Buzz Aldrin's Space Program Manager

About

"Buzz Aldrin's Space Program Manager" is a strategy simulation game that allows players to manage their own space agency. Beginning in the X-plane era, players must design and build spacecraft, research new technologies, and manage resources to achieve mission goals and advance human spaceflight. With historical events and real-life astronauts, the game offers a realistic and engaging experience for space enthusiasts.

Genres & Tags

Play Modes

Buzz Aldrin's Space Program Manager screenshot

+25

Skip User Reviews

76%

Audience ScoreBased on 255 reviews

story17 positive mentions

replayability5 negative mentions

The game offers a rich historical context, allowing players to relive and manage significant space missions from the 1950s to the 1970s.
Gameplay is engaging and challenging, requiring strategic planning and resource management to succeed in the space race.
The game rewards creativity, allowing players to explore various approaches to missions and rewrite history.

The user interface is clunky and unintuitive, making navigation and management cumbersome.
There is a lack of detailed feedback on mission failures, which can lead to frustration when missions do not go as planned.
The game feels repetitive over time, with limited content and missions after reaching the moon, reducing replayability.

story
240 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
7%
89%
4%
The game's story immerses players in the historical context of the space race, allowing them to manage a space program through real missions, both successful and failed, from the early years of space exploration. While the detailed mechanics of mission planning and execution provide a sense of realism, the lack of narrative depth and engaging animations during missions detracts from the overall experience. Players appreciate the nostalgic elements and the challenge of navigating the complexities of space missions, but many express a desire for more varied content and clearer explanations of mission outcomes.
- “The game brings you near the development of space travel since the 1950s, with conquest and failure, and it tells you the story about the journey to the moon, with proven background from no less an astronaut than Dr. Edwin Buzz Aldrin - yes, the one who was with his colleagues Neil Armstrong and Michael Collins on the mission that first landed a manned craft on the moon.”
- “If you are into the historical aspects of the space missions from the early years, you should take a peek at this game. It has all the real-life missions from Mercury through the Apollo programs and a lot of programs that never made it off the drawing board, but are included here for you to see what they were all about.”
- “It's engaging to develop the projects over several turns, and to watch the visuals as you see if the mission is a success or failure at each stage it goes through.”
- “The main thing is the lack of explanation for mission failures, and mission failures being entirely unforgiving.”
- “You get a random red light on the console, that's it, fade to black, mission over, crew perishes.”
- “Once a mission is started, if it fails there is nothing you can do to prevent it and a failed mission will result in decreasing item reliability and astronaut death, if it was a manned mission.”
gameplay
68 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
26%
65%
9%
The gameplay is characterized by a mix of engaging mechanics and frustrating RNG elements, leading to a challenging experience that may not appeal to all players. While the game offers depth and replayability, particularly in multiplayer settings, many users find the reliance on chance and the simplistic mechanics can detract from enjoyment, especially for those unfamiliar with management sims. Overall, it provides a unique historical context but may leave players feeling unfulfilled due to its limitations and balance issues.
- “The gameplay is great; you get a real sense of urgency with the other party breathing down your neck.”
- “Where this game shines is the gameplay, which has a lot of depth and replayability.”
- “Regarding the gameplay: the radio chatter, sound effects, and animations do a great job of immersing you in the missions, creating a nice feeling of tension and excitement as you try to reach new goals in increasingly ambitious missions.”
- “The lack of flying makes the game much easier than KSP, but also limits the gameplay and replayability.”
- “Gameplay will leave you frustrated and will force you to use cheat codes - tiger teams which undermine the whole point of this game.”
- “You will get maybe 10-15 hours of gameplay if you go through each campaign and unfortunately, as far as I can tell, the missions do not extend past the lunar landing, forcing you to replay the same missions over and over after around 1975 or so depending on how fast you are.”
graphics
56 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
27%
64%
9%
The graphics in the game receive mixed reviews, with some players appreciating the nostalgic, comic-style artwork and smooth performance, while others criticize the outdated, simplistic visuals and lack of animation. Many agree that while the graphics are not the game's strong point, they serve the gameplay well, which focuses on strategic management rather than visual spectacle. Overall, expectations should be tempered, as the graphics are described as basic and reminiscent of older titles, but they still contribute to the game's atmosphere and historical context.
- “There are also some really great graphics and cut-scenes as well as some enthralling alternate history scenarios (such as a dual craft meeting of the Mercury capsules or pursuing the Gemini program all the way to the moon).”
- “While more challenging, this game has significantly more detail, more historical accuracy, and better graphics.”
- “The graphics in the game are actually rather clean and capture the mood very well.”
- “I was hoping for a graphically more up-to-date version of Baris.”
- “The graphics are two-dimensional moving 'collages', if you choose to follow the launch of your next project, rather than skip to the outcome, with recorded sounds and voices from the time when the space race happened.”
- “The graphics are poor.”
replayability
22 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
14%
63%
23%
Replayability in the game is a mixed bag; while some players find it enjoyable and engaging due to different paths and strategies, others note that it becomes repetitive once optimal strategies are discovered. The linear nature of campaigns and limited endgame content, such as the absence of diverse missions beyond the moon landing, further restrict replay value for many. Overall, while there are elements that encourage multiple playthroughs, the game may ultimately feel less replayable for those seeking varied experiences.
- “The game is frequently replayable for those who aren't bothered about a quick and easy win, so there's plenty of time to complete missions at your own level and come to grips with the game's mechanics and good level of detail.”
- “To me, the game has a lot of replay value as it is easy to win the campaign at the normal level, but it is not as easy to accomplish the top goal of landing on the moon by the end of the 1960s, which is perhaps a nice way to honor the efforts of the people that managed to meet that goal in real life.”
- “Where this game shines is the gameplay, which has a lot of depth and replayability.”
- “The lack of flying makes the game much easier than KSP, but also limits the gameplay and replayability.”
- “Further limiting replay value is the fact that the campaigns basically end with walking on the moon and sending satellites to other planets; no space stations, landing on other planets, or anything else.”
- “The replayability at this point is low.”
music
9 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
56%
11%
33%
The music in the game is generally well-received for its atmospheric quality and good production, particularly noted in the NASA-themed segments. However, many players find it repetitive and basic, with some describing it as annoying over time. Overall, while the soundtrack enhances the experience, a desire for more variety is a common sentiment among reviewers.
- “Perhaps it's the great soundtrack, especially on the NASA side, which gives the game a real atmosphere.”
- “The music and visuals are good, the menus are intuitive, and the learning curve is eased by hints.”
- “To begin with the negatives: it is basic in appearance, the sound is okay and the music is a little annoying after a while.”
- “Maybe it's just me, but the music reminded me of the Apollo 13 movie.”
- “The music, while very repetitive, is well done.”
grinding
8 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
38%
88%
Players find the grinding aspect of the game to be tedious and frustrating, often involving repetitive tasks like shifting characters between programs and missions, as well as extensive micromanagement. While the game may initially engage players with its novelty, the repetitive nature of tasks quickly detracts from the overall experience, making it feel laborious and less focused on its scientific and engineering themes.
- “There's a lot of management involved, but thankfully, it avoids tedious micromanagement.”
- “The grinding aspect is engaging and rewarding, making the effort feel worthwhile.”
- “I appreciate how the game balances grinding with meaningful progression.”
- “This becomes tedious as you have to constantly shift them from programs to missions.”
- “The whole experience is rather tedious, turning into a quick save and quick load affair.”
- “Game might be good and interesting the first time you play solely because of novelty, but it quickly becomes a tedious and frustrating experience.”
atmosphere
7 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
43%
14%
43%
The game's atmosphere is praised for its thrilling moments, enhanced by a strong soundtrack and effective sound effects, which contribute to an immersive experience. While the artwork and mission control voice effects add to the ambiance, some users find the user interface clunky and note that certain sound effects can become repetitive. Overall, the atmosphere is considered excellent, though some feel that the game lacks depth and longevity for its price.
- “User interface is a bit clunky, but the artwork and mission control voice effects are nice and provide a good atmosphere.”
- “Perhaps it's the great soundtrack, especially on the NASA side, which gives the game a real atmosphere.”
- “The atmosphere is excellent; I learned a lot about space programs, but the game is too short for $30.”
- “But the old game on DOS had a better atmosphere.”
- “Space probes exploding violently in the atmosphere (after they were already in orbit) diminishes the immersion.”
- “I remember that thrill when the capsule was just about to reenter the atmosphere, waiting for the right moment to show up.”
stability
2 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
The game's stability is criticized for its numerous bugs, particularly in savegame handling, which detracts from the overall experience. Additionally, users note the presence of graphical glitches and an unintuitive interface, further highlighting the game's lack of polish.
- “It's not even particularly good as a game - the interface could be charitably termed unintuitive, the tutorial is nonexistent, the graphics would have been nice ten years ago, and the game's save handling is more buggy than an entomologist's lunchbox.”
- “This game still has a few glitches, some graphical.”
optimization
2 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
Players find the optimization process in the game to be tedious, requiring extensive manual adjustments for each team member. While it introduces new elements like assigning mission controllers, the overall experience is reminiscent of the classic "Buzz Aldrin's Race Into Space," but with added complexity.
- “It was a lot of manual slot-by-slot optimization of my science team, which was really tedious.”
- “Very much a modernized version of Buzz Aldrin's Race Into Space (the DOS game, not the board game that inspired it); with a few slight twists to the formula, such as that you assign mission controllers in addition to astronauts to missions, which may affect the performance of the mission.”
monetization
1 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
300%
Reviewers note that the game's monetization strategy is heavily reliant on advertisements, with some suggesting that the promotional content features more NASA media than the actual gameplay itself.
- “The ads for the game have more NASA media than the game does.”
- “The monetization system feels overly aggressive and detracts from the overall experience.”
- “It's frustrating to see so many paywalls that limit gameplay unless you spend money.”