Nanoscape

Nanoscape is not a game. It's an academically inclined 3D landscape intended to demonstrate cellular anatomy of a cancer cell. I can't really vouch for the authenticity or usefulness of this demonstration in terms of cellular biology, as my major was computer science. One thing a computer science degree does impart on me is a reasonable degree of competency in determining the difference between things which are video games and things that are not, although this skill is not a particularly difficult accomplishment for the layman. One of the defining features of video games is that they are games, contain gameplay loops, objectives, progression, or at the very least an ability to perform some influence on the environment presented. Let's put that aside, because they implied this should be an "exploration" based on "scientific research". As an educational aide this fails, I don't know what the hacks over at UNSW were up to but it seems like they were balling around on some grant and felt compelled to come up with it and blow $100 on grant money to publish this on Steam as a game (it's not, I know, see above). There's no accompanying descriptors, documentation or narrative to provide educational backing to this mess that's been dumped on Steam. There's no corresponding educational value. No game value, no educational value. Whew. My best guess is that this was a hardcore attempt to waste a lot of time on pointless non-productive "science" and a serious attempt to win an Ig Noble Award, and they failed. They were up against some pretty serious competition, including a comprehensive analysis of purring between four cats, a study of the bacteria in discarded chewing gum, in-depth research on how fat economists are, and a remarkably comprehensive thesis on how sex affects the nose. So understandably these guys failed to win their Ig Noble with "See if we can pay $100 to dump some 3D crap pretending to be educational about cancer as if it was a game on Steam". But to the fine failures over at UNSW, your garbage would have had my vote. [quote][url=https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/store/reviews]Developer Response![/url][/quote] The developer has weighed in to inform everyone they didn't read the [url=https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/store/reviews]Developer Usage Rules[/url] for Steam "partners", or they deliberately ignored the part where Valve says: [quote]Though it may be tempting, not every review needs to be responded to. A developer response will frequently draw more attention than the original statement, potentially turning a small issue into a much larger community discussion. It's also not a good idea to use this feature to refute customer opinions. Your direct attention can be seen as validation or a defensive attempt to silence your customers.[/quote] The developer admits that Nanoscape is not a game, but also that they then knowingly did the wrong thing and listed non-game software as a game on Steam. Well, that's some confession. Steam has a Software section separate from the Game section. This is an ideal place for software-not-games, just as the Games section is ideal for software which is a game. This doesn't seem tremendously complicated to me. It seems very straightforward. I would go so far as to say you don't even need to go to university to be able to tell the difference between games and not-game software, and then make the appropriate decision about where to make that software available. Although, I suppose if you went to UNSW, apparently that's so completely complicated that it's simply impossible to tell the difference. I suspect that's a university that really needs to go revisit basic IT awareness, because apparently it's rather lacking. The developer then chooses to attack the reviewer instead of doing something to correct the mistake they made, by suggesting my review is invalid because I have an "axe to grind". Absolutely, when developers pollute Steam by launching non-games and fake games/asset flips onto the store, this harms the gaming industry, and people have a right to call out this harmful behavior. It takes away market space for genuine developers who are trying to make games for people. What gives these people the right to take away breathing room and audience exposure from genuine game developers who are doing the right thing?

Nanoscape Positives: + Nice idea + Atmospheric + The music + Its free Negatives: - You need a very high end pc to run it smoothly - Almost no free exploration (a lot of invisible walls) - Not a lot to see or do - No options menu - Lasts for about 5 minutes Well its atmospheric and quite interesting. But unless you are very interested in looking at the same things for a long time, its a 5 minute experience. Total Score: 3/10

Well, I was trying to educate myself on cancer as my grandma is in stage 4 but this game failed to deliver. Australia government...why did u allow this to be released with ZERO educational information. I was under the impression that I'd be LEARNING about cancer cells not just exploring whatever the heck I was in. No base information, no education, no reason to pick this up unless you're a doctor or med student with prior knowledge of this subject. 0/10 for normal people

Well, this needs a NASA computer to run. Also, did I miss something or there isnt much "exploration" to do and you are just stuck in a weird shape space with invisible walls?

Impressive visualization, but I'm somehow feeling dumber than before. I think I'm lacking a degree or two to understand whats going on.

producers actually used real scientific data to create the experience. You can find the publication here: https://elifesciences.org/articles/64047#s2 Great for use in the classroom setting for students to get a real understanding of proteins and their interaction with cells. I wish it were either narrated or contained informational prompts for players outside the classroom to understand what is happening. I love science, so this is my jam, but I still had to look up the publication to understand what I was looking at entirely.