There isn't much more that one can say that hasn't been said. Learning to play Armored Core is like being let into a massive conspiracy--each review is so obviously wrong, with the reviewer misinterpreting every game element, that it's beyond frustrating.

I'm not entirely sure I would have "gotten" Armored Core if I hadn't experienced strange control schemes firsthand in Robot Alchemic Drive, which is so obtuse that it is purposely done to hinder your control. But that's what is so great about it; it ceases to be a video game, and instead it's a sim of piloting a gigantic robot from 3 city blocks way, trying to get your steel titan under control to save the world. Super Mario games have great control schemes, but then the movement ceases to have emotional impact--it's just a schema to get you from point A to point B, which makes sense as Super Mario games are more adventure-oriented.

I have to give you "mad props" or whatever kids say for today's article's title. That's simply genius.

I was so excited about this game but after reading the reviews, I thought they must have messed this game up badly because I haven't seen any good comments about it. I don't know what the controls are like in armored core 4, but if it's like virtua on then I'm in. I love the 2 stick ala smash TV.

On the subject of Virtual On vs Armored Core, I see them both as the Anti-thesis of each other. Armored core has deep levels of customisation, Complex controls and is at slower pace than Virtual On which is Faster, has no customisation (i think you could change the color of your mech in Force), and has a arcade style grab and go level to the controls.

I have to completely disagree with this article. It starts off by insulting Halo's level design, and overall effect. While the original Halo did reuse level design, a million critics aren't wrong. Halo had an interesting storyline, weapon balance, and A.I. You know, GAMEPLAY.

Armored Core has horrible gameplay, which is what games are about when it comes down to it. There's no progression of difficulty, (some early missions are hard as nails and some late missions are push-overs,) the storyline is a joke, each mission just throws you into the same old go-kill-this or protect-this, the game didn't use the analog sticks up until this game, and speaking of environments?

Armored Core has had some of the least attractive environments in a game. Of course in not wanting to breaki the trend Armored Core 4 has one multiplayer level that is basically just open sand.

Thanks for the article. It's definitely true that people don't want to learn anything new these days. I long for the days of Mechwarrior 2 style complicated controls. Even reading the manual was fun.

Arlen: Armored Core's gameplay is just not for you, really that's the problem. You say that there's no progression of difficulty, but really the difficulty of each level depends on how your craft is designed. The storyline and narrative are part of a huge backstory that's omnipresent in the series (but I'll concede the point that it's not especially clear to a newcomer). Depending on the level design, missions play radically differently. For example, one mission has you in pure darkness, and your support sends up flares so that you can target and take out enemies while there's still light.

I'll agree that the environments aren't extremely detailed, but Halo's environments basically repeated themselves ad nauseum. One level would be stretched to 4x its length by reusing a part of the map.

The "sand only" level in AC4 is deceiving. Yes, it's open sand, but that sand has ridges and hills, and isn't flat. When you're fighting on the ground, you can hide in crevasses, and from a distance, it's very difficult to find your opponent, because of the heat haze. It's similar to fighting in a real desert.

Weapon balance is just fine in Armored Core 4, there are tons of builds that are popular online. I suggest you actually play the game more before you bash it, or try taking people online before you make broad judgments.

Wow... Arlen.. You totally prove the point of this article.

"Wow... Arlen.. You totally prove the point of this article"

If you're going to argue at least put forth an arguement.

Kenan you raise some good points, but making some hills and adding in a glare effect doesn't constitute good level design.

As for different levels depending on different craft design, that might matter if

1.) The levels told you what craft was favored so that thought might actually be involved.

2.) It allowed you to have multiple ACs from the getgo to combat different situations.

It doesn't, and from a designer standpoint that's just lazy.

As for story, a guy, (or girl,) talking to you while you blow apart enemies doesn't count as a story. Sure there are usually 3-4 nice cutscenes as well, but overall the game requires the gamer to piece together the story themselves. You know what this reminds me of? Street Fighter. Sure there's a deep storyline there, but ultimatley unless you're a huge fan you won't know what it is.

In fact I was a HUGE fan of Mechwarrior. the simulation style controls were great, and I love Virtual On as well. The problem with AC is that it doesn't quite do well in any genre.

Is is a sim? Then why is it in third-person with an unrealistic damage system and unaccurate aiming,(compared to a flight or Mechwarrior game.)

Is it an arcade shooter? then why the slow turning rate and bad enemy A.I?

Is it an epic story driven game? Then why simply drop players into missions with little explination.

Armored Core pains me because it's SO CLOSE to being a great game. Tighten up the response time on controls, give gamers an identifable player or let them make their own character model, give us a story with visable characters, and have a rythm to the missions. If they can do that then I might come back.

Armored Core was a great PS1 game, it just never got past that.

As eaglearcher put it; Arlen you prove the point of this article. Even with a more detailed response you are highlighting a provincial outlook on gaming as a whole. You are referencing MechWarrior as a game that "works" and that has a decidedly Western approach to gaming (despite using Japanese mecha designs for the most part), the comparison is flawed because the intent behind the creation of Armored Core is wildly different. As such the execution is be equally so.

In addition the rolling dunes in the desert multiplayer level make for excellent cover if you use them correctly. The level design is subtle in that regard and subtle doesn't necessarily equate to bad.

The polarised discussion about this topic does highlight a cultural intolerance in regards to games and their design, which is very interesting I think.

Very nice article there Ollie, and yes, Arlen proves the point of the article quite nicely.

What's amazing to me is how common that mentality is and how most people don't realy want to take the time to sit down and understand the purpose that a game was made for.

Quoting Arlen:
"As for different levels depending on different craft design, that might matter if

1.) The levels told you what craft was favored so that thought might actually be involved.

2.) It allowed you to have multiple ACs from the getgo to combat different situations.

It doesn't, and from a designer standpoint that's just lazy."

...You just countered yourself. If the levels told you what AC to build for that mission, then it'd be a no-brainer, and no thinking would be involved as the game has told you what to do and you just select the parts that match that.

By the game not telling you what "craft was favored" the player IS FORCED TO THINK what kinds of opponents they may face, balance ammo of a weapon versus the its power, and many other factors. Eg. The stage Water Gliding, just by the stage name I can tell I'm going to be using boosters a lot to skim the water surface, so I should naturally carry weapons that fare well in water since energy weapons are not as effective. As well, I should focus on maximizing my energy output for thruster speed/efficiency rather than expending it on unnecessary energy draining parts.

...Multiple ACs from the getgo for different situations? Build them yourself. The game has ACs from the getgo to handle "multiple situations". The ability of actually being able to handle them however is a player's ability as well as their preferred playing style. For example, if you took a long range sniper mech, naturally, you're going to keep your distance and peck away all opposition, rather than rushing head on. On the contrary, a mech designed for close range combat to infighting via machineguns/shotguns/laserblades would want to get closer to its opponents before it gets sniped away.

I don't understand at all how the programmers are lazy. They had to factor in the numerous possibilties of player styles. Such as, if a player likes ranged combat, there should be good ranged parts for him to use, but not so good that people who are very competitive just keep abusing said parts to win battles. Same goes for close combat type weapons in the game. The programmers then have to cater to the guys who like to mix the different catagories to make well-rounded units that don't excel in one particular area, but can perform multiple tasks.

As stated by previous comments, this really isn't the game for you. Though MechWarrior falls along very similar lines. As I recall, Armored Core 1 wasn't too much different either... I would say that even though the game mechanics have changed, AC4 is still 90% like AC1, and all other AC games like it. If anything, I find AC4 to be the most balanced AC game ever made. Unlike AC1 where weapons like the KARASAWA were clearly outclassing all other weaponry, in AC4 there's no clear "best weapon" so it opens up the possibilities for creativity, and to allow each player to build a mech that they feel truly represents their gaming style. I would have to say... AC4 better resembles an MMORPG rather than anything else you listed in your last post. Simply because the game basically lets you make an avatar for yourself... only in gigantic mecha form.

Oddly, Zero's hit on one idea I've been contemplating myself: Once I go online with AC4, I might form/join a team and confer with other AC teams and some players who'd play a role as the corporations who'd hire us out. Or something like that.

I agree that AC4 is still largely the same as the rest of the series. Hope that online will let them start doing cool things like co-op missions, and various team games beyond the usual 'blow up everyone who's not a team mate'.

regarding my own feelings about armored core:

my first armored core game was __armored core 2: another age__. by my own admission, this is probably _the worst_ game for a newcomer to the armored core series to play. for the uninitiated, it's everything wrong about the series all at once. lack of story? yes, no story here. literally, none. there are 100 mission (+3 secret ones) and the only connection between any of them is that you are a mercenary taking them on for cash. other than that, there is little continuity if you don't already have an understanding of what was going on during __armored core 2__.

the controls were slow and difficult. after watching other people play this game and fly around with ease and fluidity, i could not for the life of me understand why my AC moved slower than molasses and handled like a truck.

i didn't have much of an understanding of building an AC (this was before the game actually let you choose from some combat capable machines at the start, you used to get a base AC built with the worst parts). i'd just throw as many heavy weapons as possible onto my AC, and thus had to pick the heaviest legs to accomodate it. this didn't do much to help my control issues, so roughly midway through the game, i was no longer able to bludgeon my way through the missions and had hit a stone wall.

at this point, perry may or may not have shown me the proverbial "light," telling me what i was doing wrong. and yes, i was clearly doing something "wrong" - and this is the thing that i think many reviewers are unwilling to admit. that there is a right and a wrong way to play an armored core game. you must adapt to the game, because armored core is very obedient once you learn to speak its language, but its highly unforgiving until you do.

the mecha in armored core are not gundams. they are not battlemechs from __mechwarrior__. they exist in a sort of middle ground - they pack tons of power but are still zippy, but you're not going to see anybody jetting along at mach 3 raining nuclear death and actually getting away with it. as a matter of fact, __armored core 4__ is the most mobile armored core ever, some designs even allow for near-inifnite flight. previous armored core games were much more restrictive in terms of flight and boost time. the debate as to whether this is a good thing or not is a topic for another debate, though.

so, back to my experience with __armored core 2: another age__. once i had figured out a few basics, the game didn't necessarily become any easier (__ac2:aa__ is the hardest fucking armored core i have ever played, bordering on impossible at times), but at least i was able to understand why i failed, and how to correct it when i did. in that sense, armored core is infinitely rewarding. completing a difficult mission with a machine of your own creation, using your own strategy, is highly rewarding. detractors will point to the trial-and-error nature of the gameplay, and i will agree, it's there. however, perhaps i'm a masochist, but i like this. i like hard games, and maybe i'm crazy but i don't mind doing things over and over until i master them. and then going back to them until i improve even more. just because something cannot necessarily be completed in the first attempt, does this make the game a bad game? in __super mario brothers__, when you first start to play and you just run to the right, eventually hitting a goomba and dying, do you deride the game as being bad? or do you go back, and jump over it the second time around? and the third time, do you realize that by stomping on its head, you can defeat it and gain points?

armored core is definitely not for everyone. and i would go so far as to say that it is for nobody at first. it __is__ for those who stick around long enough to be drawn into it, to understand its nuances and complexities. if this isn't you, that's fine. but please refrain from deriding it as a "bad game" simply because it doesn't quite fit your model of what it should be.

This game is absolutely great.

Complex controls. Lets see...

We take a PS Controller. Yeah, eight buttons, two sticks.

Complex?

Have you ever had a PC stick in hands? With hat controls, rudder controls, throttle control and maybe 10 buttons?

Maybe its complex compred to Pac-Man, where you only need o move into four directions.

L1, R1: switch between shoulder and arm weapon for right/left arm/shoulder.

L2: booster (jumpjets)
R2: quick boost (dogemove)

triangele: overboost (afterburner)

quadrat, X: fire left/right arm/shoulder weapon

circle: activate special equipment

pressing L1+R1 and either quadrat, X or circle drops the selected eqipment for enhanced maneuverability.

left stick: strafe
press left stick: lock on target
jold left stick: disabel auto aiming

right stick: turn, look up/down
press right stick: reset viewpoint to forward

Thats it. I would advise switching the auto aim from left to right stick because you tend to be hard on the strafing controls and at least me tends to unwillingly disable auto-lock on.

After this change controls are simply excellent. You pic it up in under two minutes.

And about pimping your mech rides... if you want a FPS buy Mech Assault. Be glad there is ONE series left where you CAN actually build your ride, customize it especially for your playstyle. And customization is executed excellent as well.

Combat is quickly and frenetic, fortunately the excellent controls help greatly to keep up with the pace.

The game has a online multiplayer mode.

The maps are absolutely top notch. I talk about desert ruins with sandstorms, nightmissions at the beach where submarines fire swarms of nues you have to intercept, or a huge canyon map with a bridge where you have to take down heleicopter swarms and then intercept a train below, coming at you full speed, burining whils fighting of some flying mech squad to name a few.

If you have not played this game yo have not lived, period.

I appreciate this game for what it is: an art form. This game challenges the mind unlike most games out there that any idiot can pick up. If you can't figure out what this game has intended for you in the first place, you might as well quit and play some other game where button mashing is king. AC4 has its own rewards, it teaches players to plan ahead and it sharpens the reflexes. If you pick this game up and actualy get it think of it as being invited to join the elite. I say this because unlike all the other games out there AC takes a certain kind of player and not everyones cut out to be one. I also feel the need to mention the positive attitude from all the players online, in fact all I've gotten is encouragement. I don't know about some of you guys but I am sick of getting cussed out by ten year olds on Halo and Gears. Don't get me wrong I love both those games but if you play live you've had it happen to you. GUARANTEED.

www.GHUCLAN.com

Some nice reviews. For the record, you can fly for an infinite period of time. Also, if you try REALLY hard, you can almost build an AC capable of infinite overboost. What I loved about AC4, was that the designers allowed for every style of gameplay on nearly every mission. AND they forced you out of your box a little. Example: What ever that level with the long canyon with gun emplacements is. You can choose to hang back, snipe everthing, and generally poke fun at your enemies. Or, you can choose to charge in under full throttle, cut everything to pieces and try not to lose any momentum through the mission. In contrast to the seemingly endless waits in some of the Armored Core 3 mission... (ex: please wait while we perform booster analysis... while your convoy gets attacked!) these missions are rapidly paced, and actually fairly different in terms of environment. Yeah, it's usually blow everything up. You're driving a mech the size of a small apartment building for crying out loud! What else are you supposed to do!? Anyhow... I enjoyed the different mission scenarios. Huge deserts, massive metropolises, floating cities, cavernous warehouses, labyrinthine tunnels... A lot of cool differnent areas. Oh, and lets not forget they all look pretty thanks to the new gfx engine. I only wish they had opted for framerate consistency over pixel prettiness when you get into the heavy battles... Finally, the weapons load-out. Yeah, we all miss the beauty that is the Karasawa, with the right gen. tuning to allow continuous firing and boosting from AC2... but I was AMAZED when I went online in AC4. Nearly EVERY weapon can be used to great effect. The sluggish laser cannons are devastating in the right player's hands, as are the little pingy machine guns. Rifles you though sucked turn out to be mighty annoying when wielded from the right distance (Damn that impact throws off your groove!), and look out for those seemingly useless missiles! In conjunction with something that blows your PA out of the way (tiny, innocuous plasma gun anyone?) the missile racks can seriously give you a suprise.

Anyhow, I thought this game was very enjoyable. I would've liked maybe a little more in the way of level variety, as it seems some of the maps were overused. I also would've liked to see a better arena setup, similar to that of AC3:Silent Line (those maps/enemies were cool). Finally, my only little bitch is about the flare support mission. First of all, why does a machine sporting automatic fire control weaponry, powered by who knows what kind of fusion reactor, able to FLY and take hits while remaining balanced... WHY does a machine like this not have night vision!? Come to think of it... isn't that a step back from AC3? There was night vision in that (or maybe it was silent line). Oh, and the real icing on that cake is that the "support" team, firing the flares, only seems to have about 10 flares. Nice job guys :) Your flares only stay aloft for 10s, and you only brought 10. Just goes to show ya: You can only rely on yourself, Raven.

Thank you. Something I've been saying practically word-for-word for ages. I don't mind Halo but the last sentence is truly significant.
Arlen's first post definately proves the point of the article but his second makes some good points...and bad.
Yes Armored Core could be made epic with some slight changes, but overall, many of their games are still some of my favorites. Lastly, it's a problem that a gamer may have to try and figure out the story for themselves? Excuse me for not being either lazy or idiotic and demanding that I have this info shoved in my face. I guess this is why Tsutomu Nihei's masterpieces do well in evey country but a few...oh well...

P.S.
It was Armored Core Nexus and Last Raven that had night vision.

Also, the Karasawa was removed? What about the Moonlight?

The wierdest part is that I saw a promo clip for AC4 and this mecha had a gun that looked just like the Karasawa. Naturally I assumed it was and got all worked up wondering what kind of apocalypse bringer it would be in this title. Once again: ...oh well...

steel battalion ftw.

*Crys* Finally Someone who gets it. I have been playing the AC series since 97; I've been listening to people whine about how bad the game is without playing it (and some who have for the better part of a minute) for over a decade now. This usually changes when I pick up the controller and show them that very elaborate movements are posible. Which effectively blows their argument out of the water. (Most of which seem to revolve around no human can possibly keep up with that.) Since there seem to be so few players out there I have taken up teaching friends and family how to play. I have been lucky though because alot of these friends happend to be "ninjas"; a quick tutorial and they were off.

The point of all of that is to agree with the topic post. If you don't like the subject mater which is large fully customizable machines; you probably won't want to keep playing because of the difficult. hell even if you like the AC's themselves If you want to be superb right then and there you may not stop playing right then and there, but it wont take long, you'll put it down. When I first saw previews Armord Core it was in my Tricks & tips (or Tips & Tricks I forget which word comes first) mag. I wondered what kind of ass would play something like that and said I would never. *Reaches for carrot and kicks like mule* (This is to prove ONE point.) "If it looks like work humans won't want to do it." skip forward a few months, when I grew bored of VG's in general. (Twisted Metal series. Go Moon Buggy!) I was walking through wal mard and made my usual stop at the electronics department and stumbled upon the last copy of AC:PP. I confused it for the original and said since I already have the guide I'd give it a try. It had two players so I wouldn't get bored of it alone. Picked it up took it home and the contols hit me. What kept me playing is the fact that I don't like to loose. I later found out that it was the wrong game for the book and if I ever wanted the Moonlight I would have to find the original AC play through it find it and THEN play through this game all over again. (That damn near tore it for me) However since I hade taken the time to learn how to play, and loved the story I figured what the hell, made an emblem and dove into it full time. I'm an artist so it didn't take too long befor I began obsessing over my emblems as well.... The detail resembles comic book cover art.

Enter PS2. The game was beautiful, and AC: Another Age fixed the slow gameplay problem. (Which I cared NOTHING about.) I was Okay about AC3 however it seemed to be lacking masses of effective parts, and AC: Silent Line fixed that. If you took the time (a metric TON of which) to discover how.

Nexus and Last Raven to me bit becaus the looked less real and mor like a cheap gundam rip-off. I never bought either, looking back on this post I might be slipping back into my old ways. Maybe I'll give them a shot. Couldn't hurt, could it?

This game puts a large emphasis on choosing weaponry that works in your prefered firing range, and its sometimes hard to find where that is, but that's what the testing room and simulator are for. take some time to master the controls (or customize them, a point that hasn't been made). i switched overboost to R3, shoulder to L3, and switched the gun controls to the triggers. very responsive.
also my psn is the name used here, add me if you'd like