Fact-Checking Policy
Most of what we write is about our own games, and those facts are checked by playing the games. Some guides also touch on real space science, physics or the web technology the games are built with. This page explains how we check those statements, which sources we rely on, and, most importantly, how we keep game mechanics and real science clearly apart.
What gets checked
We sort statements in our content into three kinds and check each in a different way:
| Kind of statement | Example | How it is checked |
|---|---|---|
| How one of our games works | "Storm level in Meteor Escape rises every 15 seconds." | Played and confirmed in the game itself on desktop and mobile. |
| Web technology | "requestAnimationFrame schedules a callback before the next repaint." | Compared with official documentation and specifications. |
| Real science | "Gravity gets weaker with distance from a planet." | Compared with reputable public science sources, and kept general. |
Opinions and strategy tips, such as which power-up is most useful in a particular situation, are presented as the Editorial Team's experience, not as facts.
Arcade gameplay mechanics vs. real scientific information
Our games use simplified, arcade-friendly physics. They are designed to be fun, readable and fair, not to reproduce reality. Nothing in a game should be taken as a description of how space, spacecraft or physics really work.
Because space games borrow real-sounding ideas, this line is easy to blur. We use these rules in every guide:
- Label real science explicitly. When a guide explains a real concept, it says so, with wording such as "in real physics" or "in the real world."
- Say what the game simplifies. After a real concept, the guide states how the game differs. For example, real objects in a vacuum keep moving because there is no air drag, while arcade games commonly let a ship slow down or stop on its own because that is much easier to steer.
- Keep real science general. We explain broad, well-established ideas such as inertia, gravity weakening with distance and the basic idea of an orbit. We do not publish precise mission data, engineering figures or calculations presented as instruction.
- Never treat game values as real values. The gravity on each moon in Rocket Landing, or the pull of planets in Gravity Orbit, is a tuning choice, not a measurement of any real body.
- Never imply training. We do not suggest that skill in our games transfers to piloting, spaceflight or engineering. Our disclaimer says this directly.
A concrete example: in Planet Hopper, entering another planet's gravity ring snaps your pod into a neat circular orbit. A guide may explain that, in reality, gravity from a planet is always acting and that orbits come from a balance between forward speed and that pull. It must then make clear that the game's instant capture is an arcade shortcut. Our guide to space game physics and our guide to gravity mechanics follow this pattern.
Sources we use
We prefer primary, stable, publicly accessible sources from standards bodies, browser documentation projects and space agencies. We do not rely on forums, anonymous posts, content farms or other game sites as the basis for factual claims.
HTML5, browser APIs and accessibility
- MDN Web Docs, for example the Canvas API, requestAnimationFrame, localStorage, Web Audio API, Pointer events, KeyboardEvent.key, the Web Share API and game development on the web.
- The HTML Living Standard from WHATWG.
- The Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.2 from the W3C.
Space science and astronomy
- NASA's public solar system science pages.
- NASA Space Place, used as a general-audience reference for clear explanations of basic concepts.
- The European Space Agency's Science and Exploration pages.
Basic physics
For general physics ideas such as inertia, gravity and orbits, we use the same agency sources above and well-established textbook-level concepts. If a physics statement cannot be supported at a general level by a reputable source, we leave it out. Citing an agency's public pages is for reference only and does not imply any endorsement of our site by that agency.
How a check works
- The editor marks every factual statement in a draft that is not about our own games.
- Each statement is compared with at least one source from the list above. Specific claims about browser behavior are checked against current documentation, since browsers change.
- Statements that are too specific to verify are generalized or removed.
- Where the article discusses web technology or real science, the sources used are listed at the end under "Sources and further reading."
- Statements about our games are confirmed by playing them, as described in our editorial policy.
What we avoid
- Invented statistics, studies, survey results or "research shows" claims.
- Quotes from people we have not actually quoted.
- Specific dates or numbers we cannot confirm from a reliable source.
- Health, cognitive or educational benefit claims about playing games.
Corrections
If you believe something on the site is wrong, please email YOUR_EMAIL_HERE with the page address, the statement in question and, ideally, a reliable source. We will check it. If it is wrong, we will correct the page and update its date; if a game description turns out to be wrong, we fix the description or the game so they match. We welcome reports that a real-science explanation is oversimplified to the point of being misleading, and in that case we will either improve the explanation or make its limits clearer.