Ace Combat 6 was better

[Android994]

While i enjoyed Ace Combat 7, by the end i couldn't shake the feeling that Ace Combat 6 was a better game. Here are some reasons why:

• More coherent story. While AC7's story definitely gets off to a much stronger start with better dialog and voice acting, it gets progressively stupider in its third act from the moment you capture Farbanti all the way up until the end (seriously, what's up with the whole space travel sub-plot that gets introduced 5 minutes before the end?). While AC6's story starts off pretty stupid with incredibly cringy dialog and stiff voice acting, it gets better as the plot progresses and is more coherent overall.
  
  
• More options during gameplay. The ability to tackle objectives in any order gives the game more replay value, and it's really cool how putting off an objective for too long can get you into a tight spot later when you finally get around to tackling it. Being able to give orders to your wingman gives you more tactical options during combat, and i would have liked them to expand upon that system instead of ditching it entirely.
  
  
• Cooler missions. This is probably subjective, but i think that AC6 had cooler missions overall. While AC7's severe weather missions are super awesome (such as flying through a thunderstorm and a sandstorm) the missions without weather aren't nearly as cool. The last mission of AC7 has you dogfighting a couple of drones and flying through a tunnel, while the last mission of AC6 literally has you flying down the barrel of a giant gun that is aimed at your country's capital city.
  
  
• Better music. This is definitely subjective, but other than AC7's amazing main theme that plays during missions 1, 15, and 19, the rest of the music is kinda forgettable. AC6 not only had the extremely memorable Fires of Liberation theme, but several other memorable tracks as well, such as those from the missions "Sipli Field," "Siege on Silvat," and the final mission "Chandelier".
  
  
• Aigaion is basically a bigger, cooler Arsenal Bird. While they're both large carrier aircraft that launch enemy fighters and cruise missiles at you and your allies, Aigaion is bigger, more powerful, and also serves as the home base for the awesomely named Strigon Squadron that serves as the game's main antagonists.
  
  
• More balanced selection of aircraft. While AC7 has more aircraft, from what i can tell they are mostly fighters, with only a handful of multiroles and two attackers. AC6 may only have 15 aircraft, but it has three attackers (one more than AC7), with the rest split fairly evenly between fighters and multiroles. I would much rather have an extra attacker or two than three different variations of the F-15.

EDIT: I would like to make it clear that i don't dislike AC7 at all. Even the worst Ace Combat games still tend to be good games, and i don't even think that AC7 is a bad Ace Combat game, just a bit of a step backwards from AC6. Hell, i even like Assault Horizon and think it's generally a pretty good game, despite it being considered one of the worst games in the series (although i absolutely hate the on-rails turret sections, which completely suck). I really hope that AC7 succeeds, because i really want to see an Ace Combat 8 (hopefully it won't take 12 years this time). Maybe if it does well enough Bamco will grace us with PC ports of 4, 5, 6, and Zero, although that seems pretty unlikely.

[Blackheart]

Haven't played AC6, so I can only compare to the PS2 classic trilogy...

Overall, I think AC7's story wasn't that bad but it was let down by weak characterisation and bad pacing. The first half is particularly bad and I had written it off as garbage before the latter missions salvaged it somewhat.

However, some of the changes they made to the gameplay kind of killed Ace Combat for me:

• AAA - much more effective to the point of being somewhat unavoidable but doing way less damage.
  
• The wretched new gun-sight.
  
• Enemy aircraft now always ignoring everyone else and take max performance evasive maneuvers in the vertical plane against you on all difficulties.

They are all pretty minor changes, but it just doesn't feel like AC to me anymore and left a pretty bad taste in my mouth, to the point that I will in all likelihood wait for AC8 to be bargain basement discounted before buying it.

First time I have lost interest in an AC title and dropped it before S-ranking Ace difficulty and unlocking everything.

[Android994]

引用自 Blackheart：

Haven't played AC6, so I can only compare to the PS2 classic trilogy...

Overall, I think AC7's story wasn't that bad but it was let down by weak characterisation and bad pacing. The first half is particularly bad and I had written it off as garbage before the latter missions salvaged it somewhat.

However, some of the changes they made to the gameplay kind of killed Ace Combat for me:

• AAA - much more effective to the point of being somewhat unavoidable but doing way less damage.
  
• The wretched new gun-sight.
  
• Enemy aircraft now always ignoring everyone else and take max performance evasive maneuvers in the vertical plane against you on all difficulties.

They are all pretty minor changes, but it just doesn't feel like AC to me anymore and left a pretty bad taste in my mouth, to the point that I will in all likelihood wait for AC8 to be bargain basement discounted before buying it.

First time I have lost interest in an AC title and dropped it before S-ranking Ace difficulty and unlocking everything.

An effect like that probably wouldn't affect the framerate though...

[Dino King]

Agreed!!!!! My only counterpoint is that I (personally) felt AC7 had more songs in the soundtrack that were solid, whereas 6 had plenty of powerhouses but there are quite a few songs that make me go meh.

HOWEVER, I agree with your point in all the other areas. My favorite part was the variability of having multiple objectives to complete, giving the game a massive amount of replayability.

[Android994]

引用自 Blackheart：

Haven't played AC6, so I can only compare to the PS2 classic trilogy...

Overall, I think AC7's story wasn't that bad but it was let down by weak characterisation and bad pacing. The first half is particularly bad and I had written it off as garbage before the latter missions salvaged it somewhat.

However, some of the changes they made to the gameplay kind of killed Ace Combat for me:

• AAA - much more effective to the point of being somewhat unavoidable but doing way less damage.
  
• The wretched new gun-sight.
  
• Enemy aircraft now always ignoring everyone else and take max performance evasive maneuvers in the vertical plane against you on all difficulties.

They are all pretty minor changes, but it just doesn't feel like AC to me anymore and left a pretty bad taste in my mouth, to the point that I will in all likelihood wait for AC8 to be bargain basement discounted before buying it.

First time I have lost interest in an AC title and dropped it before S-ranking Ace difficulty and unlocking everything.

Come on, it wasn't *that* bad...

[Android994]

引用自 Dino King：

Agreed!!!!! My only counterpoint is that I (personally) felt AC7 had more songs in the soundtrack that were solid, whereas 6 had plenty of powerhouses but there are quite a few songs that make me go meh.

HOWEVER, I agree with your point in all the other areas. My favorite part was the variability of having multiple objectives to complete, giving the game a massive amount of replayability.

Which songs didn't you like?

[Android994]

引用自 BrySkye：

AC6 always had a bit of a harder time than it really deserved, which I've always suspected was at least in part due to it being an Xbox 360 exclusive, when the series had been so closely associated with the Playstation brand for so long.

The story also got a bit of a hard shake as well.
It might not be the deepest thing, but honestly? I wouldn't say its any more cheesy or 'gringe' inducing than Ace Combat 5.
That game gets a hell of a pass and has been put on a pedestal that, honestly, I don't think it really deserves. Over time, and revisiting its PS4 remaster, a lot of its writing and performances are very ham fisted to the point that I can find my squad mates to be both annoying and hypocritical at times in their messages.

What AC6 had going for it was a larger sense of scale that's still unmatched.

Almost all the AC games will introduce one-off characters and little light hearted moments between your AWACS/Squadron and other allies in the stage. That's a series staple.
I think AC6 deserves credit for expanding on that picking up characters along the way, and them sticking with you.
The likes of Sky Kid, Avalanche, Windhover, AWACS Ghost Eye and Shamrock are with you throughout basically the entire game, and this builds up a sense of comradery that stands out in the series.
I can remember Warlock, Steel Gunners and the Dragon Busters, and that's impressive when you can remember ground units.

I still think Weapons of Mass Destruction has one of the greatest moments in the series, the sheer amount of enemies it throws at you.
Normally this is a setup for a forced "run away" situation, but no. You get cornered and have to "face the music".
Only for you allies to eventually show up whilst the Fires of Liberation theme kicks in.
That, for me, is some peak Ace Combat. The game over-using a cheesy catchphrase isn't going to ruin that.

AC7 has... a number of small issues, I'd say. Coherency is a problem, but it also just has so many ideas that it generally fails to execute very well combined with just a bit too much fanservice or pandering for its own good (looking at you, Mission 4).

Think about it. AC7 has us bounce between wingmates and allies quite often.
Count is the only character that is with you for more than 50% of the game. About 75%.
Yet almost all of his character development is done in the final 25% (following the death of Wiseman and the realisation that Trigger was innocent all along)

Talking about poor execution, let's look at the narrative tool that is a character death -
Take Wiseman. Count sums it up when he says Wiseman died for nothing.
I don't think anyone could try to claim his death, or that of Brownie, Champ, Full Band or Tabloid, can hold up to the likes of Chopper or even PJ. Nor the suspected death of Shamrock.
Our time with these characters is generally too limited to build up a sufficient connection for their deaths to really be significant.
Heck, Wiseman isn't even there with you on missions 13 and the preceding mission 14.
His death is MEANT to be a huge deal. The catalyst for Count changing and growing, even though he's spent most of the game prior to that being both cocky and whiny.
But it doesn't really come across as any more impactful than the 3 other pilots we've flown with that have already died by this point.

Ultimately, AC7 has a bit of a problem with lots of stuff happening, but only mentioned in passing, which makes it feel rushed. Sometimes even nonsensical.
The Kestrel II is mentioned in a briefing, only to next be mentioned in the debriefing that it sank. Whoop-de-do. That is blatantly obvious fan service that, ultimately, adds nothing.
One of the worst offenders IMO is Cossette's supposed death. Her dramatic jump from the space elevator that was part of the very first trailer, the explosion and her damaged helmet flying out of it for a brief few frames.
*Only for her to suddenly start talking to you, literally out of NOWHERE during the final mission.*
So wtf was the point of that cutscene?

That said, 6 did have a narrative problem with Strigon squadron. It did something very unusual in the series.
You can actually shoot down numerous Strigon pilots in the very first mission.
This is kind of a problem, in the sense that they never felt like the massive threat other rival aces have been. They just weren't a big deal. They never felt special.
AC04 ultimately remains the master of the enemy ace squadron.

If Ace Combat 6 had better dialog, voice acting, and the realistic weather effects from AC7, it would basically be the perfect Ace Combat game in my opinion.

[JtDarth]

引用自 Blackheart：

Haven't played AC6, so I can only compare to the PS2 classic trilogy...

Overall, I think AC7's story wasn't that bad but it was let down by weak characterisation and bad pacing. The first half is particularly bad and I had written it off as garbage before the latter missions salvaged it somewhat.

However, some of the changes they made to the gameplay kind of killed Ace Combat for me:

• AAA - much more effective to the point of being somewhat unavoidable but doing way less damage.
  
• The wretched new gun-sight.
  
• Enemy aircraft now always ignoring everyone else and take max performance evasive maneuvers in the vertical plane against you on all difficulties.

They are all pretty minor changes, but it just doesn't feel like AC to me anymore and left a pretty bad taste in my mouth, to the point that I will in all likelihood wait for AC8 to be bargain basement discounted before buying it.

First time I have lost interest in an AC title and dropped it before S-ranking Ace difficulty and unlocking everything.

If you find the AAA to be overeffective you aren't very skilled at the game. There are only a few sections of the game where the AA fire gets thick enough to be a real problem, and that can be very much countered via parts or just picking an appropriate special weapon, or even simply normal missiles at standoff.
The new gun sight does suck. It hops around too much and isn't accurate when it first enables, which wasn't a problem in previous games.
Enemy aircraft have always ignored pretty much everyone else. The main issue here is that it feels more pronounced, due to the way the friendly AI trails behind you when you fly aggressively (at least with mage and LRSSG, spare just doesn't even try to give the impression of teamwork or formations), and in the heavy decrease to damage that friendly AI has. The AI still overfocused on the player back in AC4, 5, and 0. They also still pulled max performance evasive manuvers most the time.
The difference with 7 is that the enemies that pull the max performance evasives the most, the drones, literally have better evasive performance than any player plane that isn't in a PSM, which requires the player to actually use some basic tactical thinking to take them on. Sol squadron and Mihaly are the same way. High-end planes used to their max.
At least they don't pull the ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ that the Yellows did in 04 where they are very literally undamageable until later missions, and borderline unhittable in those earlier ones. The Sol squadron also actually flies using advanced manuvers and shows some actual flight formations and tactics. The drones fly like computers, which is sorta the entire point.
Neither 5 nor 4 had enemies that really flew WELL. Some of the ones in zero did, using interesting ideas and tactics, but the actual flight capabilities of the ai left a lot to be desired.
4, 5, and zero, if using the same plane as the enemy ace squadrons, they become complete fodder, because they don't actually have very good ai. They are overly linear in their movements and actions. In 7 they can be predictable, with holes in their tactics, but they actually have some advanced manuvers in the arsenal, even if they tend to mess up the usage of post stall and make themselves an easy target.

I've not seen any worse performance out of 7 than out of previous games. As far as AA effectiveness goes, I had more issues with the Flak guns in 0 than I ever had with the AA in 7.

Your complaints about the AA seem more like you are complaining about a challenge, about the game making you have to come up with a tactic for dealing with them. The same from your complaint about hard evasives being pulled.



Of course, you turned around and admitted you didn't even bother to complete the game. You didn't bother to learn the mechanics so you could S-rank, nor did you bother completing the aircraft tree, by your own admittance. I'd say you decided to quit before even really giving the minor changes a chance. Rather than try to roll with it, you immediately decided it was worse because there were changes made from your memory of the PS2 games.

The game's formula hasn't changed much (not at all, really, when it comes to the core formula). What's changed is YOU as a player. Your tastes change as you age, and if your last outings were with the PS2 games, then you might be being blinded by nostalgia goggles and simply not enjoy AC as a whole anymore, only still enjoying the ps2 games because of the nostalgia and familiarity they bring.
I went through the same thing with a couple of franchises. Namely pokemon. I still go back and enjoy the hell out of the first 4 generations of games, but gen 5 and onward just feels sorta sour to me, despite lacking any real changes to the formula, and only minor, mostly optional changes to the rest, mega evos and fairy type shenanigans aside. I can't really name why it doesn't grip me the way it used to, not by any standard other than it feeling different.
I went through it with Forza as well. Still love the second game, still will pop it in to play every now and then, but more recent entries, even the non-horizon ones, just don't feel right, despite being the same game with a new coat of paint and the occasional new bell or whistle. Same thing with Gears of War. I didn't enjoy 3 as much as the first two, and it wasn't the game's fault. My interests had just shifted and I'd had enough of a gap that I lost investment in the story, so I couldn't rely on that to carry my interest through to the end.
Halo, on the other hand, was definitely altered horribly by 343. That one is squarely down to the changes made to the gameplay formula (they started calladootying it with Reach, but 343 went to a whole new level, shifting it way further away from it's arena shooter roots), as well as the massive shift in storytelling that effectively ruined multiple longstanding characters and contradicted it's own canon, as well as making the books required reading to really understand what was going on, rather than just extra gravy.

[Android994]

引用自 JtDarth：

引用自 Blackheart：

Haven't played AC6, so I can only compare to the PS2 classic trilogy...

Overall, I think AC7's story wasn't that bad but it was let down by weak characterisation and bad pacing. The first half is particularly bad and I had written it off as garbage before the latter missions salvaged it somewhat.

However, some of the changes they made to the gameplay kind of killed Ace Combat for me:

• AAA - much more effective to the point of being somewhat unavoidable but doing way less damage.
  
• The wretched new gun-sight.
  
• Enemy aircraft now always ignoring everyone else and take max performance evasive maneuvers in the vertical plane against you on all difficulties.

They are all pretty minor changes, but it just doesn't feel like AC to me anymore and left a pretty bad taste in my mouth, to the point that I will in all likelihood wait for AC8 to be bargain basement discounted before buying it.

First time I have lost interest in an AC title and dropped it before S-ranking Ace difficulty and unlocking everything.

If you find the AAA to be overeffective you aren't very skilled at the game. There are only a few sections of the game where the AA fire gets thick enough to be a real problem, and that can be very much countered via parts or just picking an appropriate special weapon, or even simply normal missiles at standoff.
The new gun sight does suck. It hops around too much and isn't accurate when it first enables, which wasn't a problem in previous games.
Enemy aircraft have always ignored pretty much everyone else. The main issue here is that it feels more pronounced, due to the way the friendly AI trails behind you when you fly aggressively (at least with mage and LRSSG, spare just doesn't even try to give the impression of teamwork or formations), and in the heavy decrease to damage that friendly AI has. The AI still overfocused on the player back in AC4, 5, and 0. They also still pulled max performance evasive manuvers most the time.
The difference with 7 is that the enemies that pull the max performance evasives the most, the drones, literally have better evasive performance than any player plane that isn't in a PSM, which requires the player to actually use some basic tactical thinking to take them on. Sol squadron and Mihaly are the same way. High-end planes used to their max.
At least they don't pull the ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ that the Yellows did in 04 where they are very literally undamageable until later missions, and borderline unhittable in those earlier ones. The Sol squadron also actually flies using advanced manuvers and shows some actual flight formations and tactics. The drones fly like computers, which is sorta the entire point.
Neither 5 nor 4 had enemies that really flew WELL. Some of the ones in zero did, using interesting ideas and tactics, but the actual flight capabilities of the ai left a lot to be desired.
4, 5, and zero, if using the same plane as the enemy ace squadrons, they become complete fodder, because they don't actually have very good ai. They are overly linear in their movements and actions. In 7 they can be predictable, with holes in their tactics, but they actually have some advanced manuvers in the arsenal, even if they tend to mess up the usage of post stall and make themselves an easy target.

I've not seen any worse performance out of 7 than out of previous games. As far as AA effectiveness goes, I had more issues with the Flak guns in 0 than I ever had with the AA in 7.

Your complaints about the AA seem more like you are complaining about a challenge, about the game making you have to come up with a tactic for dealing with them. The same from your complaint about hard evasives being pulled.



Of course, you turned around and admitted you didn't even bother to complete the game. You didn't bother to learn the mechanics so you could S-rank, nor did you bother completing the aircraft tree, by your own admittance. I'd say you decided to quit before even really giving the minor changes a chance. Rather than try to roll with it, you immediately decided it was worse because there were changes made from your memory of the PS2 games.

The game's formula hasn't changed much (not at all, really, when it comes to the core formula). What's changed is YOU as a player. Your tastes change as you age, and if your last outings were with the PS2 games, then you might be being blinded by nostalgia goggles and simply not enjoy AC as a whole anymore, only still enjoying the ps2 games because of the nostalgia and familiarity they bring.
I went through the same thing with a couple of franchises. Namely pokemon. I still go back and enjoy the hell out of the first 4 generations of games, but gen 5 and onward just feels sorta sour to me, despite lacking any real changes to the formula, and only minor, mostly optional changes to the rest, mega evos and fairy type shenanigans aside. I can't really name why it doesn't grip me the way it used to, not by any standard other than it feeling different.
I went through it with Forza as well. Still love the second game, still will pop it in to play every now and then, but more recent entries, even the non-horizon ones, just don't feel right, despite being the same game with a new coat of paint and the occasional new bell or whistle. Same thing with Gears of War. I didn't enjoy 3 as much as the first two, and it wasn't the game's fault. My interests had just shifted and I'd had enough of a gap that I lost investment in the story, so I couldn't rely on that to carry my interest through to the end.
Halo, on the other hand, was definitely altered horribly by 343. That one is squarely down to the changes made to the gameplay formula (they started calladootying it with Reach, but 343 went to a whole new level, shifting it way further away from it's arena shooter roots), as well as the massive shift in storytelling that effectively ruined multiple longstanding characters and contradicted it's own canon, as well as making the books required reading to really understand what was going on, rather than just extra gravy.

What did you think of AC6?

[JtDarth]

引用自 Android994：

引用自 JtDarth：

If you find the AAA to be overeffective you aren't very skilled at the game. There are only a few sections of the game where the AA fire gets thick enough to be a real problem, and that can be very much countered via parts or just picking an appropriate special weapon, or even simply normal missiles at standoff.
The new gun sight does suck. It hops around too much and isn't accurate when it first enables, which wasn't a problem in previous games.
Enemy aircraft have always ignored pretty much everyone else. The main issue here is that it feels more pronounced, due to the way the friendly AI trails behind you when you fly aggressively (at least with mage and LRSSG, spare just doesn't even try to give the impression of teamwork or formations), and in the heavy decrease to damage that friendly AI has. The AI still overfocused on the player back in AC4, 5, and 0. They also still pulled max performance evasive manuvers most the time.
The difference with 7 is that the enemies that pull the max performance evasives the most, the drones, literally have better evasive performance than any player plane that isn't in a PSM, which requires the player to actually use some basic tactical thinking to take them on. Sol squadron and Mihaly are the same way. High-end planes used to their max.
At least they don't pull the ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ that the Yellows did in 04 where they are very literally undamageable until later missions, and borderline unhittable in those earlier ones. The Sol squadron also actually flies using advanced manuvers and shows some actual flight formations and tactics. The drones fly like computers, which is sorta the entire point.
Neither 5 nor 4 had enemies that really flew WELL. Some of the ones in zero did, using interesting ideas and tactics, but the actual flight capabilities of the ai left a lot to be desired.
4, 5, and zero, if using the same plane as the enemy ace squadrons, they become complete fodder, because they don't actually have very good ai. They are overly linear in their movements and actions. In 7 they can be predictable, with holes in their tactics, but they actually have some advanced manuvers in the arsenal, even if they tend to mess up the usage of post stall and make themselves an easy target.

I've not seen any worse performance out of 7 than out of previous games. As far as AA effectiveness goes, I had more issues with the Flak guns in 0 than I ever had with the AA in 7.

Your complaints about the AA seem more like you are complaining about a challenge, about the game making you have to come up with a tactic for dealing with them. The same from your complaint about hard evasives being pulled.



Of course, you turned around and admitted you didn't even bother to complete the game. You didn't bother to learn the mechanics so you could S-rank, nor did you bother completing the aircraft tree, by your own admittance. I'd say you decided to quit before even really giving the minor changes a chance. Rather than try to roll with it, you immediately decided it was worse because there were changes made from your memory of the PS2 games.

The game's formula hasn't changed much (not at all, really, when it comes to the core formula). What's changed is YOU as a player. Your tastes change as you age, and if your last outings were with the PS2 games, then you might be being blinded by nostalgia goggles and simply not enjoy AC as a whole anymore, only still enjoying the ps2 games because of the nostalgia and familiarity they bring.
I went through the same thing with a couple of franchises. Namely pokemon. I still go back and enjoy the hell out of the first 4 generations of games, but gen 5 and onward just feels sorta sour to me, despite lacking any real changes to the formula, and only minor, mostly optional changes to the rest, mega evos and fairy type shenanigans aside. I can't really name why it doesn't grip me the way it used to, not by any standard other than it feeling different.
I went through it with Forza as well. Still love the second game, still will pop it in to play every now and then, but more recent entries, even the non-horizon ones, just don't feel right, despite being the same game with a new coat of paint and the occasional new bell or whistle. Same thing with Gears of War. I didn't enjoy 3 as much as the first two, and it wasn't the game's fault. My interests had just shifted and I'd had enough of a gap that I lost investment in the story, so I couldn't rely on that to carry my interest through to the end.
Halo, on the other hand, was definitely altered horribly by 343. That one is squarely down to the changes made to the gameplay formula (they started calladootying it with Reach, but 343 went to a whole new level, shifting it way further away from it's arena shooter roots), as well as the massive shift in storytelling that effectively ruined multiple longstanding characters and contradicted it's own canon, as well as making the books required reading to really understand what was going on, rather than just extra gravy.

What did you think of AC6?

I liked the overall scale of missions, and the gameplay was pretty good, but felt that it lacked severely in storytelling and character design. All the characters in it were completely flat, barring Voychek, who had some more depth, although you could also argue Pasternak. You had a bunch of characters, but they existed as nothing more than names, really. I think of, say, AC5's Hans Grimm, and my mind can immediately come up with a picture of his face, and numerous descriptive thoughts. Meanwhile, Windhover, Avalanche, etc? I recognize the name, but they have nothing of substance to them. Even AC04 had more memorable characters as part of the generic radio chatter. They stuck out a bit, and had actual personalities. Even as much as I dislike the anvilicious anti-war soapboxing done in AC5 and how stupid and easily preventable Chopper's loss was, I still remember the characters.

AC6, pretty much every character is static, with the only changes being related to nationalistic fervor and patriotism, which is not an individually defining trait.

The overall story is VERY bland, even from AC standards. AC04 had the whole 'view of the affected' thing going on, 0 was a look back at a critically important conflict, and managed to have some interesting philosophical bits in it. 5 had the whole behind the scenes stuff and the subterfuge to bring it to light. 7 had the story go an interesting direction, of past vs future. It wasn't really about the Erusea VS Osea conflict, but more about the potentials of modern tech in war, and how badly things can go wrong. The clash of the future and the present.
AC6? Very generic 'hey they attacked us, we're going to take our homeland back'. 04 had the next most generic story, but even it wasn't quite that straightforward, and went somewhere I found more interesting, with it's choice of storyteller and the humanization of the enemy. As I mentioned earlier, the only bit of 6's story that really interested me was the stuff with Voychek, the rest was so much noise to me.

Particular dislikes from AC6, gameplay wise? I can't really think of any, besides maybe some of the special skins and how they affect stats making other versions completely and utterly inferior. Stats should be independent of livery, TYVFM.

[devil make rye]

while i honestly feel like i can agree with most points in this, i wanted to come in just to say that
most of ace combat 6's music is sort of forgettable
maybe it's just me, because to me most of 6's music sounded really quiet and boring compared to a lot of 7's OSTs

[Android994]

引用自 JtDarth：

Even AC04 had more memorable characters as part of the generic radio chatter.

This is objectively not true. Other than SkyEye and Yellow Squadron, there are basically no actual characters who are part of the radio chatter. As i said in earlier comments, i am currently playing through AC4 using emulation, and about half way through the campaign it suddenly occured to me that i have played through all these missions before on my PS2 and had simply forgot about them. That's how unmemorable the story in AC4 was for me.

[Android994]

引用自 devil make rye：

while i honestly feel like i can agree with most points in this, i wanted to come in just to say that
most of ace combat 6's music is sort of forgettable
maybe it's just me, because to me most of 6's music sounded really quiet and boring compared to a lot of 7's OSTs

For me, it's the other way around. The only song i can actually remember from AC7 is the main theme that plays during missions 1, 15, and 19.

[JtDarth]

引用自 Android994：

引用自 JtDarth：

Even AC04 had more memorable characters as part of the generic radio chatter.

This is objectively not true. Other than SkyEye and Yellow Squadron, there are basically no actual characters who are part of the radio chatter. As i said in earlier comments, i am currently playing through AC4 using emulation, and about half way through the campaign it suddenly occured to me that i have played through all these missions before on my PS2 and had simply forgot about them. That's how unmemorable the story in AC4 was for me.

Might wanna look up the term 'objectively' before using it.
Omega 11. Jean-Louis, Gene, speech guy, Kei Nagase (the version from AC2 actually does show up as a civilian pilot in 04). These are people I remember quotes from, or can outright hear their voices if I try, from AC04. None of the vast supporting cast in 6 really stick out to me, because aside from the tank crew, Voychek, and the chick who gives the chandelier info, they are all basically the same damn person. They have nothing to distinguish them except for the existance of a picture in picture portrait. We learn nothing about them as people, beyond the general patriotism. Shamrock lost his wife (IIRC), but the others? Nothing. No personality, no funny mannerisms or other such things. Even the AWACS was bland as hell.

[aG| Wardog]

引用自 JtDarth：

引用自 Android994：

This is objectively not true. Other than SkyEye and Yellow Squadron, there are basically no actual characters who are part of the radio chatter. As i said in earlier comments, i am currently playing through AC4 using emulation, and about half way through the campaign it suddenly occured to me that i have played through all these missions before on my PS2 and had simply forgot about them. That's how unmemorable the story in AC4 was for me.

Might wanna look up the term 'objectively' before using it.
Omega 11. Jean-Louis, Gene, speech guy, Kei Nagase (the version from AC2 actually does show up as a civilian pilot in 04). These are people I remember quotes from, or can outright hear their voices if I try, from AC04. None of the vast supporting cast in 6 really stick out to me, because aside from the tank crew, Voychek, and the chick who gives the chandelier info, they are all basically the same damn person. They have nothing to distinguish them except for the existance of a picture in picture portrait. We learn nothing about them as people, beyond the general patriotism. Shamrock lost his wife (IIRC), but the others? Nothing. No personality, no funny mannerisms or other such things. Even the AWACS was bland as hell.

I'm with you there. There are more memorable voicelines from allied pilots in 04 than there are in 6, who while not bad, just aren't as good. Shamrock did lose his wife, and kid I believe.

[SAAM_I_AM]

Ace Combat 6 multiplayer was much much better. The lobby on ac7 sucks. No voice chat? Really?