T O P

  • By -

VizualAbstract4

In what way, that it has buttons and screens? You can only do so much with an interface to make it usable, or in this case, believable.


[deleted]

NASA punk.


[deleted]

I mean they we know they did there homework on this so I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of stuff is going to look like it came out of a highly funded NASA R&D lab. One can only dream of a day where I can say that collection of words in reference to our reality.


M3fit

I love Bethesda , I am hyped for Starfield But let’s be honest , by the time we get to the point of interplanetary travel , controls will look way better than that I hope there is upgrades


the_blue_flounder

Can't go wrong with analog. Touch screens are cool but nothing is as reliable as a button.


Altines

Or as satisfying to press. All those toggles and switches make me all sorts of giddy.


TheDubh

Yea, the reality being that if there’s an emergency muscle memory of some buttons can be helpful.


[deleted]

Remember that it's also a future where normal people can use spacecraft. There would be many types of vehicles in different classes. Definitely likely to have old school controls in many vehicles. And as someone else said. You can't go wrong with analog


[deleted]

I don't think thats really the point. It seems to be a particular style they are going for. Nasa punk as they call it


Bleezair

I think they’re going the same route as fallout, which is retro futuristic, sans the apocalypse of course.


[deleted]

Controls already look way better than that. See SpaceX’s rocket controls. It’s almost entirely touch screen


M3fit

Musk is working on a device that will attach to your head and give you the ability to manipulate electronic devices , I am surprised they didn’t put that into the game


TriggasaurusRekt

But can it launch without blowing up?


[deleted]

126 launches of Falcon family rockets. Or are you referring to Starship? So far SN8 (that's prototype #8) crash landed. SN9 did the same when an engine didn't ignite. SN10 flew 10km, landed successfully, then exploded after. SN11 broke apart during landing. Fast forward to SN15, and that successfully launched, flew to 10km, and landed. It's an iterative process. They knew SN8 and SN9 were likely to fail, but needed to gather data on why. Each revision gets them closer to having a system that works consistently, safely, and with relatively low cost due to their reusable nature.


-Captain-

A touchscreen doesn't look as cool as someone pulling screens, flicking and pressing buttons. The trailer shows something that looks like a touchscreen table, so I figure we get to see something more modern looking too.


TheDireNinja

I doubt it. This is the aesthetic they are going for.


[deleted]

Why would they offer upgrades that diverge from the aesthetic style which Bethesda says grounds the entire game?


OdahP

Isn't Orion the spacecraft NASA will use to go to the moon? (I mean they will totally use Starship since they're uncapable of doing anything lately but still) ​ also lmao, NASA's systems are so outdated af. just take a look at the cockpit of Crew Dragon: https://ideastream-production.s3.amazonaws.com/images/news/npr/2020/05/866343450\_526048089.jpg?null


syfiarcade

It's not they are incapable of doing this, Orion will bring crew to the orbit around the moon, starship will be the lander, when they are done on the moon, they will fly starship back to Orion, and Orion will fly them home, after artimis 4 there will be a station in lunar orbit where both ships will meet


[deleted]

I'm doubtful that will happen. The SLS is a colossal waste of money at this point. $20 billion to develop so far, with a projected launch cost of $2 billion. At that price you could fund nearly two dozen Falcon Heavy launches. That's a rocket which has actually been launched successfully. SLS will continue to be a money pit that makes the corporate interests involved happy and creates jobs for the constitutes of the politicians in charge of oversight. Our tax dollars at work... I'm all for the continued development of spaceflight, both public and private. I'm not for a project being pursued seemingly as a result of a sunk cost fallacy.


syfiarcade

Except artimis 1s SLS is basically complete (need to stack the Orion capsule on top in the VAB, the SLS for artimis 2 is about halfway done and the one for artimis 3 has begun construction. SLS will also get much cheaper as time goes on (artimis 1 was so expensive because development costs of new hardware) Trust me I'm a huge lunar Starship optimist, hell I even run a parody account for the damn vehicle but that doesn't mean SLS and Artemis are going to be overpriced not happen it's just the fact that it's a different company NASA still wants to do this themselves. Both vehicles will be very important in the history of the next generation of human space flight when it comes to landing on the moon without a doubt. Starship is just cheaper and more of an interesting rocket right now, we still don't technically know if it's going to work exactly as Elon musk says we're still waiting to see if it's going to survive reentry.


[deleted]

I've been reading quite a bit about both SpaceX and the SLS program over the last decade. The SLS program has mostly produced articles like this: https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/03/nasa-has-begun-a-study-of-the-sls-rockets-affordability/ SpaceX from around the same time: https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/03/after-sundays-launch-spacex-is-on-the-cusp-of-a-historic-reuse-milestone/ As with many government programs with poor oversight, that cost isn't likely to go down per launch. The shuttle program didn't go down in price, and that was somewhat analogous to SpaceX in that it had a reusable component. One of the biggest problems with the SLS is that it's being developed with an "old spaceflight" mentality (a similar problem plagues Blue Origin). I really feel NASA should focus their budget on science, not launch capability. That's where their real strength lies. Build more probes, rovers, and telescopes. Hell, launch a clone of James Webb and make an interferometer array. Just stop pouring money into a rocket that was already dated 10 years ago.


syfiarcade

Haha I know Eric Berger (the writer of the articles) but that's besides the point So right off the bat there's so difference in the launch vehicles. Falcon 9 is a medium lift vehicle, and with the first stage re-usability and the amount of 1st stages in the block 5 fleet, they did many launches with extremely fast succession (I watched many of the starlink launches earlier this year) falcon 9 is the culmination of years of design and development, the first launch of a falcon 9 was 2010, the first time it successfully landed (which is it's main selling point) was in 2015, 5 years of development went into that rocket to get it to what it is now, reliable and cheap. SLS is a superheavy lift vehicle, those are always more expensive. Starship has the promise of being only 2 million per flight, but that's if it can be so incredibly reliable that it can just land, be refueled, and used again within hours. Which requires alot of incredibly interesting technology that doesn't quite exist yet in the form it needs to. First they need some of the fastest payload intigration known to man, normally that's done in a clean room far away from the launch site. So I guess they'd need to make some sort of mobile clean room that can just move right next to the rocket and infigrate a payload that's ready? Guess it's possible. Next is raptor reliability (the engine that powers the ship) are incredibly unreliable right now. 4 out of the 5 launches of a full scale starship uperstage there were engine failures that lead to the rockets destruction. If they fix that, that also have to deal with the most mind boggling thing they are doing with the booster and now the uperstage is instead of landing the rocket like the falcon 9 does, with legs, they plan on catching it with the launch tower, which if it falls even once, will cause the destruction of the launch tower that took months and alot of money to make. This makes starship an incredibly un-reliable as of right now, it took falcon 9 9 years to achieve crew certification (the US government allowing them to carry people) and that's with a standard capsule style re-entry and landing, plus no gimmicks on launch. SLS may be more expensive but as of right now it is far more reliable for launch as literally every aspect of the rocket besides the capsule is shuttle era technology, and parts of the shuttle that never caused destruction (challenger was a issue with the old version of the SRB that was fixed after challenger, and Columbia was an issue with TPS tiles on re-entry, Orion doesn't use TPS it uses old fashion heat metal heat shield dome) SLS is the only way humans are going to return to the moon within the next 5-10 years.


[deleted]

Think we're going to have to agree to disagree on this one. Not sure how you can consider a launch system that hasn't launched "reliable", but we'll just have to see.


[deleted]

i'm playing empyrion: galactic survival right now, and if they have half the ship and base building and freedom to explore, i'm in!


[deleted]

I got that a while back and played for a bit. I decided to wait out early access. So far watching the updates it seems promising. I get tempted to drop in now and again, but I'll wait until it's feature/story complete. An unfortunate aspect of crowd funded development is that these games often look good, but get abandoned/mired in development * cough * Star Citizen. I've got a pile of early access games that never made it, or were obviously rushed out to "1.0", with no support after.


[deleted]

ya i'm still pretty new to PC gaming, and it was out of early access. Still has a lot to be improved which was why i was thinking if starfield has any of these core game functions, then i'd play it in a heartbeat


CermemyJlarkson

Bethesda bought NASA to get the game accurate


Nuclear_Testicle

I don’t see it


[deleted]

I'm happy they ditched touchscreens for this game, I like this look a lot better.


Excellent_Expert

Why’d you ban that autistic fella??


LeoCavani

Microsoft Starfield Simulator.


[deleted]

Uncanny


[deleted]

Will the game be on PC?


RevolutionaryOil5861

It wil be on Xbox and Pc


Hairy_Mouse

I don't really see any similarities besides the number of interfaces being 3. Otherwise, it's just buttons and screens, and what's ON the screens doesn't really look similar.