Jump to content

Welcome to Ace Combat Skies
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. This message will be removed once you have signed in.
Login to Account Create an Account
Photo

Kono Talks About ACAH on Twitter


  • Please log in to reply
55 replies to this topic

#41
FX102A

FX102A

    Rookie

  • Members
  • 17 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Plane:F-35C Lightning II

No, it'll still be shit.

 

I guess I lost this debate the minute I stepped into it.

 

I wouldn't go as far as call it Shit, Assault Horizon was kind of a "Brave Experiment". I actually respect Project Aces for trying something different because as much as we don't want to believe it, the series was starting to get maybe a tad stale. Changes have been somewhat minimum over the last few titles, in particular from AC04 onwards IMHO. I still love them, but then I'm biased because I'm a big fan of the series.

 

I also fully understand why PA decided to go for a more accessible approach to the gameplay. If the regular installments are not bringing in the profits desired, then the only choices are to change up the formula or but the series to bed. I myself don't want the latter so they went with a change up. Of course whenever you change, you have to accept that things mayu not go according to plan and so despite an upsurge in sales, it wasn't enough to reach the numbers they were probably hoping for, hence they took feedback and implemented it into Ace Combat Infinity (I have my own set of problems with that game but thats another topic for another day in another sub-forum).

 

All in all, Assault Horizon probably will remain the Dark Horse / Black Sheep of the series (though who here has played Ace Combat Advance?) but I still see it as a unique experiment. I wouldn't rank it high in my order of preference in the series (too much emphasis on multiplayer is actually the big killer for me) but I still get a kick out of replaying it every now and again.


  • 0

#42
CarrierBuzzard

CarrierBuzzard

    Phantom Phanatic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,446 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Plane:F-4E Phantom II

I hope you realise that the AC-130 has literally only appeared in ONE CoD campaign in its modern era history right? And it was in the best one, CoD4? And that it was a MP killstreak reward beyond that in MP and featured in a grand total of ONE mission in Spec Ops in MW2?

The CoD enthusiast doesn't give a shit about the campaign, they play it for the multiplayer, about being at the top of a leaderboard. So much of the pre-release focus leading up to a launch is MP focused. Hell take AW for example, the thing that killed the game on PC was the lack of dedicated servers for online multiplayer. Regen health is the ONLY thing you can put the blame solely on the CoD influence, and even then you can trace that feature back to Halo.


Horseshit. AC of old had replayability due to unlockable skins/aircraft through playing the campaign multiple times or getting a higher score by killing baddies quicker, absolutely nothing to do with mission structure. AC5 was one of the worst offenders in that regard, and AC4/6 only had a difference if you chose to attack the left group of targets instead of those on the right like in Operation Bunker Shot.


You're an idiot.


Oh boy, here we go again with "if you don't agree with my opinion that CoD 4 is the best CoD you are an idiot then" talk.
  • 1

#43
PositronCannon

PositronCannon

    very likely to be not ded

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,789 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Spain
  • Squad:Funky Arrows Unit
  • Plane:EF2000 Typhoon

Yes. Because AH is no more linear than games before it. There are a whole heap of missions in AC04-6 that play out exactly the same no matter how many times you try it. Its a non-complaint.

 

Nowhere nearly the same percentage as AH nor to the same extent, but yeah whatevs.


  • 3

#44
Skope Hogan

Skope Hogan

    Highway to the Dangerzone

  • Members
  • 6,187 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Somewhere in the Indian Ocean
  • Squad:Funky Squadron
  • Plane:F-14A Tomcat

I wouldn't go as far as call it Shit, Assault Horizon was kind of a "Brave Experiment". I actually respect Project Aces for trying something different because as much as we don't want to believe it, the series was starting to get maybe a tad stale. Changes have been somewhat minimum over the last few titles, in particular from AC04 onwards IMHO. I still love them, but then I'm biased because I'm a big fan of the series.
 
I also fully understand why PA decided to go for a more accessible approach to the gameplay. If the regular installments are not bringing in the profits desired, then the only choices are to change up the formula or but the series to bed. I myself don't want the latter so they went with a change up. Of course whenever you change, you have to accept that things mayu not go according to plan and so despite an upsurge in sales, it wasn't enough to reach the numbers they were probably hoping for, hence they took feedback and implemented it into Ace Combat Infinity (I have my own set of problems with that game but thats another topic for another day in another sub-forum).
 
All in all, Assault Horizon probably will remain the Dark Horse / Black Sheep of the series (though who here has played Ace Combat Advance?) but I still see it as a unique experiment. I wouldn't rank it high in my order of preference in the series (too much emphasis on multiplayer is actually the big killer for me) but I still get a kick out of replaying it every now and again.


I'd still call it shit, but I wouldn't think that'd detract from its experimental nature.

I can't deny it was just that; an effort to reinvent the series. I can see the desire to do so, as well. The series was pretty stable in terms of development with only a few features to differ between them.

But, by that note, the games were all top sellers. They always got the special Greatest Hit re-releases for the console installments. We're talking a 15 year trend, at the time. I wouldn't see a need to diverge so much, but I wasn't calling the shots. Given that AH sold pretty well indicates their efforts did at least pay off.
  • 0

#45
Jim

Jim

    Technicolour Dreamboat

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 980 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:In the cut where the wood at
  • Squad:Available for 2 shillings and an orange peel
  • Plane:JAS-39C Gripen

My problem with AH was that it felt like a step back for the series in every way that mattered, especially when compared with AC6. The wide sprawling battlefields where you could tackle the scenario however you pleased were replaced by scripted corridors which wrenched the control away from the player. It looks pretty, but once you realise that you have next to no agency in what's playing out on the screen during gameplay it really kills your interest.

 

Actually, I take back what I said about DFM/ASM looking pretty; the explosions and debris constantly filling the screen made it look cluttered and distracting. As for it making the action more exciting? I already said this about a year ago when the ACI JP beta came out, but the only thing that DFM did was unnecessarily drag out the action sequences by making you focus on one target for 30 seconds at a time, while the best AC games were focused around the player blitzing through scores of enemies as quickly as possible.

 

I also had problems with the game's pacing, notably how all the A2G missions were all just dumped into one clump around the midgame. The less I say about the Attack Heli and AC-130 missions, the better, but I will say they put an unwelcome halt to what momentum the game had built up in the preceding fighter missions.

 

Oh boy, here we go again with "if you don't agree with my opinion that CoD 4 is the best CoD you are an idiot then" talk.

 

Don't worry. We have plenty of other reasons for thinking you're an idiot besides your taste in CoD :^)


Edited by Jim, 02 March 2015 - 04:59 PM.

  • 1

#46
PositronCannon

PositronCannon

    very likely to be not ded

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,789 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Spain
  • Squad:Funky Arrows Unit
  • Plane:EF2000 Typhoon

My problem with AH was that it felt like a step back for the series in every way that mattered, especially when compared with AC6. The wide sprawling battlefields where you could tackle the scenario however you pleased were replaced by scripted corridors which wrenched the control away from the player. It looks pretty, but once you realise that you have next to no agency in what's playing out on the screen during gameplay it really kills your interest.

 

This guy gets it.


  • 0

#47
Skope Hogan

Skope Hogan

    Highway to the Dangerzone

  • Members
  • 6,187 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Somewhere in the Indian Ocean
  • Squad:Funky Squadron
  • Plane:F-14A Tomcat
I really need to play 6.
  • 0

#48
Muscle Man

Muscle Man

    The flame is gone, the fire remains

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,140 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Los Angeles
  • Plane:X-02 Wyvern

I really need to play 6.


6 is a solid game but I don't think it warrants a 360 purchase for it alone. Unless you have access to one, then by all means. I liked it. It felt like a step up from the PS2 holy trinity, but I've put ~40 hours into it and it's just now starting to get stale. It doesn't pack the punch the past games had. At least for me anyways.

Edited by Muscle Man, 02 March 2015 - 08:21 PM.

  • 0

#49
PositronCannon

PositronCannon

    very likely to be not ded

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,789 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Spain
  • Squad:Funky Arrows Unit
  • Plane:EF2000 Typhoon
 

6 is a solid game but I don't think it warrants a 360 purchase for it alone. I liked it. It felt like a step up from the PS2 holy trinity, but I've put ~40 hours into it and it's just now starting to get stale. It doesn't pack the punch the past games had. At least for me anyways.

 

Even being the biggest AC6 fanboy around here I still have to agree with this. The thing with AC6 is that it really doesn't have much mission variety, but I personally find that to be a double-edged sword in AC, where mission variety often means gimmicky missions that you probably won't want to play more than a couple times (half of AC5, most of JA and AH). But what it does, it does the best of any game in the series (as long as you enjoy the new mechanics and don't mind the low number of flyable planes, at least), so I much prefer that approach. What it boils down to for me is that the first playthrough isn't as memorable as something like AC5 or ACZ (the latter probably has the best balance between "first playthrough punch" and replayability), but it feels much less "same-y" on subsequent replays than previous games. AC04 was pretty much the same on a smaller scale, which is no surprise considering AC6 is a pseudo-next gen remake of it.

 

And yes, I consider the concepts of "first playthrough punch" (a better term for that might be "cinematic-ness", yeah I'm so good with words) and replayability to be opposite to each other the vast majority of the time, since the former generally depends on scripted stuff and eye-candy that gets old after the first or second time, and more importantly, tends to get in the way of gameplay. The only exception is the rare cases where the "punch" factor is done purely through a game's normal gameplay. Games like AH fail exactly because they go all the way to the cinematic end without integrating it anywhere near properly into quality gameplay that still puts you in control of things. As I said before, this can be forgiven in games like CoD where everyone's in it for the multiplayer and the campaign is expected to be more movie than game, but AH neither was marketed that way nor ended up having a good multiplayer anyway.

 

It's unfortunate, because with ACI they were definitely right back on track in terms of mission design. Obviously, multiplayer-oriented stuff is gonna be pretty much fully gameplay-focused, but even the more recent campaign missions are pretty good as well, even if basically higher scale versions of classic missions. But of course, that has issues of a whole different kind.


Edited by PositronCannon, 02 March 2015 - 08:50 PM.

  • 0

#50
ThirstierRug19

ThirstierRug19

    Seasoned Chicken Nugget

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 54 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Belkan Federation
  • Plane:F-22A Raptor

What I'm starting to believe, is that Assault Horizon was Project Aces's way of trying to bring new people into the AC series, such as the COD-reminiscient gameplay, the attack chopper, AC-130 and the bomber, and the real world locations, as opposed to Strangereal's universe. Project Aces tried to pull COD kids and players into AC by implementing COD-esque gameplay in AH.


  • 0

#51
ACAce23

ACAce23

    ༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ

  • Members
  • 6,704 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:STRAYA Chalupa
  • Plane:F/A-18C Hornet

Oh boy, here we go again with "if you don't agree with my opinion that CoD 4 is the best CoD you are an idiot then" talk.

 

Helps when you're right, which I am.


  • 0

#52
Skope Hogan

Skope Hogan

    Highway to the Dangerzone

  • Members
  • 6,187 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Somewhere in the Indian Ocean
  • Squad:Funky Squadron
  • Plane:F-14A Tomcat

 

 

 

Even being the biggest AC6 fanboy around here I still have to agree with this. The thing with AC6 is that it really doesn't have much mission variety, but I personally find that to be a double-edged sword in AC, where mission variety often means gimmicky missions that you probably won't want to play more than a couple times (half of AC5, most of JA and AH). But what it does, it does the best of any game in the series (as long as you enjoy the new mechanics and don't mind the low number of flyable planes, at least), so I much prefer that approach. What it boils down to for me is that the first playthrough isn't as memorable as something like AC5 or ACZ (the latter probably has the best balance between "first playthrough punch" and replayability), but it feels much less "same-y" on subsequent replays than previous games. AC04 was pretty much the same on a smaller scale, which is no surprise considering AC6 is a pseudo-next gen remake of it.

 

And yes, I consider the concepts of "first playthrough punch" (a better term for that might be "cinematic-ness", yeah I'm so good with words) and replayability to be opposite to each other the vast majority of the time, since the former generally depends on scripted stuff and eye-candy that gets old after the first or second time, and more importantly, tends to get in the way of gameplay. The only exception is the rare cases where the "punch" factor is done purely through a game's normal gameplay. Games like AH fail exactly because they go all the way to the cinematic end without integrating it anywhere near properly into quality gameplay that still puts you in control of things. As I said before, this can be forgiven in games like CoD where everyone's in it for the multiplayer and the campaign is expected to be more movie than game, but AH neither was marketed that way nor ended up having a good multiplayer anyway.

 

It's unfortunate, because with ACI they were definitely right back on track in terms of mission design. Obviously, multiplayer-oriented stuff is gonna be pretty much fully gameplay-focused, but even the more recent campaign missions are pretty good as well, even if basically higher scale versions of classic missions. But of course, that has issues of a whole different kind.

 

 

6 is a solid game but I don't think it warrants a 360 purchase for it alone. Unless you have access to one, then by all means. I liked it. It felt like a step up from the PS2 holy trinity, but I've put ~40 hours into it and it's just now starting to get stale. It doesn't pack the punch the past games had. At least for me anyways.

That was my reasoning, as well. There's nothing on the 360 I feel strong about outside of 6, so I suppose I'm screwed at least until I can find a cheap 360 so I can just BIOS dump when 360 emu isn't turrible.


  • 0

#53
CarrierBuzzard

CarrierBuzzard

    Phantom Phanatic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,446 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Plane:F-4E Phantom II

Helps when you're right, which I am.


Proving my point, thanks.
  • 0

#54
Tongates

Tongates

    Expert

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 366 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Where eagles dare
  • Plane:Su-25 Frogfoot

I'm not entirely unsympathetic towards Kono (just keep him away from anything involving gameplay design), and it's commendable that he owns up to the fuck-ups, but honestly, when he says something like...

 

 

...I can't really read it as anything other than "B-BUT YOU JUST DIDN'T UNDERSTAND IT!" as opposed to "Yeah, we fucked up". It also reminds me of the people who say stuff like "AH is a good game, but a bad AC game" or "It'd be more popular if it didn't have AC on the title", both of which make absolutely no sense.

 Yeah, I came away with the same impression too. Maybe it was lost in translation or maybe It was my fault for not comprehending the genius of AH.?

Choosing to blame the customer for a poor product? Gives me the thought that he's choosing to defer responsibility. Which makes me wonder if he really gets it...

Hoping it's a translation thing.


Exactly, it's similar to Steve Job's response to the iPhone 4's Antennagate problem in 2010: "You're holding it wrong".

 

I don't exactly hate Assault Horizon, the ideas were good, they just needed to be thought through more and better executed... And I'm really tired of them sucking up to the US in almost every title since AC04 and demonizing Russia and countries alike.

 Yep, If thats what they think Americans enjoy? We're in trouble.

Really think they got lazy and reached for an old worn out cliché. Hoping for easy money instead of writing a decent story? Possibly trying to cut cost after investing heavily in graphics?  Doubt we'll ever find out.


Watching the game(s) being played isn't the same as actually playing it/them; that's the unfortunate partiality that historic AC players encumber due to burden of knowledge. We know/feel how a 'good' AC should play etc., and AH just wasn't all that good. The first playthrough for most was the 'wow factor', but they quickly regained sense and saw that all the little niggles piled up into a junk yard with following campaign runs.

 

Multiplayer was fun for a while, such as with friends in rule-set lobbies, but eventually the process of DFM-Flare-Counter-Repeat just repeated itself no matter what.

 

Also >helicopters. That can die.

 

If AH was your first AC, then enjoying it is somewhat a given if flight combat games tickle you. But when compared to the old...there wasn't a candle that could be held to them. In fact the match was blown out before it even lit the wick.

 When I got to the first helicopter mission. I was done. Didn't want Heli's in a jet-fighter game.


  • 0

#55
Skope Hogan

Skope Hogan

    Highway to the Dangerzone

  • Members
  • 6,187 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Somewhere in the Indian Ocean
  • Squad:Funky Squadron
  • Plane:F-14A Tomcat

 

 When I got to the first helicopter mission. I was done. Didn't want Heli's in a jet-fighter game.

It could have been cool. Low to the ground, fast as hell, and all that good shit.

 

But, it was anything but that. 


  • 1

#56
Scherzo

Scherzo

    Revy-Chan!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,822 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Plane:F-15E Strike Eagle

A bit of a Necro, but I'm in Nemo's corner Re:ACAH's relation to CoD. Or rather, I don't think Kono wanted to superficially mimic CoD-that would've just ended up being like HAWX. I think he wanted to dissect what the core gameplay loop of CoD4 was and how it related to older FPSes, and do something similar for AC. The Aesthetics, Aircraft Variety, Setting decisions all came after that. I think it was a very comprehensive vision for modernizing the series.

 

It just, uh, wasn't a particularly good one, at least in execution.


Edited by Scherzo, 13 December 2016 - 06:51 AM.

  • 0


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users