Supreme Commander 2

[RCIX]

Basically, the big problem i have is with everyone railing at SC2 because it's not an FA 2.0. All i ask is that you for a moment forget SC1 and FA existed, then review it. I will gladly accept a review like that.

And yes, i do like creating bases like that when i have time

[Spikey00]

I emulated that mindset, but I still found it kind of empty, as in something is missing from the gameplay.  I believe that originates from the teching style, and lacking of an adequate AI (since most of my time is spent offline beyond playing with friends).

...and what's with the lack of accessibility to cheats...?  I'd like to spawn some crap for the AI off-map...

[RCIX]

I emulated that mindset, but I still found it kind of empty, as in something is missing from the gameplay.  I believe that originates from the teching style, and lacking of an adequate AI (since most of my time is spent offline beyond playing with friends).

...and what's with the lack of accessibility to cheats...?  I'd like to spawn some crap for the AI off-map...

Ok, i can accept that. Some games just aren't for some people (for instance, i would never play any shooter type game).

[Lancefighter]

I've really compared it to 'supcom lite' in terms of actual gameplay and such.. really thats about as far as I got :\

Has nowhere near the feel I get when I go 5v5 on Spring, which I largely miss in .. well, many games today. Its rare you see that level of spontaneous cooperation with good players in other games, especially with all the fps guys who assume they can do everything alone..

[Mánagarmr]

I think it boils down to that is IS Supreme Commander 2, successor to one of the best Strategy Games in my time which in turn was a successor to one of my favourite games of all time. You can't really say "Don't compare it to the first" since it is, by default, going to be compared to the first.

But, to humor you, I tried playing it and not thinking about the first. I am still not drawn in, amazed by the scope or impressed by the IP (story) or get challenged by the AI (I am by no means a pro strategy player). I just find the game lacking. I'd quite frankly rather play Starcraft that this. The spontaneous feeling I get is to plot down as many research centers I can and then steamroll the AI. In effect, I feel it promotes turtling too much.

I dunno, I never really liked RTSs that much to be honest. The few games that interested me were Tiberian Sun, Total Annihilation and Forged Alliance. In recent times, AI War of course

But, it does look pretty, I give them that. All while running very smoothly, which is quite impressive.

[Spikey00]

Having some fun basebuilding/watching the miserable AI.  It's a different base every day.  A lot of fooling around and using Steam's web browser, and the AI still is failing consistently with the basics, ie. base recreation, expansion, shielding, etc. not anything related to strategy after various map checks.





Cheating AI is cheating.

Notably in the third and last screenshot, my allied AI (and I don't remember it being a cheating AI giving me omni, unless it's map scripted) had a single engineer along with a couple mass extractors after its main base was destroyed in a silly manner.  It never gave reconstruction a thought and did nothing for the remainder of the game beyond using its remaining air units [when it did].  Whether or not it had enough residual energy to build a pgen, I don't know, but it should have, considering an energy generator is cheap.  I'm clueless on why it's such a BSOD dead-end, and even more so that it actually expanded to those mass extractors in the top right (which I left alone for it) but never built any more factories beyond one land and two air (as usual).

Sigh.

[Mánagarmr]

Well, initally the SupCom/FA AI was a piece of lols also. It wasn't until the AI mods started coming out that Skirmish became remotely interesting. That AI at least tried, while the stock one just curled up and cried if you killed a base.

[Spikey00]

More so with SupCom than FA--though of course with Duncane/Sorian, it was better.

So I hear on Sorian's blog that he didn't have a great deal of influence on the AI--so then, how's the moron who coded this garbage?  If you restrict air/etc. it will stall completely and essentially do nothing beyond using what it has, which is usually a single factory--in itself shows a major flaw in the AI, that it cannot adapt or even circumvent what it cannot do.

[Ozymandiaz]

Basically, the big problem i have is with everyone railing at SC2 because it's not an FA 2.0. All i ask is that you for a moment forget SC1 and FA existed, then review it. I will gladly accept a review like that.

And yes, i do like creating bases like that when i have time

I loved SupCom and FA, and naturally I picked up SupCom2, hoping for similar, but better expereince. I was grealty dissapointed.

I mean, if you are gonna use the name SupCom2, at least be true to the original gameplay. SupCom2 does not have any of the original gameplay in it, its more similar ot StarCraft/Warcraft then anything else. They might as well have called it 'SupCom: Tactics', because that is what this game is, it does not innvolve strategy at all, its all about tactics and rushing the enemy. No large maps to have long games with fun on or make any kind of strategic decisions.

The experimentals are also very much watred down to being run of the mill units, nothing spectacular about them any more, and a simple line of point defences behind shileds can easily kill most of em.

And the new research system I find kind of annoying as well, this I can atrtribute to my taste tho, btu still, SupCom had a nice system already.

The single player campaing mode: I found the story weak and uninteresting, the characthers where shallow and dull "high school students". The plot was as thin as it could be and the conclusions and "moral" in it made me sick. The dialog was very much unninvolving and lacked any sense of credibility. All the timing of the one liners was also off compleatly.

Not that the story was a masterpiece in teh original, but at least it was a lot more interesting and innvolving.

Multiplayer: this is where the game should shine, but I find the maps incluced to be poorly designed and small. There are also very few of them and most are borginly "balanced" to be eqaul on both sides. Where is the unsymetricly balanced maps? The randomly made maps? This is something I would have expected from such a game.

The AI: Absolutly horrible. When I need tu use "cheating AI" right from the start and still win easily, something is wrong. Its totally unadaptive to whatever I do, all it does is make a base and spam units based on a predetemined "strategy". I really think thats the total depth of the AI. Seriously. I attacked the AI with bombers, and it had the resurces and tech to make anti air (I attacked wiht like 4 or 5 bombers early on), but it continued to spam tanks (siffice it to say commander popped)... that is very very weak and is something I would expect from a game 10 to 15 years ago, not a game in 2010.


Ok, so I have stated that I think its a pretty poor game compared to the games its supposed to be a secual to.

Looking it at it more objectiely: Its an ok tactical game. Thats about it really, and it kind of sadens me to say it

Its not a SupCom game thats for sure, and it bothers me that it used the title. Had it not used it I would likly never have gotten the game in the first place, this only seems like a quick cash grab from the developers. I played like 6 multiplayer games with my friends, and I ma bored already with it.

All in all I would give it a 3/10.

(I had a quick comment in mind, but kinda made a quick and dirty review of it )