Not Again

[JoDoherty2343]

God Im getting so sick of these aircraft games that give the fighter pilots like 100 missles. That is so stupid and unrealistic, I was hoping they would do this like over g and make it so you can only hold as much as the aircraft actually could, then have to go to a airfield to restock. that was awesome but hawx is more like arcade style to me. Please ubisoft fix this

[Claudeboy_36]

There are already threads like this and if you don't like it then just leave they won't change the gameplay the game is coming this September.

[MPSSC]

if ubi game designers think that they make another AC will get the most money,we can stop waiting right now.

BTW,one of my friends who is not a flight game fan(but he likes AC 6),his comment about HAWX demo after watching it:
"it just looks like another AC,but worse.
(about with too many missiles and a missile can
destory both air and ground targets)
especially when the ERS is off,i can't see anything in the video,it's too chaotic.
i only can hear the sound like"warning""missile"."

[DR-longbow1]

another AC?

i thought of it as a clone, but worse also(experiance from AC4, 5, zero, X), 2 missiles to take down aircraft, enemy ace aircraft in formation then breaks to engage, yeah reminds me of AC4 Stonehenge mission

only difference i see is that it is in the real world, that weird yellow triangle thing and that chaotic dogfight camera thing

[Mig-29]

I want the game to be easy to learn and arcadish. I hope H.a.w.x will be similar to ace combat in terms of flight handling and characteristics. The weapons however should have a bit more depth to them maybe not such a large missile loadout but a sizable one. And missiles should require a lock on before they can track enemy targets.

I also hope that there will be third person views with hud and crosshairs to fight from unlike most flying games which don't have third person views that are suitable for fighting from.

Landings and takeoffs should also be included but shouldn't be ultra realistic.

Don't make this to much like LO-MAC Ubi. The PC needs a good and polished modern dogfighting game thats easy to learn and play.

Simply Cannot wait to fly that Mig-29 and Mig-27!

Edit: I must admit I do not think it would be too good if the game were too arcadish (completely arcade was never my intention) but it should at least be easy fly and control the plane itself. The controls should be configurable to suit the needs of sim players and arcade players. The game should also incorporate the basic effects of flight like stalls and such. I want the game to be easily accessible to all players.

[Claudeboy_36]

I thought AC6 and Over G was boring but HAWX looks amazing and fun to play.

[Icecube1137]

**** that
I agree with the TC
I am not going to buy this game, for the same reason I didnt buy AC6.

I have not seen a SINGLE realistic flight sim on the 360 since OVER G which is quite annoying.

Although IL2 Sturmovik is coming to 360 I heard, and that is a pretty good realistic flight sim.

[netflame5]

yea, I have IL-2 for the computer, and it is one of the best flight sims I have ever played. If you think it is easy though, you are sadly mistaken my friend.

[JoDoherty2343]

Thank You Ice, I want the game to be fun but I want it to be realistic, no plane but a bomber can hold a hundred missles, its stupid and unrealistic. I want a mix between ace combat and over g. I thought over g was cool because you had to actually go back and refuel and restock ammo, ace combat sucks becaue u have like a million missles and never run out. thats why im not gonna by this game, to bad ubi used to be known for making great games, they dropped the ball on this one. Pretty soon there gonna turn into ea making 100s of games and only 10% are actually good.

[johna713]

like in over g the easy mode is like ace combat, infinite ammo..
and when u put it in expert mode, there is limited ammo, and hell mode, s*** is hard, u get to carry only 4 missiles, and u have to fly A S**** plane

[sniper_five]

while I don't share any of your negative thoughts I would ask those of you posting against this game because of similarities to AC a couple of questions. only because they have crossed my mind as well, the whole 78 missles, 2 and three to bring down planes, unrealistic flying machines and the like.

keep in mind I have had the same thoughts as you now. if you wanted a realistic combat flight simulator, how much fun would it be to have expendible fuel tanks, VERY limited amounts of armourments, speaking of missles and bombs that are compatable with a specific aircrafts load.

imagine you start a mission with lets say for arguments sake 4 bombs, laser guided, free fall, whatever and 4 lock on type missles, and your basic load of gun ammo. missions would be short and sweet and not a lot of fun. you have to have a sense of realism to understand where I am going with this. you would spend WAY more time flying around than in any sort of action.

this post will probably get drilled because it was not fully understood. I am with you guys on the unrealistic weapons loads. I just don't see how you can produce a flight combat simulator with realistic aircraft load characteristics and make it fun.

I will say that if this game is anything like AC I will purchase it simply because XBOX purchased AC and I have nothing for the PS3. I liked Blazin Angels to an extent but I always found time to play AC no matter how old it got.

[Mig-29]

Originally posted by sniper_five:
while I don't share any of your negative thoughts I would ask those of you posting against this game because of similarities to AC a couple of questions. only because they have crossed my mind as well, the whole 78 missles, 2 and three to bring down planes, unrealistic flying machines and the like.

keep in mind I have had the same thoughts as you now. if you wanted a realistic combat flight simulator, how much fun would it be to have expendible fuel tanks, VERY limited amounts of armourments, speaking of missles and bombs that are compatable with a specific aircrafts load.

imagine you start a mission with lets say for arguments sake 4 bombs, laser guided, free fall, whatever and 4 lock on type missles, and your basic load of gun ammo. missions would be short and sweet and not a lot of fun. you have to have a sense of realism to understand where I am going with this. you would spend WAY more time flying around than in any sort of action.

this post will probably get drilled because it was not fully understood. I am with you guys on the unrealistic weapons loads. I just don't see how you can produce a flight combat simulator with realistic aircraft load characteristics and make it fun.

I will say that if this game is anything like AC I will purchase it simply because XBOX purchased AC and I have nothing for the PS3. I liked Blazin Angels to an extent but I always found time to play AC no matter how old it got.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif

[MPSSC]

Originally posted by Mig-29:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by sniper_five:
while I don't share any of your negative thoughts I would ask those of you posting against this game because of similarities to AC a couple of questions. only because they have crossed my mind as well, the whole 78 missles, 2 and three to bring down planes, unrealistic flying machines and the like.

keep in mind I have had the same thoughts as you now. if you wanted a realistic combat flight simulator, how much fun would it be to have expendible fuel tanks, VERY limited amounts of armourments, speaking of missles and bombs that are compatable with a specific aircrafts load.

imagine you start a mission with lets say for arguments sake 4 bombs, laser guided, free fall, whatever and 4 lock on type missles, and your basic load of gun ammo. missions would be short and sweet and not a lot of fun. you have to have a sense of realism to understand where I am going with this. you would spend WAY more time flying around than in any sort of action.

this post will probably get drilled because it was not fully understood. I am with you guys on the unrealistic weapons loads. I just don't see how you can produce a flight combat simulator with realistic aircraft load characteristics and make it fun.

I will say that if this game is anything like AC I will purchase it simply because XBOX purchased AC and I have nothing for the PS3. I liked Blazin Angels to an extent but I always found time to play AC no matter how old it got.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/3981007546/m/5021044766

It's very confusing.
In this topic,you want realistic physics and loadout,but right now you support the opinion that the planes have unlimited ammo??

Back to the loadout problem,let's look at GRAW/Splinter cell/R6 VEGAS,Is there unlimited ammo in this three games???
Even the ammo is limited,are these game not fun??

Totally just imitating other success doesn't mean that it's the only way of making money.
Did GRAW/R6 VEGAS/Splinter Cell totally imitate other games??NO!but they are still good.

[Mig-29]

Originally posted by MPSSC:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Mig-29:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by sniper_five:
while I don't share any of your negative thoughts I would ask those of you posting against this game because of similarities to AC a couple of questions. only because they have crossed my mind as well, the whole 78 missles, 2 and three to bring down planes, unrealistic flying machines and the like.

keep in mind I have had the same thoughts as you now. if you wanted a realistic combat flight simulator, how much fun would it be to have expendible fuel tanks, VERY limited amounts of armourments, speaking of missles and bombs that are compatable with a specific aircrafts load.

imagine you start a mission with lets say for arguments sake 4 bombs, laser guided, free fall, whatever and 4 lock on type missles, and your basic load of gun ammo. missions would be short and sweet and not a lot of fun. you have to have a sense of realism to understand where I am going with this. you would spend WAY more time flying around than in any sort of action.

this post will probably get drilled because it was not fully understood. I am with you guys on the unrealistic weapons loads. I just don't see how you can produce a flight combat simulator with realistic aircraft load characteristics and make it fun.

I will say that if this game is anything like AC I will purchase it simply because XBOX purchased AC and I have nothing for the PS3. I liked Blazin Angels to an extent but I always found time to play AC no matter how old it got.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/3981007546/m/5021044766

It's very confusing.
In this topic,you want realistic physics and loadout,but right now you support the opinion that the planes have unlimited ammo??

Back to the loadout problem,let's look at GRAW/Splinter cell/R6 VEGAS,Is there unlimited ammo in this three games???
Even the ammo is limited,are these game not fun??

Totally just imitating other success doesn't mean that it's the only way of making money.
Did GRAW/R6 VEGAS/Splinter Cell totally imitate other games??NO!but they are still good. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Umm where does it say I want infinite ammo? I agree with the overall point he is trying to make. I do want planes to have realistic loadouts but I also welcome unrealistic loadouts aswell.

I do support the option to have a 100% realistic loudout which is kind of like 6 or 8 missiles. It will make you think twice before you choose an airplane in MP.

Edit: made changes to my post

Edit: Does anyone know what engine the game will be using? Is it using the Lo-Mac engine?

[MPSSC]

Originally posted by Mig-29:
Umm where does it say I want infinite ammo? I agree with the overall point he is trying to make. I do want planes to have realistic loadouts but I also welcome unrealistic loadouts aswell.

I do support the option to have a 100% realistic loudout which is kind of like 6 or 8 missiles. It will make you think twice before you choose an airplane in MP.

Edit: made changes to my post

Edit: Does anyone know what engine the game will be using? Is it using the Lo-Mac engine?

sorry,I apologize for misapprehending your opinions.

[Mig-29]

Originally posted by MPSSC:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Mig-29:
Umm where does it say I want infinite ammo? I agree with the overall point he is trying to make. I do want planes to have realistic loadouts but I also welcome unrealistic loadouts aswell.

I do support the option to have a 100% realistic loudout which is kind of like 6 or 8 missiles. It will make you think twice before you choose an airplane in MP.

Edit: made changes to my post

Edit: Does anyone know what engine the game will be using? Is it using the Lo-Mac engine?

sorry,I apologize for misapprehending your opinions. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

np

[Lennart_970]

Well, maybe u can choose between easy and hard. Easy means: more missles. Hard means: a realistic amount of missels. Ever tought about that?

[sniper_five]

MPSSC, I guess my overall point of my post was to point out and state that I too have wondered what fun a realistic payload for a specific aircraft would be. in a single player enviornment you would be flying for ever to get to your targets, unload, avoid danger and return. no one would buy a game that forces you to fly for 10 minutes, attack for 30 seconds, and then fly out for 10 minutes. If you had a Raptor, you could all but wipe out the enemy without them ever knowing what hit them in the air and ground. Would that be fun??

Flight Combat Simulators must be constructed in the mannor of games such as AC. I would really enjoy a realistic/authentic game, but the masses wouldn't.

I just hope they force you to land and take off everytime, refuel in air, land on carriers and that sort of thing. In doing that make it more difficult than easy. I always hate when the level is over and you can't buzz the tower before landing.

[MPSSC]

Originally posted by sniper_five:
MPSSC, I guess my overall point of my post was to point out and state that I too have wondered what fun a realistic payload for a specific aircraft would be. in a single player enviornment you would be flying for ever to get to your targets, unload, avoid danger and return. no one would buy a game that forces you to fly for 10 minutes, attack for 30 seconds, and then fly out for 10 minutes. If you had a Raptor, you could all but wipe out the enemy without them ever knowing what hit them in the air and ground. Would that be fun??

Flight Combat Simulators must be constructed in the mannor of games such as AC. I would really enjoy a realistic/authentic game, but the masses wouldn't.

I just hope they force you to land and take off everytime, refuel in air, land on carriers and that sort of thing. In doing that make it more difficult than easy. I always hate when the level is over and you can't buzz the tower before landing.

I'm pretty sure that you didn't play the F-22 LIGHTNING III.it's a excellent example of showing that how an game is fun with limited ammo.
in this game,the F-22 has 'almost' realistic payload(GBU-31/32 data is wrong,in this game,GBU-31 is 1000lb and GBU-32 is 2000lb),and there are many air/ground targets to kill.
but the game designers diminish some of the F-22 stealth(made F-22 can be locked by enemy fighters' radar and shoot within 20 nm),and make the take off-engage-landing for supply circle much more short due to lying the airbase much close to the frontline.
if you think that flying to the objectives wasts too much time,you can make every moments in the game 6 times than usual(time also 6 times faster).
when you are out of ammo and fuel,you have no choises but to go back for supply,there are always Migs behind your tail.
for some of hardcore sim fans,it's just a sir shooting game.but it's missions are still dangerous and exciting and very fun.

so,why 'unlimited ammo' is the only answer of making the air combat game fun??

[sniper_five]

I'm pretty sure that you didn't play the F-22 LIGHTNING III.it's a excellent example of showing that how an game is fun with limited ammo.
in this game,the F-22 has 'almost' realistic payload(GBU-31/32 data is wrong,in this game,GBU-31 is 1000lb and GBU-32 is 2000lb),and there are many air/ground targets to kill.
but the game designers diminished some of the F-22 stealth(made F-22 can be locked by enemy fighters' radar and shoot within 20 nm),and made the take off-engage-landing for supply circle much more short due to lying the airbase much close to the frontline.
for some of hardcore sim fans,it's just a sir shooting game.but it's missions are still dangerous and exciting and very fun.

so,why 'unlimited ammo' is the only answer of making the air combat game fun??

No I haven't. I don't play on the PC. Strictly counsel based player. I would love to play a game with realistic payloads, missions and objectives. My opinion is based on general gamers. I just think in order to keep intrest that is why excessive payloads are available.