Why all the SupCom 2 Hate?

For a very obvious reason, as my original post stated. Perhaps you should learn to read, good sir. I'll put the answer to your question here, just because I'm that nice.

I ask questions to learn, because I do not know. Shocking, isn't it? That someone would actually seek to reduce their own ignorance? Mind-blowing.

I didn't have a good PC at the time that SupCom and FA came out, and thus, it was only after I had played the game very sparingly that I played SupCom 2, after I had a much better computer. I then went back and played SupCom and FA, and then I found myself torn between the two. I liked elements of both games, and while I certainly feel that FA was much more difficult (for me, personally) and SupCom 2, while still somewhat difficult, the former of the two was more satisfying in terms of what could be done. That being said, because I was better able to succeed at SupCom 2, not being that great of an RTS player (as I admitted in my OP), I consider SupCom 2 to be more fun, because I have a greater chance of not being destroyed by an easy AI in the first few minutes (obviously an exaggeration, but putting this here just to be safe).

I asked why people don't like SupCom 2 because I don't understand WHAT they hate about it. Does that answer your question?



Furthermore, to those of you who actually responded to this: Thanks! You guys have really helped bring some things to light that I wasn't aware of. Very helpful!

Firstly, I would like to say that "Hate" is a strong word, tossed around far to casually on the internet. There are things I hate, however there are very few games that have produced that truly odious and loathsome response. After all, if I hated a game like SupCom 2, how would I describe my feelings for games like "Big Rigs: Over the Road Racing".

The word I would use to characterise my response to SupCom 2 is disappointed. I understand the rational that lead to why it was designed the way it was, however the decisions made in it's development left an over-simplified depth that had none of the replayability of the earlier games. The economy simplification was awkward and the experimental units often ended up being generic "better" units.

I initially didn't mind the upgrade system that much, as it seemed like a reasonable way to keep the initial units relevant. However, it did this by simply preventing the construction of obsoleted units. It didn't introduce a large array of units, all with different strategic strengths of weaknesses, it just took a small pool of units and kept them around with more bells and whistles.

I also found the single player campaign to be dull and boring, with zero engagement in why people where doing what they were doing. SC and FA had an epic build up of missions, with unique characters (well, at least for an RTS) and a clear sense of conflict being more than for just conflict's sake. I get the impression that that kind of thing doesn't really matter to many of the people here, but for me, it created little interest for me to devote more time to it, and play online much.

That said, there were still a few good points that SupCom2 had. I liked the path-finding and unit grouping mechanisms. Some of the wackier experimentals were fun, and the art style was interesting. In particular, I really liked the music, and I still listen to some of it today.

But overall, the game promised a lot, and didn't deliver enough. I feel disappointed that I bought it immediately when it came out, and have gotten a fraction of the enjoyment out of it that I have from Forged Alliance.

I don't mind the direction SupCom 2 went in general. I like Starcraft. However SupCom 2 was bad in comparison to the field it was competing in. It is as simple as that. In exchange for this we lost a franchise that brought something nobody else was doing.

For me it was about product differentiation. SupCom2 was going head to head with SC2:WoL and got trounced by it. Whereas if it had followed the path of its lineage it would still be being played right now.

Essentially the decision to move SupCom into that C&C, Starcraft, AoE type of space robbed us of a game long term. It wasn't in the class of those games and simultaneously didn't do what GPG were good at. If it isn't in that class then it doesn't exist frankly. You either need to differentiate or surpass.

I dont hate it, I just dont like it at all. To me it felt like a stab in the back.

I like Supreme Commander 2. Never played the original.

The unit naming for Illuminate is the most annoying thing I found lol.

I'd try the original and FA, but I don't feel like buying them!

I prefer to SupCom2 as well, because it has something special which I cant describe...

I know Jeremy Soule is legendary and all, but I really like Howard's stuff.

No way, he worked on SupCom as well? That's why I love it, then. Guy is just... absurdly talented. Definitely my favorite composer of all time.

Yes. You don't understand, because you are "new" to this kind of RTS genre. Basically, Supreme Commander 2 took most of the things that made Supreme Commander Supreme Commander. That's why most Supreme Commander 1 fans felt betrayed. Supreme Commander 2 wasn't made for them, it was made for more "casual" console players. You can't just change your fan base like that without creating anger.


Thanks to Supreme Commander 2, this game now has two, completely different fan bases wanting completely different things from this game. And Supreme Commander 2 fans seem to think they are "related" to Supreme Commander 1 fans, because that game happened to have same name and you played the games in wrong order. But they're almost 2 different type of games. So it's natural that SC1 fans and SC2 fans don't always understand each other.

I feel so overdramatic right now.

Someone needs to send me an extra copy of SupCom so I can see the difference, clearly! =P

Supreme Commander: FA is something like $15 on Steam.

I got my extra copy (because I lost the activation code) on Amazon for $4 but for some reason it has risen to $23... http://www.amazon.com/Supreme-Commander ... +commander

SupCom2 £8.99 on steam.

Indeed. You certainly came off, at least in your former post, as quite holier-than-thou and arrogant. It was entirely unnecessary, I might add. It's that sort of attitude that divides playerbases to begin with, and is quite destructive. Anywho...

I don't see it as a bad thing that there is a split in the fanbase. To me, that suggests that there are two things that people enjoy, and ultimately when that happens, I feel there should be equal consideration given to all three parties involved: The hardcore, the casual, and the compromise between. Ideally, a game should be able to equally cater to all parties involved, while still finding a way to make an enjoyable experience for ALL involved. Obviously this is my own opinion on an ultimately ideal situation, but I don't think that's any reason to not strive for it.

You have to realize that just because you are a hardcore RTS fan that games can't always cater specifically to you. Sure, it would be NICE if that happened, but other people would be left out. I'm a furry, and I don't go around demanding and expecting anthropomorphic animals to be featured in every game, because for one, that would be silly, for two, it would exclude a lot of potential, and for three, not everybody likes anthropomorphic animals the way furries do. Perhaps this is a poor example, but it's the best I could think of off the top of my head.

Furthermore, when you say that SupCom 2 fans and SupCom fans aren't related, it seems to suggest that you're implying that just because a sequel isn't like the original that it's instantly bad, and that none of the fans of the sequel know anything about what they're talking about. I don't think that's a fair thing to say at all. The people who like SupCom 2 like it for what it is, while the people who prefer the former game like *it* for what it is. Just because they like something different than you doesn't make them wrong or stupid; it just means they have different tastes.

I can fully understand the anger you express over feeling betrayed by the game makers. They did change things that you and many others enjoyed a lot, and I've experienced that before with other games. Yeah, it really does suck, and I feel you there.

This is a perfect example of what NOT to post on the forums. Don't kick a guy when he's down. It's a **** move.

Also, personal information should not be posted on public forums. No one asked. No one cares. And it's probably against the rules somewhere. Keep it to PM.

The heck are you talking about, personal information? The only possible thing I could even construe as matching that would be saying I'm a furry, which I only brought up explicitly for the sake of giving an example. It was hardly out of line or inappropriate. Your disingenuous assertions are not appreciated.

Furthermore, please stick with the topic that's been posted. This is a thread for discussing what people dislike about SupCom 2, and why, not calling people out for their actions on an internet forum. Kindly make a relative contribution, or don't post. It's really quite that simple. If you have that great of an issue with me or my postings, please, feel free to report me/the post in question if it's that much of a grievance to you. I'm sure a moderator will be more than happy to review it and deem whether it is appropriate or not. Good day, sir.

Now then, should anyone else care to contribute their own stances on the matter, I'd be interested to hear what you have to say.

Why split them, when you can create a new, separate, fanbase... just by using a new name? When you take out the name, you take out a very large argument against Sup2: "it's not FA 2.0."

Look up Project Mojave. I also found a YouTube video on it that I hadn't seen before. Names are an important part of perception and image.

:roll:

Oh my god. A real, live troll! Things are looking up for PA. Trolls only bother to trash things within public view, where others of their kind might appreciate such wacky shenanigans.

Unfortunately, it is a bit too early in PA's development to have reckless flame wars. Come back in a month or so, when the alpha is ready to get the ol' Ramsay treatment.

I think most of the issue comes from the big gameplay difference, in FA you basicly threw units at eachother while building game enders to crush the other guy, and once the game ender was built it was mostly game over. Supcom 2 removed game enders, so you had to slug it out to the end, the pay in full economy was also annoying as it removed a lot possibilities that pay as you build had. The complexity was also an issue, as the game was oversimplified to the point that balancing became an issue. That said, I liked the improved game engine with flowfield pathing and better movement AI, something FA could have benefitted from. Mostly, it was the fans wanted FA remade, what they got was something different.

Some back and forth to understand why PA fans like or dislike SupCom 2, totally fine and appropriate for a discussion about the genre.. some of this thread is getting a little personal (both in unnecessary sharing and unnecessary attacking). Please stay on target so we don't have to start locking threads and being all punitive and such.