
IMPACT is an immersive sci-fi game set on the Moon. Build and manage a lunar base, generating valuable scientific data along the way. This data is used by the European Space Agency to train a real AI that will eventually land on the Moon.
Revenue comes from in-game items and microtransactions, which our price-based model doesn't estimate. The player count below is how many people own it, not what they spent.
About
Genres
Stats
Languages: English
Engagement
Reviews
Themes across 41 recent reviews and how positive each mention is. A keyword signal, not full sentiment analysis.
Reviews
First: I like the vision. A game encouraging and incentivising players to assist research is a fantastic idea, especially since satellites can pump out images faster than any small group of humans can analyze them. I will later discuss how poorly this is done. Binding this with a game to make it more fun seems like it should be a winning combination, but this is poorly accomplished. The game irritates carpal tunnel syndrome, provides no quality time better than burnout, and feels like a day job. It is not fun. The game is an idler of the Clash of Clans style (build generators, let them generate, then collect before they fill up). It has an inventory similar to Farmville esque games. Overall, conceptually, it is not too complicated, nor too simple. It is built on a formula that has been successful before, but misses key elements that allowed those formulae to work. The majority of the game is labelling craters. I classify this two ways. The first cases are where some scientists back in yee olden days identified craters they thought they had found, then added them to a database that this program likely pulls from, or something like that. The second class have no previous analysis. I will get back to these as well. The first class is used in game to train and learn the techniques. In this scenario, you are expected to recreate the work of previous scientists. There is no room for disagreements, nor is there room for finding new craters in already tried areas. This is odd, as there are obvious craters that are clearly missed. I suspect the scientists were dealing with lower definition images when they identified them. Learning from these (your own, clearly) missteps, one might avoid identifying craters that meet similar criteria, but the next analysis was done at equivalent image quality to what you are dealing with so all minutiae must be identified. This creates a paradox. There should be a button to request review. This does not exist, of course. The second case is for a piece of real estate where no analysis has been done. This can be as easy as the other simulation, or as hard as looking at an entirely grey square and hoping nobody cares about data quality. If they are training an AI off of this, good luck to it. I understand not all satellite photos are of equal definition, but there should be a way to indicate this photo is impossible and any data generated here is meaningless. That button does not exist. Thus, the only finished part is the game that ties it all together, right? I wish it was. See, the clash system of avoiding maxing out your drill stockpiles incentivises a player to return often, even just for a moment. If the game also incentivises players to stay a longer time, it is a recipe for burnout. Video games should not incentivise players to invest more time in a day than they spend at their job. Most things can be finished within 15 minutes. This is a good incentive to either boost the dickens out of it, or to wait 15 minutes while identifying craters. This is well done, if there are built in stopping points (see Candy Crush for one way to implement those, may their candy go as stale as the game itself). Eventually, I just kind of went "I need to leave." This isn't necessarily a bad thing; FactoryCapi makes do with long playtimes per session with 15 minute waits for many things (chiefly loading late game regions), and it is fine. This is because the game is windowed. As someone with a life outside the game, I can easily switch tabs. However, this game is full screen all the time. Again, this is likely a creative decision to keep me in the game for longer, but it is a recipe for burnout. So, let's talk about boosts. Any good idle game thrives in its ability to be played even while you are not there. This is not a selling feature; this is a staple of the genre. This game plays while you are not online. The boosts only interact with the game when you are right there holding down the button. This means I cannot boost while AFK, which in my mind defeats the point of having boosts in the first place. The Clash system of mining drills maxing out makes this irrelevant, the end result of which is it effectively doesn't play when you are offline. Still sounds like Clash there, thus why nobody farms in that game. This game is not great for carpal tunnel syndrome. This game is mouse only, requires holding down buttons, and has no natural short term carpal tunnel breaks. FPSs have their between matches. RPGs have their doors or world maps. Some games have loading screens. These may feel annoying, but they make the experience better by giving time to fill water bottles, eat meals, etc. So let's come back to the difference between a job and a game. At work, I need to focus for hours at a time, usually on things that matter a lot. Video games are a way to relax between or after tasks. They are not made to eat up productive hours. They are meant to be fun, enjoyable, and most of all short term. This game feels like my day job, with a sprinkling of gaminess in there to fill lost gaps. It isn't fun nor addicting, but never ends. Just like work! Most of these things could be changed without too much effort, but I cannot recommend this game in this state. It needs a lot more work. It is the worst of idle mechanics barring pay to win and gambling, and lacks the fun mechanics that tie it together.
Media

Related
Related
Price dynamics, follower growth, revenue and sales trajectories with interactive tooltips
This and every other Pro feature is free until October 20, 2026. A free account is all it takes.
Hours played at review time, across 41 reviews with recorded playtime.
positive critical· bar length = how often the theme comes up
This feels like a mobile game designed around a cash shop. The construction cost for the exact same building increases the more you place. All the sudden your houses need 40 rocks + 10 steel then 50 rocks + 20 steel and that is where I stopped. This is not a fun game as you can't gather enough resources in a reasonable amount of time. Identifying craters does not provide enough 3He to speed up the process. You need to capture people with a fun game to identify craters not alienate them with terrible game design.
I can't understand what benefit an AI would have learning how humans play this game. You're making me wait 20 mins for the first upgrade with nothing to do? I guess it's at this point where most people uninstall and that's sad because it's literally the first building upgrade. You would think to train an AI you would want to do it efficiently not grudgingly. I'm not going to sit there clicking the same 3 images of the moon while I wait either, I'm pretty sure any AI model that comes out of this game will only understand human frustration and not how to actually build on the moon.
Also... das Spiel basiert darauf das die Materialkosten um seine Basis zu bauen regelmäßig angehoben werden damit der Spieler Krater identifiziert um Helium 3 zu generieren. Mit dem Helium 3 kann man dann die Produktion der benötigten Materialien beschleunigen. Soweit so gut. Irgendwie muss man die Spieler ja dazu bringen sich die Images anzuschauen um die Krater zu markieren. Das Problem ist dabei das man nicht alle Krater identifizieren kann sondern nur die die ungefähr die Größe des Markers haben. Man könnte viel mehr beitragen wenn der Marker auch Krater miteinbeziehen würde die kleiner bzw. größer wären. - sehr einfach gehalten mit expliziten Anweisungen was zu tun ist - einfach gehaltene Grafik - keine Grafikoptionen - rein- rauszoomen nicht möglich - Gebäude können nicht gedreht werden - keine Optionen für Steuerung Was mir fehlt ist der wissenschaftliche Kontext, man könnte sehr viel Informationen über unseren Mond in das Game stecken um spielerisch Informationen über unseren Begleiter zu erhalten. Aber die Idee für das Spiel ist brilliant, wenn auch die Umsetzung sehr sehr einfach gehalten ist.
Is fun but basic Yes is real. Is funded by ESA https://activities.esa.int/4000142966
[quote][b]Warning: Third Party Account[/b] This game requires you to create a third party "Hochschule Darmstadt - Scientific Data Collection" account... there's no valid reason for this in a PC game when SteamWorks is available. This is often done to harvest private data and profile you, with potential sale and transmission of your private data to third parties. The developers will probably argue that you can trust them, but if they were trustworthy they wouldn't demand you create a third party account. This represents a considerable risk to gamers due to the privacy and security implications of developers that wish to bypass Steam and harvest user data. Remember, sometimes if the product is free, YOU are the product.[/quote] [quote][url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AI_slop][b]Warning: AI Slop[/b][/url] This game is partially or completely made with talentless, soulless AI generated content.[/quote] This is yet another student project, one of literally thousands self-published on Steam Direct. It's from Hochschule Darmstadt in Germany. While student projects tend to be better quality than most "amateur" games, we must still question what value they have for gamers. This isn't a fully fleshed out game. It's the result of an academic exercise and has much more limited value than a professionally developed game. Educational institutions should not be using Steam as a dumping ground for homework assignments. It helps their marketing and makes students feel good, but it puts the business before the needs of gamers. The students were deliberately taught by Hochschule Darmstadt that it's okay to use AI slop in game development... utterly unacceptable. AI slop is trained without permission on copyrighted material. When developer use AI slop in a published product they are contributing to intellectual property theft and copyright infringement. That sheer, galling lack of ethics from a no-longer reputable educational institution aside, this is just a dumb tech demo from students who made a mobile app tier "city builder" where you tap on your iPhone screen to build a "moon base". Honestly if I could go live on the moon to get away from all this low quality student homework worsening Steam, I would. This hasn't been updated since 5 months. While it may not be abandoned yet, it's rotting in development hell and it's probably never going to be finished. This unfinished game is just polluting Steam and making it even more difficult for gamers to find actual, finished games. I couldn't find this on the app stores, but for all intents and purposes this could have been a mobile app. We're here for best of breed PC gaming experiences, and this is about as far from that as you can get. That's enough by itself to disqualify this. We don't spend thousands building gaming rigs so that we can pretend they're iPhones and play iPhone games and mobile apps. As mentioned, this features really godawful, "wrong" looking AI slop instead of genuinely and sincerely created game assets. It's hard to say if this was because the developer didn't have the skill to do the job of creating real game assets or couldn't afford to hire someone who does, but it also doesn't matter. What matters is that this looks bad because of that decision. AI slop sticks out like a sore thumb... and it comes across as insulting. There's also the old adage that those who lack the budget and talent to make their own game assets usually lack the budget and talent to do the rest of the job of game development properly, too, and that's glaringly obvious here. In terms of visuals, this features fairly low quality low poly 3D graphics which will deter a lot of gamers, understandably. Gaming is a visual medium, and while some developers struggle with creating high quality visuals, failing to do so is a disservice to gamers. It's very difficult to recommend bad looking games. You're forced to sign a highly questionable yet legally unenforceable End User License Agreement... for such a relatively low effort, low quality product, this comes across more as a delusion of grandeur than anything else. This agreement includes questionable requirements that may attempt to revoke consumer law protections that gamers expect to have, which is also highly problematic. Developers must learn they are here to serve gamers, not control them. I had my cat walk over the keyboard while the EULA was displaying, which fixed that problem for me. Next is pricing and what value this has for gamers. It would be unethical for students to try charge money for their homework assignments, so you don't have to pay any money for this. But you'd still have to spend your time downloading this, and "time is money", as they say. There's the other problem, too... as a student project, this wasn't made for gamers. There's no requirement for them to polish and balance the game properly, all they need is something to show the faculty so they can get their grade and move on. Let's once more ask... why is that good for gamers? It's obviously not delivering a solid product. Yet here it is, on the store page, and here you are, reading my review for a student demo that's going to waste your time. While genuine amateur developers who made real products get ignored because they have to compete with this stuff. In some ways, this deluge of student projects on Steam is harmful to everyone. In terms of player counts and popular reception, this couldn't even crack 100 players at its absolute peak. For a free game on a platform with 130 million players, that is a spectacular failure, mostly due to the reasons I've supplied here. This student project/tech demo/glorified homework assignment provides no Steam profile benefits, no +1 to your game count, and little value to gamers (because it's just a small, unpolished student project), so I can't recommend this over the thousands of full, professionally made games on Steam. The use of AI slop is a direct insult to gamers and real, ethical content creators and artists everywhere. AI models are trained on copyrighted intellectual property without permission from the owners.
Отстой с картинками сгенерированными ИИ.
nice esa
IMPACT is a really unique game. What makes it special is that it actually supports real space research. Knowing that my actions in the game could help with future space missions makes it feel really meaningful.
What shall I say? We are gaming for science and its great!
Selling now
See how fast this game is selling right now — estimated copies and revenue per day from recent review growth.
Players by region
Where this game's players are, estimated from review languages.
Related
| Game | Estimated lifetime revenue | Reviews | Review score | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| $142 | 0 | 100% | $4.99 | |
| — | 0 | — | — | |
| $1.3M | 1.7K | 75% | $19.99 | |
| $267.3K | 320 | 78% | $24.99 | |
| $95.5K | 232 | 69% | $12.99 | |
| $51.1K | 53 | 64% | $24.99 |