Realism is just an excuse for poor gameplay. Nine times out of ten, unrealistic is more fun. Also, the AI for the units is retarded. They won't attack an enemy tower that's firing on them unless you tell them. On the tutorial I had to switch back and forth like crazy just to get them to stay attacking the stupid buildings. (not that difficult, but I'd like a little less mental retardation in my AI thank you) Also, when I say I'm unbiased, of course I have preferences, I'm just trying to say that I'm viewing this game objectively by comparing it to SupCom1.

Well, earlier today I D/Led and played a Skirmish game of SupCom 1. I have to say, the only the that bugged the living hell out of me was the seeming inability to freely manipulate the camera in 3D (ala Sins/Homeworld1/2/DoW1).

I still haven't tried the SupCom 2 demo, but I don't think I'm really going to, at least not for a while.

Then I suggest you look a little closer at your connection usage. It's a well documented occurance, as is its insane usage of CPU and RAM for he most basic of tasks.


This is the primary reason why I personally chose Impulse over Steam - even though I have both platforms installed - and I believe this would be the nature of many persons preferences, however I can't speak for everyone.

I put an army into the middle of an enemy base. They sat there doing nothing while they were fired upon by turrets. I instructed them to attack a turret, then flipped back to my other army. When I came back, they were still under fire by the second turret, but they wouldn't attack it or any of the buildings that were around them.

They should still auto-target something that is attacking them. If they don't, the micro needed for that game is insane. You could just always create long range units and micro them as to aggravate your opponent.

Where is my FAT BOY?

Supcom has a patrol function that works in a similar fashion. Supcom’s zoom and intel options kinda make such necessities redundant (at least in vanilla and forged alliance). Ive never felt the need for something like that. I like that my units do what they’re told, and don’t try and think for themselves. Its too easy to lay a trap for substandard unit AI with any other method. The units have such huge range anyhow they don’t need to do anything other than shoot at whatever comes into range.

I agree with most of what you said Tiger, especially the part about the numbers; additional information would've been nice.

The reviews for the full version are out, and the seem to mirror the general opinions of the demo here.  It's easier to play than 1, but it now lacks depth and anything to really make it stand out in the sea of RTS'.  It's not a bad game, just not one you'll still be playing months from now.  SupCom 1 was complex, but at least that gave it a niche.  Now it's just a bit too generic.

Finally (and this isn't specific to Sup Com 2), what happened to numbers? Look at older RTS, you'll see that units have attack values, defense values and the like. Here we have vague generalities. But hey, maybe I'm just a tool prattling on. Hard to tell.

 

I prefer this as well.  Since Warcraft 2, I like to know straight up how much damage my units do and how much they can take.  Sins in particular went a step further and displayed the DPS values.  Having to look at charts outside of the game sucks, and is lazy design.  I don't care if it clutters the screen, this is a RTS not an platformer.  Hell, even some platformers give you exact weapon and health data.

"Supreme Command N Conquer".  That's my thought after the demo.  I was so looking forward to this game for so long, that it's been (or should I say WAS) on my birthday wish-list for like 6 months now.

Economy; graphics; number of units; Experimentals; base building all dumbed down for the console kiddies.  Most everything I loved about SC1 and Forged Alliance have now been diluted into a milky RTS clone.  Even the physics of the units gives the game an almost "Red Alert" feel.

And watching Fat Boys being spammed like a zerg rush was the nail in the coffin for me.  Experimentals are suppose to be the titans of the battlefield, not spamable, agile, speedy, fragile units.

This reminds me SO much of Champions Online.  I know a half dozen people sick of WoW; who played Champions RPG for 20+ years; and were ready to make CO their next MMO for the next several years.  Then they made it so it worked on a console too, dumbed down the economemy and combat options so they could almost be used with a joystick, and destroyed a game that could have potentially been the next big MMO for years.  Nobody I know will touch the game now (even if there was no monthly charge).

Sad.

Actually Demigod was the third best selling PC game of 2009 so GPG is not in such dire need of a hit. Demigod has actually sold better then GPG ever expected, Frogboy confirmed this. This was indicated in the thread titled 'so much fo piracy" or something, I cant fully remember.

The Square Enix forums are full of people raging, mainly about the economy, but there is alot of conflicting views. Alot like the new art style, alot do not. The general consensus seems to be that supcom 2 has some good ideas, but wasn't faithful to the original.

 

Too early to tell, my friend. It was just released this week, and isn't even out in Europe yet.

I think there are a lot SupCom veterans giving knee-jerk negative reactions--it's reminicant of the massive backlash anytime Facebook makes a change to their layout. Give it a couple of months and people will fall in line. All the non-hardcore SupCom1 players I have spoken to really love the new direction.

Supreme Commander 2 is a great game. I've played the multiplayer several times now and each time I played it was heaps of fun. Chris Taylor deserves a pat on the back for a job well done.

mp

Sorry, I wasn't very specific in what I meant. Look at the Demigod community now. Sure, the game sold great - which means we might see a sequel - however the game is mostly a graveyard. I've been here since day one, and it pains me to see that the game didn't take off as it should have. SupCom 2 will likely follow suit - it won't be a financial flop, however it'll be a ghost town in six months time.

I'll say this first: I've only played the Demo. I've fooled around with the debug stuff, as well. My opinion is based upon the hours I've spent with the Demo, and from third party sources who's opinion I trust.
SupCom 2 has become everything that SupCom tried not to be; namely, a generic C&C and Starcraft clone. The battles are smaller - albiet still large than most RTS games, the game has less features, less streamlining (how were estimated Build Times considered a bad thing?), less units and frankly less strategy as a result. I would've prefered this to be launched as a console exclusive title under the SupCom name. Supreme Commander: Tactics or something. For me, and I still play SupCom to this day, this is not a sequel to the game I happily paid $100.00 for.