Supreme Commander is worst RTS game I ever played

Though I can agree supreme commander is good, I'd have to say that is where it ends.  It has 1 great feature and the rest is less than amazing.  The 1 great feature is that you can build an army so large that it would take 25 processors, 40 GPU's  and 168 Gbs of ram to support and then you'd get roughly 2 FPS, or 4 FPS on low graphics.  That is of course if you play against bots, online is a bit better, you could hit the souble digits....

Another feature that can be enjoyed are the artillery, they can be fun at times, but then you build that T4 artillery unit and it is lame because it is all conquering.

The downsides to the game are that the 3 factions are pretty equal, and the graphics are lame at best.  I know if you have them on max that they are o.k. and I run the game on max, but the performance hit for what you get is terrible. 

Now as for Oblivion, yeah Vanilla Oblivion is in the same boat as SupCom, but if you are viewing this page, then you have the ability to make it possibly the best game ever, the mods are infinite in what they cover, try quarls texture pack 3, most computers won't run it out of the single digit FPS, it looks amazing, theres also a mod that adds like 100 creatures and 400 exisiting creature variations, along with creature that are harmless, a cave full of rats is awesome, especially when they attack skeletons.

I don't know why everyone is saying that this is a "slow" game because it is not. Sure, it can take hours to take out all of your opponents if you are playing a 6 or 8 person match, but I can guarentee that if you are playing a worthy opponent and you are not building/ teching and using all of your available resources, you will lose. that is what is different in Sup Com than other rts games. Your resources are basically unlimited, its just a matter of how much you can pump out per second. In other rts games once your wood/gold/ whatever is gone, its gone, forcing you limit your units and attacks. not that tose games are bad, they are just a different style.Scott911

You don't even have to play on the large maps. If you play on the small maps the action and pacing is realy fast and intense. In a small map large battles can start within less than 5 minutes 

It actually does suck.  I have a great computer and can run this game on pretty high settings, but it just gets boring after about 30 minutes. C & C 3 has more action and more fun.d0ctorb

im really thinking in opening my own gaming business, I feel I could make the better games out there... theyre so many games literally in the 1000's and only 100-200 were any good to play again. S commander was a good game but to hard to view the map, and to figure out the resources for newbs.C$C3,starcraft,warcraft and someothers made it easier to have a blast online. So far, warcraft and starcraft mainly starcraft made the best RTS ever. This game alone made it where u can make a defense and have a blast trying to get through. C$C3 did well but failed horriblely at making a defense, I had so many turrents and I think out of 20 it killed 2 tanks.

So far game developers forgot about the last gen and ran to the next gen platform.... So many dx9,and dx10 games are gonna pwn everything. Theyre many classics back in the day but it feels from 98- early 04 we had a lack of options. Then after far cry,doom3,half life 2,somewhat halo for those fans they werent that many great games like now. Look at now a days games coming, u have a possible doom ET,quake wars,another wolfenstein,turkok remake,ut3,gears of wars,lost planet,battlefield series,counterstrike and hl mods, so many games are using the source,doom3,and ut3 engines. I cant wait to see what games aer gonna be like in 5-6 months.

Back to s commander, I loved how u could have a defense. But, Like I said.....  it was to hard to figure out how to get resources for newcomers.

[QUOTE="daftpunk_mk5"]this topic reminds me of all the n00bs that say oblvion is the worst game theyve ever playedteardropmina

how exactly do you discern who are "n00bs" and who are not? by taste? by skill? by the years of playing PC games? by the amount of games played? regardlessly, resorting to name calling -- branding someone as "n00b" and thusly disregard his/her opinion -- is cheap.

I personally never form any opinion about the "worst" games, since if I don't like certain games, I'm hardly interested in thinking about how bad they are. I know which games I spend most time on and have fun, there then will be "best" games to games.

The "bad" or "worse" games to me are simply those I lose interest and stop playing quite quickly. Oblivion happens to fall into this category (quit right after emerging out of the underground tunnel). Am I a "n00b"? taste? skill? maybe, but certainly not games played and years with PC gaming...My first rig was a Compaq Presario with mere 32MB system memory, which at the time was quite a decent machine; I played NBA Live 95 with it, and never stop PC gaming since then. I've played each of Fallout games, BG games and Planescape: Torment more than twice (BG-TOB, with various mods, I lost counts how many times I went through), but I was not able to stay with Oblivion after about 1-2 hours.

Actually yeah, I'd have to call you a noob :P

What gives myself and others the right to call you that? Well, taste and years of playing PC games, like you said. Anyone with experience in the RPG genre will admit that, even if for some personal reason the game doesn't work out for them, it is difficult to deny that it has some great qualities that clearly set it apart from all the mediocre RPG's out there (of which there are -many- ).

There have been games in the past that I just couldn't stand playing. But despite that, comparing said game to others of its genre, it was easy to see in what ways the game was far superior to other inferior games. Same goes for Oblivion; if someone thinks it's one of the worst RPG's around, they're either brand new to the genre, or they just don't have taste in games. aka, noob :P

I didnt like it because all the factions were the same and only had a few differences aside from the looksLouieV13

Then you must be blind.... The slight differences in each unit makes a HUGE difference in each faction.

Example:

Some Aeon ground units can hover. Take note of the Mobile Shield Generator and the 2nd Tier AA Tank. When you have a navy, the MSG can literately protect all the naval units, making them much MUCh stronger.

The Cybran depends on stealth. The "slight difference" in the air units can be devastating when going against an opponent in a big map. Did i hear FLANK

The UEF is just overall strong. Nothing really special except for their Tier 3 Gunship which can rip any ground/naval unit to pieces.

So, the "slight" difference does make a HUGE impact of the game.

If you don't like SupCom, play CoH. That game has novelty as well.

Whoever thinks CnC 3 is great and addictive must have a mundane mind in strategy games.

I had more fun playing Supreme Commander over Tiberium Wars, but either way World In Conflict >

All.K_r_a_u_s_e_r

Amen brother!

World in conflict is going to be noiiiiiiice! 

The big problem Supreme Commander has is bad tutorials and because of it you got all these idiots all over the internet saying the game blows for reasons that really become laughable remarks once you know how to play the game.

First off while the same type of units are mirrored along all factions 80% of the units for each faction actually have some gigantic differences in comparison to the next factions which noobs will think are just different models, it's not something your going to notice in an hour.

 To much micromanagement? :lol: clearly the remarks of someone who doesn't know how to do most of the things the complex things the UI is capable of honestly say what you want about this game, but know that the sheer volume of abilities the UI gives you puts all other RTS games to shame.

 The Games take to long (often I hear the laughable comments games take hours to play :lol: )  Supreme Commander has a wide range of different size maps, sure if you pick the biggest map which is literally hundreds of times bigger then the biggest maps in other RTS games the game is obviously going to take a long time, but onthe smaller maps the average game is about 15 minutes long assuming it's not a battle of two noobs turtling in their shell.

 The interface is to big? Ignorance at it's worst right here, there is a patch that allows you to make the UI much smaller in a simple click, this feature came in the first patch that was out about a week after the games release.

Heh, yeah. I turtle, but it's because I want to have a huge battle between loads of units, not because i'm a noob.

Really, people who don't like it have just tried the demo or can't handle the interface. In my experience, the Cybran are the most boring side, so the demo wasn't really representative of the real game.

The interface is hard at first, but after that, it's really easy. I zoom in, get my commander to build something, zoom out, point the mouse to somewhere and zoom in there. Micromanagement makes the game!