Scott Manley (finally) plays Orbiter !

[Hielor]

...definitively more "hardcore" fan sims...

Oh man, a hardcore fan sim...that sounds awesome! What would it be like...The Sims where your avatar is a hardcore fan of something, and you have to take him to all the conventions and feed his addiction? Someone should make this! :lol:

 

[Quick_Nick]

I think the almighty Banhammer of the almighty Probe can manage KSP-esque publicity decently.

 

[boogabooga]

Why would it make good publicity for Orbiter? I don't know the guy at all. :shrug:

I assure you that plenty of people do, and many of those may be interested in Orbiter.

Having said that, this video was terrible. You can pull off not reading the manual in KSP. Orbiter not so much. He launched Atlantis KSP style, with a long vertical ascent and into a weird orbit. He did his orbital ops with the tank still attached. Had no idea how to time accelerate. Had no idea how to open the bay doors. Then didn't realize that they open one at a time. Then surprise surprise, he sounded disappointed and for all intents and purposes said he would never play Orbiter again.

This terrible video from a newb that didn't even bother to read the manual is IMHO an unfair representation of Orbiter and all it has to offer. How unfortunate that this is "publicity" for Orbiter.

 

[Pipcard]

for all intents and purposes said he would never play Orbiter again.

And when did he say that?

 

[Evil_Onyx]

And when did he say that?

At the end he said some thing like if the video gets 20,000 views he may make another.

Considering he had 11,129 views as of 0406 GMT after 2 days up, he may make it.

 

[Pipcard]

At the end he said some thing like if the video gets 20,000 views he may make another.

Considering he had 11,129 views as of 0406 GMT after 2 days up, he may make it.

So he wasn't even saying that he hated it.

 

[statickid]

@ video; launch pitch: you're doing it wrong lol :lol:

---------- Post added at 09:50 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:42 PM ----------

 

[Face]

Hm. I've watched the whole video now, and while I can see how his light-hearted narration style could well make his KSP videos famous, I have to say that what works in KSP obviously doesn't work in Orbiter. For a tutorial/presentation video, this is of at most average quality if you ask me. Certainly not "guru" quality.

I also don't really like the kind of "mocking" he does at the end. It looks like he did it to shut up all the fans crying out for him doing an Orbiter video, not because he was really interested in putting his skills to use with/for Orbiter. With this perception in mind, I'd even prefer it if he sticks to his last and continues to create high-quality KSP content instead.

my :2cents:

 

[4throck]

Don't see what's the fuss all about. Someone does a video of a shuttle launch in Orbiter... And manages to reach orbit. Not that great actually.

Does the Orbiter community realize that there are many GOOD orbiter videos on Youtube? Perhaps the forum should have it's own Youtube channel to collect them. Or place them in a threat similar to the screenshots. (if is exists already my wrong, but honestly I'm not aware of it).

About publicity for Orbiter: don't see that the concept applies, since it's not a product.
It's a free hard core simulator. It appeals to 100% of the fans of that genre.
All the people who care about this already know about our sim....

 

[sitha241]

I think he did more of anti-commercial then commercial for Orbiter :thumbsdown:
He could open a manual or some of tutorials on youtube before taking a Shuttle like one of KSP rockets in space..

 

[Urwumpe]

Don't see what's the fuss all about. Someone does a video of a shuttle launch in Orbiter... And manages to reach orbit. Not that great actually.

Does the Orbiter community realize that there are many GOOD orbiter videos on Youtube? Perhaps the forum should have it's own Youtube channel to collect them. Or place them in a threat similar to the screenshots. (if is exists already my wrong, but honestly I'm not aware of it).

There are such threads and channels already. No real new feature. But it would make a good addition to the Main Orbiter homepage to also point to some selected videos or video tutorials about Orbiter for faster pointing new players to them.

Currently, only the classic tutorials are easy to find there.

 

[malisle]

There are such threads and channels already. No real new feature. But it would make a good addition to the Main Orbiter homepage to also point to some selected videos or video tutorials about Orbiter for faster pointing new players to them.

Currently, only the classic tutorials are easy to find there.

That is a good idea; one of the hardest things in Orbiter is getting the grasp of the basics. Even after you read Go Play in Space and other documentation the learning curve is very steep. Few basic video tutorials are IMHO the right way to go if the Orbiter community is looking to grow in numbers. David Courtney has made some really good and detailed flight recordings (he's to humble to call them tutorials) that just aren't visible enough given their usefulness.

 

[N_Molson]

While I don't want to bring up an old debate, the huge pro of KSP is the beautiful and detailed terrain and collision detection. Having to pay attention that you don't land on a mountain slope is definitively something.

BTW, KSP is currently a sandbox, but it is going to get much more complex in the future, with resources extraction, space program management etc...

And yes, it is excellent to teach the basics of orbital mechanics.

 

[Napalm42]

Personally, I dislike that he just jumped in without reading the manual and blamed the game. I jumped in without reading the manual and blamed myself for not reading the manual (when I figured there was one.) I dislike his dismissive attitude about it (and I kinda feel like launching the shuttle right as a counter argument), but hey, that's KSP.

As it's been mentioned, Orbiter is for the more hardcore, while KSP is more fun and games. As a frequent Orbiter/KSP player, both have their merits. Rather than list them, I will simply boil it down to: Orbiter provides a realistic environment for hardcore simmers to echo real life space programs, and KSP provides humor and hilarity in the attempts to make your own space vehicles and have a few detonate on the launch pad or go into suicide spins.

For me, jumping from Orbiter into KSP took almost no thought, I just put together a real rough CTV, gave it 6 or seven tries to get the weird launch profile for Kerbin, and an hour later I already landed on the moon (Mun). However, for a KSP player who may have a grasp on orbital mechanics, transitioning to Orbiter is not as easy. KSP and Orbiter exist in two different worlds that overlap at few points. Where KSP is sort of like a 3D BARIS with full mission construction, Orbiter is not (Well, unless you count Jeb's IMS vehicles).

It's two similar audiences with different desires for a game/simulator, so if he scoffs at it because he decides to float around without reading the manual and do orbital ops with the tank attached, let it be. Some interested schmuck will read the manual and learn it from watching his video, and maybe they'll fall in love with what they find just as I did.

 

[Pipcard]

I would like to see another video, but with the manual being read this time.

---------- Post added at 02:30 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:14 PM ----------

Also, this isn't the first time that someone made a popular video that involved an attempt at manually launching the Space Shuttle.

At least Scott Manley's attempt actually got him into orbit.

 

[N_Molson]

Oh man, a hardcore fan sim

:lol: Ouch, severe spelling error in my post ! :facepalm:

Nono, a hardcore fan sim is a simulator that models with an extreme precision the (complex) mechanics and aerodynamics of your desk fan. Do anything wrong and the "propeller" detaches from the fan in a catastrophic way, severing your virtual neck and splitting virtual blood all over the virtual place :rofl:

 

[Urwumpe]

:lol: Ouch, severe spelling error in my post ! :facepalm:

Nono, a hardcore fan sim is a simulator that models with an extreme precision the (complex) mechanics and aerodynamics of your desk fan. Do anything wrong and the "propeller" detaches from the fan in a catastrophic way, severing your virtual neck and splitting virtual blood all over the virtual place :rofl:

Are you sure it isn't an agent simulation of a group of hardcore fans starting in the simulated 1980?

(I mean hardcore... not hardcore techno, like many in Germany think when they hear "hardcore")

 

[BruceJohnJennerLawso]

Personally, I dislike that he just jumped in without reading the manual and blamed the game. I jumped in without reading the manual and blamed myself for not reading the manual (when I figured there was one.) I dislike his dismissive attitude about it (and I kinda feel like launching the shuttle right as a counter argument), but hey, that's KSP.

As it's been mentioned, Orbiter is for the more hardcore, while KSP is more fun and games. As a frequent Orbiter/KSP player, both have their merits. Rather than list them, I will simply boil it down to: Orbiter provides a realistic environment for hardcore simmers to echo real life space programs, and KSP provides humor and hilarity in the attempts to make your own space vehicles and have a few detonate on the launch pad or go into suicide spins.

For me, jumping from Orbiter into KSP took almost no thought, I just put together a real rough CTV, gave it 6 or seven tries to get the weird launch profile for Kerbin, and an hour later I already landed on the moon (Mun). However, for a KSP player who may have a grasp on orbital mechanics, transitioning to Orbiter is not as easy. KSP and Orbiter exist in two different worlds that overlap at few points. Where KSP is sort of like a 3D BARIS with full mission construction, Orbiter is not (Well, unless you count Jeb's IMS vehicles).

It's two similar audiences with different desires for a game/simulator, so if he scoffs at it because he decides to float around without reading the manual and do orbital ops with the tank attached, let it be. Some interested schmuck will read the manual and learn it from watching his video, and maybe they'll fall in love with what they find just as I did.

Agreed, just because he found it hard doesn't mean that people watching wont give it a try. Perhaps he would have read the manual through if it contained any information on launching the space shuttle? :shrug:

And YES, for anyone who has tried IMS, building an IMS ship is harder than anything you can try in KSP. Building a KSP ship on Orbit doesnt really require any knowledge beyond how to dock & keep the superstructure symmetrical.

 

[AlfalfaQc]

As far as I'm concerned, I discovered Orbiter through KSP (KurtJMac did a couple of video about Orbiter). I like both a lot, I like the feel of realism of Orbiter, but since I know absolutely nothing about coding, I use KSP to build stuff (and blow up stuff :lol: ).

The thing I dislike with KSP is that (for now but it's coming soon) there's a fair bit of realism missing. I try to play the more realistic way I can (i.e. no aerobraking at 10km/s in deep atmosphere with a ISS-like ship, and that kind of stuff). And I also play full vanilla because I think the majority of the mods are OP. I try to build my rocket saying ''could it be plausible in real life'' (to a certain degree of course). I'm waiting impatiently for reentry heat to be added and hear people complaining about how they cannot reach other planets because they cannot aerobrake (I know it's bad to laugh about other people).

That being said, I personally don't really like Scott... I know he has a really good understanding of orbital mechanics and stuff, but I hate seeing him abuse the game like he does (9 part vessel to minimus... really...).

And on the Orbiter vs KSP debate, I think the developers of KSP said that they were inspired by Orbiter, but their goal is not to compete with it. They are different, Orbiter is more for hardcore fans sim (Fan Simulator X? ) and KSP is for fun and explosion and quick games (it's a lot faster to do stuff in KSP). Oh and for people like me who wants to build stuff but don't know how in orbiter :lol:

Again, this is only my view of the things.

 

[BruceJohnJennerLawso]

As far as I'm concerned, I discovered Orbiter through KSP (KurtJMac did a couple of video about Orbiter). I like both a lot, I like the feel of realism of Orbiter, but since I know absolutely nothing about coding, I use KSP to build stuff (and blow up stuff :lol: ).

The thing I dislike with KSP is that (for now but it's coming soon) there's a fair bit of realism missing. I try to play the more realistic way I can (i.e. no aerobraking at 10km/s in deep atmosphere with a ISS-like ship, and that kind of stuff). And I also play full vanilla because I think the majority of the mods are OP. I try to build my rocket saying ''could it be plausible in real life'' (to a certain degree of course). I'm waiting impatiently for reentry heat to be added and hear people complaining about how they cannot reach other planets because they cannot aerobrake (I know it's bad to laugh about other people).

That being said, I personally don't really like Scott... I know he has a really good understanding of orbital mechanics and stuff, but I hate seeing him abuse the game like he does (9 part vessel to minimus... really...).

And on the Orbiter vs KSP debate, I think the developers of KSP said that they were inspired by Orbiter, but their goal is not to compete with it. They are different, Orbiter is more for hardcore fans sim (Fan Simulator X? ) and KSP is for fun and explosion and quick games (it's a lot faster to do stuff in KSP). Oh and for people like me who wants to build stuff but don't know how in orbiter :lol:

Again, this is only my view of the things.

I think the real issue here is jealousy. We humans are jealous of the kerbals for getting to live in such a shallow gravity well :lol:

And jealous because they get to have an asteroid moon around their planet. Oh, if we only had one around Earth