Armored Core: For Answer Review
- Posted October 6th, 2008 at 17:34 EDT by PSU Staff
- 8,113 views
- 9 Comments
Review Score
- PSU Review Score
- 7.5
- Avg. user review score:
- 7.1
Summary
It's not perfect, but Armored Core: For Answer is a definite step up from the previous few iterations in the series.
We like
- Online co-op
- Excellent destructible environments
- Tons of customization
We dislike
- Lack of visual polish
- Flimsy camera
- Hit and miss missions
See PSU's review on Metacritic & GameRankings
After a few stagnant releases, the Armored Core series seemed to be on the track to irrelevancy. With Armored Core: For Answer, however, developer From Software has managed to bring forth an entertaining mech-filled romp for the PlayStation 3.
With gigantic robots at your fingertips, expect some well qualified action. It must be said that if you are an Armored Core veteran, you won’t likely notice too many differences in the gameplay from Armored Core 4 and For Answer. Essentially a sequel to Armored Core 4, For Answer is reminiscent of previous iterations -– a plus for hardcore fans of the series to say the least. After all, fast-paced mechs and arcade-esque gameplay is what Armored Core: For Answer boils down to.

In terms of the single-player campaign, players will encounter short missions that are essentially a hit and miss affair. On one front, you have some disappointingly slim battles that only last for a few minutes and are over before you know it. On the flip side, the battles that do generate a lot of excitement are those where you must take down armed forts that are heavily fortified and put up a decent challenge against you. Destroying these forts are rewarding and players can expect to use cover and other tactics to overcome the odds. If these armed forts don’t entice you, then be prepared for a decidedly generic assortment of missions, ranging from destroying all enemies, knocking out generators and safely escorting others.
So what else does For Answer offer? For starters, the destructible environments are impressive. Locations can transform from absolutely pristine to a devastated battlefield with a few errant projectiles. Having debris and objects tossed around after hundreds of missiles miss your opposition is a visceral pleasantry that needs to be experienced. Despite this, it’s unfortunate that the developers didn’t provide more detailed locations to run through, as textures are noticeably lacking in many places.

Tearing cities apart is only the beginning of the fun, as players also have the chance to customize their mechs to their hearts content. As always, Armored Core: For Answer delivers wonderful customization options that have become a staple for the series over the years. While For Answer isn’t the deepest of the franchise in this respect, players can still expect to switch out their weapons, armor, and much more for their mechs. Even better is the improved interface and navigation of the previously-complex menus. Newcomers shouldn't be deterred from giving this game a shot, as it's far more user-friendly than Armored Core 4.
Another great attribute of For Answer is the ability to play through the game online cooperatively with a friend. Including online co-op for the first time is a welcome addition, adding an ample amount of replay value to the title. Disappointingly, From Software chose not to include the ability to play with a friend over local play, an aspect that needs to be addressed for the future. Currently, finding players online proves quite a task.

As mentioned earlier, the game is a mixed bag when it comes the overall visual quality. The chaos can be enthralling at times, but it isn’t the prettiest game on the market. Like Armored Core 4, For Answer experiences framerate slowdown when there is too much going on in the game. The audio department fairs a little better, thankfully, featuring quality voice-actors and terrific sound effects.
Armored Core: For Answer is a lot better than many anticipated. Though issues like the flimsy camera frustrate, the gameplay as a whole is fairly strong. Having said that, the visuals leave a lot to be desired, and the game could have benefited from the addition of offline cooperative play. While these flaws prevent the game from walking into must-have territory, fans in particular are likely to look past the game’s hiccups and enjoy it nonetheless.
Comments
-
-
-
-
GrugNorg0606 |
L1QU1D_F0X (The I's are ones & the O is a zero)- 7:43pm BST - October 6th, 2008
- 4
@3 yea agreed. Needed the review to entice me
-
Odium_Generis_Humani
- 9:19pm BST - October 6th, 2008
- 5
I love how level-headed PSU reviews are. It's listed as a "con" that the graphics aren't the best of this new generation, but it wasn't a deal breaker like it is for oh-so-many graphic you-know-what's. They also take time to play the game through, which is why (I'm guessing) their reviews take a little longer than other sites. I know they may get advanced copies, but you're not telling me Gamespot and IGN are playing through those games before passing judgement. They rate the "wow/hype factor" of the first 30 mins of play, not the games (that's how GTA4 got a 10, but a perfect sports sim like MLB The Show 08 gets an 8.4 at a site like IGN and others).
*
NOW. Having said all that, it seems like if a game has weaker graphics AND a weird camera AND "hit or miss" missions in a mission-based game, that seems lower than 7.5, doesn't it? Just thought that was weird, but I'm sure the review is on point.
-
-
-
-
thekingtut |
thekingtut- 12:41am BST - October 12th, 2008
- 9
AC4 was alright. I'm not picking this up because I don't have the money. BTW, why on Earth is Assasin's Creed under related games? Because they have the same initials?


Advertisement