Using the Fluent Design System enables the Mixed Reality Design Labs team to incorporate depth, materials, and lighting to Lunar Module while still using the new augmented reality of HoloLens.
- Depth. Incorporating depth within the primary concept and interaction was easy. Other aspects were less apparent. For menus, layouts, and objects that might have been 2D, we required benefit of parallax, Z axis, and variable depth. A good example (within the tutorial section) may be the hands that report gestures are nearer to you compared to module, that is 3D itself.
- Materials. In Fluent, materials are physical and invigorating. Luckily, our game happens around the moon, therefore we might have fun designing textures inspired by glowy, sci-fi, backlit arcade games and, obviously, the greater tactile actual moonscape and NASA’s moon lander. Plus some programmatic dithering on some screens to supply that low-fi, retro arcade feel.
- Light. We used light like a practical tool to share information, in addition to provide atmosphere hanging around. The sunshine in the landing pad beam, for instance, helps lead you where should land the module, then changes color to show you if you are arriving too quickly or going to land effectively. We light only area of the ground to show the moon texture while you gaze around, because we discovered that showing your whole room using the moon texture grew to become distracting.
Bobby Siecker: For all you moon hoax conspiracy theorists out there: Do you really think the USSR was stupid enough to believe this supposed hoax? Don't underestimate the soviet space engineers. They knew what was going on, and what was required to get to the moon. These guys launched pretty much the first of everything into space for crying out loud. They and the Kremlin would not have cancelled their N1 project if they had but the slightest inkling that the USA was faking the whole deal.
crinoid1919: We landed………… get the fuck over it.
LindaStevensBZ: Apollo is still the greatest feat of engineering in the history of the human race. And what Grumman and the LM guys did is simply astonishing.
Holy Moly: It was a huge achievement, especially back in 1969, when I was zoned out on psychedelic music, incense sticks and free-love. Well, not so much of the latter! But I think it's incredibly mean-spirited (and pretty stupid) to deny the achievement. It was brilliant. Those brave astronauts were incredible.
Hawaiifive01: Sooo… we can build all of this stuff (which still exists). Create mountains of paperwork (which no one EVER talks about) to support it. Fly it to the Cape in a giant plane (that is parked at Ellington field in Houston right now). Stack it up inside of a skyscraper (that I toured in 1976). Drive it out to the beach on a crawler (which has been in use for the last 50 years). Control it with microprocessors (which still exist & can be seen on Youtube). Load it with fuel from tanks (which are still in use). Blast 3400 TONS of it up at a 70 degree angle, accelerating to 6500 mph (which 500,000 people witnessed live). Break it apart using explosives on live TV. Keep accelerating (which was also seen from the ground.) Then Skylab. Then Apollo-Soyuz. Then God knows how many satellites (that you can still see from the ground every night.)Then 5 space shuttles. Then ISS. And yet, we couldn't somehow, figure out how to land on the moon? We had to fake that in a studio? And the Russians never once called bullshit? WTF?
William Fitch: Epic! And not a single 'NASA Lies' comment. They mustn't have got round to this video yet – but they will.
julio lausell: To many engineers, the final vehicle was an insult to every notion of what a spacecraft should look like. I personally think it's perfect. I wouldn't change a thing, It's beautiful.
CountArtha: Grumman built over 20,000 planes for the US Navy. I hardly think they'd be considered "a small aircraft company."
Ancient Exercise: I thought the whole moon hoax thing was rubbish until I saw this video. If you pause it at 39:07 you'll see what I mean. It's very suspicious. There is no way those eye brows are real. No way. NASA is trying to hide something.
sQWERTYFALIEN2011: OK you Hoaxsters out there . People like to argue different details , here's some thoughts I had on the subject . The pictures from the moon did not look like what people expected to see , In the Movies the sky is full of stars , the photos from the moon show few stars or no stars . Just try taking a picture of a star from your front yard at night , the astronauts were taking pictures during the daytime . The Lunar Module always lands with its back to the sun . You wouldn't land staring into the Sun now would you ?