Soldato
- Joined
- 11 May 2006
- Posts
- 5,786
This is pretty much all they needed to do to make SupCom 2 sucessful as FA was pretty much 95% of the way to perfection, it had all the ground work for a very decent sequel.
*** Supreme Commander 2 ***
- Thread starter Kosmiche
- Start date
This is pretty much all they needed to do to make SupCom 2 sucessful as FA was pretty much 95% of the way to perfection, it had all the ground work for a very decent sequel.
ignoring red alert 3 it's not really fair to compare this to C&C.
C&C tib wars for example has very different races with unique units.....they dont get mirrored.
C&C has some nice touches too..snipers for example can spot for their artillery which can shoot pretty much anywhere on the map.
certain vehicles shoot depending on which infantry they have in.
only the aliens have shields.
graphics in C&C tib wars are pretty impressive and look far more believable/realistic....the scrin races Tripod looks like it has been copied from a movie rather than a lego advert.
C&C may have been gradually dumbed down over the years but this game has somehow managed to go back further than its starting point(Total Anihilation) in just 1 go.
supcom has went from being a massive deep strategy war game to lego tanks.
C&C tib wars for example has very different races with unique units.....they dont get mirrored.
C&C has some nice touches too..snipers for example can spot for their artillery which can shoot pretty much anywhere on the map.
certain vehicles shoot depending on which infantry they have in.
only the aliens have shields.
graphics in C&C tib wars are pretty impressive and look far more believable/realistic....the scrin races Tripod looks like it has been copied from a movie rather than a lego advert.
C&C may have been gradually dumbed down over the years but this game has somehow managed to go back further than its starting point(Total Anihilation) in just 1 go.
supcom has went from being a massive deep strategy war game to lego tanks.
Supcom\FA were commercial failures. So much so that Chris had to let go 80 of his 125 GPG employees in 2008, and sell the IP to Square Enix.
Sadly, most of the market would buy a C&C clone...
Last edited:
With regards to why the game wasn't just based on the SC/FA engine, it is because the engine or underlying architecture that governed how resources were generated was extremely complex and dogged FA down in terms of performance.
I had read a C.Taylor interview about this, where he explained why he had to move away from the SC/FA era. Almost everything in FA had a constant resource tick, even vehicle/object debris (until properly destroyed) for example. FA, lets face it was a dog in terms of performance, let alone AI but the core gameplay was rather sound.
I feel somewhat dissappointed with the short amount of SC2 I have experienced, but I'll play the remainder of the campaign missions later tonight.
I've always been an RTS tart, but firmly in the Age of Empires/C&C/Total War games. Prior to a mate mentioning SupCom in 2009, I had never even heard of the games. Then I was introduced to FA mid-2009 and the way I looked at my other RTS games completely changed.
I still can't get over how unbelievably camp the ingame 'videos' are of the various characters. Don't get me started on the quality of the ingame units we've seen so far...
I had read a C.Taylor interview about this, where he explained why he had to move away from the SC/FA era. Almost everything in FA had a constant resource tick, even vehicle/object debris (until properly destroyed) for example. FA, lets face it was a dog in terms of performance, let alone AI but the core gameplay was rather sound.
I feel somewhat dissappointed with the short amount of SC2 I have experienced, but I'll play the remainder of the campaign missions later tonight.
I've always been an RTS tart, but firmly in the Age of Empires/C&C/Total War games. Prior to a mate mentioning SupCom in 2009, I had never even heard of the games. Then I was introduced to FA mid-2009 and the way I looked at my other RTS games completely changed.
I still can't get over how unbelievably camp the ingame 'videos' are of the various characters. Don't get me started on the quality of the ingame units we've seen so far...
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 12,319
- Location
- England
Have they left the graphics options off ie textures/high settings disabeled ?
Maybe the demo has left a lot out was just pondering....
Wish I could try but doubt its worth trying on a HD4350 card lol
Maybe the demo has left a lot out was just pondering....
Wish I could try but doubt its worth trying on a HD4350 card lol
A Cybran commander who says "toodles" as he leaves the battlefield is probably describable as camp, yes.
I think it will disappoint the old fans but will impress the people who never played the first.
Just like Supcom 2
I think most of the real SupCom fans are liking the changes.
Check the GPG forums, its only the newbies that are complaining, just like they did with the last one.
I will reserve judgement until I have seen the full tech tree and I should point out that the Fatboy 2 is not a powerful experimental. There are higher levels experimentals too
I suggest you visit www.supremecommander2.com (and the first site, take off the "2") and check the bottom of the screen. You know, where it says "Supreme Commander is a registered trademark of Square Enix"?
As for the employees part, it was discussed on the GPG forums, I'll go find the details.
Edit: Here you go - http://g4tv.com/thefeed/blog/post/7...e-Games-With-Chris-Taylor-And-Mike-Capps.html
Last edited:
GPG make more games then just SupCom/FA. The fact Demigod and Space Siege weren't all that (there's a pattern here) will have contributed plus the obvious financial climate of the time. I thought THQ owned the IP and sold it to Square.
From what I read on the GPG forums no publisher wanted to touch the game if they made it like SupCom/FA. It had to be more mainstream. Whether that's the case or just a convenient excuse for this dross I don't know.
I realise that, but do you really think SS and Demigod sold even as much as Supcom?
If you watch the SC2 interviews with Chris it becomes apparent he takes his marching orders from SE now. That includes giving wishy-washy answers to important questions.
Which was my point.
Kings & Castles had better not be a repeat of TA: Kingdoms or GPG is heading down the sinkhole...
I was hoping this was the case with the demo. Although when you look at the install size of the full game, it is just 4-5GB when SC or FA was around twice that. It does make you think.
Does anyone know how large (filesize) the demo itself is? I never did check.
Haven't looked into that game. Though with the current trend at GPG there's a good chance it will be gash. I hope not though.
1.64gb in my Steam folder.
Games move around all the time within studios and lets not forget that the name means nothing to this game after all it was TA beforehand
Also that isnt a link to the main forum
Decided to load up Forged Alliance. My first mission, a good couple of 100 buildings, a 100 Amphibious Assault Bots and 100 Air/Naval units, a huge unlimited range artillery gun (<3) and a giant push forwards with every available unit onto the mainland to set up a front base.
Why did they change from this resource system? If you had difficulty understanding it i can only assume you need to go back to school. Managing my Mass/Energy by occasionally having to switch my Fabricators off is part of the game.
Why did they change from this resource system? If you had difficulty understanding it i can only assume you need to go back to school. Managing my Mass/Energy by occasionally having to switch my Fabricators off is part of the game.