supreme commander

[Dorkenstein]

Is the full game better than the demo? I wasn't impressed by the demo, it didn't really live up to the screenshot hype and I felt let down. Just wondering if some patches or whatever makes it worth picking up. Thanks.

 

[Starbuck1975]

I picked it up yesterday, and was hugely disappointed by it. The graphics and textures in game do not live up to the screen shots. You are stuck in a top down perspective for most of the game, and cannot rotate the camera...you can hit the space bar to create a free roaming camera for taking screenshots, but not for game play.

The screen gets so crowded with units that it is nearly impossible to make any tactical decisions...you just build lots of units, rush the enemy base, and hope for the best.

I will say that the sound effects are very well done, but the graphics and explosions, at least visually, don't match up.

The plot is generic, and the three factions are boring...one faction is the typical earth federation/alliance/whatever, one faction is the enlightened spiritual faction, and one faction is the cyborg mechanoid faction...woo flippin hoo.

Honestly, I feel the game is a throwback to the original C&C or Dune 2. I might play a few more levels just to see if things imrprove.

But after playing Dawn of War, Company of Heroes, and the Total War series, this style of RTS just doesn't excite me anymore.

 

[NYHoustonman]

I'll give the opposite opinion...

Like you, I was disappointed with the demo, I played it for a few minutes and quit. But the full game, for whatever reason, drew me in more. The graphics are actually quite good - not quite on the level of Company of Heroes as far as textures, but a lot of the units are really rather impressive, and large scale battles with some of the experimental units are a joy to watch.

Gameplay-wise, I've enjoyed it a lot. It's a game that allows me to set up near-impenetrable defenses, something I've always liked to do but that isn't as easy in a lot of games. The command queue feature is nice as well; you can order different units to do multiple things - engineers to build multiple buildings and then resume their patrol, a spy plane come close enough to an enemy base to see its outer defenses and then fly home, that kind of thing - and it's easy to get used to. Plus, I've always loved artillery and weapons of that sort, ones that have huge range - and the nuclear bomb is one of the most well-done I've seen in a video game . It's usually easier to use these kinds of units to soften defenses, and then attack; you'll have more control over the situation.

The factions are, indeed, quite similar, with minor differences (the Cybrans rely more on stealth, for example) and different experimental units. The plot is somewhat generic, but I can't remember the last time I played a RTS for its plot.

I'd probably give it ~85%... It's not the best RTS I've ever played (I certainly wouldn't put it on the same level as Company of Heroes), but it's close enough.

 

[Nothinman]

You are stuck in a top down perspective for most of the game, and cannot rotate the camera..

The camera shifts a bit when you zoom in all of the way, but I never figured out how to make it perfectly perpendicular to the ground. But you can rotate the camera with Ins/Del, IIRC.

 

[Gunther]

I think the full game is "fun", but I don't really feel it was worth it. I would wait till the price goes down before picking it up.
The sides are way too similar, once you played one you played all 3. There was no wow factor for me, it felt like I had played this game countless times already.
Pick up Company of Heroes before picking Supreme Commander, COH is a far superior game.

 

[AbAbber2k]

The similarity between races doesn't bother me. Nor did it in Total Annihilation.

 

[chazdraves]

Does the full version run any smoother than the demo? I imagine there have been a few patches by now. I'd be willing to pick up a copy if I knew it ran even a little better than the demo.

Regards,
- Chaz

 

[jdoggg12]

Full version runs a bit better for me - but for those that are complaining about the gfx, you have to realize that no 3d card can render this game if they were to put much more detail into it. It's a great game for strategy b/c every offense can be countered with a specific defense, and vise versa.

If you can play this at full settings in a large game w/o slowdown, you must have a beast of a rig. To add much more detail would put the requirements over the top, IMO.

 

[Molondo]

It truly depends. Me? I grew up on starcraft and warcraft. These strategy games are alot faster compared to SC.

 

[chazdraves]

Well, the graphics don't bother me at all. It's actually rather attractive if you get in close. My biggest beef is hitting 6 fps at the end of a 500 unit battle 1v1 (the demo). Maybe this would be just as well, here are my specs:

A64 3400+ OC to 2.64
BFG 6800GT OC OC to 418/1018
1GB RAM (@440)
Win XP

Any opinions?

Thanks, guys!
- Chaz

 

[Inspector Jihad]

I want to play it but my rig cant handle it

 

[chazdraves]

Well, I can't say from experience - obviously - but I've seen folks over at the official site running it on less than that.

- Chaz

 

[0roo0roo]

demo was horrible. you hve to play zoomed out, its a joke when zoomed way out. in close it didn't look so great anyways. story was meh and character design/art was also meh.
this forum needs a barf emoticon

 

[Starbuck1975]

Interestingly enough, I am running all of the graphic setting on high, 4x AA, and 1280x1024 @ 85hz, which is the recommended resolution and timings for my CRT monitor.

And I have yet to have a frame rate slow down...maybe Supreme Commander is loving my dual core...not really sure...but I was fearful this game would bring my system to its knees, and surprisingly, it is not.

 

[Alienwho]

I'm the kind of guy that likes every unit to be special and contribute to the fight. I don't feel that satisfaction with supreme commander. 1 unit is worthless, and in many cases, so is 5. You have to have a lot of units to really do anything. And all the units seem to look and act exactly the same way, that is, if you can actually see your units. In order to differentiate the units you have to zoom in so close that you can't see anything else except that individual unit. If I've got an army of tanks, anti-air mobile tanks, engineers, mech warriors, and then throw in some level 2 tanks, it's freaking nearly impossible to differentiate what the hell does what. This in turn makes the strategy a whole lot tougher and simply not fun. Maybe i'm missing something because I never played total annihilation. It simply isn't fun having to create the exact same basic 3 types of units for air/land/sea (anti air, bomber, and generic land attacker).

This game entertained me for about 3 hours, and that was all learning curve.

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975
Interestingly enough, I am running all of the graphic setting on high, 4x AA, and 1280x1024 @ 85hz, which is the recommended resolution and timings for my CRT monitor.

And I have yet to have a frame rate slow down...maybe Supreme Commander is loving my dual core...not really sure...but I was fearful this game would bring my system to its knees, and surprisingly, it is not.

only good thing about the game is it uses up to 4 cores atleast.

 

[Chaotic42]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975
I picked it up yesterday, and was hugely disappointed by it. The graphics and textures in game do not live up to the screen shots. You are stuck in a top down perspective for most of the game, and cannot rotate the camera...you can hit the space bar to create a free roaming camera for taking screenshots, but not for game play.

Hit Ctrl+V. Then hold down the space bar and move the camera where you want it. It will stay there.

Not that that's all that useful.

I guess I see why so few games like this come out. It looks like a lot of people don't like it. As for me, this is *exactly* what I've been looking for in a video game since Total Annihilation came out. It's a resource hog, no doubt, but this game has single-handedly saved computer gaming for me. I was done.

I enjoy the NATO-like symbols for the different units. That way I know exactly what's coming. I like the stragegic feel of the game. I like having defensive choke-points, ferry systems, and patrol routes. Knowing what I know now, I'd gladly have paid $300 for the game, because it's pretty much exactly what I would have done if I were Chris Taylor. It's a rare thing to get a game like that.

I should also note that I hated Starcraft. In my mind it's an example of an RTS done incorrectly. Again, that's just me.

Supreme Commander is pretty much the only reason that I even bother to turn the computer on. I guess having people to play with helps.

 

[chazdraves]

I'd say it's a matter of taste. If I want tight, focused, light-numbers combat, I've got Warcraft III (yeah, still). However, if I want something entirely massive that allows me to act out whatever strategic notion may have struck me, I've got Supreme Commander. I know this is getting a bit dated but, "if you don't like it, don't buy it".

On a related note, it is playable on a 6800GT, just keep it down if you're going to be facing AI in skirmishes. An 8-Way skirmish brought the thing to it's knees - even though it still said 30-some fps.

My 2 Pennies,
- Chaz

 

[shortylickens]

Originally posted by: Dorkenstein
Is the full game better than the demo? I wasn't impressed by the demo, it didn't really live up to the screenshot hype and I felt let down. Just wondering if some patches or whatever makes it worth picking up. Thanks.

Well, no. The game is exactly like the demo only more.
So if you didnt like the demo the game isnt going to make you go "OMGWTFBBQ!".
And the game doesnt need patches.
Mods maybe.
But again, if you just plain didnt like it, no mod will change your mind.

 

[Skunkwourk]

Originally posted by: chazdraves
I'd say it's a matter of taste. If I want tight, focused, light-numbers combat, I've got Warcraft III (yeah, still). However, if I want something entirely massive that allows me to act out whatever strategic notion may have struck me, I've got Supreme Commander. I know this is getting a bit dated but, "if you don't like it, don't buy it".

On a related note, it is playable on a 6800GT, just keep it down if you're going to be facing AI in skirmishes. An 8-Way skirmish brought the thing to it's knees - even though it still said 30-some fps.

My 2 Pennies,
- Chaz

so what settings are you running at? and just how often and badly does it slow to a crawl?

I've only got a 6800GT paired with a 754 3700 and 1.5 ram.

 

[VashHT]

I have played a ton of RTS games in my life. Supreme Commander is a very good game imo. I enjoyed TA a lot when it was out, and Supreme Commander delivers the same experience with a lot of improvements to the TA forumla. I thinkt he reason most people don't want this kind of RTS is because its too slow paced compared to most RTS games out today.

Now I enjoy both fast and slow paced RTS games. Right now CoH is probably the best RTS game I have ever played, and I have been playing RTS since C&C and WC2. IMO where SC really shines is in LAN games or gaming with your friends. I play with my brothers and my friends, and we always come up with some ridiculous armies in these games. I can't see myself playing this online against other people though, the game sjsut take too long.

I guess if you really didn't like the demo then this game isn't for you, but if you played TA and enjoyed int hen definitely pick up SC. If you were more into starcraft at the time TA was out then you probably won't like it. Personally I never enjoyed starcraft at all, despite being a huge fan of the warcraft series.

On a performance note, people should be more worried about their cpu and ram than graphics card for this game. Its one of the few games out that uses multi core processors, and personally I think its almost a must for a person to have dual core for this. I can play it at 1920x1080 with the graphics maxed except for AA and shadows, and it runs great. This is on a X2 4800, 2gb ram, and a X1900XTX.

 

[QuantumPion]

The flamers are just mad that they can't micro manage individual units to be able to win fights where they are outnumbered 2-1 simply because they can click faster.

While I think RoN is still the best RTS of all time, SupCom has potential once it is patched and balanced a bit.

 

[chazdraves]

Originally posted by: Eghck

Originally posted by: chazdraves
I'd say it's a matter of taste. If I want tight, focused, light-numbers combat, I've got Warcraft III (yeah, still). However, if I want something entirely massive that allows me to act out whatever strategic notion may have struck me, I've got Supreme Commander. I know this is getting a bit dated but, "if you don't like it, don't buy it".

On a related note, it is playable on a 6800GT, just keep it down if you're going to be facing AI in skirmishes. An 8-Way skirmish brought the thing to it's knees - even though it still said 30-some fps.

My 2 Pennies,
- Chaz

so what settings are you running at? and just how often and badly does it slow to a crawl?

I've only got a 6800GT paired with a 754 3700 and 1.5 ram.

Well, I would say the only real ah heck is when you send all those units on a death march and the particle effects start flying. Honestly, I haven't taken the time to play online - as I suspect that would be a notable improvement, but I'm not too disappointed. What I've found is that Fidelity and Shadows are the real killer. Heck, I can turn 4XAA on and off and not really notice, but those shadows will halve the frame rate, and "Fidelity" is just as bad.

On that note: I typically play on Low Fidelity with High textures, 4XAA and 1440x900 (my native). Here I can enjoy almost no slow down so long as the units stay under 1000 total. Of course, as soon as you cave to temptation and flip it up to high with full shadows, you won't want to turn back. Heck, I've endured 7FPS through many battles just because it looks so slick.

Fingers crossed for a performance patch

Hope that helps,
- Chaz

 

[Starbuck1975]

The flamers are just mad that they can't micro manage individual units to be able to win fights where they are outnumbered 2-1 simply because they can click faster

I don't think that is the problem with this game...I decided to stick with it, and have made it about three missions into the main campaign.

The ferrying and build queue system is definitely a nice addition to RTS...I can set a few engineers to build my entire base, and then walk away from it without having to micromanage the placement of every structure...I also like that you can essentially build defensive structures to your heart's content...I love to turtle up my bases, and Supreme Commander does allow for that, and then some...interestingly, the AI is quite cunning at probing my defenses, and has managed to find blind spots on more then one occasion.

That being said, going on the offensive drives me absolutely insane...I can build a 300 unit, well balanced force, and watch it get wiped out in a matter of seconds...not because I am poor at micro managing units in combat, but rather because it is nearly impossible to locate units once they are in the combat fray...that, and the unit pathfinding is terrible...the formations option is absolutely essential, but good luck getting your units to stay in formation when moving...if they encounter a hill, obstacle or any other object in their path, they tend to scramble...and become easy pickings for enemy units.

I do like that the game almost requires the use of scouts and recon...in most RTS games, I never bother to use the scout units because they are not all that valuable...in Supreme Commander, you almost have to set scouts on patrol routes to watch for enemy movements...because of the sheer scale of the game, you can have a rather large enemy force beating down your gates in a matter of seconds.

Overall, the game is starting to grow on me, but that is because I like games that require lots of base building...I recently picked up Earth 2160 as well, and I wish Supreme Commander mirrored the visual effects and unit customization options of that game.

 

[Ichigo]

To the guy who says games are too long, that's because you don't really know how to play the game, in all honesty. Check out some replays. The better players out there are finishing games within 15-20 minutes.