Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Square Enix Announces Supreme Commander 2

Soulskill posted more than 5 years ago | from the branching-out dept.

PC Games (Games) 70

arcticstoat writes "Supreme Commander 2 has now been officially announced, but with a surprise publishing partner on board — Square Enix. Gas Powered Games' original RTS game and its expansion pack, Forged Alliance, were published by THQ, who is no stranger to the RTS genre, but Square Enix has previously specialized in Japanese RPGs such as Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest. Explaining the move, Square Enix said in a statement that it 'has previously worked exclusively with Japanese development companies, so the decision to form strategic partnerships with developers located outside of Japan serves as a new cornerstone of its strategy to create games targeted primarily at consumers in Europe and North America. Additionally, Square Enix Group's foray into the real-time strategy genre is a significant expansion of its product lineup.'"

cancel ×


Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Front Mission (3, Insightful)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 5 years ago | (#25740467)

The Front Mission series is incredible. Not to mention that I'm more interested in the developer than the publisher when it comes to experience and game design.

Doesnt suprise me that much. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25740549)

Supreme Commander had alot of robots, japanese love robots. So that gas powered games teams up with a japanese country isnt that strange.

Let me get it out of the way (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25740583)

Let the great grandchild of Total Annihilation [] be as great as the original!

Re:Let me get it out of the way (2, Insightful)

cbhacking (979169) | more than 5 years ago | (#25741023)

I suppose I'd call SupCom2 the grandchild, not the great-grandchild, but yes. please do let it be so. Also, please let it not require hardware in excess of what, say, StarCraft 2 will need (although TA had its taxing moments as well - I remember thinking that the 256MB needed to play the Four Corners map was completely unreasonable). SupCom will only barely run on one of my computers (though it's fine, if not any where near maxed out, on another).

Re:Let me get it out of the way (4, Informative)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 5 years ago | (#25741151)

This is vaguely off topic, I suppose; but I think that TA Spring [] the weirdo timeline defying clone of the TA/SupCom family deserves a mention. It brings classic TA mechanics(assuming you use the appropriate mod) into a modern 3D engine, all with fairly modest resource requirements.

Re:Let me get it out of the way (1)

vraa (1086475) | more than 5 years ago | (#25747743)

TA Spring is an amazing game Multiplayer has so many tactics you'd never believe TA Spring is what complex RTSes strive to be What else would you expect from an open source game PS: I highly suggest the CA (complete annihilation) mod []

Re:Let me get it out of the way (1)

keithjr (1091829) | more than 5 years ago | (#25750169)

I think it's on-topic enough. Spring is _amazing_, and ahead of its time. If I were the guy at GPG looking for new partnerships, I'd tap those guys rather than looking to Square Enix.

Supreme Commander (4, Interesting)

ShakaUVM (157947) | more than 5 years ago | (#25740709)

Supreme Commander was interesting, but had a weird economy that sort of just kept growing exponentially. You get to a point in the game where you can survive just by making the uber-unit of the game. The uber-units also produce energy for the economy, and can assist in producing more uber-units, so you end up with this sort of Fibonacci sequence progression of uber-units in the game. At some point, you decide you've made enough of them, walk them along the bottom of the ocean to your opponent's base, and annihilate them.

It's a very odd game mechanic, and I'm not sure it's one I liked.

Re:Supreme Commander (4, Insightful)

moderatorrater (1095745) | more than 5 years ago | (#25740745)

The uber-units also produce energy for the economy, and can assist in producing more uber-units, so you end up with this sort of Fibonacci sequence progression of uber-units in the game.

Then your enemy's not playing right. A horde of small/medium units should have been able to wipe out your base while you were building up to your uber units. Unless you were only playing against the AI, in which case you probably shouldn't have been expecting a challenge anyway :)

Re:Supreme Commander (1, Informative)

Creepy Crawler (680178) | more than 5 years ago | (#25741185)

But that's how you play it...

You send in a line of continual rocket kbots and small cheapies to harass and destroy mexxes and solars. While you do that, you set up a perimeter, prepare missile defences against aircraft and later on nukes, and tech up fast and build what you need.

By the time you cloak and get good radar coverage up, you should have a bertha or 2 for suppression and "OMG BERTHA".

One of the fun strategies is to play with cloakers and attack from both sides using either MERLs (medium range missile launchers) and artillery. They have no idea where it's coming from until they cut their forces in two trying to find the source... Then you send your big guys through the unguarded front door.

Re:Supreme Commander (2, Funny)

kesuki (321456) | more than 5 years ago | (#25741547)

"But that's how you play it..."

so boring playing just one game and just one way. i've got about 6500 games on and i could not have done that with a single strategy for each race. heck i couldn't even remain sane playing that much and there were many people pulling me away from warcraft.

but just imagine how much happier say for instance pigs in some giant factory farm would be if they could play warcraft all day. sure with a short life span they're not going to learn how to play games that well, but if while in the womb they get training in how to play while their minds develop... but then all the factory farms need to have a good data network so all the pigs can play video games all day.

and maybe they don't all have to play war games, maybe a variety of games they can be trained in, so they can at least live and die happy.

sure beats the hell out of smelling the awful shit smell and knowing you live in a cage, being force fed food for someone else who likes pork... in a factory farm the methane can all be collected and used instead of venting outside (natural gas and methane are compatible exchanges)

and we don't have to stop with pigs, cows, chickens, turkey... don't get me started on what i can think of, I'm labeled paranoid schizophrenic, but I'm also labeled Obsessive Compulsive Disorder.

Re:Supreme Commander (1)

Jellybob (597204) | more than 5 years ago | (#25745361)

+1: Bat-shit crazy

That's possibly the oddest thing I've read on /. in a while - thanks for brightening up my day!

Re:Supreme Commander (1)

Stephen20x6 (1317895) | more than 5 years ago | (#25745693)

So we're in the Matrix only instead of being in the Matrix, we're playing Supreme Commander and instead of people, we're actually pigs? It's like the Wachowski brothers directed Animal Farm. I approve!

Re:Supreme Commander (1)

Psiven (302490) | more than 5 years ago | (#25746951)

lmao that would be awesome.

Re:Supreme Commander (1)

Derekloffin (741455) | more than 5 years ago | (#25741767)

Kbots? Bertha? Let's not confuse SC with TA please, despite the lineage.

Turtling isn't too bad a strategy in vanilla, but will get you stomped good and quick in SC:FA. There is just too much power on each side for even the most over the top defensive lines to be stopped.

Re:Supreme Commander (1)

AngelofDeath-02 (550129) | more than 5 years ago | (#25741845)

So true. Nukes have a huge advantage compared to the anti nukes so worst case scenario you drag the fight out till they build mass nukes and overwhelm your nuke defense.

Re:Supreme Commander (1)

KDR_11k (778916) | more than 5 years ago | (#25743967)

I heard SCFA is what SC should have been with actual fun in the game. I still avoided it since my PC couldn't handle even a moderate number of units in SC and I was annoyed at being expected to buy a second game to get what the first one should have delivered.

Re:Supreme Commander (1)

RichiH (749257) | more than 5 years ago | (#25745855)

Agreed. At least before the patches, building anything large was just plain stupid. Lots of medium stuff will always win. Which is why this game was so extremely boring.

Re:Supreme Commander (1)

capn_planet (1302143) | more than 5 years ago | (#25748469)

Then your enemy's not playing right. A horde of small/medium units should have been able to wipe out your base while you were building up to your uber units. Unless you were only playing against the AI, in which case you probably shouldn't have been expecting a challenge anyway :)

Exactly. Try playing against humans and see how quickly your strategy will change - if you reached Tech3 in 30 minutes before, expect to be barely hanging on at Tech2 after 1 hour... THIS WILL HELP. [] [GPG]

Don't be offended by the title - I always played SupCom by slow, quiet research followed by the same old blitzkrieg and got bored pretty quickly. You'll be surprised how intense and stressful a game can be when you play by going for blood rather than immediate research, not to mention how quickly your game (and adaptability) will improve.

Re:Supreme Commander (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25741025)

SupCom's resource mechanic encouraged map control, or at least until high levels of play it did. For long games, converting energy (which the player could theoretically endlessly generate) into mass (for which you had to control certain positions) was more profitable economically. I liked the idea of disadvantaging turtles and encouraging early game skirmishing, but it didn't exactly work as planned.

Re:Supreme Commander (1)

mlk (18543) | more than 5 years ago | (#25746919)

Aye it did not. Online the game was simple - Who rushed who first.

Against friends, when you could build in some extra "this makes the game fun" type rules it is a great game.

Re:Supreme Commander (1)

KDR_11k (778916) | more than 5 years ago | (#25749429)

I'm not sure a "no rush" rule actually makes it more fun. Maybe when people don't know the game well it lets them experiment but when they're more adept it'll either lead to an insane arms race (I know many games where a 20 minute no rush rule would mean at 20:00 the game turns into DefCon) or just boredom.

Re:Supreme Commander (1)

mlk (18543) | more than 5 years ago | (#25759943)

Depends on how formal you take "No Rush". We never have the No Rush option ticked, just a gentleman's agreement that none of us would spam units in early game.

Re:Supreme Commander (1)

KDR_11k (778916) | more than 5 years ago | (#25769309)

I only remember an RA2 game (FFA so no teams) I was part of, the rule was just "no rush". When I steamrolled the nearest few players with a gigantic army they complained that I was rushing. A rush is when you sacrifice economic development to get a strong force out fast enough that the enemy cannot defend, I just made sure to expand my economy quickly and then ran the factories at full speed all the time. I even waited quite long before making a move with the army. Not my fault that they were playing SimBase and had a tech center before even building a tank. They tried to spend all their money on economy and teching (or at least that would be the closest valid strategy, they were probably just floating gigantic amounts of cash and building up at a very leisurely pace, probably waiting for getting the tech center before making ANY units) and were surprised when an actual army knocked at their door and one tesla coil could not beat it.

The point is that some people see anything as a rush that doesn't let them leisurely build up a huge army and wait until they feel ready before starting the battle. Of course that fucks up the tech balance since teching up is supposed to hurt you economically when you're living at the edge, with all money going on the battlefield and all the units needed to survive, when you can leisurely spend your money however you see fit with no fear of getting crushed if you let your defenses down of course teching up carries no penalty and a big part of the game is lost.

Seriously, to me it's not a rush if the target has hit or was working towards T2, that means the game is going and he had enough chances to build up his own army. A rush strikes at T1 when you're still getting basic economy up, not when you're nearing the endgame units and the attacking army took 10 minutes to build up. Too many scrubs can't tell the difference between a rush, harrassment and a big, regular attack.

Re:Supreme Commander (1)

mlk (18543) | more than 5 years ago | (#25784623)

I'd not take that as a rush. To me rushing is more T1 spam. Which is what most of the online games I've played turned into. IMO T1 spam is just not fun.

Re:Supreme Commander (1)

Xylaan (795464) | more than 5 years ago | (#25741145)

As part of the first expansion (Forged Alliance) the developers reworked the economy (by reducing the energy efficiency of mass fabricators) and reduced the effectiveness of assisting (now it's barely worth doing) to prevent that late game exponential growth without actually taking up more land area.

Yes, if your enemy can expand his base to cover large swaths of the the map, then their production will be ridiculous, but no longer are they continuously growing their economy without taking up more space.

Re:Supreme Commander (2, Interesting)

WDot (1286728) | more than 5 years ago | (#25741399)

My friends and I would play against the bots and ended up in this same situation. We downloaded the Sorian AI mod, which fixed the problem. Seems odd that a modder is required to fix the catatonic AI, but the guy does a really good job. []

In this case, simply building uber units won't work, as the enemy bases will almost certainly have enough shields and defense to bring them down before they even reach the defenses. While you may be able to hold your own, you can get stuck in nasty stalemates, so try experimenting with new strategies.

Re:Supreme Commander AIs (2, Interesting)

DuncanE (35734) | more than 5 years ago | (#25741803)

Not to blow my own trumpet, but I also did a fairly successful AI patch for SC.

Get it here: []

The AI script was all in lua so it proved quite easy to mod.

Re:Supreme Commander (1)

steelfood (895457) | more than 5 years ago | (#25741989)

There were several 3rd party AI patches for TA as well that would improve the AI. Not by much, but it would at least improve the AI.

Re:Supreme Commander (1)

Guspaz (556486) | more than 5 years ago | (#25748755)

With vanilla, the built-in AI was so horrible that Sorian was pretty much required to get any challenge out of skirmishes or comp stomps. And I'm absolutely horrible at RTS games, as much as I love them. However, by the time FA came out, the built-in AI had improved to the extent that it didn't really need help to kick my ass.

Unfortunately, even though the built-in AI was much improved, it was still dumb. One of the advantages of Sorian was that it behaved a lot more like a human, making the game more fun as well as more challenging.

So, for me, enabling Sorian in FA is just a recipe for an asskicking.

So, with FA, if you're a player of average or sub-par ability like me, you've either got the choice of an AI that's the proper difficulty but not very human, and an AI that's too hard but very human.

It's too bad there's no "easy" version of Sorian; comes with the improved logic, but not quite as difficult. Perhaps the opposite of the cheating AI would help. Or adding random delays to commands issued to slow it down. That sort of thing.

Re:Supreme Commander (1)

pbaer (833011) | more than 5 years ago | (#25741957)

It was like this for a long time, but they changed it near the end. It's now a very different much much deeper game. There's infinite resources, but a more linear growth curve thanks to capped building speed, in addition to making the economy generating structures much more expensive.

Unfortunatly, the community is basically dead, because they left the game in a fucked up state for too long and a lot of people left. That and having a ranking ladder with extreme smurfing where one person had 10+ top 100 accounts discouraged a lot of people.

Re:Supreme Commander (1)

ShakaUVM (157947) | more than 5 years ago | (#25743081)

It was like this for a long time, but they changed it near the end. It's now a very different much much deeper game. There's infinite resources, but a more linear growth curve thanks to capped building speed, in addition to making the economy generating structures much more expensive.

Unfortunatly, the community is basically dead, because they left the game in a fucked up state for too long and a lot of people left.

Hmm, interesting.

Unfortunately, that was why I left. =)

Re:Supreme Commander (1)

Guspaz (556486) | more than 5 years ago | (#25748841)

OTOH, the game is mod-friendly enough that somebody could produce a mod that rolls back the game to any previous version, or makes whatever other balance changes they like. There have always been a ton of balance-related SupCom mods.

Fucking bastards (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25740733)

Suck my cock you nerds.

Linux has lost the game, and so has open source. Blender is run by furfags and Wikipedia is ran by a deletionist taliban which deletes everything as not notable.

-1 away, its just a number, but it means that you can't take the truth.

How much (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25740887)

How much is a Square Enix in metric (m^2) , imperial (sq in) or american (football fields)

I Wish Them Well (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25740911)

I've been playing Total Annihilation (spiritual predecessor) for years now. Opened it just yesterday to get a quick game in. Supreme Commander was a great follow-up to that and Forged Alliance worked to balance it out. Hopefully Chris Taylor will have some input into this. He's the guy that was behind both Total Annihilation and Supreme Commander. His input went a long way to making those games as great as they were. Hopefully he'll have just as much input here.

oh noes (4, Funny)

hort_wort (1401963) | more than 5 years ago | (#25741045)

Square Enix? an RTS game? HA! Hahaha! I can see it now, all the units with have spiky hair, and all the engineer units will be named Cid.

Re:oh noes (1)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 5 years ago | (#25741161)

And don't forget the whole high level units with attack animations that take 10 minutes aspect...

Re:oh noes (1)

SYSS Mouse (694626) | more than 5 years ago | (#25741993)

Consider this, Heroes of Mana [] , a game of Mana series.
This game has as much RPG element as, well, Warcraft 3. (It is actually marketed as a RTS-RPG).

Re:oh noes (1)

hansamurai (907719) | more than 5 years ago | (#25748955)

Also Final Fantasy XII: Revenant Wings was an RTS.

Re:oh noes (1)

xenocide2 (231786) | more than 5 years ago | (#25749263)

And they were both godawful and slow.

Re:oh noes (1)

Tragedy4u (690579) | more than 5 years ago | (#25748485)

Your units will also get "magic powers" by buying them a new dress outfit.

I hope this means ... (1)

SirJorgelOfBorgel (897488) | more than 5 years ago | (#25741807)

they will finally patch Forged Alliance!

I loved Total Annihilation (and Absolute!) and Supreme Command. Forged Alliance added some direly need rebalancing to Supreme Commander, however the game was never 'finished'. It had some serious unit bugs that were, indeed, possible to live with, but should be patched (and many have been patched by the community). However, FA slows down. And slows down. And slows down.

I have a really fast computer, but still, just launch a game with two LAN players and no AI. Do _nothing_. Just let it run 'nothing' for an hour or two. The game will have slowed to a crawl. You cannot play long games or 'epic battles' in FA because of this - with real play it happens, in my computers, after about 30-45 minutes on the ingame clock... a second will not take up to 10 real seconds.

Sad, really. I'm sure I'll buy SC2, but as a proud owner of TA, SC and FA (In total I legally own 10 games, and play less) I do hope FA gets fixed, it had a lot of potential, but pretty much died for lack of support.

Re:I hope this means ... (1)

KDR_11k (778916) | more than 5 years ago | (#25744027)

Get Spring [] , it has much lower sys reqs than SupCom and both the engine and the games on it are still seeing active development so if an issue arises it can actually get fixed.

Re:I hope this means ... (1)

GenP (686381) | more than 5 years ago | (#25746025)

Too...many...dependencies. Do they really need Java, Lua, and Python?

Re:I hope this means ... (1)

KDR_11k (778916) | more than 5 years ago | (#25749293)

Python is used for the build system (scons), Lua is the scripting language for custom game logic. I have no idea why it uses Java though.

I hope they get better artists and programmers... (1)

blahplusplus (757119) | more than 5 years ago | (#25742177)

Supreme commander 1 was horribly designed, this fact must be faced. It used a tonne of memory and the art direction was barely passable for roughly %50 of units for all races.

They also ruined the story of the game in the expansion by cutting off any interesting threats one could generate off the first game. The seraphim just became another evil-alien faction, when in the beginning they were these enlightened beings. It was really sad that the seraphim were all cookie-cutter. They killed the russian girl in the 2nd expansion in just the stupidest way. The supcom team proved they had the skills to make a game but not one outstanding unfortunately, they made a lot of basic blunders that had been learned 10 years prior. I still can point out basic errors when I go back to starcraft and see how they basically mimic'd the interludes between and sometimes in missions with animated faces.

The art direction for supcom in game was horrible and uninspired, I have to say. They had some neat units but they were outnumbered very largely by mundane and uninspired ones. They bit off way more then they could chew, and the strategic zoom really made the art irrelevant since the distance and scale of the units was way off so you could hardly ever realy enjoy the units that were halfway decent becuase you were almost always zoomed out for strategic reasons.

Re:I hope they get better artists and programmers. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25742523)

I loved TA, always been one of my favourite games. And after FA, Supcom is actually very nice to play too. But...

Supreme commander 1 was horribly designed, this fact must be faced. It used a tonne of memory and the art direction was barely passable for roughly %50 of units for all races.


Many of the units and art looks bland, the factions are waaaay too symmetrical. I wouldn't be unhappy if they left the Seraphim out of Supcom 2 completely. It would probably be better if they made an entirely new story (500 years ahead, or back, or w/e?), setting and artstyle, but keep the gameplay. And leave out the cheesy cartoony characters and dialogue. The idea and gameplay of SC1 was good, the details just need improving. But that is doable. :]

Looking forward to SC2.

-Anonymous Commander ;p

Re:I hope they get better artists and programmers. (1)

blahplusplus (757119) | more than 5 years ago | (#25743135)

I agree, supcom had a lot of potential that was blown by bad design decisions. It's too bad they lost any kind of creativity when they mirrored the factions, the xpack was entirely underwhelming, Supcom did not need another race, what it needed was the replacement and/or tweaking and upgrading of the art and units that already existed.

The artist they hired to do supcom were simply all over the map, some of the stuff they produced was great, while the bulk of it was "meh" and uninspired.

Requirements (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25742831)

>4gb ram? OH NOES!

Please, by the time its released we'll be at that point already, don't try and deny it

Re:Requirements (1)

Dr_Barnowl (709838) | more than 5 years ago | (#25744455)

It's reasonably unlikely - moving up to 4GB of RAM on Windows means getting a 64 bit operating system. They are available, but 64 bit installs are very much in the minority.

I still don't trust 64 bit versions of Windows to be compatible with everything, and 64 bit versions of Linux can be a PITA sometimes. I may well be unfairly biased.

The majority of shipped computers with installed operating systems are still using 32 bit versions of Windows, so I think it unlikely that anything outside of rarified markets like CAD/CAM and server iron will start insisting on 64 bit capabilities any time soon.

Re:Requirements (1)

ThaReetLad (538112) | more than 5 years ago | (#25744803)

I've been using Vista 64 for 18 months or so, both at home and at work and I think you should trust 64 bit Windows. It's very good, and as long as you can get drivers for your hardware (initially a problem, but not so much any more). As far as software compatibility goes, it's pretty good. The only difficulty I've had is with some video codecs and overclocking software which needs to install low level drivers. Graphics drivers were iffy for a while, but they're fine now.

Anecdotally, I've observed that people who have installed Vista 64 are much happier with it than those with 32, but that may have more to do with clean user installs against crapware infected OEM installs.

I hope that Windows 7 will be 64bit only, or at least 64 bit by default

Re:Requirements (1)

Beltonius (960316) | more than 5 years ago | (#25746209)

During my latest round of desktop upgrades I reinstalled with XP64. It runs like a dream.

The only real 'teething' issue it had was Creative's utter driver incompetence (X-Fi Titanium sound card). They have 64-bit XP drivers...they just don't want you to get them, apparently. And their customer service reps are either deliberately mislead as to what's available on their website or are utterly incompetent.

I've been pleasantly surprised by the number of games that have 64-bit installs available (Crysis and I believe Bioshock among others). I'm just waiting for Steam to properly install 64-bit versions (UT3 still runs as a 32-bit program).

I'm eying an upgraded from 4 to 8 GB of RAM, mostly because I can.

Long story short, 32-bit good, 64-bit better. I can't see a reason to not move to it on your next install.

Re:Requirements (1)

Guspaz (556486) | more than 5 years ago | (#25748905)

From the experience running Ubuntu's AMD64 version, there isn't really anything to be a PITA; the only thing with any issues whatsoever is that you must use npviewer to get Flash running in a 64-bit browser, and it's very unreliable.

Re:Requirements (1)

Nick Ives (317) | more than 5 years ago | (#25745967)

? Your post makes it look like your replying to something but you're not. I haven't seen any mention of the system requirements anywhere, in fact I don't think they've even confirmed it's coming out on PC. From TFA:

Little has been revealed about the game itself yet, although weâ(TM)re promised more details about the gameplay, features, supported platforms and the release date in due course.

Obviously it'd be mental if it didn't come out on PC, but still. Your post looks like a poor troll.

Re:Requirements (1)

Psiven (302490) | more than 5 years ago | (#25747305)

I'm not sure where the memory req's were mentioned either, but I am certain SC2 will at least prefer 4GB. SC was one of the first games to hit the 2GB memory limit on 32bit systems. Apparently SC would crash on very large maps when it hit the limit, even on 64 bit systes (bc the game is 32bit and still limited to 2GB mem).

Here is an article citing Chris Taylor that even 4GB is not enough for all the factions they wanted to add to SC2: []

And here is a link citing the original problem: []

Unit and map tools! (2, Insightful)

Sabriel (134364) | more than 5 years ago | (#25742857)

I no longer care how good it is. Unless they include decent unit and map making tools as part of the game, I'm not going to buy it. I'm sick of hearing "they'll be released later" and then getting crap or nothing.

You hear me, GPG? Unit and map tools. Good ones. No more excuses.

Re:Unit and map tools! (1)

Psiven (302490) | more than 5 years ago | (#25747325)

You should write them a snail-mail, bro, if you're serious about it.

Re:Unit and map tools! (1)

Guspaz (556486) | more than 5 years ago | (#25748935)

It would probably help if you said what you think is wrong with the existing map and unit making tools. Apparently the community thought they were good enough to pump out a ton of awesome custom maps and units.

Re:Unit and map tools! (1)

Sabriel (134364) | more than 5 years ago | (#25754909)

The community? You mean the tiny subset of the game's playerbase with the free time and coding skills to devote to hacking the game rather than just playing it?

Total Annihilation: official map editor eventually released, as a beta, and so buggy and unstable that this "community" had to write their own version (which while more stable, had even less features). No official unit editor at all; "community" had to write their own.

Supreme Commander: official map editor (described as pre-alpha!) eventually released in a style that reminds this Hitch-Hiker's fan of signs saying "beware of the leopard". No official unit editor; "community" has written scripts and things which might vaguely be considered collectively a unit editor.

Perhaps the community's efforts have progressed since I last was involved; however I hope you can understand why I wrote "I no longer care".

Re:Unit and map tools! (1)

sporkmonger (922923) | more than 5 years ago | (#25752311)

I care how good it is. Unit and map making tools are nice, but I'm more concerned about the game being buggy. The original for the PC had more patches than you can count, and the Xbox 360 version is still unplayable, months after it was released.

Did S-E even play Supreme Commander 1?? (1)

Sephiro444 (624651) | more than 5 years ago | (#25743451)

It wasn't a bad game overall, but it had bugs, balance issues, and became quite repetitive as compared to other RTS titles. And instead of working to correct the issues fans had with the title, it went ahead and rush an expansion pack out the door (which sold far worse than the original title) and moved on to the equally abysmal "Space Siege."

Oh well, at least it'll have some awesome looking cutscenes!

Re:Did S-E even play Supreme Commander 1?? (1)

Psiven (302490) | more than 5 years ago | (#25747381)

OMG Space Siege was horrid, and I was so looking forward to it after the acclaimed Dungeon Siege. As a developer, they really need to take better care of their IP because all of it reflects on them as a brand.

Maybe the choice to move to S-E as a publisher is a reflection on this? S-E seems more likely to give GPG the space and time they need to release a quality product.

I was disappointed (1)

GospelHead821 (466923) | more than 5 years ago | (#25743699)

I used to be a huge fan of Total Annihilation and I was really looking forward to Supreme Commander. I was pretty disappointed with it though. Allow me to preface this complaint by admitting outright that I am bad at RTS games. The scope of the missions was, for me, very frustrating. On one mission in particular, I could complete the first theatre pretty easily, the second theatre without too many snags, and then got completely trounced every time I got into the third theatre. Presumably I was doing something incorrectly early on, but I had to play 30-45 minutes of the first two theatres over and over again just to get to the third theatre (always to find that I was still inadequately prepared.) Eventually, I just gave up.

you didin't miss much (1)

thermian (1267986) | more than 5 years ago | (#25743821)

I too was disappointed. The missions for all three races took place on the same six maps, which was pretty dull. Also you spent most of your time zoomed out in order to see what was going on, so the game reverted to watching dots move around.

Overall I'd say 'nice idea, terrible execution'. I'd also suspect that the real reason for bringing in this new company is because whether they admit it or not, supcom was an awful game.

I waited eagerly for it, having also been a huge fan of TA back in the long ago, and I was gutted when I realised how flawed the game really was.

Re:you didin't miss much (1)

Psiven (302490) | more than 5 years ago | (#25747509)

I agree regarding the zoom affecting overall "fun-ness". It's ironic that the most highly touted feature had this impact. In retrospect I would opt for a mini-map that had a more functional level of abstraction. Make it more useful then just unit type and location.

I was also impressed they utilized a second monitot for the mini-map. Great feature. Everygame should utilisze multiple monitors if there is a practicle reason for it.

Re:you didin't miss much (1)

KDR_11k (778916) | more than 5 years ago | (#25750409)

It wastes rendering power though. A zoomed out minimap can use just one flat image for the terrain while a screen needs to render the map geometry.

Re:you didin't miss much (1)

Djehuty3 (1371395) | more than 5 years ago | (#25752455)

There is a minimap, and you don't need a second screen to activate it; Simply press (to my memory) "I" in game, and you'll get a little menu come up.

Alliance forging? (1)

Sobrique (543255) | more than 5 years ago | (#25745397)

I still play Forged Alliance, and think it's pretty good. There's a _few_ balance issues, that have been community patched, but I still think it's a take for 'top of the class' as RTS games go.

So I'll be watching developments here with interest.

Square has made strategy games before (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25746687)

There were plenty for the SNES last I checked and they were working on some new sequels to those games...

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>