Supreme Commander 2 demo is released

Json23 said:
I get better FPS on SupCom2 than I do the original? Why? Because the game is inferior to the original. The only thing that stands out as actually being better is the pacing. No longer does it take 20 minutes to break out the big guns.


This game is less Total Annihilation and more Warcraft/CnC this time around. At least that is the impression I get from the demo. I already bought the game on STEAM so I will give it the benefit of the doubt. I don't really care about single player anyway so it would be stupid for me to completely condemn the game until after I have spent a few hours on multiplayer.

Anyone else feel a little let down after playing the demo?
Click to expand...


wrong and right.. the engine is leaps and bounds better then the supcom 1 engine.. yes the game is inferior to the original but not because of the graphics.. because it become a consolized piece of crap.. the supcom 1 engine is insanely bad.. even though they stated the game was multi-threaded.. IT WAS BOGUS.. the game had 0 multi-threaded support.. not to mention it was single core speed limited.. so even a e8400 @ 4ghz would massacre a q9650 for example.. this problem was fixed in the supcom 2 engine.. thus why it performs better on your system then the old engine..

and to sum this all up.. theres a little thing called common sense and you would if figured out why it performs better then the old engine..

as far as the let down part? i was let down months and months ago but then again i had a lot of insider information on the game which ended up being crap because the dev's constantly kept changing their minds about shit and adding and removing stuff up until the very last minute..
 
The demo won't start for me. It just says that it's installing DirectX runtime, closes out and does nothing. I've restarted Steam, still the same result.

EDIT: A reboot fixed it.
 
Last edited:
just got done and i really like it. was a fan of TA which is why supcom was the first game i bought when i built my pc last year. demo runs great on my stock e8500 and 1gb 4870 at 1920x1200. fps never dropped below 70, real smooth. i was wondering why i couldnt queue up a storm with my units but after reading this thread i guess that comes with the change in resource management. definitely a let down there, but ill still be buying it.
 
well being bored tonight i broke down and tried the demo.. god this game blows.. not even worth talking about it anymore then this.. units are dumb.. single campaign is dumb.. stupid research points.. WTF!! ill just stick with supcom:FA til GPG decides to shut down GPGnet now that supcom2 is using steam..

if your a true supcom 1 gamer.. CHECK THE DEMO FIRST!! because trust me you will want to cancel your pre-order..
 
Ihaveworms said:
As a big fan of total annihilation and supreme commander 1, I am pretty disappointed with this. It has been dumbed down due to being multiplatform. I felt like there was no real variety in units. It has the basic stuff like anti-air, tank, etc, but nothing niche like the previous series had. I don't know if I couldn't find the option, but it felt like the units were very bland and you couldn't get higher tech vehicles. I understand you can upgrade them, but I wanted a new tank. Not the same old basic tank with more turrets slapped on it.
Click to expand...

To be fair, it's a Demo. I don't expect we got access to every unit the UEF(or whatever) can build in SupCom2. I know what you're saying, but I still expect more variety in the final product.


Speaking of the vehicles, I felt that the models looked like toys. In Supcom 1, the units felt like actual war machines going into battle. Now I am sending around lego tanks to go shoot at one another.
Click to expand...

The air vehicles are just awful. They flip and float all over, it's kinda funny to watch them attempt to fly.

Then there is the economy. Why did they remove the one really unique feature that they had going for them? I loved TA and Supcom for its resource system, but now it is just the generic system every other RTS uses.
Click to expand...

Because the game didn't sell as well as Chris Taylor wanted it to, and some of the feedback he got said "The economy is too complex.", so he/his team changed it. I disagree with the changes, but it's still not *quite* the same system other RTS use. Most RTS games have non-renewable resource piles. Mass deposits, like your generators, last as long as the game does.

If nothing else, they got the interface right. I've been waiting for an RTS to come out and do its interface as well as Supreme Commander did, and it's taken until Supreme Commander 2 for that to happen.

I suppose I'm not as let down as some people seem to be because I knew about all of the changes long before I played the demo, and I was expecting the game to be much worse than the demo showed. I'm eagerly awaiting proper reviews of the full game. Assuming the battles are of similar scale to previous games, I'll probably buy it.
 
I may buy this game, maybe.

The strategic zoom appears to still work like before which is good.

I do not like not being able to queue up as many units as I like as do others it would appear. You do not need any storage facilities for some reason. The tech tree is okay but I quite liked upgrading the individual units.

One thing I also noticed is that aircraft no longer have fuel. Can they fly full pace as long as they like?

Does anyone know if they will retain the 1000 unit limit with 80 x 80 maps?
 
necrophile said:
I may buy this game, maybe.

The strategic zoom appears to still work like before which is good.

I do not like not being able to queue up as many units as I like as do others it would appear. You do not need any storage facilities for some reason. The tech tree is okay but I quite liked upgrading the individual units.

One thing I also noticed is that aircraft no longer have fuel. Can they fly full pace as long as they like?

Does anyone know if they will retain the 1000 unit limit with 80 x 80 maps?
Click to expand...

they can fly for ever.. i left them flying around for over 50 minutes after i got bored with the demo and minimized the game and started browsing the web.. the campaign is boring as hell..
as for the unit limit all ive seen is a 300 unit limit in the campaign so far.. so if that says anything then a 1000 unit battle is probably not going to happen until some one creates a mod for it..
but i definitely will not be buying this game unless it drops below 30 dollars.. and probably not until its at or under 20 dollars.. i swear it feels like im playing RA3 all over again except with normal supcom camera view..(and no i didnt like RA3 either)
 
It might still be fun but I mainly played long, defensive skirmish games against 7 supreme A.I and I hope I can have those major battles again. No other game like it really.

From my brief play I can see what they were hoping to acheive but I just think that they have under estimated the amount of sales they got because of how different it was to other RTS. The strategic view is not enough IMO. Whether they will gain enough sales to recoup on those who may be turned off I don't know.
 
I need to post some screenshots of SupCom1 units to show you that they ARE more detailed looking than SupCom2..
 
I just ordered it! Liked the demo, love the changes. Seriously.. for those that wanted accessibility and ease of access.. it seems much better. This game was never going to be the same level of complexity as Supcom 1..

it needs to hit the masses to generate the sales required. Just like C&C... but with more strategy, and a strategic zoom to die for.

The only people who seem to be complaining hard are SupCom1 die hards who were hoping for a game with the same or more complexity. This game was never supposed to be that, so I dont know why they are still moaning when the previews/write ups all said it wouldnt be that.

The people who crave complexity make up a small % of the people who just wanna play a decent RTS with strategic zoom and have fun.

I do think the graphics in the demo though are dumbed down a bit... the videos and screenshots ARE different, so maybe the demo was from an earlier build/graphical model.
 
lewchenko said:
I just ordered it! Liked the demo, love the changes. Seriously.. for those that wanted accessibility and ease of access.. it seems much better. This game was never going to be the same level of complexity as Supcom 1..

it needs to hit the masses to generate the sales required. Just like C&C... but with more strategy, and a strategic zoom to die for.

The only people who seem to be complaining hard are SupCom1 die hards who were hoping for a game with the same or more complexity. This game was never supposed to be that, so I dont know why they are still moaning when the previews/write ups all said it wouldnt be that.

The people who crave complexity make up a small % of the people who just wanna play a decent RTS with strategic zoom and have fun.

I do think the graphics in the demo though are dumbed down a bit... the videos and screenshots ARE different, so maybe the demo was from an earlier build/graphical model.
Click to expand...

We have plenty of cookie cutter simplified drooling-console-player RTS's. One of the things that made SupCom unqiue was the complexity. Complexity allows more tactics and strategies.

Ive been following the discussion about supcom2 for some time in the gpg forums and so this is not a surprise, but its still a letdown. Ill check the demo out, but doubt I will be buying the game.
 
lewchenko said:
I just ordered it! Liked the demo, love the changes. Seriously.. for those that wanted accessibility and ease of access.. it seems much better. This game was never going to be the same level of complexity as Supcom 1..

it needs to hit the masses to generate the sales required. Just like C&C... but with more strategy, and a strategic zoom to die for.

The only people who seem to be complaining hard are SupCom1 die hards who were hoping for a game with the same or more complexity. This game was never supposed to be that, so I dont know why they are still moaning when the previews/write ups all said it wouldnt be that.

The people who crave complexity make up a small % of the people who just wanna play a decent RTS with strategic zoom and have fun.

I do think the graphics in the demo though are dumbed down a bit... the videos and screenshots ARE different, so maybe the demo was from an earlier build/graphical model.
Click to expand...

I'm a die-hard TA fan and I'm not so terribly disappointed by SupCom2 right now ... because that happened a long time ago. I wish I was interested in this game, because there was a time when it seemed like Chris Taylor was the only person in the RTS industry who really understood what I liked in games. Now it seems he only cares about pretty maps with baked GI and ridiculous looking units.

I understand that there is a considerable market for easy and quick RTS games where a 30-minute game is "long" and every unit has an obvious hard counter. But let's face it - those gamers are going to play Starcraft 2 because that's what Blizzard does really well. SupCom 2 looks like an inferior game in that niche. I just don't understand what CT was thinking.

Oh well. I guess there's still Civ5 to look forward to.
 
Heres the thing -- when you modify core principles of your game to appeal to the masses, you wind up angering your existing fanbase, and now its a crapshoot as to whether or not the 'masses' like your game.

It MIGHT sell really well now. It'll be hugely popular and a lot of people will buy it and play it a lot.

OR -- It might have lackluster sales and not be a big hit, but now the 'existing' fanbase that would have bought it anyway won't because they are angered by the changes.

In other words, changing core principles of your game to appease the masses is very risky, and more often than not, doesn't work out so well.

Note: I haven't played this demo yet, I'm just speaking generally.
 
Kaldskryke said:
I'm a die-hard TA fan and I'm not so terribly disappointed by SupCom2 right now ... because that happened a long time ago.
Click to expand...

I've come to accept that TA will never be surpassed in the RTS arena.

The RTS has devolved into Paper-Rock-Scissor simulators like Starcraft and flashy skirmish games.
 
Bankie said:
I've come to accept that TA will never be surpassed in the RTS arena.

The RTS has devolved into Paper-Rock-Scissor simulators like Starcraft and flashy skirmish games.
Click to expand...

am I the only one that was completely convinced that supcom 1 was superior to TA in every way? i *loved* supcom 1...

havent tried the demo for 2 yet... but i'm getting a seriously bad feeling....
 
Played the demo last night @ 1920x1080 running everything on medium/high 2aa/4af

played smoothly the entire time on my Q6660, 3 gigs of ram, 8800gtx.

probably never dipped below 60fps, but the battles never got too big.

I really like how supcom 2 plays compared to the first, its a little more dumbed down, but it doesn;t take 2 hours to get to the battles. lol

but then again im agreeing with most of you on here that, they took away some things I really liked from the first. Guess you can't please everyone.
 
Even bezel managed Eyefinity could not save this boring demo, imo. Was it just me or did this look like Total Annihilation? I felt like I was playing a 10 year old game and a really slow paced and fiddly version of it.

It was uninstalled before I even got through the first real mission, in the arctic. I'm glad they brought out a demo as it saved me 27 quid.
 
brucedeluxe169 said:
am I the only one that was completely convinced that supcom 1 was superior to TA in every way? i *loved* supcom 1...

havent tried the demo for 2 yet... but i'm getting a seriously bad feeling....
Click to expand...

I think SupCom 1 is at least equal to TA, but probably superior when I take my rose-tinted glasses off. One thing that made TA so awesome was all the extra units you could get. Cavedog used to release one or two every week didn't they?

Those were the days.
 
I swore I would never support SupCom ever again after the lack of support from the first and separate expansion, but damn these screens look tempting.
 
brucedeluxe169 said:
am I the only one that was completely convinced that supcom 1 was superior to TA in every way? i *loved* supcom 1...

havent tried the demo for 2 yet... but i'm getting a seriously bad feeling....
Click to expand...

SupCom just seemed to be missing something. It was fun but it just doesn't call to me like TA still does. I've had SupCom since release but if I get the desire to play an RTS I load up TA
 
Bankie said:
SupCom just seemed to be missing something. It was fun but it just doesn't call to me like TA still does. I've had SupCom since release but if I get the desire to play an RTS I load up TA
Click to expand...

I feel the same way. The game is too generic and lacks character. There are so many good RTSs out there and that I own, that I think I will skip this one, though the demo wasn't half bad.
 
3. You can have epic games.
Nothing as big as Supreme Commander's biggest, which could last eight hours and take place on maps the size of a small country. But you can still have huge, CPU-crippling clashes on some decent sized maps. SupCom 2 is much more about huge armies than huge territories, and far more games result in forces of multiple experimental units smashing into each other. The biggest map is a remake of Seton's Clutch, for eight players - it's smaller, but still makes for some great games
Click to expand...

FAIL!!!!!!

Will wait for a sale before picking it up.
 
The demo has great graphics and the new engine runs very smooth. I think the reason why most people are complaining is because the demo has no multiplayer support. I could care less about the single player game and so do most people who play RTS games.

As for the generic feeling (this was what people said with supreme commander). I think they did a much better job at polishing the supreme commander engine and making it a more fluid game. I think the real test will come down to multiplayer side of the game and how the balance and netcode works out. If the multiplayer side of the game is competitive, balanced, and intense... Then I can see this game being one of the top multiplayer RTS games on the market.
 
necrophile said:
FAIL!!!!!!

Will wait for a sale before picking it up.
Click to expand...

Maps and dumbed down models are due to the dual development process from the xbox360. I dont worry about that stuff though because user made maps and mods should fill in the void.
 
nullzero said:
Maps and dumbed down models are due to the dual development process from the xbox360. I dont worry about that stuff though because user made maps and mods should fill in the void.
Click to expand...

There is no confirmed release of a map editor. However, Chris Taylor stated it is a likely possibility one will be released.

Here's a way to enter debug mode so people can play around with various units and stuff: http://forums.gaspowered.com/viewtopic.php?t=42637
 
I'm glad there was a demo so I could pass on this one at least until it hits rock bottom Steam sale pricing. Sure it runs smoother than the first but I found everything that was enjoyable about the first SupCom removed from this one. Like others have said if I wanted to play the style of RTS that SupCom2 has become, I'll go and play Starcraft.
 
Bankie said:
I've come to accept that TA will never be surpassed in the RTS arena.

The RTS has devolved into Paper-Rock-Scissor simulators like Starcraft and flashy skirmish games.
Click to expand...

I still have it installed. I can recall the very first screenshot of TA to hit the public, back in the days of PCaccelerator Magazine.

Its the only real true game that you can play offence or a real defensive game for hours on end. It was, and still is the pinnacle of my gaming joy.
 
The demo wasn't as bad as I thought it would be, but I wont be buying it right away. Maybe later, when the price comes way down and if any community developed mods add some value to it.
 
I get INSANE graphics artifacts/glitches on the demo. It's unplayable. I have no idea what it could be.

I'm running crossfireX, 10.2 drivers, latest DX updates...
 
Supcom + cartoons + dumb economy = supcom2.
Will never get my dollars.

Seriously, WTF happened to the Chris Taylor of TA?
edit: if they ported the CPU enhancements and the grouping system back to supcom Id pay for supcom2 just to support them. But they wont.
 
Last edited:
sirmonkey1985 said:
the supcom 1 engine is insanely bad.. even though they stated the game was multi-threaded.. IT WAS BOGUS.. the game had 0 multi-threaded support..
Click to expand...

The game was multi-threaded, i even posted a very quick benchmark i did when the original first come out http://85.17.60.21/supcom.gif

Thats not to say the engine wasnt bad in other places though, especially the ground AI on maps with islands on.
 
dj_2004 said:
There is no confirmed release of a map editor. However, Chris Taylor stated it is a likely possibility one will be released.
Click to expand...

lol not buying that BS again. They made a lot of promises with SupCom... map editor (the piece of crap pre-pre-alpha they released does NOT count), multiplayer saves, DX10 extras... Right. I loved SupCom but there's no way in hell I'd believe anything out of Taylor's mouth again.

As for the demo, I could barely complete the first objective on the arctic island map before I got bored to tears and quit. The graphics are a huge step down, and I really don't see anything compelling about this game. Mostly it reminds me of how laborious and anti-climactic most games of 1 were. The entire match felt like cleanup from start to finish.

The performance improvements are nice and all, but this game is otherwise just a regression of the first.
 
So I played the demo:

It was fun, but I definitely miss the awesome economy that TA and supcom1 had. This economy feels way dumbed down. You have energy and mass, like before, but when you build buildings/units, it instantly removes the total cost from your stock, and it won't let you build stuff if you don't have enough resources. Unlike Supcom1, where it would slowly drain mass/energy while you build things, and you could run into a deficit.

In other words, the economy is very simplistic now and more like other standard RTS games. I don't like it.

Otherwise, the visuals were alright, but IMO Supcom1 was a better looking game. I would have liked the chance to check out the other races, or have some kind of skirmish game, but you only get to play 2 missions of the campaign.

Some buildings can get upgraded, an example is you can upgrade your factories to have a personal shield and weapons. I didn't see any way to upgrade my mass/energy producers, and I don't know if there are higher level versions of them. But you can do research to upgrade them.

Theres research now, you earn 'research points' over time as you are playing, and 'spend' them for upgrades to units, or the ability to buy new units. There looks like a lot of options there, but gone are the days (so it seems) of T1, T2, T3, T4. You do this through an interface that looks like a sideways WoW talent tree. You pick which 'Talent tree' you want to upgrade -- Air, Land, Navy, ACU, Buildings -- And inside each tab is a tech tree. Basically, imagine WoW's talent tree and you have it.

In the demo, i rather quickly and easily researched my way up to an experimental -- it cost 2000 energy and maybe 1000 mass to produce, and took maybe 2 minutes to build. What happened to the experimentals that would take 10-15 minutes to build and absurd amounts of mass/energy?

*SPOILER* Storyline Spoiler *SPOILER* Storyline Spoier *SPOILER*

So the first mission has your main character playing the role of the ACU, and you (UEF) are fighting the enemy (Cybran). You spend some time blowing up their base, and after doing so your commander tells you to go shoot some Illuminatae (Another race I presume). Your character nonchalantly says "Oh but sir, my wife and children are there". Your command says "Its ok, we'll get them out of there", with all the tone and inflection as if he said "How bout that weather we've been having". Then your character, again with the nonchalant "Its a nice day outside" inflection says "But sir, they ARE illuminatae.", at which point your command gets pissed and relieves you of command, just in time to see you telling him to piss off as you get in a plane and leave...

WHAT? Its like they were trying to throw a major plot twist into the first page of a book. That would perhaps have been cool as part of the 3rd or 4th mission, but it seemed awfully ridiculous that this guy would be a high enough ranking officer to get into an ACU, and the leaders of the UEF don't even know his wife and kids are playing for the other team.

***--END SPOILER---***

As an RTS game it looks good and has promise. As a SupCom game, it does not. If you're looking for another standard RTS, you might enjoy this. But a lot of the things that made SupCom unique are now gone. Its as if they took base building out of a C&C game........Oh wait :(.
 
Direwolf20 said:
WHAT? Its like they were trying to throw a major plot twist into the first page of a book. That would perhaps have been cool as part of the 3rd or 4th mission, but it seemed awfully ridiculous that this guy would be a high enough ranking officer to get into an ACU, and the leaders of the UEF don't even know his wife and kids are playing for the other team.
Click to expand...
The campaign levels they included ARE 3rd and 4th levels of the UEF campaign, so while the twist comes early, it's not in the first mission.
 
I honestly think the game would be pretty darn good if they reverted the economy back to allowing deficit spending and not pausing factories when you run out of resources. Oh well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top