NASA Game Lets You Build Complex Space Networks 47
gregg writes "According to this article, a new game called NetworKing, developed at NASA's Ames Research Center, 'lets players build fast and efficient communication networks by first setting up command stations around the world and then linking them to orbiting satellites and space telescopes. Resources are earned throughout the game as players continue to acquire more clients.' The game is available for play through an internet browser, and also has downloadable versions for Windows and OS X."
Not for linux... (Score:5, Informative)
The Unity Web Player enables you to view blazing 3D content created with Unity directly in your browser, and autoupdates as necessary.
Unity allows you to build rich 3D games with animated characters, sizzling graphics, immersive physics. Then you can deliver the games to the web or as standalone players.
Windows
Mac OS X
Unity Web Player
The Unity Web Player is not currently compatible with the operating system that you appear to be using.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Do you guys even have anything to do with space anymore, or are you guys turning into a space gaming company?
Really, when I was a kid, I dreamed of going into space, and always thought it would be NASA that would pave the way forward. Instead, the US is spending their taxpayer's dollars on war, fake money on Wall Street, fake money in housing and more pork in Washington.
I really hope that the American spirit that the world admired rise
Re: (Score:2)
Look ... I'm not terribly enthusiastic about the way the US is spending its efforts either. And I think part of the reason so much is wrong with our culture (I say "our" because I'm an American) is the complacency that almost naturally follows from perceived superiority of self, in the economic and political domains. My bet is that if Europe was in a similar position, it wouldn't be in too different a situation compared to the US - I really think it's part of human nature. So, while your point is legitimate
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"But I don't think anyone can legitimately argue that the US's current space vision is the wrong thing to do in the long term."
I can.
Passing up the opportunity to develop a long-term, industrially-oriented moonbase is nothing short of dropping the ball. The moon gives you a weak gravity well -- but a gravity well -- in which to construct large projects and launch them. It is well enough to say that this might be done better in LEO, but that simply isn't true. We have decades of experience now showing that construction in microgravity is far, far too slow and expensive. You need appreciable gravity in order to do efficient constr
Re: (Score:2)
An interesting proposal. I was not aware that the technology required to build and operate moonbases was within our reach. The ability to do large-scale construction in space is most definitely a very important goal.
However, a couple of questions:
1) What advantages (and disadvantages) would using the proposed moonbase to build large projects (mainly for deep-space exploration at this project) offer compared to building these projects on Earth?
2) You propose that this moonbase be industrially-oriented. By th
Re: (Score:2)
As for advantages, if any of the moon's resources (or even asteroidal or comet resources, for that matter) can be exploited for either construction material or fuel (there is lots of oxygen in moon rock, for example), then that mass would not have to be lifted from Earth. Tha
Re: (Score:2)
Probably, yes. Unity is a fully-functional 3d engine. Implementing the features of such an engine in any of the above environments is at least hundreds of hours of work, and the result is unlikely to be as good. It would likely have tripled the required budget for this project, which was probably done on a shoestring.
Re: (Score:2)
And many of them are open source, which would have saved NASA tons of cash in licensing costs alone.
Unity is free-as-in-beer, as long as you don't need certain advanced features (e.g. mobile clients).
Re: (Score:2)
There are plenty of fully functional 3D engines for Java [wikipedia.org].
You know what I don't see in that list: one of those engines that has been used for commercially successful games. With one notable exception: minecraft. A game renowned for the low quality of its graphics.
There may be a reason for this omission: they may not be good enough. (I don't know, I haven't actually tried using any of these, although I look at the descriptions of some of them and see that they are Java ports of C++ systems that I knew were second-rate systems five years ago).
No problem. (Score:2)
Just download NS-3 (which does work under Linux), install NASA's Delay-Tolerant Protocol and use that to simulate networks of satellites and ground stations. For added fun, install the module that lets you use Network Simulator as a NIC under Linux and tunnel actual traffic across your simulated network to see how it would perform in practice.
Not only will this be more reliable than this Unity game, it'll be more accurate, more customizable and more productive (since you get network stats rather than a scor
Re: (Score:2)
It actually comes with standard satellite link parameters. For non-standard orbits, you'd need to write a scriptlet, sure. But if you're designing the network, wouldn't you want to write your OWN scriptlet and not use an assumed set of values?
Re:Nice game for nerds... (Score:5, Informative)
Don't click, that link is goatse.
Re: (Score:2)
Is it a Goatse video, or just the standard picture. If it's a video I'm morbidly curious.
Re: (Score:2)
Why am I out of mod points now?
not playable in a web browser (Score:1)
it's the lame unity3d proprietary plugin
Re: (Score:1)
As well as a button that automatically makes you say "question mark exclamation point question mark exclamation point question mark exclamation point question mark exclamation point question mark exclamation point question mark exclamation point question mark exclamation point question mark exclamation point question mark exclamation point question mark exclamation point".
Kinda short.. (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
It's true that you can't lose and eventually you will get enough resources to purchase everything you need with very little thought invested in your decisions.
However, if you play the game to minimize the number of rounds you need to beat the game, then it becomes a lot more interesting, and your decisions carry more weight. Maybe you should hold off on purchasing a certain research item so that you can build another NEN node so you can accept another client offer. Then again, maybe the client offer isn
I wonder (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Budget cuts.
Next thing you know, the USDA will be studying Farmville to develop agricultural subsidy policies...
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Probably. Which is why, as I mentioned above, I'd regard Network Simulator and the Click module that lets you route actual traffic to/from it to be a far more productive use of time.
Re: (Score:2)
Finished in 47 rounds (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Finished in 40 rounds.
The game seems to be hinting that Guam might not be necessary?
Re: (Score:1)
Hardly play in browser (Score:2)
When you have to install a lot of shit on the computer
Hardly a game - NASA should open source it (Score:2)
A lot of info in the "game," lots of text, very little gameplay. Felt too Super Paper Mario. It would be nice to see NASA open source this so it could play more like Civ 1, trickling out the education as you focus on the gameplay, rather than blasting you with endless text and doing a very poor job of clarifying why you need a Space Network and how much of it to get a given Research item. The win condition is pretty weak as well... you just research one more thing.
NASA game on! (Score:1)