Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Skyguns MKII on July 01, 2025, 03:49:48 PM
-
1. Address Outdated Graphics and UI
Current problem: The game looks and feels old, especially when compared to modern flight sims like War Thunder, IL-2: Great Battles, or even DCS World.
Fix: A serious visual overhaul with improved UI/UX design would attract newer players and make the experience smoother.
2. Modernize the Business Model
Current model: Monthly subscription ($15.00) limits the player base in today’s free-to-play-dominated market.
Better strategy:
Free-to-play core game.
DLCs or battle passes for planes, cosmetics, or scenarios.
Optional subscription for hardcore players (e.g., private arenas, ranked events, mod tools).
3. Revamp Player Retention and Onboarding
Problem: Steep learning curve, poor tutorials, and lack of early guidance drive away new players.
Solution:
Intuitive tutorials and training missions.
AI co-op scenarios to ease into multiplayer.
Achievement-based progression system to keep players invested.
4. Lean Into Community and Modding
Modding tools and a Steam Workshop page to expand content.
5. Bring It to Modern Platforms
Steam integration was a good start, but they could go further:
Console support (Xbox Series X/S could handle it).
Cross-platform multiplayer.
VR support to tap into the growing sim VR community.
6. Strategic Marketing
Partner with aviation streamers, YouTubers, and combat sim influencers.
Host special events or historical campaigns that tie into real-world anniversaries (e.g., Battle of Britain week).
Bottom Line:
Aces High III can absolutely make a comeback—but only if it modernizes and pivots to match the expectations of today’s gaming audience. Its flight model and community are solid foundations—it just needs new paint, a better business model, and stronger first impressions.
-
We just did this in 1000 other threads.
Nobody has the time, immense funding or any of the other ridiculous resources to make any of that happen.
-
We just did this in 1000 other threads.
Nobody has the time, immense funding or any of the other ridiculous resources to make any of that happen.
Closed mouths dont get fed :old:
Its a response... but some of it is absolutely possible.
-
All that would mean just developing a new game altogether.
-
Not sure who you are sky but you're beating a dead horse..
Just have to look at the bbs and see it's already been discussed repeatedly..
But if it's discussed just one more time I am sure something will change... :banana: :joystick:
Eagler
-
But if it's discussed just one more time I am sure something will change... :banana: :joystick:
Eagler
+1
-
Closed mouths dont get fed :old:
Its a response... but some of it is absolutely possible.
And apparently open mouths are repeatedly ignored
-
We just did this in 1000 other threads.
Nobody has the time, immense funding or any of the other ridiculous resources to make any of that happen.
And if they did, realistically they would simply write a different game, on a modern graphics engine like Unity or UE, and target a younger audience with a longer shelf-life, more open minds, and less historical baggage of "that's not the way we have always done things since AW!"
-
All that would mean just developing a new game altogether.
I had had such high hopes for Pacific War. I had hoped they were about to take an new path with SP support, and a Tour of Duty like MP career mode.
I'd love to run some US and IJ carrier pilot careers in MP. Using the Episodic Staged Mission tech they were developing for nice tight gameplay 2 hr. mini-scenarios. A beginning, a middle, and an end within a possible game session duration.
But that isn't what they went for. I'm not sure what they were going for but it wasn't clicking with me.
-
Ban Tempests and Give Troops Bazookas is all I am asking for. :airplane:
-
It’s POSSIBLE to import these assets snd objects to UE, C++ would need to be twesked for modern C++. But with a proprietary engine it may not be possible.
Frankly with all the skills here a company could be created to build in UR, its easier, but that could be more open to hacks.
It is what it is. I tried suggesting I could redo effects, but crickets were louder.
Its still fun as is, play it while ya can. Sims no longer look all as promising as 35 yrs ago. No one listens to players. Its a programmer's way or beat it.
-
It’s POSSIBLE to import these assets snd objects to UE, C++ would need to be twesked for modern C++. But with a proprietary engine it may not be possible.
Frankly with all the skills here a company could be created to build in UR, its easier, but that could be more open to hacks.
It is what it is. I tried suggesting I could redo effects, but crickets were louder.
Its still fun as is, play it while ya can. Sims no longer look all as promising as 35 yrs ago. No one listens to players. Its a programmer's way or beat it.
At this point im surprised the community hasnt been given the resources to make/test new vehicles and game structures/objectives in offline mode like they do with skins and maps to be greenlit later if liked. The game already has die hard community willing to put in the effort. But like you said opening that door may open up issues with hacks. Iv dabbled with skins, maps, sounds and can 3d model but i dont have a clue when it comes to implementing that model via code...
-
At this point im surprised the community hasnt been given the resources to make/test new vehicles and game structures/objectives in offline mode like they do with skins and maps to be greenlit later if liked. The game already has die hard community willing to put in the effort. But like you said opening that door may open up issues with hacks. Iv dabbled with skins, maps, sounds and can 3d model but i dont have a clue when it comes to implementing that model via code...
There might be people here who could make a mesh. I know we have professional level skinners.
One big problem is that I believe there is some hefty commercial software used int the hierarchical componentization of all the little parts for animation, physics simulation, damage modeling, etc. This is not open source. I assume he has a limited number of seat licenses. So maybe a dedicated intern could go learn all that and use that seat license to help build a new plane, but it probably isn't anything that can be shared generally.
Building the mesh is just the first tiny step in the process and he could always just go buy that off Turbosquid probably.
I could be wrong, but I think the issue has been addressed before by HT and it just isn't feasible that the community can just in and start adding game objects.
I had added a custom object before (observation balloons in WWI:WF) but those were statics. An aircraft model is an entirely different matter.
But if there were one or two advance experienced modelers in the community, they should contact HT and see what they could do, but I don't see a plane editor the way you have a terrain editor.
$0.02.
-
There might be people here who could make a mesh. I know we have professional level skinners.
One big problem is that I believe there is some hefty commercial software used int the hierarchical componentization of all the little parts for animation, physics simulation, damage modeling, etc. This is not open source. I assume he has a limited number of seat licenses. So maybe a dedicated intern could go learn all that and use that seat license to help build a new plane, but it probably isn't anything that can be shared generally.
Building the mesh is just the first tiny step in the process and he could always just go buy that off Turbosquid probably.
I could be wrong, but I think the issue has been addressed before by HT and it just isn't feasible that the community can just in and start adding game objects.
I had added a custom object before (observation balloons in WWI:WF) but those were statics. An aircraft model is an entirely different matter.
But if there were one or two advance experienced modelers in the community, they should contact HT and see what they could do, but I don't see a plane editor the way you have a terrain editor.
$0.02.
Interesting how hands are tied if thats correct.
Vehicle editor would be nice but im sure the code savy here could figure it out without it if it were just available. The ability to alter the strats, objectives, targets, ect to test dynamic game play would be pinacle.
But I should stop wishing since the second coming of hitech will happen and will preach the announcement of aceshigh4 in 2 weeks...
-
Interesting how hands are tied if thats correct.
Vehicle editor would be nice but im sure the code savy here could figure it out without it if it were just available. The ability to alter the strats, objectives, targets, ect to test dynamic game play would be pinacle.
But I should stop wishing since the second coming of hitech will happen and will preach the announcement of aceshigh4 in 2 weeks...
I could always be wrong or things might have changed. Trying DM'ing him.
But then there is still the flight model. I assume that is partially hand tweaked and probably requires a lot of polishing.
And tying in the damage model with effects on the FM.
Sound effects.
Also, how much can he expose to the general player base and how much would that compromise security.
Building a static observation balloon is one thing. Building weapons is a whole different level of risk. and even then, he made it clear that something like that would never be allowed in the Melee arena. WWI:WF was just a disposable test-bed.
-
I could always be wrong or things might have changed. Trying DM'ing him.
But then there is still the flight model. I assume that is partially hand tweaked and probably requires a lot of polishing.
And tying in the damage model with effects on the FM.
Sound effects.
Also, how much can he expose to the general player base and how much would that compromise security.
Build a static observation balloon is one thing.
Building weapons is a whole different level of risk.
I feel like there is plenty of resources out there to go off of but yes a lot of polishing...
for the security thing it makes me wonder if it is/could/would be the same as skins and maps, they are limited to offline mode until green lit.
I could make a lime green skin for example but i would still be limited to offline with it until approved.
-
I feel like there is plenty of resources out there to go off of but yes a lot of polishing...
for the security thing it makes me wonder if it is/could/would be the same as skins and maps, they are limited to offline mode until green lit.
Terrains go through an approval process.
Skins are just rendered locally so there is no system risk there.
There is an object editor of sorts in the distro, but it is very limited for static objects like an ammo crate or something. Its how I compiled in my balloons, but no kind of weapon or anything flyable. And those objects are only for custom missions or scenarios.
No custom objects allowed in a MA map.
-
Terrains go through an approval process.
No custom objects allowed in a MA map.
This should change. I find the MA arenas lacking depth. If it works and is balanced why not. Better bridges, balloons, ect why not...
-
.
(failed typo edit)
-
All that would mean just developing a new game altogether.
wrong
You and I play 2 different games in the main arena
Yours is score dependent, mine is map reset dependent. You game has been compromised by shade cheaters for 20 or more years.
The math does not support your logic any longer :salute
-
wrong
You and I play 2 different games in the main arena
Yours is score dependent, mine is map reset dependent. You game has been compromised by shade cheaters for 20 or more years.
The math does not support your logic any longer :salute
WTF are you talking about? How is my my game 'score dependent'? And what has 'my game' to do with the implementation of OP's suggestions?
-
wrong
You and I play 2 different games in the main arena
Yours is score dependent, mine is map reset dependent. You game has been compromised by shade cheaters for 20 or more years.
The math does not support your logic any longer :salute
lol what is this even mean.