Customer Reviews
Do not buy this if you are a Supreme Commander fan
WARNING: It has come to my
attention that there is an organized campaign to manipulate the review
scores for this game, with posters on the official forums attempting to
recruit others to create multiple accounts and write 5 star reviews.
Obviously it hasn't been very effective, but be aware that the review
scores have been slightly increased by this shilling. I highly encourage
you to download the demo and find out the truth.
Supreme
Commander 2 is the latest game in a disturbing trend gripping the gaming
industry: more and more developers simply have no regard at all for the
fans who put them on the map. If you enjoyed Supreme Commander and
Forged Alliance for everything that made them unique, DO NOT BUY THIS
GAME. It is complete and utter rubbish, in essence a parody of the
masterful original. The game has been dumbed down to be almost
unrecognizable, although some of the good elements like extreme map
zooming and a good unit patrol interface remain. Those who prefer more
micro-heavy games like Command and Conquer may still get some enjoyment
out of it, but if you want a small scale RTS there are many of them
better than Supreme Commander 2.
The problems start with Tiers.
In Supreme Commander 1, there were three tiers of units, plus
experimental units. The first tier units were like little ants, useful
for little other than early game harassment but incapable of dealing any
real damage. Second tier units were capable fighters, and third tier
units were pretty powerful. By the end of the game, you could have
hundreds upon hundreds of units out, yet it was still possible for a
single experimental unit to slice through your entire army and kill your
commander. It was thrilling to devote your entire economy for a
protracted period of time just to get that experimental out, and you
would cheer for it as it completely shifted the battle. Supreme
Commander 2 throws all of that away. The units now fall roughly along
the lines of the dozens of C&C style RTS games, with experimental
units being roughly as powerful as Mammoth Tanks. I saw an experimental
unit get taken down by five gunships. FIVE. Now there is no longer any
strategy in deciding what to build. Whereas before, you would need to
make hard choices about whether to devote significant resources to tech
up and devote a large portion of your economy to build single units or
structures, now you can pump out experimental units in under 5 minutes
from the start of a game. In other words, Supreme Commander 2 is now
just your standard RTS, but with units far more generic than most. The
macro has been scaled back dramatically, yet most units are still
one-dimensional so there is little need for micromanagement since you
won't affect the outcome of a skirmish.
As for resources, the
great system where you used mass to build things and power to, well,
power them is gone. Structures and units no longer use up power by being
in play. Instead, power is just like mass. When you build something,
power is deducted from your cache and that's it. In other words, you can
build shield generators and artillery all over the place with no
consequence since it costs nothing to support them. This means even more
incentive to turtle since a surgical strike on any one area of your
base isn't going to damage anything you can't easily replace. In Supreme
Commander 1, it was at least a possibility that your generators would
be taken out, rendering you defenseless as the shields and turrets shut
down. To make matters worse, the old system where resources were
deducted as units and structures were built is GONE. Now resources are
deducted immediately when you queue up unit production or structures,
which means you can no longer queue up a massive base and then let an
engineer do his thing. This was one of the two or three most important
aspects of Supreme Commander and it is completely ruined.
Now
there is a third resource: research. Points are produced by buildings
and can be spent in one of five overly convoluted tech trees. This is a
terrible system that replaces the tiers from Supreme Commander.
Unlocking the best units is too easy, and the pace of the game is killed
by having to constantly open up the tech menu to unlock things. It also
discourages adapting your tactics to the situation because there are so
many minor upgrades that you'll need to choose between specializing in
ground, air,or naval units since it will take a very long match to power
up all three. It was just flat out stupid to have a menu-based system
instead of tying upgrades to buildings. Some games like Battle for
Middle Earth make it work because they don't have as many upgrades and
don't require constantly accessing the menu, but it doesn't work here.
Normally
a sequel is supposed to be bigger, badder, and better in every way.
Supreme Commander 2 takes a step back in almost every aspect. The
graphics are scaled back. There are far less unit types and the unit cap
is far lower. The maps are much smaller. They aren't small just in
comparison to the original, they're actually some of the smallest maps
I've seen in a RTS. The campaign is very short, with 18 missions that
take around 10-30 minutes each. Normally a RTS with such a low mission
number will at least have 1-2 hour missions. And as for the much vaunted
"story" and "cinematic experience" that was supposedly added? It's
terrible. The CG is just video of the normal in-game assets, so it
actually looks worse than the gameplay if you have a decent computer.
The characters are insufferable, the dialogue terrible, and the story
paper thin. The only positive thing I can say is that the art design of
the maps is improved.
There is very little to recommend Supreme
Commander 2. If you like the original, you're better off playing that,
and if you didn't, there are many better RTS to spend your time and
money on. To add insult to injury though, once you own this terrible
game, you OWN it. That's right, Steam is required for this game, and it
will be tied to your account forever. I look at this as a shrewd and
cynical move by a developer that knows the market would otherwise be
flooded with used copies because most who buy this game will not want to
keep it.
-------
Addendum: If I could revise my score down to 0
stars after what I've seen of the online play after writing the original
review, I would. Matches end one of two ways almost every time. In a 2 v
2 or larger match, multiple players will rush with their commanders at
the start and kill one of the enemy commanders 2 on 1. Then repeat with
the other players. Total match time is around 5 minutes. Otherwise, the
match will end in a swarm of gunships due to the weak anti air options.
There is no reason to build anything else because there aren't any units
or structures in the game that, for the same resource cost, can kill a
swarm of gunships faster than they can kill a commander. Also, to
clarify something I said earlier, in SINGLE player it is very easy to
unlock the best experimental units and pump them out in mass quantities.
In online play however, they barely play any role at all. Anyone who
tries to build them will probably lose because they are not as effective
as normal units, dollar for dollar. There is no point in trying
different strategies. Online play is ruled by basic units and whoever
has the bigger blob of them wins.
Why
would you do this to us, Chris Taylor?
If you liked the intricate
economy and extreme scale of Supreme Commander and Supreme
Commander:Forged Alliance, you probably won't like this game.
Years
ago, I heard about Total Annihilation. It was similar to other RTS
games, but on an absolutely massive scale. I loved carrying on
coordinated assaults of multiple groups of hundreds of units each. It
redefined how I looked at all RTS games.
In 2007, I got Supreme
Commander expecting more of the same. I couldn't have been more pleased.
Incredibly huge maps, beautiful graphics, an unbelievable difference in
the size and power of units - everything I could hope for in a
large-scale RTS. Some maps were so big, that it could take slower units
10-15 minutes to cross it. Some units took so long to build that it
could take an hour for a single low level engineer to complete them.
After you completed this massive unit (they were called
"Experimentals"), it was always a pleasure to watch it slowly plod
across the map and take down hundreds of units and half of the enemy
base. Economy and assault required substantial planning and
coordination. These were all possible because the game had an excellent
interface, and a lot of thought was put into streamlining economy and
mobilizing assaults. All of this worked together to provide an extremely
rewarding experience. I can say without hesitation that Supreme
Commander provided you with the most satisfaction of any RTS when
carrying out a successful assault.
Supreme Commander:Forged
Alliance was more of the same, but better. They added to the game,
optimized and improved it.
Chris Taylor (the creator of these
games) had outdone himself each time, so it never even occurred to me
that Supreme Commander 2 would be anything less than magnificent. I
preordered it without hesitation. The best way to describe the changes
from the last game is its been massively "dumbed down". Economic
planning is less significant because you must have all of the required
resources before you can begin building. Maps are positively tiny
compared to the old game. Not nearly as many units to choose from (even
if you ignore the lower tech levels in the previous games).
Experimentals aren't nearly as powerful or daunting. They only take a
couple of minutes to build, and they aren't nearly as satisfying to use.
There's less variation in power and size of all units. Almost all of
the sense of scale from the old games has been eliminated.
The
game feels like it was simplified in every way (graphics, concept,
scale, complexity, and multiplayer), so that it could run on the Xbox
360.
Gameplay aside, there are other problems with it -
especially for people with poor internet connections. Chris Taylor has
always been a proponent of LAN play. Both Supreme Commanders were LAN
playable with one copy of the game. His previous RTS, Demigod, was also
LAN playable with one copy, and the instruction manual even joked about
it. Supreme Commander 2 has no LAN play.
Steam (the digital
distribution platform) was, unexpectedly, also a problem. Steam has its
problems, but overall, I love it. I use Steam every day. But less than
half of the game was actually included on the disk. The disk install was
a little over than 2GB, and the "update" was more than the install. I'm
sorry, but I don't consider a 2.5GB "update" on the day of release
acceptable. I couldn't play it at all on release day. I had to wait till
I went to another place with a good internet connection, download it,
back it up on a USB drive, and restore the backup on my computer.
Positives
-
Excellent game interface - slightly more refined than the previous
games
- Glassy smooth graphics on middle of the road hardware.
-
Good campaign (so far)
- Not possible to bring your production speed
to a halt
Negatives
- Overall lack of large scale
-
Substantially fewer units
- Simplistic economy requires more
maintenance
- Steam can be a problem for some
- No LAN play
If
you haven't played Supreme Commander:Forged Alliance, I would recommend
it over Supreme Commander 2. I will not be buying any more Supreme
Commander games unless there are some MAJOR changes.
This is a
good RTS, but it just doesn't deserve the name "Supreme Commander".
UPDATE
10-7-2010: Against every expectation, 7 months after release, they've
addressed at least one of my major complaints about this game - the
economy. Now, you can queue up as many units as you like in advance
without worrying about having the resources at that moment. From the
update description, it seems that it still deducts the full amount
immediately upon the start of construction. The old games had a
pay-as-it-was-built system. Between, the two, each has its positives and
negatives, but this update is a MASSIVE improvement over what the game
shipped with.. I'm going to have to play this game again.
Supreme Disappointment
Supreme Commander 2 may well
be the most disappointing PC game I've ever played. The original Supreme
Commander, spiritual successor to Cavedog's fantastic Total
Annihilation, allowed players a depth and complexity far beyond any
other strategy game of its day. Massive unit variety, stunningly
well-made interface and epic scale combined to create incredible
tactical and strategic diversity. Unfortunately, it seems that the
sequel has lost its way. Worse is the fact that many clever improvements
made their way into this game, only to be overshadowed by the game's
serious flaws.
Graphics: First, the good: units, structures and
effects look incredible. Animations are likewise very impressive indeed.
Missiles trail believable contrails, fighters swoop around, cannons
recoil. Visually stunning; this game is by far the best-looking strategy
game out there, especially when its scope is taken into consideration.
Faction units are distinct and cleverly designed. Experimental units
look suitably enormous and powerful. Lighting and shadows are top-notch.
Sound:
Here we have the first serious issue. As strange as this sounds, the
voice acting of all things is one of the deal-breakers. The writing and
acting is possibly the worst I've heard in a video game. It may be hard
to believe that voice acting can make a difference one way or the other,
but if you have any plans to play the campaign, I recommend having the
mute button handy. It is incredible to me that this game made it to the
public with its current script. Think Star Wars Episode 1 Jar-Jar Binks.
Unbelievable. Sound effects and music are fine, but the (non-skippable,
impossible to disable) voices are just awful.
Gameplay: First,
the good - SC2 makes a few seemingly minor but clever and helpful tweaks
to the SC1 formula. For those familiar with SupCom: engineers can now
repair aircraft in flight, aircraft fuel has been removed, and
pathfinding is immensely improved. The game sports "flow-field" coding
for its group pathfinding, improving upon a serious flaw in early
versions of the original. Groups of land units will smoothly navigate
around obstacles without breaking formation and will attempt to form up
when possible. Units work better together and are much more able to
navigate the complex terrain of the battlefield. Customizable buildings
are a great decision and are one of the features that would have been
wonderful in the original. On the other hand, unit variety has taken a
serious hit. In an effort to "streamline" the game, many units have been
removed entirely. Gone are the days of hundreds of structure and unit
choices. The economy has been completely reworked. The streaming economy
that made TA and SupCom unique and interesting has been replaced by a
standard pre-pay for units concept. In theory, this was meant to reduce
players' need for micromanaging. In my experience, it results in far
more micro throughout the course of the game. Factories can no longer be
set to pump out endless hordes of tanks and planes. Now every purchase
must be weighed individually, resulting in smaller armies and a greater
focus on factories instead of formations. UI tweaks include a group icon
for multiple units given the same order, which mainly has the effect of
stopping the player from clicking on a few of his units without
accidentally selecting the whole group. The research concept is
interesting and fairly well implemented, although it is very easy for
new players to get badly bogged down in poor research choices and lose
because of their confusion.
Overall, the game seems to have been
designed with a "Supreme Commander Lite" theme squarely in mind.
Experimentals are everywhere, and are not particularly epic any more.
The grand strategic picture of large battles will still confuse new
players, and the lack of tactical diversity and the serious economic
simplifications have driven away veterans of the series. Somehow Chris
Taylor managed a game simultaneously too complicated for new players and
too simplified for experienced players. Very disappointed.
No comments:
Post a Comment