Well I think one of the reasons why we love DOSBox and keep struggling to run Very Old Games On New Systems is because we're, well, gamers, aren't we? While we love to discuss how to run Duke Nukem in DOSBox with smooth frame rate, for instance, I think it could be fun if we share our thoghts about the games themselves besides discussing how to make them run. So here's the game review thread.

I actually hoped there will be more DOS game / old game reviews, though --the games we loved to play with DOSBox; the games that make us downloading DOSBox on the first place. Maybe that's just me, but I'd really love to see more old game reviews. HOTU is more focused on 'underdog-type' games, while sites like Abandoned Places tend to have nothing but short description about the game. Who knows that someday Vogons will have its own dedicated old game review pages besides the forum. 😀

The following is not exactly a 'review' since I just played a short scenario --first look or quick glance could be more appropriate. Well this is about Air Force Commander; the game I discussed on this thread, and which I eventually bought as you already knew from this thread.

Air Force Commander
Year: 1992
Publisher: Impressions
Genre: real-time wargame

First thing first, I actually love RTS, as long as it is NOT tactical point-and-click cliche like WarCraft clones or Command & Conquer clones. Fragile Allegiance is actually a game that falls into my category of "innovative RTS", and so is Populous (or so I heard, since I missed the game on the first place).

I have to admit that Air Force Commander is definitely one. It is a real time wargame, since the resource management aspect is pretty much limited. The game mechanic is quite simple: basically you click around your radar map to assign your aircrafts to perform various tasks like intercepting enemy aircrafts, performing ground strike, doing circular sweep to increase radar coverage (AWACS-only), and patrolling around your territory. Certaiin type of aircraft can only perform specific mission, of course (you cannot expect an AWACS to perform ground strike, for instance). You can also launch cruise missiles and deploying mobile SAMs around your airbase. Oh, and this game is exclusively about Middle East conflicts. I could understand the designer's choice, though, since Middle East is the place with the most (modern) air conflicts out there.

I just played a fairly simple (albeit quite difficult) scenario of Qatar & Bahrain against UAE, though, so I still couldn't say very much about this game. Overall, it is quite an exciting gaming experience although not without many shortcomings. In fact, after reading the negatives, you may not like this game at all. I just love the subject matter very much (air combat, that is) that I may be biased towards this game.

I'll go with the negatives first. Okay, since this is a real-time wargame, I expect a sufficient amount of automation, especially when intercepting incoming aircraft. In fact, the game manual actually says that assigning a specific aircraft to intercept a specific incoming bandit is not a good gaming practice, since it can be very overwhelming to do so --it should be easier to assign your interceptor on "patrol", so that it will automatically intercept incoming enemies that enter your airspace.

Alas, certain type of fighters (like the Mirage F-1) just lack the capability of patrolling your airspace; you need to specifically assign such fighter to intercept a specific incoming aircraft. During the early phase of the scenario, when you have many enemy bombers invading your airspace, the amount of clicking is quite overwhelming. More advanced fighters like Tornado F-1 is capable of automatically intercepting incoming attackers if you set them on "patrol", though, but alas, such fighters are quite a rarity when playing a country like Qatar. I don't know whether the designer chosed this "feature" for realism's sake (less advanced fighters should equal more headache for the Air Force Commander), but heck, I think even the outdated Mig-21 should be capable to patrol!

Also, this game is fairly short. In fact, as long as you're doing a good job of intercepting incoming aircraft (which translates to frantic point-and-clicking when you only have outdated fighters like Mirage F-1) while keep storming the enemy's radar stations, whittling down enemy attacks should be a second nature. After mounting a succesful defense, you can take a deep breath and going to the offensive --which involves storming the enemy's nearest airbase.

When you have successfully eliminated their major airbase, winning the scenario is a breeze --especially since the objective of each scenario is gaining air superiority instead of winning the entire war. Mind you, the game manual specifically says that you can also target the enemy's infrastructure like fuel dump, water supply, and even cities to demoralize their population and help you winning the game. However, I found that those extra targets are irrelevant and superflous since all you need to do is eliminating their major airbase (the airbase where those attackers come) to win the game. It seems that Total Air War's WarGen engine does a better and more comprehensive job of simulating modern war than Air Force Commander --and the former is a flightsim while the latter is a wargame! But like I said, I just played a fairly short and simple scenario of Qatar & Bahrain against UAE. Maybe in more complex scenarios, those extra targets will be more relevant in winning the scenario.

But my biggest disappointment is the fucking manual; it wastes almost sixteen pages to describe the conflict in Middle East and the role of modern aircraft (heck, it even has two pages explaining the religion of Islam), but it doesn't do jack shit of explaining the capabilities of the units involved in the game. Here's an excerpt from the manual:

E3 A.W.A.C.S: Long range, high flying radar coverage plane. B52: Very long range strategic bomber. . . Hind: Soviet built armour […]
Show full quote

E3 A.W.A.C.S: Long range, high flying radar coverage plane.
B52: Very long range strategic bomber.
.
.
Hind: Soviet built armour attack helicopter.
Lynx: Short range attack helicopter.
UH-1 Huey: Old limited armour strike helicopter.

Oh my 😒 Despite its simplified gameplay, Air Force Commander is still a wargame. At least Panzer General manual does a better job of describing the units strengths and weaknesses (ie use infantry instead of tanks to attack cities, etc).

Yes, I discovered that Tornado GR-1 does a better job of ground strike than the old Jaguar, but I actually knew it from my real-life common sense instead of the game manual! Maybe this game is specifically aimed to air combat enthusiasts, and if that's the case, that is too bad because the gameplay and the game's mechanics are simple enough to introduce the subject matter to more mainstream gamers.

Furthermore, there are still things that needs explanations; such as why I cannot target the enemy's fixed AA installation with ground strike aircraft and have to resort to high-altitude bombers for that purpose, and what kind of targets should be better attacked with cruise missiles or helicopters instead of risking my precious Tornado. Well at least the manual describes that A-10 Warthog is a really excellent aircraft to attack enemy's armored forces, but that's all.

There's still one last nitpick; you cannot queue your order to the aircrafts that is still on the air --you should actually wait until they land to give them the next order.

The manual also mentions about the next installment of Air Force Commander, which will be focused on WW2-era air warfare. That should be interesting but alas, it seems that the next installment never came.

But despite all its shortcomings, Air Force Commander is still an interesting game to play. Intercepting enemy attackers may be a little bit overwhelming during the early phase, but the overall interface, game mechanics, and even pace is quite balanced to make a fun gaming experience. Also, things get better when you attack enemy's installation because you can set those aircraft in "Auto Launch" to repeatedly attack the target without manually assigning subsequent orders. Frankly, I found it quite thrilling to assign various aircrafts to do various jobs and watching the result in real-time. The game lacks multimedia polish even when judged by 1992's standards, but the close-up satellite view is pretty much adequate to view the ensuing actions.

I'm actually looking forward for Air Force Commander 2 with more automation features to avoid frantic clicking (Fragile Allegiance provides it in very elegant way, by the way), more involving warfare where those other ground installations are more than window dressing, expanded aspects of warfare like landing airborne troops to seize ground installations, better multimedia polish, and especially better game manual! Alas, it seems that Impression did not even bother to release the WW2 version of this game. Thus, Air Force Commander is the only game of its kind by far. And being the only one of its kind, I still feel that the game is quite entertaining.