Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

An Early Look at the NASA MMO

Posted by Soulskill on Mon Feb 23, 2009 04:14 AM
from the looking-for-more-to-raid-the-moon dept.
Big Download is running an article with details and screenshots from the MMO under development by NASA. The game makes use of Unreal Engine 3, and it's titled Astronaut: Moon, Mars and Beyond. A demo is planned for later this year, and in 2010 they expect "the first episodic installment of the game" to come out. Jerry Heneghan, founder and CEO of Virtual Heroes, described it thus: "This game is going to be a fresh look at the future circa about 2035. ... The core of the gameplay is going to be people building up their characters and as you move forward, you will have more options unlock with new places to go, new equipment to use and new things to do. We are not so much focused on interstellar flight and all that entails... the gameplay is actually about being in a habitat on a planetary surface and doing things like mining Helium-3 for fuel, operating a hydroponics facility to grow plants and create oxygen and operating robots and vehicles."
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • A game? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by clarkkent09 (1104833) * on Monday February 23 2009, @04:22AM (#26955519)
    What's up with everybody using my money to make games these days. It's the latest fad in government agencies or what?
    • Re:A game? (Score:4, Interesting)

      by MichaelSmith (789609) on Monday February 23 2009, @04:26AM (#26955539) Homepage Journal
      I think it is an outreach thing, which for part of the Government amounts to advertising. Basically they are marketing themselves to future voters.

      Maybe there is a lesson in this for other advertisers. Will there be a "Coca Cola" and "Tesla" MMOs in the future?
      • Re:A game? (Score:5, Funny)

        by gad_zuki! (70830) on Monday February 23 2009, @10:30AM (#26957725)

        "Tesla" MMOs in the future?

        You are a long-haired early 1990s rocker standing in studio. What do you want to do?

        > sing signs

        You are now singing a protest song about trespassing and signage. Stupid people think its "deep."

      • Well, maybe, but exactly what idea or notion are they trying to get the people interested in? They can basically,

        1. Actually show what life in such a colony would be like. Which is probably going to be as boring as paint dry.

        It won't even be some kind of a wild-west lone-frontierman scenario. It won't even be a WoW-crafting-only scenario. Most likely you'll just be an employee doing a job there. Maybe an employee of NASA or maybe an employee of whichever corporation thinks they can make a fortune mining tha

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      Your share of the game's development budget will be measured in cents, unless you're rich. What's wrong with inspiring a generation of kids for that little money? I'd imagine many intelligent people went into aerospace after Apollo and so made our lives better far in excess of what was spent.
      • Re:A game? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by clarkkent09 (1104833) * on Monday February 23 2009, @04:39AM (#26955579)
        So what's next, Dept of Agriculture getting in on the game with SimFarmer? It's wrong because there are very few ways for the government to spend taxpayers' money that is justifiable and sorry but this isn't one of them. It's wrong to the game companies too who now face a competitor with huge guaranteed budget obtained by force, and no expectation of profit, in fact who probably will be giving the game out for free.
        • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

          In Soviet Russia, government pays you!
        • a competitor with huge guaranteed budget obtained by force, and no expectation of profit

          Translation: the game will suck.

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Anonymous Coward

          Why is it wrong? It promotes education in the sciences; it's a way to get kids interested in something else besides the Power Rangers or whatever it is kids watch these days, something that might make this world a better place for a change.

          Education matters, you know, and getting kids to set their sights on things like these keeps getting harder. Specially in times like these, that are so harsh on people's dreams.

          From TFA:

          ...the ultimate goal of his team is to inspire generations of future space explorers...and encourage game players to pursue careers on science, math and engineering careers.

          As an aside, don't worry about the gaming companies. Free, government-sponsored compe [americasarmy.com]

        • Re:A game? (Score:4, Insightful)

          by Skuld-Chan (302449) on Monday February 23 2009, @05:28AM (#26955743) Journal

          The game is actually being developed by Virtual Heroes and from what I understand is being offered as a educational tool for 9th graders and they are encouraged to use development tools to build content for the game themselves.

          If this isn't a good investment for our country - not sure what is - especially if its an educational game that is fun to play.

          Dept of Agriculture should do the same thing - to help younger generations get interested in working on and developing technology in the field of agriculture. If it works - I'd be for it - America needs more good farmers and people working in that field.

          • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

            Dept of Agriculture should do the same thing

            No, they shouldn't, and neither should NASA, because it will be used to push an agenda. If it was the DoA they would be championing the Green Revolution, which is responsible for a great deal of topsoil loss and in general the loss of soil diversity which is necessary to produce healthy crops. The soil on the average American farm has been all but sterilized with synthetic fertilizers and pesticides, sits on top of a layer of hardpan produced by repeated tilling (you can do it with oxen, but hardpan is prod

        • Looking through the article and the NASA press release linked therein, NASA seems to be treating this as an educational tool:

          The NASA Learning Technologies (LT) project supports the development of projects that deliver NASA content through innovative applications of technologies to enhance education in the areas of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM). Research and development are at the core of the LT mission. LT seeks to enhance formal and informal education in STEM fields with the goal of increasing the number of students in those fields of study and is currently investigating the development of a NASA-based massively multiplayer online educational game (MMO).

          Now, I don't know about you, but I can see a lot of worse things to spend some money on than getting people interested in science.

                • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

                  The free market doesn't pay for education, or highways, or national defense, or any of a number of things that benefit everyone. Doesn't pay for trauma centers, so even if you were willing to pay for your own medical care, there would be no guarantee that it would exist in any kind of proximity to you.

                  I love the free market. But I don't use the free market as an excuse for not wanting to pay taxes.

                  • Re:A game? (Score:5, Insightful)

                    by flyingsquid (813711) on Monday February 23 2009, @12:15PM (#26958953)
                    Libertarianism is the new Communism. It's an ideology that sounds nice on paper, but doesn't really work in real life. The idea that unrestrained capitalism can, by itself, lead to a fair and functional society is a fairy tale. It's a religiously held belief with no basis in reality- Free Market Fundamentalism. As you point out, the current economic meltdown is an example of why this faith in free markets is misplaced. The experience in Iraq over the past few years is another example of why free markets don't cure all ills. It's hard to run a business if your customers are afraid to walk across the street without getting shot or blown up by a car bomb, let alone drive across town. It's hard to run a business if organized crime and militias are trying to extort money from you. It's hard to run a business if the power, water, and sewage aren't functional half the time. It's hard to run a business if there's not a functional judiciary to enforce contracts and resolve disputes.

                    The reality is that the free market needs certain things to be able to function. Infrastructure like roads, bridges, electricity. Security from internal and external threats. A judiciary that can enforce the rules that a market functions by. If libertarianism really worked, then Somalia- which lacks a strong central government- would be a thriving society, not a failed state. And frankly, I just think that Free Market Fundamentalism a repugnant ideology. It basically says, "the hell with all of you guys, I'm going to do whatever is best for me" and then attempts to rationalize this behavior and say that, in fact, immature, short-sighted selfishness is some kind of a virtue.

            • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

              At one extreme you have Anarchy/Capitalism at the other extreme you have Fascist/Communism.

              Everything in between is socialism.

        • Dept Agriculture might do OK, but NASA will flop. It won't be monotonous enough.

        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          Yeah, such companies are really into such sims. Wait...they are more willing to crunch out dysopian shooters than any real life sim. Where is my copter sim? Where is living city sim? Ahhh right, they are hard to do, expensive, and doesn't pay back so well as dump shooters.

          Actually SimFarmer would make huge sense for small kids to learn about how food gets to the supermarket.

        • Re:A game? (Score:5, Informative)

          by SGDarkKnight (253157) on Monday February 23 2009, @07:44AM (#26956205)

          Actually, Maxis already created a game called SimFarm which more or less simulated all the activities of a farm, i remember playing it way back in the day, but i'm sure if some government agency made one, it would be far different... or would it? Anywho, here is the wiki link to the description, and if im not mistaken, you may even be able to downlaod a freeware version of the game as well.

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SimFarm [wikipedia.org]

          • Re:A game? (Score:5, Insightful)

            by TapeCutter (624760) on Monday February 23 2009, @05:52AM (#26955831) Journal
            As someone who watched Armstrong step on the moon live on TV way out in the back-blocks of Australia I disagree. Every kid on the planet already knows "how fantastic being an astronaut would be", the aim here is to take that interest and redirect it to teach science. It may well flop but it's not taxpayer money so NASA have nothing to lose and everything to gain.
            • Re:A game? (Score:5, Funny)

              by M1rth (790840) on Monday February 23 2009, @09:05AM (#26956795)

              Except neil armstrong would not step onto the moon and then start spamming the chat channels with "HOW I MINE FOR FISH? HOW I MINE FOR FISH?"

          • Re:A game? (Score:4, Interesting)

            by JoeMerchant (803320) on Monday February 23 2009, @07:05AM (#26956079)
            Dunno, there are plenty of support staff in Houston who are fired up to the core for life, and I think that part of that fervor comes from exposure to "the astronaut experience" even if they don't get to go into space themselves.
    • Re:A game? (Score:5, Funny)

      by Yvanhoe (564877) on Monday February 23 2009, @05:03AM (#26955659) Journal
      Mars Rovers were in fact a secret plane to create a massive FPS arena. The next batch will be able to fire rockets. The 40 mins lag is a bitch however.
      Seriously, the rovers did no serious science (yes I saw the article about drops, they see a drop they are unsure of what it is. Genius) and were just PR toys. All real science was made from orbit where satellites did stuff like map the entire planet for underground stocks of water (and found plenty)
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        the rovers did no serious science

        Oh really? [nasa.gov]

          • Your speculation is rampant.

            "I can't imagine much science was done, not that I've investigated AT ALL, and I must be right."

            Welcome to Slashdot, where you are the king of kings.

            YA, RLY

            From your link, its missions were :

            * Determine whether Life ever arose on Mars

            An immobile probe that would have dug 5 meters under the surface would have had a far better chance to find living organisms (it could have reached water layers) than something that stays on the surface and scratches the rocks.

            * Characterize the Climate of Mars

            "Dude it's cloudy today". On the other hand, there are orbital observations that give a far better and deeper understanding of Mars' climate and weather.

            * Characterize the Geology of Mars

            That's the "scratching a rock" phase. From orbit we got a geological map of Mars and even of its underground, to some extent. The knowledge we have from the area where the rovers landed is probably only marginally better than what we scanned from orbit.

            * Prepare for Human Exploration

            How so ? Localizing water, minerals and so on was not made very efficiently by this rover team. It didn't build anything of use for explorers and I fail to see what new information it brought that the Viking probes didn't give us already.

          • Re:A game? (Score:4, Insightful)

            by socrplayr813 (1372733) on Monday February 23 2009, @09:17AM (#26956927)

            The pictures from the orbiter are great, but pictures alone can't give you a complete view of anything, especially not when exploring a foreign planet. The orbiter can't give you a chance to interact with the environment. Maybe the rovers didn't find everything we hoped they would, but there's no way to be sure until you go down there and check it out.

            Honestly, I don't understand why people are so afraid to spend money on science projects. If there's one place/field where the status quo shouldn't be good enough, it's science. Of all groups, I would hope Slashdot gets that.

            People have lost sight of what science really is. Take the Mythbusters for example... A lot of people say things like "it's not real science." Well that's just plain wrong. Science is about exploring, forming theories, and disproving them through experimentation. (Oblig xkcd [xkcd.com])

            And of course, when the experiment doesn't work the way you want it to, you make something explode. The rovers have built-in planet-buster nukes, right?

    • Yes, your government are spending fractions of pennies of the taxes you pay them to try and get your countries children excited about science and space exploration.

      What a bunch of bastards.

    • What evidence do you have that this is your money?

      The article gives a hint with the words "subscription based", three clicks and I managed to find the RFP [nasa.gov], a quick skim gives the following quote: "Funding to design, develop, and deploy the MMO should be included in the proposer's business plan."

      Apologies for interupting everyone's political flame fest, please continue...
      • What evidence do you have that this is your money?

        Hmm, well not much to be honest. The summary said "the MMO under development by NASA", so it seems clear enough, but then summaries are often wrong here. TFA doesn't mention who pays for the development at all. I'd be surprised if there is no NASA money going towards it though and if this will be a normal commercial game since the article does mention that NASA Learning Technologies is involved.
        • Yep, NASA Learning Technologies will have had to (at a minimum) pay people to review and pick the winning tender. I'm not a US taxpayer so I will leave it to others to judge if that's a waste of their money.
    • Re:A game? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by jandersen (462034) on Monday February 23 2009, @06:00AM (#26955859)

      What's up with everybody using my money to make games these days.

      If it was your money, it would be in your pocket and yours to spend, wouldn't it?

      Tax is the contribution of the citizens towards the cost of running the state. The state in return provides certain services, roads, schools, military and a number of other things. Only a very minute part of your tax is spent on this sort of light entertainment - although I think this may be more in the category of edutainment, which is not a bad idea; too many people in America have no idea about astronomy and space technology, and a game like this might bring them a little bit closer to reality - and who knows, maybe even inspire some to learn more.

      • Re:A game? (Score:4, Insightful)

        by balthan (130165) on Monday February 23 2009, @08:19AM (#26956411)

        Only a very minute part of your tax is spent on this sort of light entertainment

        By this agency, on this project. When you start adding up the hundreds of projects from dozens of agencies, it doesn't seem so minute. And when you factor in our short-term trillion dollar deficit and the long-term budgetary crisis that will happen in the next couple decades, maybe a space MMO isn't such a great use of taxpayer dollars right now.

    • Re:A game? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by GreggBz (777373) on Monday February 23 2009, @07:38AM (#26956177) Homepage
      You know, I obsessively played a game called Starflight [wikipedia.org] when I was 11 or 12. That game was a springboard for a lifelong interest in space and astronomy. It also inspired a few years of bedroom programing [outerspacecrew.net] in an attempt to recreate it. It was pretty unique in that it was fairly hard-sci-fi with lots of accurate terms and ideas.

      Don't underestimate what capturing the imagination of a child can do for their adult life. We need better science education in this country.
    • Don't worry-- the NASA MMO deal is that the developer has to spend their own money. All NASA provides is basically licensing rights to use NASA images, the name, etc (in return for some oversight on the project). In fact, that was the big controversy last year during the NASA MMO pitches, that NASA wasn't pitching in money but expected the developers to fund it under NASA term's but with the developer's dime. That's why they ended up getting far fewer pitches then originally attended their big meeting.

      So

  • by sahonen (680948) on Monday February 23 2009, @04:42AM (#26955591) Homepage Journal
    Will it have realistic physics? And by realistic I don't mean video game realistic, but actual rocket science physics like Orbiter [orbitersim.com] has.
      • Why not? They could make it like racing and flying simulators, where you have (usually) 3 stages...

        Arcade
        Semi-Pro
        Simulation

        Or sliders for various things like time-scale (60x, 30x, 10x, double, real), and physics accuracy, etc... if you can run multiple missions at the same time, then you could start off heading for Mars, then switch over to another mission, but have the ability to say run the Mars mission as a screensaver, so you can see how far it has gotten... could also run various experiments the same w

  • 2035? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by blackirish (794322) on Monday February 23 2009, @04:49AM (#26955613)

    If it's set circa 2035, why is there a space shuttle docked to the ISS in the screenshots? Shouldn't it be an Orion capsule?

    • Re:2035? (Score:5, Funny)

      by GrpA (691294) on Monday February 23 2009, @04:52AM (#26955621)

      2035, US budget cutbacks, shuttle still in use...

      Sounds like they've brought in experts to make their new game seem plausible :)

      GrpA

  • Trying to capitalize on the runaway success of all those exciting first-person mining/farming simulators, are they?

  • Is that something they're spend their slice of the stimulus on?

    Really, how do people take Keynesian economics seriously today?

  • This game is going to be a fresh look at the future circa about 2035

    We're lucky if we get people beyond earth orbit again by then, let alone to Mars. The notion that we'll have Mars-based habitats (like those depicted in the game) is implausible. I think people just don't realize how ill-suited man is to space travel, how difficult and costly it is to keep people alive in space, and how costly it is to get mass up into orbit and beyond.

    Manned interplanetary travel will happen eventually (if we don't kill

  • Grinding (Score:5, Funny)

    by A. B3ttik (1344591) on Monday February 23 2009, @05:46AM (#26955803)
    The first portion of the game will have you fighting Level 1 Obsolete Satellites, and it'll take about 70 of them to level the first few levels. You'll have missions to destroy tiny asteroids, maybe fix some GPS Satellites, or possibly collect a dozen 'Unique Space Debris' and bring them back to the Hubble Telescope.

    But by the end of the game, there will be large 40-man Raids scouring the Martian valleys, fighting Dust Golems and Communist Colonists, the final boss of which will be the long-missing rogue Mutated Mars Rover.
  • by aapold (753705) on Monday February 23 2009, @06:27AM (#26955941) Homepage Journal

    How else are we supposed to keep the moon clear of moondust farmers?

  • The core of the gameplay is going to be people building up their characters and as you move forward, you will have more options unlock with new places to go, new equipment to use and new things to do.

    Wow, that doesn't sound generic at all. What exactly are people building their characters up towards? What are they moving forward to?

    Please don't make this a generic grinding game that tries to solve Global Warming...

    One of the story arcs that will take place over the course of the game's first year is the very real threat of global warming.

    Oh crap...

    "What do you do when someone is injured in space out on the surface of the moon?" asked Shariff. "One answer is a rover that can be used as an ambulance..."

    One option, and this may sound callous, is to leave them. I'm fairly sure that the astronauts would sign waivers that acknowledge the risks of space travel and the costs of rescue missions are generally not feasible. Then again, that wouldn't work well for a plot in a game.

  • by bluphysted (1340479) on Monday February 23 2009, @06:50AM (#26956013)

    It won't take long for the Chinese Helium-3 farmers to ruin the economy.

  • Circa about? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Aladrin (926209) on Monday February 23 2009, @07:12AM (#26956109)

    Does someone need to look up the term 'circa' ?

    And 2035... Unless we get a SERIOUS move on, 2035 will be very, very little different than today: No manned spacecraft to the Moon or Mars at all.

    • Wouldn't happen with Blizzard, they are too busy making Starcraft 2 and the next-gen WoW.
    • by cyp43r (945301) <cyp43r@gmail.com> on Monday February 23 2009, @05:17AM (#26955703)
      "Houston - we have a problem." "Aight, I put on my robe and wizard hat."
    • by pejyel (1275304) on Monday February 23 2009, @07:06AM (#26956085)

      Astronaut: Moon, Mars and Beyond will be a 'first-person-exploration' game that will also include traditional role-playing game (RPG) elements for both single-player and team-based space exploration, but with a realistic twist.

      By "traditional RPG elements" they must mean goblins and wizards and the most absurd J-Pop characters creatively possible...how they plan this with a realistic twist is beyond me.

      Sounds to me like Final Fantasy in Space. Can't wait. Elder Scrolls Moon Landing perhaps?

      Way to see our government dollars and manpower hard at work!!

      No. Traditional RPG elements are inventories, permanent avatars, the ability to develop skills and fulfilling quests/objectives : applied to this game, I can think of building/buying new spaceships, satellites ; trying to get new fundings, taking photographs to make maps, exploring, etc...

      Goblins, wizards, magic swords, hats and robes are classical heroic fantasy or D&D elements, not typically RPG.