Never before has aerial combat been so fast, so in-your-face and so vicious. It's time to set the sky on fire.
The demanding Project Aces development team at Namco Bandai Games Inc. in Japan weren't satisfied. They wanted more from the series. They wanted planes that tore apart limb from limb right in front of your face, spewing their oil lifeblood across the sky. They wanted to scrape the streets and dodge the steel skyscrapers of real world cities at blistering speeds, in an enthralling war drama that spanned the globe with a web of intrigue. They wanted players to pick up the controller and become deadly combat pilots in seconds, pulling off breathtaking kills at impossible speeds, and doing battle online in a multiplayer sky littered with fiery supersonic debris. What they wanted was steel carnage in the sky.
The result is not a sequel in the multi-million selling smash hit Ace Combat series, but a complete rebirth, a phoenix from the ashes flying at three times the speed of sound. The Project Aces team is building Ace Combat: Assault Horizon from the ground up, with new technology fuelling their passionately realised vision of a game that puts players in the dark heart of the fight like no aerial combat game has done before.
Scottie25 June at 15:44 Interestingly though 13 million people didn't vote - were they lazy, didn't care or undecided?
Corrosive25 June at 15:33 well i guess we will see how this all plays out
Corrosive25 June at 15:33 The 60% thing makes complete sense. 52/48% is to close. Basically half the people don't want this but are now stuck with it. If it was SA buildings would be burning.
Trying to explain to people that this sort of democracy is broken and they throw back some line about being a sore loser when I am really just saying that you can't have half the population unhappy with a decision this huge
Scottie25 June at 15:13 LOL too late now but it could always be applied to the Scottish referendum.LOL
Scottie25 June at 15:12 One million sign petition for a new referendum (60% minimum needed for change, which I actually think is fair if it had been applied BEFORE referendum) and minimum 75% turnout (which is BS).