Supreme Commander 2

Robot rock?

So, Chris Taylor wants to take us all down, down to robot town. He wants to make Supreme Commander more accessible and less unwieldy, pushing a kind of technological miniaturisation. Same product, just a little smaller, smoother, shinier and more refined.

Supreme Commander was a traditional RTS (read: Total Annihilation) with the single defining feature being its ridiculous scale. 300 different units, three different levels of land, sea and air factories to push through, mammoth maps, nuclear warfare and comically big "experimental" robots that took an age to appear in any match. And for the sequel they're... reducing the scale?

In practice Supreme Commander 2 works well despite its tactical reduction, and that's not as surprising as it sounds. For one thing, the scale still dwarfs any other RTS out there and you still have the opportunity to fling hundreds of robots at your opponents like a child upending his toybox on his kid sister.

For a second thing, Chris Taylor is a right-winger of the RTS genre. In his interview with Eurogamer a few weeks back he actually compared innovation in RTS games to either putting a fifth wheel on a car or taking a wheel off.

Placing to one side the fact that anyone who can call the ideas present in Company of Heroes, Sins of a Solar Empire or World In Conflict "putting a fifth wheel on a car" needs a stern talking to, Supreme Commander 2 represents Taylor playing to his strengths. In reeling back what was outlandish about the original game, he's supervising the creation of a game he's more comfortable with, and it shows.

'Supreme Commander 2' Screenshot 1

It's a less turtle-friendly game this time around. No walls, less artillery, smaller shield generators, more squealing as enemy bots puncture your flimsy defenses.

Here's what I'm talking about: in massively reducing the number of units from 300 to 120, each one plays a simpler, more comprehensible purpose. In removing the different levels of each type of building (you now only get one type of land factory, one mass extractor, one anti-air turret and so on) you get a better grip on how to construct your base.

In reducing the scale of the single-player missions, they no longer play so drearily when you've set up adequate defenses against the AI, and in making lots of smaller multiplayer maps available you encourage a less stilted, more rapid pace of play (something also aided by adding units which teleport or shoot smaller units across the map).

From a personal perspective, I always felt Supreme Commander was big in an awkward, tedious way, probably because of its traditional micromanagement-heavy framework. I wanted to get good at the game, but it didn't want to help. It was embarrassing for both of us.

'Supreme Commander 2' Screenshot 2

You can, however, now upgrade factories with indirect turrets. Seems Gas Powered Games is pushing for tense base defences without the drudgery of knocking down walls.

That's not a feeling I get with Supreme Commander 2, and I haven't even touched on the engine yet. It's prettier, but also markedly smoother than the original game. You can still expect a painful frame-rate drop if you zoom in during the ridiculous 100 vs. 100 scraps (i.e. when you want to enjoy the visuals most), but broadly it's a neat technical improvement and it does feature a much-requested improvement in pathfinding.

The final big change to Supreme Commander 2 is the new research tree, which I'm in two minds about. The way it works is you now amass research points by constructing research facilities in your base, or, more nonsensically, by blowing up enemies. At any point you can bring up your research menu and go shopping, spending these points on upgrading your existing units or structures or unlocking new ones.

It's a weird one, and as distant as you can imagine from, say, the OMG experience of spending command points to go up a doctrine level in Company of Heroes. Instead you're flinging points at the tree constantly, a +10 per cent to aircraft health here, a +50 per cent to sonar distance there, and only occasionally enjoying the satisfying payoff of saving up the mass of research points required to unlock an experimental unit.

As a system, it doesn't seem to sit quite right. The advances are always useful enough that it's worth bringing up the research menu and tossing your amassed research points into the void, yet only rarely are the advances very exciting. Perhaps the tree might feel a little less like a hungry mouth to feed if bringing it up didn't mean obscuring your view of the action proper.

What I do like about the tree is that it will allow for a variety of sneaky plays in multiplayer. While some of the upgrades you can acquire cause subtle visual changes to your units, by and large you only realise that your opponent has been shunting all his points into aircraft when you end up on the receiving end of them.

Likewise, the prerequisites required to unlock nukes or a top-level experimental are largely statistical upgrades, so if you're careful you'll be able to build them unexpectedly. It's nice. A little bit of guile and bluff to go with the first game's blunt economics.

It's good there's something to look forward to on the multiplayer front, because now I need to make a public service announcement about Supreme Commander 2's single-player campaign. Gas Powered Games are trying to tout Supreme Commander 2 as a treat for single-player gamers, right? With a strong, human, character-driven plot?

This is the first game I've played in a very, very long time with writing so tedious I've recoiled from the screen, and in my preview code (still a chance for this to be fixed!) most of it plays out during unskippable cut-scenes.

'Supreme Commander 2' Screenshot 3

Can we just have a game about the Cybrans? Am I alone here? Can't we just have Supreme Cybran? Cybran Commander?

Also, I'm not going to replay a 30-minute long single-player mission to check, but I'm near-positive I heard a Cybran commander use a big word incorrectly as he fled the battlefield. As in, the script-writer had an incorrect understanding of what it meant.

(Update: On Gas Powered Games' recommendation I did play the mission again, just to check. He wasn't speaking nonsense! He was just quoting a passage from Shakespearean tragedy Titus Andronicus! We really regret this error. Sorry, Gas Powered Games.)

Other gems you can look forward to include this heated exchange between your commander and his opponent during a mission:

"Guys like me eat guys like you for breakfast!!"

"Well, that explains the foot in your mouth."

It's annoying, because I've read a lot of people griping that since Square Enix are publishing Supreme Commander 2, the plot's obviously going to be terrible. I was hoping for the chance to knock those guys back. [For the record, I think that foot mouth joke is amazing. Pre-ordering. - Ed]

In any case, disappointment about the plot aside, even this yet-to-be-finetuned preview code feels like the superior game to the original Supreme Commander, and it would be crazy to ask for anything more than that. That would be like asking for a fifth wheel on your car, or something.

Supreme Commander 2 is due out for PC on 5th March, with an Xbox 360 version to follow.

Comments (22) Latest comment 2 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • Demikaze #1 2 years ago

    I, uh, don't actually get the whole foot mouth exchange. As in I can't understand it. How does the retort even make sense?

    /feels dense
    Edited by 4 at 05/02/10 @ 17:28
  • Demikaze #2 2 years ago

    I mean, how does the retort even make sense?
  • Zaiz #3 2 years ago

    Don't worry, it's Supreme Commander, you didn't come for the plot, you came for overly-long, and pretty dull battles. Oh, and Chris Taylor saying he isn't innovating, he's just completely changing his game. That's all.

    I'm trying my very hardest to veil my contempt for a developer that is rapidly becoming very third-rate.

    Edit: Oh, and don't worry, it's obvious they don't have a writer, so we can't blame anyone for...that.
    Edited by 1 at 05/02/10 @ 17:33
  • Avaloner #4 2 years ago

    Say what you will, I love anything Chris Taylor does. He moves me.
  • Eraysor #5 2 years ago

    That new research tree sounds like an improvement to me.
  • Metalfish #6 2 years ago

    As someone who owns both the original and exp pack, i.e. the sort of person most interested in a sequel and therefore, abstractly at least, the sort of person who they hope will buy it, I'm not exactly being bowled over by what I've seen so far.

    I loved SupCom, for all the flaws. The major flaw was the level of micro required, not the scale, not the number of units, not even the plot. I loved that there was no 'tech tree' or the same unlocking of nebulous powers that has been in every RTS since C&C Generals. It was about constructing a devastating war machine and smashing it into other war machines. For me, company of heroes and dawn of war have got squad/company level RTS locked down, it's madness to try and take those on right now.

    A few tweaks are all that are required. How about factories that upgrade themselves, or broad "build me a base here while I come up with clever tactics" type automation.

    Eliminate clicks per minute, not ideas.
  • Zephro #7 2 years ago

    What they really needed was the massive scale, but with some AI/interface wizardry to make managing a huge, huge, huge army of robots a joy not a chore.
  • Stop-gap #8 2 years ago

    "I was hoping for the chance to knock those guys back." I would hope the dev would too, but nah, let's stick with lazy crap like
    unskippable cut scenes which were amateurish and annoying back in 1998.

    There's time enough for things to change and time to be proven wrong, but this preview reads exactly like a list of things they broke while trying to "fix" other things that were fine. Still, if the AI is up to the task this time, neither flawless or useless, and it gathers a reasonable community to mod it to be a bit more like its predecessor, then it should be worth a look. /crossfingers
    Edited by 1 at 05/02/10 @ 18:07
  • CalmHorizons #9 2 years ago

    It may seem like a minor gripe to most. But does anybody else suffer from intense ambivalence regarding the narrative setup of the SupCom games? In particular the idea that my units are all just robots.

    One of the joys of RTS's for me, even since the original red alert (which had no survival motivating experience point system), was my loving drive to anthropomorphise the little flesh and blood units onscreen. Leading Tanya and a few doomed but stalwart spies on a lone assault of an enemy base was infinitely more tense and harrowing than throwing hundreds of soulless mechs at another commanders army of the same. Probably largely because she and other characters were imbued with real personality between missions.

    In short, once my imagination is told to recognise that my units are automatons, it does exactly that. And as a result alot of my emotional investment in the game is nullified. Shame really because as I recall the universe in the original TA was about clones vs. consciousness embedded microchips. Even in that game I got perverse pleasure out of saving my units from annihilation most total..
  • Zaiz #10 2 years ago

    I just got the joke. It wasn't a laugh a bit later moment, it was more of a facepalm moment. >.> I'm going to put what I think it is in the spoiler.

    Since he eats people, that's why he has a foot in his mouth! Or maybe he has a foot in his mouth because the writing is poor.
  • KillerMonkey #11 2 years ago

    This isn't working for me. I don't want smaller scale, I don't want simplification, I don't want less buildings. I want MORE units, bigger units, crazy units, crazy huge experimentals, lots of buildings, lots of different things to do, try and experiment with.

    :'(
  • Quickstick4 #12 2 years ago

    Loved both SP and SP:FA and really hope they don't ruin the series. Im getting slightly feed up with developers making sequals "more accessible". Heres hoping they can pull it off.

    *goes back to play 5 hour game with freind*
  • Ryuken #13 2 years ago

    Don't know what to think of a writer who didn't "get" the first SupCom to be honest. The comment about incremental upgrades pretty much says it all: those kind of boosts were exactly what you got when you separately upgraded Radar Towers and Factories in the original game. That's a lot less clicks than before if you knew the first game well enough (and yeah, that does sound like a good thing).

    Looking forward to this, for the skirmish and multiplayer mainly. Singleplayer is just a bonus, as with every RTS.

    EDIT: also, if you try quoting someone at least do so with a bit of context:

    But I definitely think there's been some desperate moves in the industry to find a new place for RTS. There was a game that had you fighting on the surface and below the surface - Armies of Exigo - and there was one where you could be fighting on a ground map and also in space. All these kinds of variations, but it's like saying let's add a fifth wheel to a car, or let's take a wheel off. But maybe we can actually make the car more comfortable, maybe we can make the drive less noisy or more fuel-efficient.

    That's CT in the EG interview, if you see him pointing out SoaSE or WiC I'd say you got a point in this preview but he explicitly mentioned a single, specific example of an RTS mechanic which showed up in Armies of Exigo (and Metal Fatigue respectively), namely the addition of another map layer (underground, space, air, etc.) on top of a regular ground level. AoE and MF did add more than most players could possibly handle without the most important thing of all in a strategy game: overview. CT made a great point there, period. I got no qualms if you crush his promises of a well-written SupCom 2 campaign but for the love of God, get that quoting right if you got some journalistic integrity left.
    Edited by 1 at 06/02/10 @ 02:13
  • ave #14 2 years ago

    I loved Total Annihilation. I worshipped the game for years, upgraded my PC(twice!) for it, downloaded custom maps and mods galore(surprisingly, it had a brilliant space RTS mod that i cannae remember the name of).

    Yet SC was just too much for me. I couldn't handle the micro'ing and enjoy it, though I tried.

    So this sounds perfect for me!

    [edit]Just went back and found the Mod. My god I forgot just how diverse and large a modding community TA had, it puts Half Life to shame.
    Edited by 1 at 06/02/10 @ 03:14
  • Moz #15 2 years ago

    must say i'm starting to look forward to this, was a big TA fan and when SC came out was rather dissapointed by it, never felt like you get right down into the battles had to spend way too much time zoomed right out.

    SC2 is sounding like a far more conventional RTS which is great news :D
  • TheBlueShmoo #16 2 years ago

    It's a real shame that the sequel to one of my favourite RTS's has been reduced in scale. I loved massive 8+ hour games with friends over LAN or tinternet. I loved building a huge super safe base, and then building a gargantuan assault force to attack my enemies with. This will be a no sale for me I reckon. :(
  • dirk_aircool #17 2 years ago

    I thought the whole point of the TA + SupCom titles was to micromanage everything and have 1000 units on screen at once.its not supposed to be easy, its an RTS.and it used to be the best one. I hate not building big bases and managing resourses and I also hate the C&C types with stupid ' ker - ching ' hero types taking out the whole battlefield alone. RTS = Real Time STRATEGY, not running around at the speed of sound in a game U can't slow down.
  • Toby #18 2 years ago

    Reminds me of Happy Gilmore:

    "I eat pieces of shit like you for breakfast!"
    "You eat pieces of shit for breakfast?"
  • Fellblade #19 2 years ago

    "From a personal perspective, I always felt Supreme Commander was big in an awkward, tedious way, probably because of its traditional micromanagement-heavy framework."

    Supreme Commander was one of the most micromanagement light RTS games that I have ever come across in fifteen years of playing games.

    "He wasn't speaking nonsense! He was just quoting a passage from Shakespearean tragedy Titus Andronicus!"

    Have you considered alternative employment?
  • sneetch #20 2 years ago

    "Placing to one side the fact that anyone who can call the ideas present in Company of Heroes, Sins of a Solar Empire or World In Conflict "putting a fifth wheel on a car" needs a stern talking to"

    Well, no, because you're taking him completely out of context, he said:

    "But I definitely think there's been some desperate moves in the industry to find a new place for RTS. There was a game that had you fighting on the surface and below the surface - Armies of Exigo - and there was one where you could be fighting on a ground map and also in space. All these kinds of variations, but it's like saying let's add a fifth wheel to a car, or let's take a wheel off. But maybe we can actually make the car more comfortable, maybe we can make the drive less noisy or more fuel-efficient."

    So the wheel analogy does not apply to Company of Heroes because it still had all the core features of RTS games: base building, unit purchasing and all that it didn't make sweeping changes to those features to try to stand out. It does apply to Dawn of War II where the lack of base building and unit production seriously reduce the options available to the player (you can't decide to see the same mission would play with a tank heavy strategy or air assault and so on).

    Edit: how the hell did I miss Ryuken's excellent post above?
    Edited by 1 at 08/02/10 @ 14:20
  • Highwayman #21 2 years ago

    After all the asset stripping they have done to C&C4, I'm more than ready for this game, loved the previous games in the series.
  • m0ngy #22 2 years ago

    From playing the demo Sup Com 2 would appear a complete piece of sh!t. It has very little of the fantastic RTS gameplay that made TA & SupCom so awesome. Slightly improved graphics and smoother unit AI does NOT make up for a lack of units generally, poor gameplay, lack of perspective, and total inability to approach the game laterally. Clearly, this new game has been developed for 10 year old kids to play on the 360, PC player be damned. We don't give a DAMN about stoyline!! Did the developers bother asking any hardcore RTS players what they wanted? We want HUGE maps, HUGE tech trees, and battles which last days, eventually duking it out with nukes. THIS is the essence of RTS. Hey noob writer, micromanagement is FUN!! You're just too dopey to be able to work it out because it's complicated and takes a fair degree of intelligence.
    Edited by 1 at 02/03/10 @ 06:47