SupCom2 Demo
Moderator: Moderators
Re: SupCom2 Demo
That might be how the others work for all we know, we only have 1 cybran transport to look at and a handful of UEF units to go by
Re: SupCom2 Demo
The technology is very impressive, the new pathfinding is very slick, and graphically the game is beautiful, especially with the very out-of-the-box maps, with a lot of vertical space and limited land movement.
In terms of gameplay, it's shit. Even worse than the first supcom. There's a delay on giving commands(like, ~1 second, big delay), everything is SLOW, the whole 'tactical zoom' is overrated and feels very sluggish.
A lot of the strategy and tactics have been removed by the unit upgrades that are allowed, giving a basic tank range, shields, high firepower, and AA. Single unit spam is once again effective, no need to worry about the tradeoff between range/toughness, or land/air, etc.
Instead of the tech system it uses research, which I wouldn't be entirely opposed to, except you have to get a bunch of T1 upgrades before you can unlock any T2 units, all of which have to be unlocked separately.
But the biggest problem: the econ. For some stupid reason Chris T. decided to remove the income econ system that's been used since TA, which is an amazing system, and is one of the things that really sets it apart from other RTS games. Now it uses the typical (and bad) stockpile system, where you just harvest energy and metal and it builds up to massive amounts. It doesn't even matter if your resources are taken out, because you have stockpiles that don't deplete themselves. Everything has to be prepayed.
That said, in terms of tech it'd be nice if Spring copied some things, most notably being the pathfinding and proper dual screen support.
In terms of gameplay, it's shit. Even worse than the first supcom. There's a delay on giving commands(like, ~1 second, big delay), everything is SLOW, the whole 'tactical zoom' is overrated and feels very sluggish.
A lot of the strategy and tactics have been removed by the unit upgrades that are allowed, giving a basic tank range, shields, high firepower, and AA. Single unit spam is once again effective, no need to worry about the tradeoff between range/toughness, or land/air, etc.
Instead of the tech system it uses research, which I wouldn't be entirely opposed to, except you have to get a bunch of T1 upgrades before you can unlock any T2 units, all of which have to be unlocked separately.
But the biggest problem: the econ. For some stupid reason Chris T. decided to remove the income econ system that's been used since TA, which is an amazing system, and is one of the things that really sets it apart from other RTS games. Now it uses the typical (and bad) stockpile system, where you just harvest energy and metal and it builds up to massive amounts. It doesn't even matter if your resources are taken out, because you have stockpiles that don't deplete themselves. Everything has to be prepayed.
That said, in terms of tech it'd be nice if Spring copied some things, most notably being the pathfinding and proper dual screen support.
Re: SupCom2 Demo
Only auto select group units and pathfinding is good in this game... all other is step back :/ No thanks. Spring games still best.
-
1v0ry_k1ng
- Posts: 4656
- Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 10:24
Re: SupCom2 Demo
after a brief spin of the game, enjoy an extensive, cadyr-esque tl;dr review powerfully compressed into just two words
this blows
this blows
Re: SupCom2 Demo
The demo is interesting but we'll have to play the full game. I'm sincerely hoping they just chose the wrong stuff to put into the demo.
For one the demo doesn't adequately play out land well. Theres no generic RTS battle, its all kill the aircraft and send over the fatboys that are auto-produced you have no control over, or send in a navy and aircraft on an island map.
The missions are horrible choices for a demo.
Supcom 1 had the pause order bug too, it got fixed in a patch rather quickly
For one the demo doesn't adequately play out land well. Theres no generic RTS battle, its all kill the aircraft and send over the fatboys that are auto-produced you have no control over, or send in a navy and aircraft on an island map.
The missions are horrible choices for a demo.
Supcom 1 had the pause order bug too, it got fixed in a patch rather quickly
Re: SupCom2 Demo
Doesn't change the fact that the research and econ systems both suck.AF wrote:The demo is interesting but we'll have to play the full game. I'm sincerely hoping they just chose the wrong stuff to put into the demo.
For one the demo doesn't adequately play out land well. Theres no generic RTS battle, its all kill the aircraft and send over the fatboys that are auto-produced you have no control over, or send in a navy and aircraft on an island map.
The missions are horrible choices for a demo.
Supcom 1 had the pause order bug too, it got fixed in a patch rather quickly
-
Spawn_Retard
- Posts: 1248
- Joined: 21 Dec 2006, 14:36
Re: SupCom2 Demo
This game feels a step back, my rescourses never ran out and it felt like a tech demo of a concept art for the game.
Re: SupCom2 Demo
maek units lolSpawn_Retard wrote:This game feels a step back, my rescourses never ran out and it felt like a tech demo of a concept art for the game.
Re: SupCom2 Demo
Really can't say much, it's campaign missions and those rarely if ever draw out the interesting parts in an RTS.
Re: SupCom2 Demo
havent gotten far today, but i really hate the stockpiling and inability to stall your economy. That also means you cant queue units ahead of time if you dont have the resources for them yet. Experimental require stopping all your factories until you have enough metal to make them.
Research is a great idea as far as simplifying the build options, and the gui and graphics and artwork are phenominal imo (well everything is lower poly and not as detailed i think but nice animations). No more awesome transports
. Unit grouping, management, and pathing is amazing, but submarines still do funky things like move sideways and stuff, but hey what can you do with long units anyway? They are handled better than long units in spring i think. Autoformations are nice, and com has some sweet upgrades.
The tutorial campaign is annoying as hell, DO NOT DO IT you will be very pissed off by the end of it. Its good if you have never played an rts on a pc before.
BASICALLY: Great work on the artwork and the gui and user interaction. The game looks great. Maps look awesome too. However, there are some iffy gameplay aspects. Honestly I am glad some commercial rts has done this, because I want to see how it actually works out in multiplayer and balance.
Research is a great idea as far as simplifying the build options, and the gui and graphics and artwork are phenominal imo (well everything is lower poly and not as detailed i think but nice animations). No more awesome transports
. Unit grouping, management, and pathing is amazing, but submarines still do funky things like move sideways and stuff, but hey what can you do with long units anyway? They are handled better than long units in spring i think. Autoformations are nice, and com has some sweet upgrades.The tutorial campaign is annoying as hell, DO NOT DO IT you will be very pissed off by the end of it. Its good if you have never played an rts on a pc before.
BASICALLY: Great work on the artwork and the gui and user interaction. The game looks great. Maps look awesome too. However, there are some iffy gameplay aspects. Honestly I am glad some commercial rts has done this, because I want to see how it actually works out in multiplayer and balance.
Re: SupCom2 Demo
I don't like it.
That said, there are some interesting new things about it, previously mentioned was the strategic mode unit grouping, which was really nice imo. As well as the maps -- which were very interesting and beautiful but could have used more open spaces.
The research trees were a bit... limited imo (well, the commander one seemed to have some cool features, but i think it could have been better) and the research caches seem like a silly gimmick. But I like the idea of upgrades and research.
As was stated before, Don't play the tutorial!! unskippable, long-winded, ingame cutscenes (wouldn't be so bad if they were interruptable ) with horrible dialogue. The incessant mention of how everything is brought to you by some futuristic dystopian corporation has been done to death, and is executed poorly.
<insert rehash of terrible resource system here>
That said, there are some interesting new things about it, previously mentioned was the strategic mode unit grouping, which was really nice imo. As well as the maps -- which were very interesting and beautiful but could have used more open spaces.
The research trees were a bit... limited imo (well, the commander one seemed to have some cool features, but i think it could have been better) and the research caches seem like a silly gimmick. But I like the idea of upgrades and research.
As was stated before, Don't play the tutorial!! unskippable, long-winded, ingame cutscenes (wouldn't be so bad if they were interruptable ) with horrible dialogue. The incessant mention of how everything is brought to you by some futuristic dystopian corporation has been done to death, and is executed poorly.
<insert rehash of terrible resource system here>
Re: SupCom2 Demo
lmao yeah that was so annoying "Investing in peace through advanced weaponry" or something was the amusing slogan they used. It would have been funny but for the fact it was repeated 1000 times.
Also there was some stupid explanation for why the research made sense and how it worked. Game designers need to learn that some things are better left unexplained. For example, we dont explain how metal magically enters and leaves a central storage in *A, we just know it makes the game work and ignore it.
the dialogue was cheesy as hell.
still, fabulous from a tech demo POV.
Also there was some stupid explanation for why the research made sense and how it worked. Game designers need to learn that some things are better left unexplained. For example, we dont explain how metal magically enters and leaves a central storage in *A, we just know it makes the game work and ignore it.
the dialogue was cheesy as hell.
still, fabulous from a tech demo POV.
Re: SupCom2 Demo
The strategic grouping still needs to pass the test of big battles with many units...
I wanna point out gain that unit control is crap...
Just compare how you are able to control a unit in supcom and its responsiveness and how it is in spring.
As usual all projectiles are extremely fast and hardly seen making it almost pointless to try and avoid incoming projectiles with your units .
I wanna point out gain that unit control is crap...
Just compare how you are able to control a unit in supcom and its responsiveness and how it is in spring.
As usual all projectiles are extremely fast and hardly seen making it almost pointless to try and avoid incoming projectiles with your units .
Re: SupCom2 Demo
yeah, and everything is a missile and is homing, so its just a brute force counterattack game again. not great gameplay in that regard. Whatever is causing the delay in unit control needs to be optimized, and im guessing its the formations.
Also what happened to controlling the formations like in SCFA? I could scroll and make it wide or long... oh well
Also what happened to controlling the formations like in SCFA? I could scroll and make it wide or long... oh well
-
Google_Frog
- Moderator
- Posts: 2464
- Joined: 12 Oct 2007, 09:24
Re: SupCom2 Demo
Why not supcomm on the spring engine? The interface and resource system would be so much better.BA on the supcom engine plz.
Everything I have seen looks like it is possible with spring. The anti-missiles would be hard to do with current behaviour but easy if we had a shield hit callin.
Gota, I think the point of supcomm is that it is 'strategic'. I doubt units are suppose to be able to dodge projectiles.
Re: SupCom2 Demo
yan talks alot about micro but I have never seen much good micro from him 
THIS had anti-missiles because the missiles were units (i think this is how it was done, i never really investigated). Same could be done for torpedoes and flares.
Does spring have built in support for flares?
Looking at the units underwater, and I think spring or at least *A has more realistic feeling water, and units that move in the water. SC water feels fake, and the units do cool manuevers like going sideways, but they make no sense.
another question: in the campaign you are supposed to kill the cybran experimental submarine. In my game, the submarine surfaced and submerged a couple of times, but never attacked me, just floated around. Then, right before it died, its tails suddenly flipped up and shot lasers, but it was just only when it was almost dead that it fired. Is this a bug? Or is the submarine seriously just a high-hp pet rock that floats around and does nothing.
THIS had anti-missiles because the missiles were units (i think this is how it was done, i never really investigated). Same could be done for torpedoes and flares.
Does spring have built in support for flares?
Looking at the units underwater, and I think spring or at least *A has more realistic feeling water, and units that move in the water. SC water feels fake, and the units do cool manuevers like going sideways, but they make no sense.
another question: in the campaign you are supposed to kill the cybran experimental submarine. In my game, the submarine surfaced and submerged a couple of times, but never attacked me, just floated around. Then, right before it died, its tails suddenly flipped up and shot lasers, but it was just only when it was almost dead that it fired. Is this a bug? Or is the submarine seriously just a high-hp pet rock that floats around and does nothing.
Re: SupCom2 Demo
Goog i get that but the fact its strategic should not mean there can be no such micro...what about smaller battles on smaller maps..how about making it so that u could micro entire formations from dodging missiles or incoming projectiles?I don't see why that would be impossible..There are just several design decisions in supcom that prevent that.
Re: SupCom2 Demo
Imo problem with Supcom (only played first one but saw some videos of 2) is there have this large scale RTS which is a complex genre but have to make dumb enough for average gamers with no rts experienc.
Does not work.
Does not work.
Re: SupCom2 Demo
I was being partially sarcastic, and was talking from an almost purely visual standpoint. You can't argue that Spring looks or runs better than SupCom. It looks amazing and it runs fantastic, and it has very nice features like the new pathfinding (I would LOVE to see that in Spring).Google_Frog wrote:Why not supcomm on the spring engine? The interface and resource system would be so much better.BA on the supcom engine plz.
Everything I have seen looks like it is possible with spring. The anti-missiles would be hard to do with current behaviour but easy if we had a shield hit callin.
Gota, I think the point of supcomm is that it is 'strategic'. I doubt units are suppose to be able to dodge projectiles.
Interface and features in Spring are equal or superior. Although, it would be nice if spring could get a more pretty interface, while the one we have now is perfectly functional, it's kinda ugly and does contribute to the whole 'this is an unpolished open source project' feel. Or maybe there is one and I just don't know about it?