an excellent collection of 'moments' (if you ignore that its pastiche/regressive nostalgia, they're all ripped off whole-sale from past entries in the series, which uniformly executed them better) but a legitimate trainwreck of a narrative built on one flimsy justification after the other. i unfortunately lost a lot of my goodwill and charitability towards the game in the last quarter of this meandering, directionless, and deeply hypocritical/ill-considered work. would rather be playing this over 5 but it's not saying much. ive said it before but AC's base of mechanics are in my wheelhouse entirely, and without very much in the way of improvement or alterations to the formula i'll end up looking to other factors in assessing any given title here but man this was such an exhausting disappointment im not even sure i want to unpack it, i'm not sure it's worth my time. a mess in every single way.
okay maybe there's one thing i want to address. there's a bit in ace combat zero that i love; a faceless and nameless belkan squadron intercepts your sortie. at first, the player is led to believe they are yet more threats to quarrel with, but the squadron instead begins attacking the enemies you had already begun duelling - belkan bombers who intended to bring a fiery end to the war through means of nuclear self-immolation. in keeping with ac0s themes, how you engage with this neutral squadron is up to you - and their names are never revealed, ultimately buried by nuclear ash in the annals of history. but they were lone actors in a campaign marked by a quite complicated and nuanced war effort, singularly opposed to a crime against humanity at the hands of their nationalist, authoritarian generals.
ac7 ends up making the argument that belkans are innately evil warmongers who just cant stop engaging in conspiracy and stirring international conflict as revenge for the past lol. you can see how the person behind ac5 spearheaded this games script. any game that earnestly tries to make the argument that drone warfare is bad but fighter jets are cool and good should probably be laughed at. doubly so if the protagonist fights for the in-universe analogue for america against these drones, which are manufactured by an antagonistic state for which drone warfare would only be beneficial in reducing the casualties of war. triply so if the in-universe america analogue was repeatedly shown in the campaign to be obscenely incompetent and corrupt, forcing convicts to be conscript forces, and this goes unquestioned. or if a late-game mission involved you and your band of unlikeable cronies raiding and indiscriminately tearing through an independent separatist state filled with refugees to 'stock up on supplies' with no oversight from higher authorities, and this was the narratives stab at posturing moral ambiguity. but yeah man drones are bad
i dunno man AC3 and 0 are proof you can have it all in this series. cohesive and fantastically considered storytelling, tight core gameplay that has been tweaked to serve the titles themes, immense replayability…so much of that is neutered here, and even if i only craved the simplicity of arcade sensibilities i could still turn to ace combat 2 or x instead. understandable how AC7 managed to find a new audience, but an exasperating disappointment for series veterans.
okay maybe there's one thing i want to address. there's a bit in ace combat zero that i love; a faceless and nameless belkan squadron intercepts your sortie. at first, the player is led to believe they are yet more threats to quarrel with, but the squadron instead begins attacking the enemies you had already begun duelling - belkan bombers who intended to bring a fiery end to the war through means of nuclear self-immolation. in keeping with ac0s themes, how you engage with this neutral squadron is up to you - and their names are never revealed, ultimately buried by nuclear ash in the annals of history. but they were lone actors in a campaign marked by a quite complicated and nuanced war effort, singularly opposed to a crime against humanity at the hands of their nationalist, authoritarian generals.
ac7 ends up making the argument that belkans are innately evil warmongers who just cant stop engaging in conspiracy and stirring international conflict as revenge for the past lol. you can see how the person behind ac5 spearheaded this games script. any game that earnestly tries to make the argument that drone warfare is bad but fighter jets are cool and good should probably be laughed at. doubly so if the protagonist fights for the in-universe analogue for america against these drones, which are manufactured by an antagonistic state for which drone warfare would only be beneficial in reducing the casualties of war. triply so if the in-universe america analogue was repeatedly shown in the campaign to be obscenely incompetent and corrupt, forcing convicts to be conscript forces, and this goes unquestioned. or if a late-game mission involved you and your band of unlikeable cronies raiding and indiscriminately tearing through an independent separatist state filled with refugees to 'stock up on supplies' with no oversight from higher authorities, and this was the narratives stab at posturing moral ambiguity. but yeah man drones are bad
i dunno man AC3 and 0 are proof you can have it all in this series. cohesive and fantastically considered storytelling, tight core gameplay that has been tweaked to serve the titles themes, immense replayability…so much of that is neutered here, and even if i only craved the simplicity of arcade sensibilities i could still turn to ace combat 2 or x instead. understandable how AC7 managed to find a new audience, but an exasperating disappointment for series veterans.
5 Comments
hey, thanks for the comment! you're right, it is a pretty thrilling game, i enjoyed that it seems like harder difficulties boost the point requirements in annihilation missions for the first time and the moment-to-moment mission design is mostly competent (narratively though it leaves a lot to be desired especially compared to 4s arcs and campaign structure, extremely disjointed stuff happening in this game) but it's also undeniably really similar to previous games, with new additions like weather being cool but not amounting to much. all it's got going for me in my head is a great soundtrack and some gorgeous visuals, neither of which are necessarily compelling as reasons to keep playing imo. it's a great series on balance and i wholeheartedly recommend checking out some other entries!
but yeah, i think ac7 is one of those games that's just accidentally really malicious. most of it feels very first draft, i know this game had a lot riding on its shoulders and it had a pretty troubled development so i wonder how much of that influenced the narrative outcome. it's just like a little chain reaction of really dumb things that culminate in inadvertent xenophobia in order to justify itself lol. as i see it the themes of technological advancement gone awry are a response to the franchise catching up to AC3 in the timeline but handling it in the worst possible way, and then everything else banks on fanservice/forced ambiguity/cool imagery to hope people dont point to the weak foundations of the story. i know 'belka was behind it all' is a meme in the AC community now but its honestly so dumb in this game, i couldnt stomach it. frustrating too cause i think with like one or two more drafts and changing even a few key details the game could actually work on some level
but yeah, i think ac7 is one of those games that's just accidentally really malicious. most of it feels very first draft, i know this game had a lot riding on its shoulders and it had a pretty troubled development so i wonder how much of that influenced the narrative outcome. it's just like a little chain reaction of really dumb things that culminate in inadvertent xenophobia in order to justify itself lol. as i see it the themes of technological advancement gone awry are a response to the franchise catching up to AC3 in the timeline but handling it in the worst possible way, and then everything else banks on fanservice/forced ambiguity/cool imagery to hope people dont point to the weak foundations of the story. i know 'belka was behind it all' is a meme in the AC community now but its honestly so dumb in this game, i couldnt stomach it. frustrating too cause i think with like one or two more drafts and changing even a few key details the game could actually work on some level
Great read. I imagine it's inadvertent, but I kind of liked the lack of catharsis throughout- corrupt officers and war criminals getting away under the guise of unified action, and the optimistic ending undercut by the knowledge of the dystopian world of AC3. Felt a bit more real to me than every plot thread getting neatly resolved.
Your point about the framing of Belkans is spot-on and I also hate the way it intersects with the drone plot; makes it seem like drone warfare is the result of one evil guy creating an evil robot army, rather than a systemic issue. Schrodinger has line where it seems like he implies he didn't originally create the A.I. for war, and that seemed more appropriate- a scientific breakthrough snatched up and warped for its military utility. Don't know if it's something that should be thwarted by a tunnel run.
Oh- and I think the missing piece, mechanically, are the post-stall maneuvers. Love the idea of an extra bit of maneuverability, but it's way too easy to play the entire campaign without them.
Your point about the framing of Belkans is spot-on and I also hate the way it intersects with the drone plot; makes it seem like drone warfare is the result of one evil guy creating an evil robot army, rather than a systemic issue. Schrodinger has line where it seems like he implies he didn't originally create the A.I. for war, and that seemed more appropriate- a scientific breakthrough snatched up and warped for its military utility. Don't know if it's something that should be thwarted by a tunnel run.
Oh- and I think the missing piece, mechanically, are the post-stall maneuvers. Love the idea of an extra bit of maneuverability, but it's way too easy to play the entire campaign without them.
don't forget the mission before the aforementioned one in your last paragraph where it's highly likely that the friendly eruseans that have aligned with you, or at least members of the same faction (who are supposedly trying to keep their country intact from the "radicals" who have fully engrossed themselves in drone tech) committed a bunch of war crimes by murdering a bunch of belkan drone tech researchers and their family members, and then the incident is never brought up again. it doesn't serve anything to the story or themes besides a generic postulating at "wow (don't) look at how bad war is," and the fact that the series constantly portrays belkans as black & white evil doesn't really help.
it was a really fun game and i think a good entry into the series but a complete mess narratively and thematically, even before the mess caused from the satellite destruction. obviously the dev hell has a lot to do with how disjointed it is as a story but i can't see how this would've impacted the rather lackluster messaging in M17 and M18. given what i heard about the spare squadron subplot being added on later (so i don't think there was ever a plan for a subversion where, say you switched sides to erusea with spare squadron due to osea's incompetence/corruptness), it makes me wonder if the story could really ever have been good regardless of the poor dev cycle.
it was a really fun game and i think a good entry into the series but a complete mess narratively and thematically, even before the mess caused from the satellite destruction. obviously the dev hell has a lot to do with how disjointed it is as a story but i can't see how this would've impacted the rather lackluster messaging in M17 and M18. given what i heard about the spare squadron subplot being added on later (so i don't think there was ever a plan for a subversion where, say you switched sides to erusea with spare squadron due to osea's incompetence/corruptness), it makes me wonder if the story could really ever have been good regardless of the poor dev cycle.
This comment was deleted
Using prisoners (especially one accused of jihading the fucking president) as fighter pilots is an unbelievably stupid premise.
But I can look past that or even find it endearing if it uses that to idk make some kind of statement about the military/prison industrial complex, conscription, something.
But no the game completely waxes over this and the NOT NATO org that is extremely corrupt is just the rootin’ tootin’ good guys here to save us from the damn pesky radicals and their drones.
But I can look past that or even find it endearing if it uses that to idk make some kind of statement about the military/prison industrial complex, conscription, something.
But no the game completely waxes over this and the NOT NATO org that is extremely corrupt is just the rootin’ tootin’ good guys here to save us from the damn pesky radicals and their drones.
AutumnLily
2 years ago
And then I just got so caught up in the moment-to-moment gameplay, this was my first Ace Combat game and as someone who hasn't experienced the series before that aspect of the game was thrilling. And amidst all the excitement I didn't notice that the game had completely failed to address any of my earlier concerns, and had in fact decided that it was playing all that awful framing completely straight after all.
Seeing all the problems so clearly laid out like you've done in this review is making me have to go back and seriously re-evaluate this game, and whilst I'd struggle to call it wholly bad (the flying and various skirmishes and myriad set-pieces are all too exciting for me to discard it entirely), there's certainly something rotten at the heart of the writing here that I'd too easily become distracted from previously, a rot that makes it hard for me to really defend this game.