my profile | register | search | faq | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
»  COMBATSIM.COM Forum Archive   » Game Discussions (Genre)   » Jets   » What sim has the worst AI of all time?

   
Author Topic: What sim has the worst AI of all time?
Major Tom
unregistered

posted 11-12-1999 07:16 AM       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
In my opinion, out of all the sims I have played since my days on the good old Macintosh SE, one sim stands out miles beyond the rest for it's really half arsed AI. That sim is USAF.

Want proff? Just look at what your wingmen do after you die on a mission. They all crash or get shot down some way or another.

Seriously, the AI in USAF just plain stinks. More often than not, the other AI squadrons will not complete their missions, leaving you, out of bombs and out of nerves. You quite litteraly have to do the AI's job, or fail a mission.

AND THATS JUST THE FRIENDLY AI!!!

The enemy AI is even stupider. I dusted 5 MiG-29's, full "realism", full enemy "skill." Oh did I mention I did that in a F-105?

At least the stupid old AI from the days of Chuck Yeagers Air Combat and Battle of Britian never became one with the landscape without drawing enemy fire.

Can anyone else site a sim with stupider AI than USAF?


IP: Logged
Ozias
unregistered

posted 11-12-1999 07:05 PM       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Sounds like the Ef2000 V1 wingbeciles who had a hard time avoiding the ground, let alone killing enemy aircraft/SAMs.

IP: Logged
Aaron
unregistered

posted 11-12-1999 07:23 PM       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Hehe
Yeah the AI wingmen in USAF can't land at all
you can't even try to fly back to your base even on missions where you have a base, because you will rack up negative points as all your wingy's crash!!
Still I do like that when I tell a wingy to attack, they do and they do it well.

The enemy AI is pretty dumb in gun fights
I had a SU-27 on my tail for 2 minutes and he never fired his guns once. Then I just pulled some G's and wrapped around on his 6 and took him out. SAD

Now they are pretty lethal with missiles tho.
course they fire enough of em.


IP: Logged
Jake Strafer
Member
Member # 600

posted 11-13-1999 12:24 AM     Profile for Jake Strafer   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
I have a feeling, that Jane's was catering to the guy and his son, who never really think that much about jets or jet sims, but have this really spiffy computer they bought from Best Buy. And while they were browsing the game isles there, they came across this neato looking game called USAF with all of these neato looking pictures on the back. I'm sure this guy and his son (who finally figured out that pushing the joystick to the top makes the airplane fly down; not up), would get really tired if, while playing this game, the other planes kept shooting them down all the time.

Well, believe it or not - most consumers of flight sims are these kind of folks. That's why you can get Falcon 4.0 for 9 bucks now at Best Buy.

-just provoking thought


Posts: 239 | From: Burlington, NC, USA | Registered: Oct 1999  |  IP: Logged
Scuro
Member
Member # 282

posted 11-13-1999 01:01 AM     Profile for Scuro   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Well, what do you think?
A vast majority of gamers can't be wrong, right? WROOOOONG!

I don't mind playing Quake2 and other similar games, but I - like many other fellow sim lovers - like the challenge of studying a whole manual to experience what only a few chosen ones can actually experience.


Posts: 25 | From: | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
Major Tom
unregistered

posted 11-13-1999 01:32 AM       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Yes, the great majority of flight sim purchases are by people that probably do it just for the pretty box graphics. Look at how many people bought Falcon 4.0. Practically none of them had any idea what they where getting into.

I think the key to having a profitable flight sim, while it may be slightly unethical, is a nice looking box. You could quite litteraly fill up the back of the box with phrases like "realistic ground shadows" and "pollygon based environment." No one would care.

Same thing with cheap sci fi novels. It's kind of sad to think that my father has been choosing Sci Fi novels by the cover artwork for well over 40 years worth of extended business trips to exotic and strange foreign places like South Korea, Argentina, and Utah.

The F-104 proved that anything will fly if given a powerfull engine. Microsoft Combat Flight Simulator proved that you can make any game fly if you put the right stuff on the box.

Flight sim producers seem to be taking quite a few shortcuts these days. Lack of a good ingame soundtrack, lack of purpose, unrefined documentation, or a good box for that matter. Little things that can do a great deal for a simulations appeal to Joe Consumer.


IP: Logged
jk
unregistered

posted 11-13-1999 01:18 PM       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
how can you bash a game that hasn't been patched yet? I remeber Falcon4 having really bad wingmen before being patched.
IP: Logged
mbaxter
Member
Member # 191

posted 11-13-1999 02:28 PM     Profile for mbaxter   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
I would say F4 and USAF are tied for the dubious honor of "Worst wingmen AI of all time". I would say USAF has the worst ENEMY AI, while Falcon4 has the worst FRIENDLY AI.

Ironic that USAF is lame when you consider that the ATF series sims had the best AI of any sims yet made.


Posts: 1687 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
Major Tom
unregistered

posted 11-13-1999 04:19 PM       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
mbaxter:

The USNF series did have rather good AI. I agree with that. Always responsive, accurate, and smart. If you go 3 F-14's on 15 MiG-23's. The AI will actually shoot down their fair share. You probably wont even get 7 kills out of it.

USAF is a true step back in simulations. When USNF came out, no one was commenting on how un realistic the flight model was. That's because it had one of the better flight models out there if you looked at it's competion.

Pixelogic cant even best USNF in gameplay. They try, but cant pull it off. Lets attribute it to lack of skill.

Lets not forget the kamakazi F/A-18 hornet 3.0 wingmen ;-)

Jk:

I can bash it because the whole idea behind buying a game out of the box is that it will WORK out of the box, and work well. If we let other companies get away with what software companies do, we'd be patching our Sedans and Toaster ovens.

Some people dont have access to the internet and these wonder 'patches.' Those people take back games that dont work right out of the box.

The internet is the best and worst thing that ever happened to PC gamers. It lets millions of people all over the world, virtually blow each other away ;-) But it also is giving game makers and easy out when it comes to product reliabilty.


IP: Logged
florrb
unregistered

posted 11-13-1999 11:01 PM       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
"1942 Pacific Air War" deserves mention for its suicidal+incompetent wingmen, and enemies who fly into the mountainside most of the time on certain missions. There's also the fun of having the auto pilot kill you on the way home unless you're willing to make a 3-hour flight home by yourself.
IP: Logged

All times are MST (US)  

   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | COMBATSIM.COM Home

COMBATSIM.COM, INC. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by Infopop Corporation
Ultimate Bulletin Board 6.04b

Sponsor
2014 COMBATSIM.COM - All Rights Reserved