For those that are interested :P
or bored
This topic is locked from further discussion.
Just as I thought: Underwhelming, not fun or exciting to play, and incredibly bland and without a soul.
This one will land in the bargain bins incredibly quickly and follow the same path as Demigod. GPG never learns.
Ack, the opinions have me on the borderline now. Probably won't buy it.HOMIE_G64I wouldn't judge the game on other peoples opinions, try the demo out for yourself, I personally don't think half of the people that are knocking the game even played it personally, just trolling and looking for attention, I'm downloading the demo now, but I won't played it until tommorow more than likely.
[QUOTE="Shade340"]
Just played it what a dissapointment they dumbed it down considerably this make me sad, and I almost preordered it
The last one was total crap and too hardcore that it died in no time. They had to try something. That's your opinion, but it was far from crap imo, it got great reviewers.After being a huge fan of Total Annihilation, and thoroughly enjoying Supreme Commander, I hate to say that I find this sequel to be a tad...underwhelming.
Several faults I have with the game:
1. Can only queue units that you can actually afford, which also includes x5 queuing (I really don't like this)
2. This might be a bug with the demo, but I couldn't get engineers to assist my commander or other engineers to build something
3. Voice acting is terrible. I know, very minor, but they made this game with a more appealing story. Can't really feel for the characters when they have the emotional range of a teaspoon.
4. Unit info doesn't show any info, just health and rank. Sup Com 1 at least showed what each unit was capable of be it Anti-Air, torpedoes, etc..
5. Units regain health without any sort of rank up (there's even a research tree which increases the healing speed)
6. This is just my personal opinion, but I'm not particularly fond of research trees. You get everything by the end of the game anyway.
7. I didn't find the graphics particularly appealing, but in truth, everything from the mountains to the ground was a dull gray or blue in the first level of the demo.
There are a few more things, but most of them are stupid or exceedingly minor complaints. Flame on!
well if you liked it, yes. but you should only buy the first one or wait for the second one. they look very similar. unless you want to follow the story, but the story had nothing special.This is my first time playing a Supreme Commander game and I thought it was a blast, maybe I should try out the first 1 and Forged alliance?
BLUBBBER
agree with everything here. especially the dialogues, i almost fell asleep while listening to them. the tech trees are kind of boring too for the most part.After being a huge fan of Total Annihilation, and thoroughly enjoying Supreme Commander, I hate to say that I find this sequel to be a tad...underwhelming.
Several faults I have with the game:
1. Can only queue units that you can actually afford, which also includes x5 queuing (I really don't like this)
2. This might be a bug with the demo, but I couldn't get engineers to assist my commander or other engineers to build something
3. Voice acting is terrible. I know, very minor, but they made this game with a more appealing story. Can't really feel for the characters when they have the emotional range of a teaspoon.
4. Unit info doesn't show any info, just health and rank. Sup Com 1 at least showed what each unit was capable of be it Anti-Air, torpedoes, etc..
5. Units regain health without any sort of rank up (there's even a research tree which increases the healing speed)
6. This is just my personal opinion, but I'm not particularly fond of research trees. You get everything by the end of the game anyway.
7. I didn't find the graphics particularly appealing, but in truth, everything from the mountains to the ground was a dull gray or blue in the first level of the demo.
There are a few more things, but most of them are stupid or exceedingly minor complaints. Flame on!
MythPro1
yyyyyyyyyyyea!
Thanks for the heads up man, downloading now. Debating between this or Starcraft 2...SupCom 2 for the epic gameplay and singleplayer, or SC2 for the opportunity to finally get into multiplayer RTSs.
SupCom might satisfy both, though
QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]
yyyyyyyyyyyea!
Thanks for the heads up man, downloading now. Debating between this or Starcraft 2...SupCom 2 for the epic gameplay and singleplayer, or SC2 for the opportunity to finally get into multiplayer RTSs.
SupCom might satisfy both, though
SupCom 2 for single-player? You're joking, right? Starcraft 2's single-player will absolutely DESTROY anything SupCom 2 has to offer.
Is anyone else unable to select the highest resolutions? I want to set the game to 1600x1200, but the list of resolutions is incredibly long (with 5 or 6 refresh rate versions of every res), so much so that it actually goes off the bottom of the screen. However, they provided no way to scroll through this list, so the highest I can set it is 1280x1024 -_-.
QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]
yyyyyyyyyyyea!
Thanks for the heads up man, downloading now. Debating between this or Starcraft 2...SupCom 2 for the epic gameplay and singleplayer, or SC2 for the opportunity to finally get into multiplayer RTSs.
SupCom might satisfy both, thoughTHA-TODD-BEAST
SupCom 2 for single-player? You're joking, right? Starcraft 2's single-player will absolutely DESTROY anything SupCom 2 has to offer.
dunno, if SC2's siingleplayer is anything like SC1, itlll be dull
the plot, as with any BLizzard game, will be epic...but I just found the individual missions of Starcraft dull and repetative.
I will problably buy both eventually, though
Here is pretty much what I thought when I played the demo, copied from another thread....
-Economy: What made Supreme Commander different from all other games was that you didn't need to gather resources, or see if you had enough money to buy something. Now what sets this game apart from the other RTS games out there? I understand that its harder to stall ur economy, actually it seems almost idiot proof to stall. In doing so they please the casual gamer, but have changed a core element of the franchise.
-Engineers cant build together. As far as i could tell, the days of 50 engineers building an experimental is over. So are the days of things requiring 1 hour to build. I think all the "experiments" we saw are not the "Major" experimentals. Either that, or they are severely underpowered. "Oh no! a fatboy is coming!", "Oh its ok, my 10 gunships took it out???"
-Maps are small: The previous game had huge open areas where you could just mass armies into. With this map design taken from demigod, the maps are just too small. You are limited in some areas (Your main platform in the last level of the demo). Is the idea to get us to expand? Why do we need to expand if we can make our own resources? If your going to change this game and be like all the others, why would i buy this game?
-Buildings are too big: Holy Cow were they big. I build an extra land factory and my base felt really small. And the experimental Airfield was just way to big for nothing.
-Mini experimentals are useless: Fatboy was easily taken down by Air units. What happened to "Holy **** a fatboy!" and the panic that followed in the first Sup Com? Its been replaced by a "hmm, ok ill build some gun ships i guess"
-Hard to see command cues, and some text: I had difficulty seeing some text in the game because of the font, and the lines for command cues were not big enough, or bright enough. (Ill get to brightness later on)
-No unit description? Whats the difference between the sub and the cruiser? ... I have no idea. 1 is a sub, so i guess it can go under water. Other then that I have no idea what the unit im building has that makes it so special. I unlocked a bigger ship in the first water level. I assumed it would be more powerful, and it was. But what was different about it? Nothing.
"Strategy happens before the game, Tactics happen during". Well said CT. Now, what 'strategy' could i use while sending these ships? Perhaps one cant attack air? Guess ill have to build 3, send them into battle, and hope to god that i can remember which can shoot planes.
-No progress for unit being built: Whats the point of "Half Baking" something if you cant even see what its % is at? I would be building units, and have no idea when they would be completed or not. So you kinda have to guess when your half baking an experimental.
-No economy management: Its been reduced to the point where i never thought "Maybe i should build more mass, or energy". I guess that could be good in some ways, but with that aspect of the game removed, am I just seeing who can click the fastest?
-No economy bonus (adjacency bonus)
-Maps are all about land, sea, and air. No wait! There's no water in the clouds, just air and land? I mean thats one thing that i liked from Supreme Commander, it was that the base was soo huge, if there was an island, I could flank from the back. Or go around the base. Now what can i do? Send air units into an area where a smart player would build many AA guns near a cliff, and lots of PD where the bridges are. This leads to massive funneling problems, where you only have a limited points to defend.
-Disney colors! My god are the colors horribly bright. Its a war, an inter Galactic war! Why does every thing look like a Final Fantasy game?!? Who's publishing this game for Christ Sake! You would swear it was Square Enix! What??? They are?!? Seriously, add some dirt, make it dark, space is a cold dark place, stop making it feel like everything shines super bright.
-Hud is useless, and provides you with no information. You have to mouse over a unit to find its health. But once you mouse over, the info goes away. You would think selecting a unit would give you a permanent section on your hud providing relevant info, like health, etc. but no, it doesn't either. So if your sending an expermental unit that took you a while to build, and you want to monitor its health, you better have your mouse glued on it like a hawk. Oh and if it flies? Well good luck with that. The hud is suppose to tell you all the relevant info thats needed in the game. I felt like it merely provided me with some buttons, most of which were useless, or needed to be clicked too many times, or HAD NO INDICATION OF WHAT THEY DID! What does the wrench in the circle do? I have no idea.
There are even more things that I could list that make this a horribe, horrible sequel. It felt nothing like the first SC. They ripped its soul out and trampled it to dust. Shame on you Square Enix.
I only just started playing and already there are a few things i miss.
-Engineer Assist is gibbed. It felt odd that I could only dedicate a limited number of engineers to a single factory instead of having full blow dedication from any number of engineers that I want. Sames goes for building since it felt horribly strange that i can only dedicate one engineer to a single building.
-I liked how my ACU was able to walk underwater. I'm either missing a certain research upgrade or thats just the definite way they designed the unit.
-Flux Economy: ye old econ system was fine enough really. I'm damn sure people are fully capable of understanding it so I cant see the current system being a good thing to adapt. Especially if at the very least, it ain't going to fluctuate around like it did in the first supcom.
-They really ought to throw in unit descriptions and a percentage indicator for completion of units. Its so damn fundamental yet not in the game >_>
I guess I'm a fan of "dumbed down" RTS games then. I love it. I love the feeling of sending hundreds of units out to destroy an enemy, and I feel like SupCom2 nails that feeling. And I think the graphics are pretty great, especially the environments. I don't understand why people are complaining about them.
I don't think it's as bad as everyone is making it out to be, yes it is different from the first game, and not quite as good, but judging from the demo it's still a pretty great game in its own right. People need to stop talking down on this game as though it's some unplayable mess like Stalin vs Martians or Universe at War rather than just a kinda disappointing sequel that is still great, just not as great as the first game. Also, anyone who thinks the enviroment graphics are bad in the demo should go back and play the first game, because the maps look significantly better in 2, the worst thing about the original SupCom was its graphics.kieranb2000
I could not agree more.
While the graphics are technically not much better than the original, the detail and art direction of the environment, buildings, and units is far, far better...there are more moving parts, more detail, and in general it just looks more vibrant
As far as the gameplay is concerned, it feels just like the old game.
The economy system is a bit different; I much prefer the "tug of war" of the original and SupCom 1 where you had a +x amount of resources, and -y draw on the resources, as opposed to the typical "lump sum" system found in every other RTS.
Still...the maps are big, the battles are grand, and building units en masse and hurling them at the enemy is even more enjoyable.
The only genuine gripe anyone should have with the demo is the lack of information in the interface (i.e. a description of the units); outside of that, this is a well-polished game that is fun, and runs far better than the original ever did.
[QUOTE="kieranb2000"]I don't think it's as bad as everyone is making it out to be, yes it is different from the first game, and not quite as good, but judging from the demo it's still a pretty great game in its own right. People need to stop talking down on this game as though it's some unplayable mess like Stalin vs Martians or Universe at War rather than just a kinda disappointing sequel that is still great, just not as great as the first game. Also, anyone who thinks the enviroment graphics are bad in the demo should go back and play the first game, because the maps look significantly better in 2, the worst thing about the original SupCom was its graphics.mrbojangles25
I could not agree more.
While the graphics are technically not much better than the original, the detail and art direction of the environment, buildings, and units is far, far better...there are more moving parts, more detail, and in general it just looks more vibrant
As far as the gameplay is concerned, it feels just like the old game.
The economy system is a bit different; I much prefer the "tug of war" of the original and SupCom 1 where you had a +x amount of resources, and -y draw on the resources, as opposed to the typical "lump sum" system found in every other RTS.
Still...the maps are big, the battles are grand, and building units en masse and hurling them at the enemy is even more enjoyable.
The only genuine gripe anyone should have with the demo is the lack of information in the interface (i.e. a description of the units); outside of that, this is a well-polished game that is fun, and runs far better than the original ever did.
Glad to see someone who isn't jumping on the hate-wagon :P That said, I miss the old economy, where power actually you know...powered things. As far as I can tell now power is just another resource that is used to build things, which sucks :/ I enjoyed needing to balance my power usage, turning off shield generators and radars on safer positioned buildings to help defend the front lines while building more energy generators. Man, Fun times.Oh man... I'm really, really not liking how this game looks. This extreme, bright color saturation coupled with overdone vibrancy on all the units and buildings looks beyond distasteful for me to the point of being offensively bad. I like me a well-done vibrant look (Mirror's Edge has a very nice aesthetic to it), but this just looks exhorbitant and very offputting to me. I've played a lot of games I didn't care for the look of where I was more than able to look past the visuals. But with this game, I feel like I'm actively tolerating what I'm looking at while playing it. It's very weird for me as I don't think I've ever felt this way or had this kind of impulsive, base negative reaction about a game's appearance before...
Is anyone else unable to select the highest resolutions? I want to set the game to 1600x1200, but the list of resolutions is incredibly long (with 5 or 6 refresh rate versions of every res), so much so that it actually goes off the bottom of the screen. However, they provided no way to scroll through this list, so the highest I can set it is 1280x1024 -_-.
JP_Russell
I had the same problem. I just kept choosing the largest resolution I could (as far down the list I could go), apply that, and choose the next largest one, etc. Think it took me 3 times to get to my resolution, lol.
[QUOTE="JP_Russell"]
Is anyone else unable to select the highest resolutions? I want to set the game to 1600x1200, but the list of resolutions is incredibly long (with 5 or 6 refresh rate versions of every res), so much so that it actually goes off the bottom of the screen. However, they provided no way to scroll through this list, so the highest I can set it is 1280x1024 -_-.
Esoteric
I had the same problem. I just kept choosing the largest resolution I could (as far down the list I could go), apply that, and choose the next largest one, etc. Think it took me 3 times to get to my resolution, lol.
Yeah, unfortunately I can't set it to 1600x1200 even at 1280x1024. Stops at 1600x900 at 72Hz, I think.
But can you choose 1600x900, and then see further down the list?
Esoteric
Nah, 1024 is more Y-axis pixels so I actually see less at 1600x900.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment