Bought Supreme Commander - such terrible game

[Golgatha]

Originally posted by: Zenoth
Total Annihilation still to this day entirely rips Supreme Commander apart from the inside out.

Agreed, I so wanted to like Supreme Commander because of my experiences years ago with Total Annihilation. However, SC just falls short on so many levels from TA. My biggest issue was that most of your strategic game play was done on the mini-map with little icons. Even zoomed in, the graphics were nothing spectacular, especially considering the steep hardware requirements.

 

[Lonyo]

I didn't enjoy Sup Com much, but I'll be damned if I'd say it's terrible.
It may be below average for me in terms of gameplay overall, but the features it brings to the table are, IMO, things which most games should aspite to.

The long zoom - awesome. Multiple monitor support - awesome.
The complexity of what you can do, as mentioned earlier, in terms of auto transporting units and having groups fly guard patterns etc is good stuff (although not applicable to every game, since they would over-complicate a lot of things).

Nice ideas, poor experience in my opinion. I prefer AoE2 and CoH.

 

[Golgatha]

Originally posted by: shortylickens
I find it utterly fascinating that everyones complaints could easily be solved by TA:Kingdoms, and yet almost nobody even remembers that game.

Kingdoms is far superior to TA and Starcraft in every way. But none of those fans like it because it had archers instead of mega-plasma-photon-death-tanks with broken alien skulls hanging from the turrets.

Also, ALX (the lurker) was right.
SPAMMING in Supreme Commander is the same as in Starcraft. Whoever wins the resource war will likely win the game. But at least TA and Supreme Commander had the good sense to make resourcing less intensive & time consuming by automating it, and making it less of a factor by allowing infinite resources.
Now you actualy get to focus on playing a war game instead of a dumbed-down version of SimCity.

The big problem with Kingdoms was mainly balance issues in the beginning, and the fact that no mere mortals hardware (at the time) could run the game once you had 100 units or so built. Later patches fixed the balance issues and hardware caught up with the game, but by that time most folks had moved on.

 

[Golgatha]

Originally posted by: chizow

Originally posted by: shortylickens
I find it utterly fascinating that everyones complaints could easily be solved by TA:Kingdoms, and yet almost nobody even remembers that game.

Kingdoms is far superior to TA and Starcraft in every way. But none of those fans like it because it had archers instead of mega-plasma-photon-death-tanks with broken alien skulls hanging from the turrets.

I remember that game and did enjoy it quite a bit. I did really like some of its innovations, and it was one of the first games to introduce limited/hero-like units with the faction Dragons. I'm pretty sure it was also one of the first games to give units Veterancy improvements both visually and statistically.

I think the biggest problem though with TA:K was its insane system requirements at the time to play it reasonably well. Pretty sure I had a P3 500 with a V3 3000 at the time and it brought my system to a crawl. Its also the first game that really made me appreciate different API rendering modes and GPU importance running a V3 in Glide vs. a ATI Rage in DX.

But ya I hated Spam Commander as well, although FA was a lot more enjoyable. SC had its moments, but it involved spamming up from nothing to get to that short climactic spam fest that might bring a slight grin to my face.

I played TA Kingdoms on a PII 400, 8MB Voodoo II, and 160MB of RAM. I remember upgraded to a Coppermine PIII 700, 512MB RAM, and a Voodoo 3 3000 and it still ran like ass. I think the first time I thought it was playable was when I moved on to a P4 1.8Ghz Northwood, 1GB RAM, Voodoo 5 5500 system. Of course, by then MP was non-existent so I just played through SP and got rid of it.

 

[Golgatha]

Originally posted by: shortylickens

Originally posted by: chizow

Originally posted by: shortylickens
I find it utterly fascinating that everyones complaints could easily be solved by TA:Kingdoms, and yet almost nobody even remembers that game.

Kingdoms is far superior to TA and Starcraft in every way. But none of those fans like it because it had archers instead of mega-plasma-photon-death-tanks with broken alien skulls hanging from the turrets.

I remember that game and did enjoy it quite a bit. I did really like some of its innovations, and it was one of the first games to introduce limited/hero-like units with the faction Dragons. I'm pretty sure it was also one of the first games to give units Veterancy improvements both visually and statistically.

I think the biggest problem though with TA:K was its insane system requirements at the time to play it reasonably well. Pretty sure I had a P3 500 with a V3 3000 at the time and it brought my system to a crawl. Its also the first game that really made me appreciate different API rendering modes and GPU importance running a V3 in Glide vs. a ATI Rage in DX.

But ya I hated Spam Commander as well, although FA was a lot more enjoyable. SC had its moments, but it involved spamming up from nothing to get to that short climactic spam fest that might bring a slight grin to my face.

Kingdoms didnt use 3D acceleration for anything more than enhancing the cloud effects for fog of war. The units and terrain were software rendered.
But yes a P3 500 was too slow. Problem is, when that game came out there were already P3's in the 1Ghz range, which was more than powerful enough to handle it.
And my laptops Celeron 366 actually did an OK job too, certainly not great, but more than enough to make an RTS playable. I think it must have just been your system.

System requirements Pentium 233 MHz, 32 MB RAM, Windows 95/98, VGA graphics card, Sound Blaster-compatible sound card, 4x CD-ROM drive, and 80 MB hard-disk space

I think recommended requirements were on the order of a PII 400 with 64 or 128MB of RAM.

Quoted from Wiki -

Though never billed as a sequel or prequel to Total Annihilation, TA:Kingdoms carried with it the expectations engendered by the "Total Annihilation" in its name. It never resonated well with fans of the original game or critics, but Total Annihilation: Kingdoms did attain a reasonable measure of success with the number of units sold and its own following which is active to this day. In spite of this, the game continues to be seen as a failure and is often regarded as the reason for Cavedog's demise. This may be attributed partly to the fact that when TA:Kingdoms first launched, what was considered very good computer hardware for the day had extreme difficulty playing the game at a smooth speed; often the screen refresh would become so slow as to become unplayable. Within several weeks, Cavedog released a patch for TA:Kingdoms that increased performance by at least 100% in all cases, but many players were so fed up with the performance already that it had received a crippling number of bad reviews.

 

[chizow]

Originally posted by: Golgatha

Originally posted by: shortylickens

Originally posted by: chizow

Originally posted by: shortylickens
I find it utterly fascinating that everyones complaints could easily be solved by TA:Kingdoms, and yet almost nobody even remembers that game.

Kingdoms is far superior to TA and Starcraft in every way. But none of those fans like it because it had archers instead of mega-plasma-photon-death-tanks with broken alien skulls hanging from the turrets.

I remember that game and did enjoy it quite a bit. I did really like some of its innovations, and it was one of the first games to introduce limited/hero-like units with the faction Dragons. I'm pretty sure it was also one of the first games to give units Veterancy improvements both visually and statistically.

I think the biggest problem though with TA:K was its insane system requirements at the time to play it reasonably well. Pretty sure I had a P3 500 with a V3 3000 at the time and it brought my system to a crawl. Its also the first game that really made me appreciate different API rendering modes and GPU importance running a V3 in Glide vs. a ATI Rage in DX.

But ya I hated Spam Commander as well, although FA was a lot more enjoyable. SC had its moments, but it involved spamming up from nothing to get to that short climactic spam fest that might bring a slight grin to my face.

Kingdoms didnt use 3D acceleration for anything more than enhancing the cloud effects for fog of war. The units and terrain were software rendered.
But yes a P3 500 was too slow. Problem is, when that game came out there were already P3's in the 1Ghz range, which was more than powerful enough to handle it.
And my laptops Celeron 366 actually did an OK job too, certainly not great, but more than enough to make an RTS playable. I think it must have just been your system.

System requirements Pentium 233 MHz, 32 MB RAM, Windows 95/98, VGA graphics card, Sound Blaster-compatible sound card, 4x CD-ROM drive, and 80 MB hard-disk space

I think recommended requirements were on the order of a PII 400 with 64 or 128MB of RAM.

Quoted from Wiki -

Though never billed as a sequel or prequel to Total Annihilation, TA:Kingdoms carried with it the expectations engendered by the "Total Annihilation" in its name. It never resonated well with fans of the original game or critics, but Total Annihilation: Kingdoms did attain a reasonable measure of success with the number of units sold and its own following which is active to this day. In spite of this, the game continues to be seen as a failure and is often regarded as the reason for Cavedog's demise. This may be attributed partly to the fact that when TA:Kingdoms first launched, what was considered very good computer hardware for the day had extreme difficulty playing the game at a smooth speed; often the screen refresh would become so slow as to become unplayable. Within several weeks, Cavedog released a patch for TA:Kingdoms that increased performance by at least 100% in all cases, but many players were so fed up with the performance already that it had received a crippling number of bad reviews.

Hmm old thread, but ya Glide wasn't just better in some 3D apps (UT), it was also better on 3Dfx hardware for many 2D games as it drew 2D sprites and tiles faster than DX/DDraw. Diablo 2 is a perfect example of this as the V5 5500 was the epitome of IQ and performance for many years in D2. Also, I'm quite sure the only thing faster than my P3 500 when I got TA:K was maybe a 600MHz Coppermine that cost $500 or something. 1GHz CPUs weren't out until later that year, December or so for P3 with Tualatin I believe..... But ya I agree, it took a 1GHz T-bird (OC'd to 1.4GHz ) to finally play this game smoothly.....

 

[Jax Omen]

wtf @ thread necros.

 

[lupi]

Kingdoms was a very good game; it died and ended up taking cavedog with it cause you really needed a cutting edge computer to take advantadge of all its features; an eerily similar situation to SC with the studio collapse. I expext SC to gain popularity as the geforce 8 series (and not the 8600 crap) cards drop to sub $100 and become norm on budget pc builds.

I also have the TA:K expansion but never played it. All this talk makes me think about loaded it back up to play.

 

[destrekor]

I just picked up Supreme Commander, well, just installed it finally. Came bundled with my video card over a year ago, and never wanted to do anything with it, as normally I am not a big RTS fan. But at this moment, I've had a change of heart in terms of PC gaming, and want to pick up a good RTS AND an action-rpg. Going to play the Space Siege demo right now too.

But I've just come to say to the OP:
3-faction gameplay started with Dune II, NOT with Starcraft. Unless a game prior to Dune II started it... but Dune II was pretty much the start of the modern RTS game.
And I still say Emperor: Battle for Dune is still one of the best modern RTS games, mostly because it's so stuck to the roots of RTS gameplay as Dune II presented them. Not epic in scale, or overly tactical. Nothing wrong with either of those varieties, just stating a point. I love World in Conflict, it being a real time tactical game...

 

[shortylickens]

BUMP BUMP BUMP BUMP BUMP !!!!!!!


Advice for all those folks still in a bad mood:

1. Go get laid.

2. Buy World in Conflict, Dawn of War (plus expansions) and Act of War (plus expansion if you can find it).

3. Profit.

 

[mrblotto]

Originally posted by: phexac
So to recap:
-The game is ugly as hell, even at high resolution at max settings.
-Bland flat maps contribute to shallow gameplay.
-3 different sides are basically the same side with a different coat of paint.
-For all the talk about scale, the number of units in play is actually not that high compared to some games that did not decide to randomly categorize themselves as "epic scale games."
-The zoom feature, while cool as a concept, means that you are playing most of the game zoomed waaaaay out, so all you see are little icons moving around the screen.
-Cheap look because of some obvious omissions such as water effects around a moving sea vessel.

Dont hold back. Tell us how you really feel..............

 

[Oceandevi]

TA:Spring

/Thread

 

[40sTheme]

SupCom was awful. There's no strategy involved; just spamming and rushing. Even the 'Expert' replays on GR.org were how I played the game in the first 5 minutes I had ever played it...

 

[AlgaeEater]

I liked Forged Alliance; esp the campaign since the voice actors they used were pretty fitting for their roles (as limited as they were). The bald HQ guy is probably one of the better/realistic voice actors I've heard in a game since Freespace 2.

Other than that, $15 bucks at Target clearance and I'm ok with my purchase. The original SupCom was horrible from launch, but FA is fun and its growing on me in its own way. But I'm mostly on C&C3 anyway.

 

[waggy]

I got it free and think i overpaid.

 

[Oceandevi]

Originally posted by: Oceandevi
TA:Spring

/Thread

Whats that oceandevi?

Oh yeah its an open source TA sequel/mod/ that offers better gameplay, mods and maps than SC or FA.

Really and it is free?

Indeed

 

[ed21x]

Supreme Commander reminds me of Command and Conquer: Tiberian Sun. Everybody was suppose to like it, the marketing was there, talented developers, good concept, and the sequel to an amazing game. So in the end, everyone was in denial, and some even gave it a very high rating even though when you get right down to it, the game just didn't feel right, and was boring in the long run. Nobody wanted to be the first to admit that it was a bad game because it had such a high production value, hype, and good screen shots. People made excuses for it, tried to convince themselves that it was good. Probably in a few years from now, there would final concensus that the game simply sucked.

 

[AlgaeEater]

Originally posted by: ed21x
Supreme Commander reminds me of Command and Conquer: Tiberian Sun. Everybody was suppose to like it, the marketing was there, talented developers, good concept, and the sequel to an amazing game. So in the end, everyone was in denial, and some even gave it a very high rating even though when you get right down to it, the game just didn't feel right, and was boring in the long run. Nobody wanted to be the first to admit that it was a bad game because it had such a high production value, hype, and good screen shots. People made excuses for it, tried to convince themselves that it was good. Probably in a few years from now, there would final concensus that the game simply sucked.

Haha, I know what you mean. I also (now that I think about it) enjoyed the campaign mode for C&C: TS, but didn't like the game itself or its multiplay aspect.

Ah memories.

 

[Golgatha]

Hmm old thread, but ya Glide wasn't just better in some 3D apps (UT), it was also better on 3Dfx hardware for many 2D games as it drew 2D sprites and tiles faster than DX/DDraw. Diablo 2 is a perfect example of this as the V5 5500 was the epitome of IQ and performance for many years in D2. Also, I'm quite sure the only thing faster than my P3 500 when I got TA:K was maybe a 600MHz Coppermine that cost $500 or something. 1GHz CPUs weren't out until later that year, December or so for P3 with Tualatin I believe..... But ya I agree, it took a 1Ghz T-bird (OC'd to 1.4GHz ) to finally play this game smoothly.....

CS 1.6, Diablo 2, Kingdoms, and Need for Speed 2 were all awesome on 3dfx hardware. Luckily I still have a system with a Voodoo 4 4500 in it .

 

[Golgatha]

Originally posted by: waggy
I got it free and think i overpaid.

Kind of like getting a free movie pass and then walking out thinking, "Well, there's 2 hours of my life I'll never get back.".