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 Address Outdated Graphics and UI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.
-
This should change. I find the MA arenas lacking depth. If it works and is balanced why not. Better bridges, balloons, ect why not...
We have destroyable bridges now, not all maps are updated. Adding custom objects just add the need for a better computer. Sure AH is pretty easy on a computer these days but why add things just to have them?
The new maps have very nice ground settings, rolling terrains, maybe a few too many trees, but the ground game is top notch. From a fighters point of view, the only time anything needs to be added is planes, and really how many new planes do we need? Is there all that many planes left that they need to add? As for graphics, make a hi-fidelity interior for the planes and the graphics update is done. What more does anyone really need?
The game has a ton of depth, strategies, tactics both "world wide" and individually in the game. I think that is the toughest part of this game, showing new players how deep this game is. They are having a hard time trying to figure out how to get into the air, never mind tactics like hurting another teams supply, damaging a base, or capturing a base from the air or the ground.
I thik AI is way off with its assessment.
A serious visual overhaul with improved UI/UX design would attract newer players and make the experience smoother.
As I said, just clean up the cockpit. The UI?? Whats wrong with it? I always thought it was pretty "intuitive" and easy to find what you need.
I have said before that if HTC margins can take it I would drop it to $9.95 and add a FTP group of planes in the MA, but thats all internal at HTC. We dont know how things work at HTC, all we can do is speculate.
And this line.....
VR support to tap into the growing sim VR community.
Proves AI doesnt know what its talking about. VR in Aces High is one of the best executed setups going. The only thing it could use is a "neck saver" type of thing to be able to adjust curves for head turning, but other than that, again what more do you need?
-
There's actually a whole bunch of training videos that happen when you first start the game. IMO, any one who cannot figure out it out is lazy.
The only thing holding the game back is the subscription and microfreeze issue for d11 if some have it, but DX9 works fine for me.
The subscription severely limits players from coming back to the game after a month of not playing. Their decision to pay the sub is the biggest decision they have to make upon retrying the game. Would I pay $15 to retry a game that I may not be 100% about and play once or twice only for that month? Tough call.
Besides a new map rotation and losing some of the bigger maps, and perking the Temp higher, there's not much that really needs to change. We have a ton of planes that all fly unique ways, the game is easy to log into and figure out.
IMO, its the huge maps a new players isnt gojng to understand where the battle is they will fly around aimlessly for an hour and not find someone or insta die after flying for 30 minutes by some vet in their easy mode Tempest. Smaller maps provide the bigger battles that draw players and keep them in the game engaged. Small spread out tiny dars doesn't tell a new player where to fight to get into the action. So they just paid $15, log in at 2pm on a Saturday afternoon, get into the map, and there's like hardly any action they can see on the map, so they'll get discouraged and log out.
-
Where I flew in 2005, you could drop a single commando from a C47 or it's russian cousin (LI2) who may or may not take down all the acks or simply shoot up a single hangar.
It worked great if you had a couple of acks left to get rid of.
-
We have destroyable bridges now, not all maps are updated. Adding custom objects just add the need for a better computer. Sure AH is pretty easy on a computer these days but why add things just to have them?
I've always felt that this mindset holds the game back. If I, as a player, want to take the time to model one of the many large, iconic bridges from the war and incorporate it into a map I'm creating and placing it over an otherwise impassable valley or river to create a strategic route, then why shouldn't that be encouraged? If I mirror it for both sides (since many of the Main Arena maps are mirrored for balance), adjust the hardness values and find a way to make it industructable to GVs, test it offline, and share it so others can see and evaluate it, and if it ends up benefiting the game, then what’s the issue? This also goes beyond just bridges there is plenty that could be implemented for both game depth and dynamic.
Fields, trees, a couple of roads, poly bridges and a few buildings scattered between points is repetitive and thats what these younger gamers will notice. (Not that the "Good ol' boys club" In aces high cares about that)
As for the argument about computer performance, I strongly disagree especially as time goes on. That concern may have been valid when Aces High III was first released, but at some point, catering to those who can’t/won’t upgrade their systems only holds back the game’s evolution and broader appeal.
Proves AI doesnt know what its talking about. VR in Aces High is one of the best executed setups going. The only thing it could use is a "neck saver" type of thing to be able to adjust curves for head turning, but other than that, again what more do you need?
Does this game support hand tracking? I honestly dont know since i dont bother with VR. But nowadays you can use your hands to move controls. Not that i would use it but i dont know if there is a market for it.
I have said before that if HTC margins can take it I would drop it to $9.95 and add a FTP group of planes in the MA, but thats all internal at HTC. We dont know how things work at HTC, all we can do is speculate.
I dont believe this will help as much as everybody thinks it will. I think that aces high will have to do something like go free to play and make perk vehicles DLC or its own subscription. Make LW arena and special events the subscription and the rest free to play or something like that. But like you said that will take the second coming of HT.
-
Do you want to play a game or build models? What kind of models do you think we need? 3 Eifel towers (one for each side)?
Yes the hand controls work in VR, I believe throttle and control stick. As for buttons and such, Hitech has said there is no point in having active buttons just to have active buttons.
As for the Arenas, the Main, Axis vs Allies, and the special event arenas are the subscription arenas, all other arenas are free including custom arenas that any one can open.
-
You don't want to use virtual hand controls for the stick and throttle axes. I tried that. Look back and you have no idea what your hand is doing to your pitch/roll. You need physical contact for those. YMMV.
-
Do you want to play a game or build models? What kind of models do you think we need? 3 Eifel towers (one for each side)?
This way of thinking is outdated and waaaay out of touch with today’s gaming community, and I say that respectfully. People, like yourself for example, take pride in contributing to a game. Who is anybody to say how they do it?
Should the people who made the skins, sounds, maps, and sights you use have just not bothered and simply played the game? Did it contribute to your experience? There are huge mod communities behind games that reward them by implementing their work. Entire new games have spun off from popular games because of community input and implementation.
I mean, hell, Steam has a whole section where a game’s community made content is showcased.
How many new players are playing custom arenas?
-
The subscription severely limits players from coming back to the game after a month of not playing. Their decision to pay the sub is the biggest decision they have to make upon retrying the game. Would I pay $15 to retry a game that I may not be 100% about and play once or twice only for that month? Tough call.
IMO, its the huge maps a new players isnt gojng to understand where the battle is they will fly around aimlessly for an hour and not find someone or insta die after flying for 30 minutes by some vet in their easy mode Tempest. Smaller maps provide the bigger battles that draw players and keep them in the game engaged. Small spread out tiny dars doesn't tell a new player where to fight to get into the action. So they just paid $15, log in at 2pm on a Saturday afternoon, get into the map, and there's like hardly any action they can see on the map, so they'll get discouraged and log out.
Good points. I quit commenting for the most part because it feels like we're beating a dead horse and the two people I ended up putting on ignore would attack me like clock work.
That said I completely agree with you description of how a new player would feel. In one of those other popular games that I dare not mention, the battle starts with 32 players on two evenly matched sides and up to 64 in custom matches. This is in an area what would be a very small map size here. 25 minutes later the battle is over. This setup usually leads to a furball of of at least 20 planes in the middle of the map within about 5 minutes of the start. Players who are used to this kind of quick action will most likely log after short amount of time in AH3.
I know, I know, 500+ players in one arena and all is better then 32 or 64. Only problem the numbers rarely break 100 from what I've seen lately and these players are usually scatter over a large area. If none of these things that you and other have are addressed then the result is pretty predictable.
In the past when I was still playing I used to try to recruit players from other games like IL2 and WT but as soon as I mention a sub and no FTP their interest ended.
When other similar games have thousands of players and more games are being developed that model planes from the same time frames, it says to me that the numbers are out there...
-
Good points. I quit commenting for the most part because it feels like we're beating a dead hoorse and the two people I ended up putting on ignore would attack me like clock work.
Your passive-aggressive ankle humping is pitiful. You're a professional victim. Wah mods! Wah bad mans! Wah can't create account! :rofl
-
Your passive-aggressive ankle humping is pitiful. You're a professional victim. Wah mods! Wah bad mans! Wah can't create account! :rofl
You calling someone a pro victim is maybe the most meta things ever said here.
-
You calling someone a pro victim is maybe the most meta things ever said here.
Just like clockwork another weeb is on my ankle. :rofl You contribute here as little as you do in the arena. :rofl
-
This way of thinking is outdated and waaaay out of touch with today’s gaming community, and I say that respectfully. People, like yourself for example, take pride in contributing to a game. Who is anybody to say how they do it?
Should the people who made the skins, sounds, maps, and sights you use have just not bothered and simply played the game? Did it contribute to your experience? There are huge mod communities behind games that reward them by implementing their work. Entire new games have spun off from popular games because of community input and implementation.
I mean, hell, Steam has a whole section where a game’s community made content is showcased.
How many new players are playing custom arenas?
I've tried my hand in all of those, still use the site I made, and I see your point. However is allowing a player to create models going to draw in a lot of folks? I doubt it, even if Hitech allowed it, he is a bit of a security freak.
The game only needs numbers to get back to its former glory. The game is top notch, we..... the old timers, just need to help out any new player coming in. I have a guy that just joined the Discord server and he says he's coming back into the game when he get home from vacation. I hope he does. He's had a couple of questions and most likely have more when he starts up but Im standing by to help him or anyone else that needs it.
What we have is great, if under populated. Adding possible buggy mods isnt going to help.
-
he says he's coming back into the game
I find it interesting that most of the "new" players seem to be returning players. I wish there was a way to get more new "new" players.
I've noticed in some of those "other games" that there is a balance of new and old players and AI as well so new players aren't subjected to the same level of beat down as a new player starting AH3. I think that's a tough thing for new players to get past if they do get past the subscription phase cause I don't think many new players can become competitive in 2 weeks.
-
I wonder if he could extend trial periods to 30 days; In addition, market an annual return to AH for all the vets (refresh their timers so they can all come back and try the game for free).
Also, it would be nice if Hitech had some kind of "Letter from the Producer/Developer" that would answer some of these questions so we can just move on. If these options are or are NOT viable then list them so we can quit these redundant post regarding game changes.
I appreciate that it seems like he is the only one managing the game so I can't imagine it's easy to make significant changes and the remaining subscriptions are keeping the lights on, so I imagine its stressful making any potential changes.
-
If it works
The million dollar words here.
With custom stuff comes bugs and whatnot. It's why AvA terrains were not allowed in the SEA. It's why SEA's custom object terrains years back were not allowed in the MA. There used to be some immaculate custom airfields and tank combat zones etc. but it was all event-only.
When you have a product you cannot let others' work hinder the image of your product, even if by accident.
-
I'm just here for the boobs.
-
The million dollar words here.
With custom stuff comes bugs and whatnot. It's why AvA terrains were not allowed in the SEA. It's why SEA's custom object terrains years back were not allowed in the MA. There used to be some immaculate custom airfields and tank combat zones etc. but it was all event-only.
When you have a product you cannot let others' work hinder the image of your product, even if by accident.
Unfortunate that those bug issues havent been nipped in the butt when they had the chance but as mentioned earlier in this thread, code is one of the things i have very limited experience in and have no idea what difficulty implies. I agree with some being immaculate. Really made the game immersiveness unmatched at the time. Part of me just wishes the community just had more authority in the games development/beta testing somehow being that HT will not be coming back but again, security issues ect.
-
I've tried my hand in all of those, still use the site I made, and I see your point. However is allowing a player to create models going to draw in a lot of folks? I doubt it,
Gamers want/enjoy immersive developments and updates and take pride in being part of that/listened to. Im sorry but again, outdated.
he is a bit of a security freak.
I understand this may be a potential security risk for modeling vehicles/game structure/strat system but for custom objects/maps?
The game only needs numbers to get back to its former glory. The game is top notch, we..... the old timers, just need to help out any new player coming in.
I do not believe the game will get remotley close to its former glory without significant development. (Which is why I have a unrealistic pipe dream for community authorized development since HT isnt coming back). With no further development we may as well just hope for retention over enlistment. The numbers in MA reflect whats left of a die hard community and that will wither as time goes by until what needs to be done will be done... By all means PLEASE help new players coming in and good on ya. But its going to take a lot more than whats being done to increase that to get "former glory".
What we have is great,
It is, but thats a matter of opinion and the gamer market is entitled to theirs. So how do we make sure their opinions doesnt end at "a killer community buuuut..."
Adding possible buggy mods isnt going to help.
Spikes put it well in his comment.
-
I wonder if he could extend trial periods to 30 days; In addition, market an annual return to AH for all the vets (refresh their timers so they can all come back and try the game for free).
Also, it would be nice if Hitech had some kind of "Letter from the Producer/Developer" that would answer some of these questions so we can just move on. If these options are or are NOT viable then list them so we can quit these redundant post regarding game changes.
I appreciate that it seems like he is the only one managing the game so I can't imagine it's easy to make significant changes and the remaining subscriptions are keeping the lights on, so I imagine its stressful making any potential changes.
He has answered this pretty definitively if you ask most sane people.
Fugi is right… enjoy whatever we have while we have it
-
A longer trial time is most certainly wanted, 30 days would atleast give players a view of most maps if they can play enough. 2 weeks goes by quickly and some may only play once or twice and forget it was only 2 weeks.
Hell if it weren't for H2H back in 05 and TA57s FFA allowing me some quick fights to learn a little about air combat in a smaller setting. I probably wouldn't have stuck around after 2 weeks because 15 a month is a lot for a kid and the MA was too big for me. After H2H had closed 6 months later, I was forced to subscribe, and there it was worth it because I understood the game somewhat better. Though it was still so much bigger but I learned quite a bit more by joining the 367th squad and then other squads over the years.
Ive always been a big proponent of H2H style servers because it gave me an opportunity to play and learn the game in a less intimidating setting for free. I trully believe its beneficial to attracting players to the game. Ones that will actually stick around in the long term. Its unfortunate that there isnt a 24 hour FFA, but what can else can I do but ask?
For what its worth, its the battles where all parts of the game are involved. Thats what makes AH MA so fun. Not the furball islands and tank towns. Its all about the battles and emersion. Thats what keeps players in the game and logged in longer. That is why the huge maps just arent good for off hours gameplay and makes it harder to drive players up and keep them in the fight longer. AH is all about building #s with momentum in the fights.
-
I'm just here for the boobs.
F-Yes!
:salute