67310d921fbd9

Post Reply

Your name:
Subject:
Message Icon:

Verification:
This box must be left blank:

____ at you, hacker: a pathetic creature of meat and bone!  (Fill in the missing word):

Shortcuts: Alt+s to submit/post; Alt+p to preview


Topic Summary

Posted by: voodoo47
« on: 27. April 2019, 19:15:35 »

yaay, necromancy. anyway, someone asked about the ship size on discord, after a very rough calculation (1m = 4.25DU, and the rick1 map being about 500DUs long), I've come up with about 600m as the total ship length.

any other ideas/estimations?

Posted by: voodoo47
« on: 16. March 2013, 20:19:22 »

von born
that (awakened the otherwise dormant grammar nazi).
Posted by: Chandlermaki
« on: 16. March 2013, 20:11:34 »

so the game is of poor design and makes no sense, says the guy who churns out four barely understandable post in a row. also, try googling "web browser with grammar correction".

I managed to understand him just fine, personally.

Stop complaining about insults where there are none. Instead deal with valid criticism. Never use the expression "don't even get me started on that" when no one started you on anything. And don't step on the one.

Image: http://i.imgur.com/nlqCO7A.gif

That was an insult, and was uncalled for. Regardless of whether or not his grammar is top notch, none of the aforementioned posts were hard to understand. He made valid points, and rather than stay on topic, voodoo decided to pull the obnoxious grammar nazi card.
Posted by: Kolya
« on: 16. March 2013, 12:46:14 »

Stop complaining about insults where there are none. Instead deal with valid criticism. Never use the expression "don't even get me started on that" when no one started you on anything. And don't step on the one.

Image: http://i.imgur.com/nlqCO7A.gif
Posted by: voodoo47
« on: 16. March 2013, 08:15:59 »

I'll try to be friendlier then - for the sake of other users browsing the forum, do try to construct your post in a less nonsensical way, and check your grammar (most modern browser such as google chrome support this feature).
Posted by: brendnabbb
« on: 16. March 2013, 08:08:41 »

so the game is of poor design and makes no sense, says the guy who churns out four barely understandable post in a row. also, try googling "web browser with grammar correction".

was it really needed to insult me.
Posted by: voodoo47
« on: 16. March 2013, 08:01:40 »

...
so the game is of poor design and makes no sense, says the guy who churns out four barely understandable post in a row. also, try googling "web browser with grammar correction".
Posted by: brendnabbb
« on: 16. March 2013, 07:29:05 »

That's the thing, most of the decks were designed to encourage designated crew members to stay at their stations.  Decks 2, 4, 5, and 6 had crew quarters as one means of doing this, as well as lounges, mess halls, and other smaller commodities like a slot machine or pool table.

Also, it can be assumed that there is more than a single main elevator in the same shaft.  These extra elevators could be used in case of mass-movements between decks or for emergencies, with extra spaces for these elevators to be stored.  What strengthens this is the idea that if the elevator were to break it would need to be replaced and Rebecca uses the elevator at some point while you're using it as well to travel around the ship.

rebeca being on engering at the same time as you makes no sense in more ways then one do not get me started that.
Posted by: brendnabbb
« on: 16. March 2013, 07:27:04 »

Speaking of the elevator shaft, who would design a huge space ship with only a single point of access between the decks?  It's a single point of failure and asking for trouble.
i know right i made a comment about that just now the only other access to enginering is through a mantaince tube on deck 2 well thats all great if ur on deck 2 but what if ur on another deck lol.
Posted by: brendnabbb
« on: 16. March 2013, 07:23:38 »

There was clearly little if any effort put into ensuring that SS2's maps would assemble into any kind of consistent whole. If memory serves, the elevator shafts on the Von Braun don't even line up. Like, at all. For example, think about the location of the maintenance shaft between MedSci and Engineering, relative to the elevators.

the desgin of the von born made little to no sense at times. ur right i never noticed that. i myself was just thinking to myself that was it was so convenent that we happened to stuck on deck 2 which just happened to have a mantance hatch that could take us to enginering. i mean what would have happened if we were stuck on deck 3 or 5 or heck even deck 4 sure we could reporgam the sim units but we would be cut off from the rest of the ship.
Posted by: brendnabbb
« on: 16. March 2013, 07:20:35 »

(WARNING: Potential SPOILERS ahead.)

It occurs to me that if you consider the diagram discussed here (plus the placement of the Rickenbacker on top of the Von Braun, as it can be seen in the intro, as well as on the screens on the Rickenbacker bridge deck) as compared the actual in-game map/deck design, as well as the views from various windows, they seem to be contradictory to each other to a larger or lesser extent.

For instance, not only should a huge portion of the upper hull of the VB be visible from its bridge front view, but the Rickenbacker should actually pretty much be obscuring it, as it sits right in front of the VB bridge. In-game, nothing at all but space can be seen from the VB bridge. Interestingly enough, in the intro video the VB bridge part is completely dark (which might suggest that it actually wasn't considered to be the bridge at the time the cutscene had been made)...

Another inconsistency that comes to mind is the placement of the Engineering Deck shuttle bays. On the diagram, they are placed below the nacelles, whereas in-game, they are positioned in the opposite, front part of the ship, approximately where the diagram indicates the fuel storage to be (the huge empty bay at the very bottom of the VB should also be in that area, but somewhat more below the coolant section).

While playing the game, I was amazed at the intricate (and seemingly very coherent) design of the VB, and I was disappointed by the contradictions that popped up later when comparing with the ship model. I don't even need to go into how much of a letdown the interior of the Rickenbacker was (that's a military vessel? where are its crew/military quarters, armories? the "Deck A/B/C" vs "Pod 1/2" mess, etc.).

honestly my biggest concern was how on earth does a ship that small contain 150 crew members. however i heard a theory that somehow the big hole brech from pod 1 was appartly half the ship. or at least was the crew quarters.
Posted by: NeilHoward17
« on: 09. August 2012, 16:17:47 »

Good point, As far as the internal continuity goes, the maps aren't too bad. save some scale differences. Hydroponics is the worst one for that, the map with the coolant tanks is huge in comparison to the rest of the maps.

I really want more images of the exterior, all I've been able to find are the ingame shots, box art, and an image from what looks like a insert CD screen.

Does anyone know who designed the Von Braun?
Posted by: unn_atropos
« on: 09. August 2012, 12:58:49 »

I've recently been trying to put together the maps of the Von Braun using the ingame maps. These feature a red outline around what is the hull of the starship.
Actually every deck has its own colour on the maps:

command yellow/orange
recreation yellow/orange
operation purple
hydroponics blue
med/sci red
engineering orange
Posted by: NeilHoward17
« on: 09. August 2012, 09:55:38 »

I've recently been trying to put together the maps of the Von Braun using the ingame maps. These feature a red outline around what is the hull of the starship. I believe that initially there was a plan to get the interior to match, but as different map makers come in mistakes will happen, rooms overlapping, lifts and xerxes hubs missing one another.

For me the biggest annoyance is that the stars in CS2 move (very slightly) from screen left to right. but themap shows the cryo bay to be on the otherside of the ship. the stars are moving the wrong way. Which reminds me of SS1's intro, the interior shot of hacker doing his thing on citadel station, shows saturn and the stars moving the wrong way considering the rotation we saw prior.

My only complaint about the vector images is that the cutscenes and maps clearly show a more curved hull, which I kind of prefer.

As for the rickenbacker obscuring the bridge view, thats a matter of Engine capibillities and also the need to see out a window in space. considering light levels and that technology such as the cyberjack interface would make navigation not require a window.

Nerd rant over.  :headshot:
Posted by: Fironkkuify
« on: 09. March 2011, 18:00:25 »

Cancel that point then.  I suppose most of the changes were done to the outside of the hull and possibly a few inside; there's only one view of inside Hydroponics during the cutscene and it didn't necessarily look that different.  Could be that that map is of the finished sector 1 of Engineering Deck.  I might need to look into it some more and get some more clues.  But the refit theory still sounds like a good explaination for the differences in the Von Braun's design.
Posted by: Kolya
« on: 09. March 2011, 15:05:17 »

Hah! I never realised that.
Nice find atropos. :thumbwink: 
Posted by: unn_atropos
« on: 09. March 2011, 14:48:45 »

If you remember in the beginning cutscene, the map layout of one of the decks was dramatically different from any layout that we seen in any deck during the game, supporting the idea that it was refitted for something compact probably).
Do you mean this map shown in the intro? That actually was in the game, its the engineering deck( https://www.systemshock.org/index.php?topic=2058.msg20669#msg20669 )
Posted by: Kolya
« on: 09. March 2011, 14:29:00 »

Jefferies tubes are kinda boring if there are no enemies that can climb or crawl. Otherwise I'm all for it.
Posted by: Nameless Voice
« on: 09. March 2011, 13:21:14 »

The whole design still needs more Jeffries tubes.
Posted by: Fironkkuify
« on: 09. March 2011, 10:43:35 »

Speaking of the elevator shaft, who would design a huge space ship with only a single point of access between the decks?  It's a single point of failure and asking for trouble.

That's the thing, most of the decks were designed to encourage designated crew members to stay at their stations.  Decks 2, 4, 5, and 6 had crew quarters as one means of doing this, as well as lounges, mess halls, and other smaller commodities like a slot machine or pool table.

Also, it can be assumed that there is more than a single main elevator in the same shaft.  These extra elevators could be used in case of mass-movements between decks or for emergencies, with extra spaces for these elevators to be stored.  What strengthens this is the idea that if the elevator were to break it would need to be replaced and Rebecca uses the elevator at some point while you're using it as well to travel around the ship.
Posted by: Nameless Voice
« on: 09. March 2011, 10:29:56 »

Speaking of the elevator shaft, who would design a huge space ship with only a single point of access between the decks?  It's a single point of failure and asking for trouble.
Posted by: Fironkkuify
« on: 09. March 2011, 10:10:15 »

Yes, it's hard not to notice how the elevator and the maintenance passage seem to be some ten times farther apart on Engineering than they are on Med/Sci. Though, I think that this kind of inconsistency is still, if barely, passable (and probably stems from the fact that the various decks were designed by different people from LGS/Irrational). You could even attempt to justify this by implying the presence of an unshown horizontal passage between the endpoints of the maintenance access, even if this would come across as a bit (literally) "stretched"... compared to this, not seeing the upper side of the VB and the Rickenbacker from the VB bridge is in my guess a more blatant inconsistency, even if it doesn't jump at you immediately.

I also noticed how the the labels "port" and "starboard" (essentially meaning "left side" and "right side", respectively) are reversed on the Engineering Deck map showing the coolant/engine section. Assuming they were correct, it would follow that the engine core and nacelles are at the front of the ship, which makes very little to no sense at all (for instance, the "front" view of the ships' bridges would turn out to actually be facing the rear).

Now one could start a debate on what the protocol droids were on saying that "this place is a terrible mess"...

Well, when you think about it, the flaws between the designs and the actual product may simply be blueprints or beta stages left by LG/Irrational to hint that the Von Braun perhaps went through a test run under a different name with a different UNN vessel to test a different set-up.  That could explain why the Von Braun wasn't very complete when it set off on its maidan voyage as a number of changes had been made to refit it for the final model.  (If you remember in the beginning cutscene, the map layout of one of the decks was dramatically different from any layout that we seen in any deck during the game, supporting the idea that it was refitted for something compact probably).

Also, if you've played Dead Space, the horizontal/vertical elevator actually does make sense.  Think about it for a bit; the decks are all probably organized in a way to be compact and leave no oddly empty spaces (the layouts of each deck are pretty different from one another and so, simply layering each deck on top of one another would create a very odd-looking hull and leave quite a bit of empty space). 

That's my theory so far.
Posted by: Krytron
« on: 07. March 2011, 04:45:18 »

Yes, it's hard not to notice how the elevator and the maintenance passage seem to be some ten times farther apart on Engineering than they are on Med/Sci. Though, I think that this kind of inconsistency is still, if barely, passable (and probably stems from the fact that the various decks were designed by different people from LGS/Irrational). You could even attempt to justify this by implying the presence of an unshown horizontal passage between the endpoints of the maintenance access, even if this would come across as a bit (literally) "stretched"... compared to this, not seeing the upper side of the VB and the Rickenbacker from the VB bridge is in my guess a more blatant inconsistency, even if it doesn't jump at you immediately.

I also noticed how the the labels "port" and "starboard" (essentially meaning "left side" and "right side", respectively) are reversed on the Engineering Deck map showing the coolant/engine section. Assuming they were correct, it would follow that the engine core and nacelles are at the front of the ship, which makes very little to no sense at all (for instance, the "front" view of the ships' bridges would turn out to actually be facing the rear).

Now one could start a debate on what the protocol droids were on saying that "this place is a terrible mess"...
Posted by: ZylonBane
« on: 06. March 2011, 20:13:46 »

There was clearly little if any effort put into ensuring that SS2's maps would assemble into any kind of consistent whole. If memory serves, the elevator shafts on the Von Braun don't even line up. Like, at all. For example, think about the location of the maintenance shaft between MedSci and Engineering, relative to the elevators.
Posted by: Krytron
« on: 06. March 2011, 19:37:42 »

(WARNING: Potential SPOILERS ahead.)

It occurs to me that if you consider the diagram discussed here (plus the placement of the Rickenbacker on top of the Von Braun, as it can be seen in the intro, as well as on the screens on the Rickenbacker bridge deck) as compared the actual in-game map/deck design, as well as the views from various windows, they seem to be contradictory to each other to a larger or lesser extent.

For instance, not only should a huge portion of the upper hull of the VB be visible from its bridge front view, but the Rickenbacker should actually pretty much be obscuring it, as it sits right in front of the VB bridge. In-game, nothing at all but space can be seen from the VB bridge. Interestingly enough, in the intro video the VB bridge part is completely dark (which might suggest that it actually wasn't considered to be the bridge at the time the cutscene had been made)...

Another inconsistency that comes to mind is the placement of the Engineering Deck shuttle bays. On the diagram, they are placed below the nacelles, whereas in-game, they are positioned in the opposite, front part of the ship, approximately where the diagram indicates the fuel storage to be (the huge empty bay at the very bottom of the VB should also be in that area, but somewhat more below the coolant section).

While playing the game, I was amazed at the intricate (and seemingly very coherent) design of the VB, and I was disappointed by the contradictions that popped up later when comparing with the ship model. I don't even need to go into how much of a letdown the interior of the Rickenbacker was (that's a military vessel? where are its crew/military quarters, armories? the "Deck A/B/C" vs "Pod 1/2" mess, etc.).
Posted by: Kolya
« on: 31. March 2008, 17:49:01 »

Okay, I see what you mean now, but the SVG is attached to the first post anyway.

Edit: I fixed it so it shows up in the post as well now.
Posted by: rccc
« on: 31. March 2008, 12:36:21 »

Could you elaborate which pics you mean? Because all images on this page work.

It's the first image:
http://anodal.org/images/TCSvonbraunV2.svg

leads to a 404

Posted by: Kolya
« on: 27. March 2008, 23:57:44 »

Could you elaborate which pics you mean? Because all images on this page work.
Posted by: Gaco
« on: 27. March 2008, 18:28:06 »

Link is broken for the first couple of pics.. I wonder what they were :/
Posted by: Lambda 00
« on: 01. December 2007, 23:44:28 »

There is a Windows Bootscreen for that, too:
http://www.wincustomize.com/skins.aspx?skinid=1658&libid=32
Posted by: Briareos H
« on: 27. July 2006, 05:56:45 »

Tags: °art °SS2
06/08/01 EDIT : Updated file to V2. Removed the huge PNG. Attached "bonus" files.

Follow-up to this topic on TTLG
This is an Inkscape SVG version of the Trioptimum Corporation Starship : Von Braun, based on the same view we can find in the loading screens of System Shock 2. I made it extremely close to the original version, and did not remove nor add anything (click the first image to get the full SVG, uncolored version).




Comments are welcome. Licence is FreeArt, basically meaning that you can do anything with it. If you want to pay tribute, just include my nickname in the metadata.

As soon as I have more free time, I will try to make a wallpaper out of it and maybe start adding some detail based on my own interpretation.
Contact SMF 2.0.19 | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines | Terms and Policies
FEEP
67310d922138b