We have to give AC7 credit for one thing though: We gotta appreciate how they made the plane flare before landing. In previous games you basically pointed the nose at the runway until you were just over it, levelled out and then stalled onto it. AC04 was a bit better in that you could sorta make a glide slope out of "edge stalling", as I like to call it, but it looked a bit goofy in the replay.
Funny thing, you can do that in every PS2 and Later ace combat game except 7(Unsure about Assault Horizon as well). I actually got good at doing a proper glide slope in 4, 5, 0, and 6.
Wow you mean unappreciate how they Hold your hand in landing when Ace3/04/X and 6 ALL had you able to “flare” or Glide slope Down as the Flight model Was ACTUALLY GOOD
Looks like AC7 used purely animation triggers instead of a combination of physics with all three legs' collision boxes. Once one of the gears touched down in a safe plane, it'd just start the "compression" animation. Simple, but it does feel like a rushed job. I wonder if Ace Combat 6 or the PS2 trilogy did it better? Didn't pay attention to them much.
Exactly! In fact, the nose-gear sorta gets compressed even further when a 2-point landing is executed. So I'm not sure why the two-phase nose-gear compression was implemented in the first place (not sure about AC6 but for PS2 versions, they simply slam to the ground like magnets on touching down :) )
U know, there's a game in called Half-Life 2 that has proper wheel/axle compression physics, and that game aint a flight sim, but rather a fps. I wonder how a game made with Unreal Engine 4 has worse compression physics than a game made usinf the outdated Source Engine....Heck even Microsoft Flight Simulator Simulator X has better physics...and that was in 2006.
I don't think that's the case. Watch the cutscene at the nd of mission 7. The gears are compressing as the planes taxi. There does seem to be some physics involved as it looks pretty random
@@Jarsia cutscenes aren't a good example. Because as a dev myself, cutscenes (even in-game cutscenes) can be made from animation tracks rigged into the planes models; not legit physics going on.
I think it's more to do with how Ace Combat handles their flight physics. It's mostly math and vector based. Apparently the previous entries were more physics based. They must've had to write out some complex code to sort out a proper suspension system, so I guess animations were the easy choice. Weird that both the main & nose gear use the same animator though, guess it was too much work to have it be 2 seperate instances.
Here’s my best bet: for a bit of realism, the front landing gear extends further to begin with. That way, in case of aircraft damage/pilot injury, a tricycle landing or front gear landing won’t make the nose hit the ground or break off. But once the flight systems know that the rear landing gear is down, it can safely retract the front one to a more manageable distance. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Thank you!! :) I have tried Ace2 many years ago but I felt the game was too arcade-y. Maybe I would consider this game again if I find anything that'd be worthy enough to be included in future comparison videos. :)
This is a completely unfair comparison, because AC3 doesn't have a third person view for landing, which is what you were comparing AC3 to. If you compared AC7's HUD view with AC3's HUD view, it would've been a fair comparison. Nice to see you making fun of Project Wingman for once though. I'm still waiting for you to compare Lethal Skies II to an Ace Combat game and/or Project Wingman, I think VTOL would be an excellent topic, since LS2 properly models and implements it, but AC:AH and PW have pseudo-VTOL where the plane basically is incapable of truly stalling (and the ASF-X in AC:AH can, in fact, *CLIMB* while stalling!), in that stalling doesn't make them plummet out of the sky, but instead makes them stop and hover in one spot, but they can't exactly ascend or descend vertically, or fly backwards/sideways. And the F-35B, ASF-X, and Harrier in AC:AH do not rotate their engine nozzles (or the lift fan in the F-35B's case) when it's in "VTOL" mode. (In quotes because it's not actually VTOL. It's meant to superficially *resemble* VTOL without implementing an *actual* VTOL mechanic like Lethal Skies II did.)
PS: I've noticed that in Su-35, when firing 6AAM, the MISS-ile drops first and then launches itself at the position it needs to deviate to. Normal right? What if the aircraft is upside down? 0_o. There's no dropping down upon firing the missile. See this Belka? And you say you've done nothing wrong. ( ;｀Д´)
We have to give AC7 credit for one thing though: We gotta appreciate how they made the plane flare before landing. In previous games you basically pointed the nose at the runway until you were just over it, levelled out and then stalled onto it. AC04 was a bit better in that you could sorta make a glide slope out of "edge stalling", as I like to call it, but it looked a bit goofy in the replay.
Funny thing, you can do that in every PS2 and Later ace combat game except 7(Unsure about Assault Horizon as well). I actually got good at doing a proper glide slope in 4, 5, 0, and 6.
Wow you mean unappreciate how they Hold your hand in landing when Ace3/04/X and 6 ALL had you able to “flare” or Glide slope Down as the Flight model Was ACTUALLY GOOD
Ace3 the most smooth landing although we can't use 3rd person when landing
AC-2 first person view when landing too.
AC4 has a fairly realistic gear wobbling too plus 3rd person
Looks like AC7 used purely animation triggers instead of a combination of physics with all three legs' collision boxes.
Once one of the gears touched down in a safe plane, it'd just start the "compression" animation. Simple, but it does feel like a rushed job. I wonder if Ace Combat 6 or the PS2 trilogy did it better? Didn't pay attention to them much.
Exactly! In fact, the nose-gear sorta gets compressed even further when a 2-point landing is executed. So I'm not sure why the two-phase nose-gear compression was implemented in the first place (not sure about AC6 but for PS2 versions, they simply slam to the ground like magnets on touching down :) )
U know, there's a game in called Half-Life 2 that has proper wheel/axle compression physics, and that game aint a flight sim, but rather a fps. I wonder how a game made with Unreal Engine 4 has worse compression physics than a game made usinf the outdated Source Engine....Heck even Microsoft Flight Simulator Simulator X has better physics...and that was in 2006.
I don't think that's the case. Watch the cutscene at the nd of mission 7. The gears are compressing as the planes taxi. There does seem to be some physics involved as it looks pretty random
@@Jarsia cutscenes aren't a good example. Because as a dev myself, cutscenes (even in-game cutscenes) can be made from animation tracks rigged into the planes models; not legit physics going on.
I think it's more to do with how Ace Combat handles their flight physics. It's mostly math and vector based. Apparently the previous entries were more physics based. They must've had to write out some complex code to sort out a proper suspension system, so I guess animations were the easy choice. Weird that both the main & nose gear use the same animator though, guess it was too much work to have it be 2 seperate instances.
3 literally has no modeled landing gear tho 💀
Here’s my best bet: for a bit of realism, the front landing gear extends further to begin with. That way, in case of aircraft damage/pilot injury, a tricycle landing or front gear landing won’t make the nose hit the ground or break off. But once the flight systems know that the rear landing gear is down, it can safely retract the front one to a more manageable distance. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Retracting gear upon touching down
.
.
.
.
.
.
n o i c e
@@mathmocha1331 not all the way, obviously
Everytime I see that googly eyes FAEB, I laugh
Too weird that front landing gear not turning along the rudders
Lmfao, Love your subtle nitpicks but in a funny way!
Have you played Air Combat and Ace2 Ps1 ?
Thank you!! :)
I have tried Ace2 many years ago but I felt the game was too arcade-y. Maybe I would consider this game again if I find anything that'd be worthy enough to be included in future comparison videos. :)
Not to mention gear suspension for ac6
This is a completely unfair comparison, because AC3 doesn't have a third person view for landing, which is what you were comparing AC3 to. If you compared AC7's HUD view with AC3's HUD view, it would've been a fair comparison. Nice to see you making fun of Project Wingman for once though.
I'm still waiting for you to compare Lethal Skies II to an Ace Combat game and/or Project Wingman, I think VTOL would be an excellent topic, since LS2 properly models and implements it, but AC:AH and PW have pseudo-VTOL where the plane basically is incapable of truly stalling (and the ASF-X in AC:AH can, in fact, *CLIMB* while stalling!), in that stalling doesn't make them plummet out of the sky, but instead makes them stop and hover in one spot, but they can't exactly ascend or descend vertically, or fly backwards/sideways.
And the F-35B, ASF-X, and Harrier in AC:AH do not rotate their engine nozzles (or the lift fan in the F-35B's case) when it's in "VTOL" mode. (In quotes because it's not actually VTOL. It's meant to superficially *resemble* VTOL without implementing an *actual* VTOL mechanic like Lethal Skies II did.)
The landing gears in AC7 are the type of people that will inject the fuel few seconds before inserting it into the car 0_o or in this case, aircraft.
PS: I've noticed that in Su-35, when firing 6AAM, the MISS-ile drops first and then launches itself at the position it needs to deviate to. Normal right?
What if the aircraft is upside down? 0_o.
There's no dropping down upon firing the missile.
See this Belka? And you say you've done nothing wrong. ( ;｀Д´)
'Promosm'