Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Randy1 on August 05, 2013, 11:31:54 AM
-
I have noticed that my greatest enjoyment in AH comes when I am more involved in the simulation side of AH rather than the game side. I find this especially true when their is a team effort going to defend or capture a base or one of Earl's pickup missions.
I do like the game side so if I get blasted out of the air, I just reup but the addiction I think comes from the simulation side of AH.
Do you see AH as more game than simulation or more simulation than game?
-
I believe HiTech said something like it was a game using a simulation.
-
Game.
Simulation is DCS. Game is AH.
-
What HTC supposedly said, a game using simulations. simulation would be even more realistic though as far as aircraft modeling and tank modeling we aren't so bad.
-
I have noticed that my greatest enjoyment in AH comes when I am more involved in the simulation side of AH rather than the game side. I find this especially true when their is a team effort going to defend or capture a base or one of Earl's pickup missions.
I do like the game side so if I get blasted out of the air, I just reup but the addiction I think comes from the simulation side of AH.
Do you see AH as more game than simulation or more simulation than game?
:airplane: I had it explained to me this way: Hi Tech wanted an on-line flight simulator, based on WW2 aircraft, with the goal of having "stick and Rudder" air to air combat! Then as time passed, other things and goals were established to please the never ending new guys, hence you have what you see today.
I do enjoy the re-enactment missions, sometimes we have a "dialog" between crew members and air traffic control, just to add some atmosphere to the mission. Occsionally I add some kind of sound effects to go along with the mish, such as air raid sirens, general alarm calls when doing Navy mish's and sometimes, let the guys actually hear "Axis Sally" and Tokyo Rose spilling their vile BS.
-
I enjoy t quite a bit when we fly within my squad because we use terminology and tactics as opposed to just trying to fight and survive. Part of it is because the terminology is really good for short comms discipline and part of it is just the immersion into the simulation. I wish there was more of a push for realistic additions to the game and integrity.
-
Early on I called it a Simulation (It felt like one when I was a noob) and was verbally smacked down by HT informing me it was a game.
Now it feels more like a game, throw the dice , move , repeat.
Everything was new like a new love but now more like a 20 year marriage to your best friend but you still love her and can't think of leaving remembering all the good times. :D
-
I think game that uses simulation is very accurate. Without delving into the offline options, the online play offers the MAs and DAs as a part of the sandbox game aspect, and for more simulated or historicaly accurate play you have the AvA, FSOs and Scenarios.
Probabley why so much reliance in the MA-sandbox is on the individual maps, as they ultimatley determine what you'll (individual or organised group) use and how you aproach a given situation or objective (which depend on the map or it's current state). This also relates to side switching too, which I'm not argueing against, since being stuck on one (loosing or winning) side/situation can severely limit your freedom of choices.
-
I had not considered the point of view of it being a game that uses simulation. That does seem to blanket most of AH. It may well be that AH's build philosophy is what holds players year after year.
I appreciate the replies.
-
Simulation dumbed down too make a game?
-
Simulation dumbed down too make a game?
I think it has only been dumbed down to fit your computer (2D screen, keyboard+mouse+joystick input, the ability to answer the door or go to the bathroom without crashing) or to help the new/inexperienced.
-
I have had the most fun in the scenario events that I've flown, so closer to the simulation side of gameplay I think :airplane:
-
It's a game.
ack-ack
-
Hop in a simulator one time and you'll have your answer. ;)
-
I look at this game as sitting in a bar drinking a couple with a few friends bs'ing about this awesome fifth you got into and barely came out alive.
semp
-
The flight physics feel quite a bit more realistic than FS9/FSX, but there isn't as much that has been modeled.
I imagine thinking of it as a game that uses aspects of a simulation (namely, the flight models) is the most accurate.
-
Game.
Simulation is DCS. Game is AH.
AH is a better WW2 air combat simulator than DCS. DCS fails to give any cues for G load. You have to look at the G gauge in DCS. You don't dogfight looking at gauges. DCS is a better cockpit simulator but that's not what AH is trying to do. DCS does best with modern aircraft where your key data is on the HUD. For large scale simulation like the BOB scenario there is nothing like AH.
-
To me it is a chance to climb into one of my favorite airplanes and play tag with a bunch of other airplane lovers.
-
AH is a better WW2 air combat simulator than DCS. DCS fails to give any cues for G load. You have to look at the G gauge in DCS. You don't dogfight looking at gauges. DCS is a better cockpit simulator but that's not what AH is trying to do. DCS does best with modern aircraft where your key data is on the HUD. For large scale simulation like the BOB scenario there is nothing like AH.
Eh, simulation for me is where everything is sacrificed for the sake of realism, including gameplay. DCS might not have the best gameplay but it's as close the real thing as you can get without flying a real A10/P51/Ka50/Su-25. The four biggest sims I can think of is DCS for planes, Arma 3 for infantry, Silent Hunter for subs, and iRacing for cars.
AH to me is a game with sim-level flight models. Most realism factors are taken out for gameplay reasons.
Il-2 Cliffs of Dover and Rise of Flight are what I call in betweens. Il-2 has the cockpit accuracy of DCS, and all the engine management configurations, but their flight model feels like crap. Rise of Flight flight model seems to strive to be as accurate as possible, yet everything is simple to configure that I can't really even name it as a sim. Whether it's simple because the planes themselves are simple (hell, some of them don't even have a speedometer), or the developers dumbed it down, I don't know, but it's extremely easy to jump into Rise of Flight compared to DCS even though they both strive for as much realism as possible.
-
simulation would be even more realistic though
Simulation dumbed down too make a game?
Hop in a simulator one time and you'll have your answer. ;)
verbally smacked down by HT informing me it was a game.
Y'all can call it whatever you want to, but you can't change Websters.
In ww2 they put pilots in a wooden box with a few gauges and a teeter totter underneath and called it a simulation.
There is no definition of simulation that says what features are required.
Does anyone know how detailed the first 3D simulation the US air force used was? I'll wager it wasn't as complex as AH.
It's a fun frkn simulation!!!
-
AH is a better WW2 air combat simulator than DCS. DCS fails to give any cues for G load. You have to look at the G gauge in DCS. You don't dogfight looking at gauges. DCS is a better cockpit simulator but that's not what AH is trying to do. DCS does best with modern aircraft where your key data is on the HUD. For large scale simulation like the BOB scenario there is nothing like AH.
I consider DCS to be more of a 'study' sim, like Falcon 4.0 and Jane's F-15.
ack-ack
-
:banana: :banana: :banana: :banana: :banana: It is truly is a stimulation !!! :banana: :banana: :banana: :banana: :neener: :neener: :banana: :banana: :banana: :neener: :neener: :x :x :x :x
-
Y'all can call it whatever you want to, but you can't change Websters.
In ww2 they put pilots in a wooden box with a few gauges and a teeter totter underneath and called it a simulation.
There is no definition of simulation that says what features are required.
Does anyone know how detailed the first 3D simulation the US air force used was? I'll wager it wasn't as complex as AH.
It's a fun frkn simulation!!!
I agree with what you are saying. Along with your statement what many people miss , is that the word simulation by it's self is meaningless. Because the would simulator, must be accompanied by a classification.
Obviously AH is not a dish water simulator. Also the next question is what is a product trying to simulate, and why. Many simulators are made simply to learn system management. The feel of flight, and the edges of the flight envelope are completely irreverent. An IFR simulator would not need much world detail, but the gauge placement would be incredibly important.
You can also not just assume recreating all details will make an accurate simulation. Many times an overall effect must bee looked at, as an example there we people during the war dedicated to provide intercept information to pilots, so some way must be found provide the information those people provided.
And also it must never be forgotten that AH is a game. It's primary purpose is to provide entertainment. At some times adding extreme simulation detail & accuracy to part of the game provides entertainment. Other times adding things do nothing be detract from fun, (example having to wait for oil temp to reach temp before take off, I.E. wait 5 mins on the run way). I do this on cold days in my RV, I don't find it enjoyable in the RV either.
Adjustments must be made for the equipment you a using. The lack of tactile feed back on a computer makes some things much more difficult then real airplanes. The joy stick alone works nothing like a real plane stick. Hence trimming a computer is far more difficult then trimming a real plane.
HiTech
-
Wait.?!? AH is not real.... :uhoh
-
Neither, this game is reality ! :noid
-
Folks, if you'd like to try out something that is much closer to simulation of WWII battles, please join us for the upcoming "Battle of Britain" scenario.
Scenarios are events that are based on historical battles. If you haven't already, you should try at least one to see another aspect of game play.
Battle of Britain runs for four Saturdays in September, starting Sept 7, with start times of 3 pm Eastern.
Here is a pictorial after-action report from one of the days of a past scenario:
http://electraforge.com/brooke/flightsims/scenarios/201102_battleOverGermany/aar_frame1.htm
Also, there are other events between MA and scenarios. "This Day in WWII", SEC, and Snapshots are events also based on WWII battles, but less structure and realism than scenarios; and there are FSO's for squads. The calendar shows you when they run:
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php?action=calendar
-
I agree with what you are saying. Along with your statement what many people miss , is that the word simulation by it's self is meaningless. Because the would simulator, must be accompanied by a classification.
Obviously AH is not a dish water simulator. Also the next question is what is a product trying to simulate, and why. Many simulators are made simply to learn system management. The feel of flight, and the edges of the flight envelope are completely irreverent. An IFR simulator would not need much world detail, but the gauge placement would be incredibly important.
You can also not just assume recreating all details will make an accurate simulation. Many times an overall effect must bee looked at, as an example there we people during the war dedicated to provide intercept information to pilots, so some way must be found provide the information those people provided.
And also it must never be forgotten that AH is a game. It's primary purpose is to provide entertainment. At some times adding extreme simulation detail & accuracy to part of the game provides entertainment. Other times adding things do nothing be detract from fun, (example having to wait for oil temp to reach temp before take off, I.E. wait 5 mins on the run way). I do this on cold days in my RV, I don't find it enjoyable in the RV either.
Adjustments must be made for the equipment you a using. The lack of tactile feed back on a computer makes some things much more difficult then real airplanes. The joy stick alone works nothing like a real plane stick. Hence trimming a computer is far more difficult then trimming a real plane.
HiTech
Aside from all the ceaseless echoing of "Hitech said it's a game," there are plenty of clues in the game design that demonstrate you get the difference and what your goal was from the start.
I'm just tired of the "it's not a simulator" spaz attacks. I am not even close to the type that takes the simulation aspect to it's full stride. But if I ever do feel the need, Brooke has plenty of garage sale signs to point me in the right direction.
I do have an appreciation for his effort and believe it's an undeveloped aspect of the game. I didn't participate in scenarios mostly because of the scheduling and inconvenience of it. If it was a integral aspect of the MA, I might participate half the time.
Those types of players should not be excluded from the MA because players without enough foresight to imagine that a more realistic representation of warfare could coincide with a free for all type game play and even benefit the game.
Take the new formation command for example. I've heard folks enjoy it. I've also seen someone suggest that it makes the game too easy or gamey because it takes the "skill" out of the game. And I agree to a point, but just like your engine warm up example, it's a relatively unimportant shortcut.
It is exactly like things I see in your design to make the game more enjoyable and less tedious yet it is indicative of the desire for more "simulation" type features. My definition of simulation being something that mimics all or some of the experience of the air war; and I don't believe that excludes the possibility of fun for the less enthusiastic crowd.
-
Trick question. Simulation is a genre of video GAME
-
Don't laugh...but I think it makes me a better pilot! I'm listed as one of the smoothest landing pilots verified by FOQA!
Flifast
-
this is a game??? :huh i thought it was real life!!
-
Don't laugh...but I think it makes me a better pilot! I'm listed as one of the smoothest landing pilots verified by FOQA!
Flifast
I believe that is true sir. I read somewhere video games make your senses tuned. Something like that. Very cool indeed if so.
-
Don't laugh...but I think it makes me a better pilot! I'm listed as one of the smoothest landing pilots verified by FOQA!
Flifast
It does help driving too. Friday I was hit in the bed of my truck by a woman under the influence of something. She ran a red light as I was turning. In that moment I caught her speeding pickup coming to me, I knew I had to clear her path much the same as a 262 attack so I went heavy on the gas. i didn't clear her speeding truck but I did get my cab out of her way. She crashed into the bed between the two gas tanks. The bed crushing absorbed a lot of the energy making it less of an accident than if she hit the cab of my truck. Her problem is she fled the accident scene but she could not out run a fine young man on a motorcycle. The police caught up to her just as she crossed into the next county.
The downside was I just had picked up a new dishwasher from Lowes. it went up out of the holding straps and took a hard hit when it landed.
-
Wait.?!? AH is not real.... :uhoh
Real enough as long as you stay ported into HiTech's Matrix.
-
this isn't real life? I was hiding in a barn for days waiting for cons to leave! I DONT WANNA DIE!!!! :cry
-
I work at a steel mill and when I go into the slab yards full of 20 and 30 ton steel slabs sometimes I'll look up to see the over head crane and think to myself "careful he might vulch you".
semp
-
Trick question. Simulation is a genre of video GAME
:huh When you can properly classify a question, you might be qualified to classify Aces High....
But probably not. You helped prove my unstated point though, thanks :D