This, is what PA will have to top.

I think this discussion has reached a point were we will just have to agree to disagree unless we wanna start repeating ourselves endlessly.

If people keep posting this, I may snap . . . :x

If both side refuses to give you allways reach a point were they keep repeating the same statements over and over, to continue the discussion at such a point would be foolish. Thats why you have to "agree to disagree".

This smells of elitism. The implication is that almost everyone will automatically shun him because he likes something that is "widely" considered to be "trash". Well I'm sorry, that's not fair to SC2 lovers because it implies we're dumb idiots for not having a "cultured opinion", and it's not fair to you guys because it sweeps away a unique perspective (which certain people could see if they'd just stop whining about horrible ideas and try and make something of concepts which have potential).

As my sig says, I like SupCom, FA, AND SC2. I went into the experience with an open mind and an intent to enjoy it. I didn't expect flow economy to remain (or go away), I was neutral on tiers being removed, etc. Why? It was a sequel. That's it, period. They shouldn't be chained to the flaws and design of the previous game any more than PA should be chained to FA. And they should get a refreshed playerbase not intent on carrying out some petty vendetta because it didn't live up to their dreams.

(/rant)

Yea i guess it is a bit of elitism, sorry for that.

But i do honestly have a lesser opinion of someones opinions that prefears supcom 2 over supcom in a forum supposed to be about a spiritual successor of TA, as most agree with supcom 2 can hardly be considered to fit into that category while supcom can.

Thats not to say that i have a lesser opinion on him as a person or on his gaming ideas, just about his opinions in connection with PA (since it is a spiritual successor of TA) and even if it is a kind of elitism, i doubt im the only one (nor does it make the point any less valid, everything i say isent automaticly wrong just becuse im a bit elitism'ish).

Btw i like Supcom 2 too, but its nothing like TA or Supcom. It has strayed way to far for that. If they hade said "Were making a game losely based on TA" then sure, make it something more supcom 2 ish, but they are making a spiritual successor to TA, thats what im paying for, not something supcom 2 ish.

How about we wait till neutrino has a plable alpha of PA and then discuss what we want? PA will play differently to TA; FA and SupCom2, the planets will make sure of that. Right now we are discussing something without knowing what the basics PA will be like.

I think neutrino will take the best of both worlds. What was really great about SupCom2 (and I think we can all agree on that)? AI and pathfinding. They hired Sorian and they are looking into a pathfinding system that will be based on the same principles as SupCom2. If you add that on top of the best of unit design and economy from TA and FA everybody can be happy imo.

Why though? As you point out,

It's like saying you think the opinion of basketball fans is less valuable when those basketball fans happen to have an opinion on what the best baseball team is. The two have little to do with each other, other than the fact that they're both sports (RTSes).

Yea there are absolutely aloot of things that supcom 2 did great and that would fit into a spiritual successor of TA without straying from the orginal concept, just add and improve on it.

If someone thats a basketball fan gives his opinion on a baseball team and wishes to change the baseball team to fit his opinion you wouldent value his opinion less then one of a baseball fan?

I (and most others i would assume) backed the game becuse it is a spiritual successor of TA, Supcom 2 while being a good game dont fit into that category.

We could make a poll...






NOOOOooooo, I was just kidding!!!

If he wanted to do that, his ideas were bad, and you couldn't salvage anything good from those ideas, no I wouldn't value that opinion. But far too many people write off ideas because "supcom 2 is bad/can't apply to these games", and don't examine the ideas themselves :<

If he wanted to do that, his ideas were bad, and you couldn't salvage anything good from those ideas, no I wouldn't value that opinion. But far too many people write off ideas because "supcom 2 is bad/can't apply to these games", and don't examine the ideas themselves :<

Im not saying that you should write him of completely. Just that i have a lesser opinion of his opinion.

But to be frank (after rereading the post in question), that particular post was a unmature outburst of elitism, i admit that. Sorry.

Apology accepted Now, this thread can go back to... whatever it was it was about.

You almost got me there..

Imagine if Blizzard tried to replace resource gathering, the Asians would have exploded. Same thing happened with supcom2, which unfortunately, regardless of opinion, was an AWFUL game that fell because it attempted to cash cow the series with the accepted standard of pretty lights and simplification. The more you try to make your game more accessible, the less core gamers will play.

I'm sorry, I couldn't hear you over the sound of having fun in my awful cash cow game.

This implies that you think tiers and a flow economy can reasonably be described as flaws in the TA/Supcom1/FA games. Is that really your opinion?

They can be described as flaws and as strengths. Respectively, tiers end up creating too many units with role overlap (at least in SC1 and FA), and flow economy resulted in it being more Economic Combat Simulator 2009 than an RTS. Tiers also add a wonderful sense of escalation and flow economy adds a lot of interesting stuff to do.

This thread has degenerated from informed discussion to ANOTHER flame war about whether SupCom2 was good or not. This can go on forever and it WILL go on forever unless we stop now.

And to answer the original poster- I would assume that PA would be better. After all, there is no competitor to beat in production time, and the fact that they can now look at all the mistakes RTS games have made before and strive to avoid them.