the reason why I'm concerned personally about it is that skeuomorphic designs are a lot easier to gleam information off of, and are much quicker to navigate, both exceptionally crucial when doing a fair more complex operation like landing a spacecraft. I'm not asking for something gaudy, I'm asking for something functional.

I can see a skeuomorphic design being helpful in situations where users would be able to recognize the meaning behind such designs, rather than an abstraction, such as using a "pencil" icon for an "edit" action. That reasoning starts falling apart for situations where the information to be gleamed from such a design is unrecognized in itself. Using a prograde icon would be just as little help to a complete beginner as it would be just as vague as the world "prograde", or any other form of how prograde would be displayed "skeuomorphically". (NASA displays MFDs aren't much prettier ;D) As such, an abstraction, like an icon you have to learn ends up being more useful once your use to it as its minimal. 

Most of what is in the UI in KSP 1 are these abstractions, where an skeuomorphic design wouldn't really help understand what is going on. Sure a round navball is nice, but thats more in-line with aerospace of 50 years ago. Most planes provide a flat MFD navball, just like what KSP 2 is moving toward, with the obvious addition of orbital indicators. Overall there aren't many elements in the UI players would recognize and understand at a glance skeumorphically or otherwise, so what design is it wont matter. 

 

Finally, since we live in a digital world, skeuomorphic just looks dated and isn't as practical for even simple UX cases, as everyone has become more accustomed to more "abstracted" designs. This is exactly why buttons on modern UI's are usually of flat and simple designs. For example, all the controls in the rich-text-editor you use in this form use icons rather than text menus. Minimalism has also become more and more the norm, especially for non-interactive elements. Often simple UI interactive elements have 1 primary action, and all other secondary actions stuffed away somewhere (usually a "three dot menu"). With even things like "gestures" taking over distinct UI elements, for example you probably swipe left/right to start moving an item into the trash on some apps like email apps on mobile. 

 

KSP can follow a similar suite and push most actions to the keyboard, and keep the UI as minimal as possible, as you have to learn about what it all means regardless of what design your using. Hence, using a minimal/digital UI allows developers to shove more information into your eyeballs while keeping the view clean from overstuff-ness, while also supporting consoles, with limited and different controls schemes. Just think, KSP 1 never had a giant button anywhere for "staging" even though that is arguable the single most important action in the game when flying.

If a totally new player needs to understand what a prograde is, what its icon looks like, then it wont matter much what the design is. 

 

PS. I study UI/UX. You might not like the UI/UX right now, but you will get used to it and look back and find KSP 1 had a "worse experience". That's usually how design works, unless there is a massive oversight in UX, and UX wise KSP 2 more or less looks functionally exactly the same. 

[PlutoISaPlanet]

An entire dev diary on the UI would be great.

Also, Jools clouds were teased and we still have not seen them! I say this every week but I am realy hanging of a cliff.

[KawaiiLucy]

I'd love to see more of actual gameplay features, ie if anything/what is happenning or changing from ksp1 in terms of career or science gameplay.

[Missingno200]

Spoiler

2 hours ago, MKI said:

I can see a skeuomorphic design being helpful in situations where users would be able to recognize the meaning behind such designs, rather than an abstraction, such as using a "pencil" icon for an "edit" action. That reasoning starts falling apart for situations where the information to be gleamed from such a design is unrecognized in itself. Using a prograde icon would be just as little help to a complete beginner as it would be just as vague as the world "prograde", or any other form of how prograde would be displayed "skeuomorphically". (NASA displays MFDs aren't much prettier ;D) As such, an abstraction, like an icon you have to learn ends up being more useful once your use to it as its minimal. 

Most of what is in the UI in KSP 1 are these abstractions, where an skeuomorphic design wouldn't really help understand what is going on. Sure a round navball is nice, but thats more in-line with aerospace of 50 years ago. Most planes provide a flat MFD navball, just like what KSP 2 is moving toward, with the obvious addition of orbital indicators. Overall there aren't many elements in the UI players would recognize and understand at a glance skeumorphically or otherwise, so what design is it wont matter. 

 

Finally, since we live in a digital world, skeuomorphic just looks dated and isn't as practical for even simple UX cases, as everyone has become more accustomed to more "abstracted" designs. This is exactly why buttons on modern UI's are usually of flat and simple designs. For example, all the controls in the rich-text-editor you use in this form use icons rather than text menus. Minimalism has also become more and more the norm, especially for non-interactive elements. Often simple UI interactive elements have 1 primary action, and all other secondary actions stuffed away somewhere (usually a "three dot menu"). With even things like "gestures" taking over distinct UI elements, for example you probably swipe left/right to start moving an item into the trash on some apps like email apps on mobile. 

 

KSP can follow a similar suite and push most actions to the keyboard, and keep the UI as minimal as possible, as you have to learn about what it all means regardless of what design your using. Hence, using a minimal/digital UI allows developers to shove more information into your eyeballs while keeping the view clean from overstuff-ness, while also supporting consoles, with limited and different controls schemes. Just think, KSP 1 never had a giant button anywhere for "staging" even though that is arguable the single most important action in the game when flying.

If a totally new player needs to understand what a prograde is, what its icon looks like, then it wont matter much what the design is. 

 

PS. I study UI/UX. You might not like the UI/UX right now, but you will get used to it and look back and find KSP 1 had a "worse experience". That's usually how design works, unless there is a massive oversight in UX, and UX wise KSP 2 more or less looks functionally exactly the same. 

 

It feels as if though my points were totally overlooked. In any case, when I first left the house earlier, I was planning scathing comments, and explaining how just because you study UI/UX does not mean your points are instantly valid, but I have since calmed down. I'm going to agree to disagree, and move on, because frankly, this is a stupid argument to take, and our definitions of skeuomorphism appear to be divergent, making any meaningful conversation exceedingly difficult.

[PlutoISaPlanet]

30 minutes ago, KawaiiLucy said:

I'd love to see more of actual gameplay features, ie if anything/what is happenning or changing from ksp1 in terms of career or science gameplay.

Hopefully during the buildup to launch ( which I hope begins later  this year or early 2022).

[TLTay]

Hopefully not something like Kerbal skin texture again.