I don't hear much about it anymore, except from fanboys. And we all know how totally obnoxious you stupid fucks are about your games.
Note that was intended to be sarcasm. And there are way more obnoxious fanboys of C&C than there are of Supcom.
And yet I still hear about it more often than Supreme Commander... and I've even been able to speak with people at shops, restaurants and jobs about C&C as well. Nary a mention of Supreme Commander...
Once again, you failing to notice my sarcasm.
I find the idea much less tactical because there's no thought involved with it and literally no management. Construct a shitload and forget it; you don't even need to expand, which leads to those oh-so-delightful turtle games that drag on for hours.
You think that, and you're simply wrong. It's not really a matter of opinion since such things play out and can be judged as fact. You obviously, having had a bad impression of the game at first, haven't played it online much. Games can drag on, but there's plenty of ways to breach defenses. You just need a combined assault of multiple different types of units, and most importantly artillery. This goes for many RTS games, not just Supcom. Hell I've seen people break through defenses on Warzone 2100, and if you've ever played that game you'll know the capacity for turtling is way higher than even Supcom. Dear sweet lord the base defenses on WZ2100 are insane...
There's a hell of a lot more management with a gatherer mining resources; be it a miner with ore or a builder with minerals. You have to protect your economy much, much more and that alone opens up zillions of tactics and countertactics.
In Supcom your economy can go up in flames in a single well placed bomber strike. I've seen it happen. Besides in some ways comparing the gameplay of C&C to Supcom is like comparing apples and oranges.
Also a lot of the issues that Vanilla supcom had (issues I agree were bad) were fixed in Forged Alliance. The economy is much harder to defend, and things such as mass fabricators are more expensive, take way more power per amount of mass they create, and aren't as effective. Seeing as how you've not played Forged Alliance not much more I can say.
It's probably not but a lot of games, C&C included, use power structures as the base for everything. Power goes out, most of your structures blackout or stop working. But to lose construction altogether... eh, kinda makes it extremely cheap.
It's a method of making it realistic. If you loose power you can't build shit. That makes it cheap? Didn't you say that the game made it easier for games to drag on, but now you're complaining that power going off makes it cheap? That's essentially game balancing. Saying it's a "cheap" way to balance the game is very relative and very subjective.
Oh look. I'll just spam resource buildings and then build so many defenses no one can get through. Fucking yawn.
It is not easy to spam resource buildings. And the defenses, as I've said before, all have a weakness. Hell if you want to complain about turtling play Warzone 2100 and you'll be fucking horrified. You can build layers and layers of walls and bunkers, and every weapon you research to mount on a tank can be researched into a defensive hardpoint.
I play for blood and speed, not a battle of who can get more fucking artillery.
Wouldn't this same complaint be lobbed at TA, which you liked? Hmm...
You can't just use artillery. Everyone knows unguarded artillery is a sitting duck to fast units, even low tech units. The aim of the game is to mix units well. Granted a lot of RTS games have that, but this game makes it absolutely necessary in most cases, well that is if your opponent is smart...unlike the people I was playing against earlier today. Fucking idiots didn't even put up a fight.
I do play games for the plot and I don't find games with boring or generic storylines very much fun. Granted, there are always exceptions to that but not in this case.
Honestly the storyline was just decent, generic, but decent. It wasn't contrived and terrible, and it's very fucking hard to be original nowadays.
An RTS is meant to have an excellent story, it has the room and capacity to do so, much like an RPG. Most games with a generic plot feel cheap and mass produced. To take the time to craft a deep story is the true test of greatness. Again, exceptions here and there and Supreme Commander is not one of them.
No I honestly think RTS games should be more gameplay than story oriented. Story is a bonus, not a requirement for me. Storyline priority is for RPGs mainly and adventure games.
It doesn't make any less void. You can rip off your own work.
And I once again bring up my point about all C&C games being the same gameplay with updated graphics and story.
TA was actually pretty good from what I remember. Supreme Commander just feels cheap and thrown together just to make a modern game. But that seems to be the case with a lot of games these days.
That's too general a summary. Elaborate.
You know, I'm not even trying to say C&C is teh ub0r greatest. You keep bringing it up like I'm comparing it to Supreme Commander, which I'm not.
Whether you are or not, my main reason for bringing it up is the fact one of your primary arguments against Supreme Commander is it's a "half-assed" rehash of TA. Yet every C&C game, and you're a fan of C&C, is essentially the same gameplay with a different story and updated graphics. Considering there's way more C&C games, it just shows that your argument is hypocritical, since that logic can be used against C&C threefold.
This proves my point further. I'm not sure what it is that makes you believe I'm using C&C as my base comparison, other than that I actually enjoyed them over Supreme Commander. If anything, my base for comparison would be StarCraft.
See above, and Starcraft...well, I'll be honest, I don't hate Starcraft, but Starcraft 2 just seems like Starcraft with updated graphics, playing mostly on nostalgia. Then again, I have no idea what your opinions are, or are going to be on Starcraft 2, so I guess that's irrelevant.
Either way, I'll put it simply, I did not enjoy my experience with Supreme Commander. It felt cheap, bland, dry and unimaginative. I'll never convince you otherwise so the whole debate is an exercise in futility. Though it is amusing to watch you foam at the mouth for disliking your holy grail of fail.
Considering I refuted all your other quite and simply broken points about why you think Supreme Commander is a bad game, and that it is simply not a holy grail of fail (not an opinion, a logical conclusion by a sane unbiased individual), it seems to me you simply just prefer fast paced games. AKA the equivalent to someone preferring an RPG over an FPS, or a racing game over an RTS, same principle, really. So you saying the game was shit is obviously due to a skewed elitist standpoint. It's not like I'd go out of my way to bash racing games because I don't care for the racing genre.
Oh, and you know I could go into and endless rant about the utter retardation of the masses and masses of C&C fanboys jacking off to Kane and Soviets.
I never see "raving fanboys" who are actually courageous enough to defend Supreme commander...I have noticed that it tends to be played by an older audience, so I guess they -generally- act more mature (generally, not as a rule, but really I have not seen rabid immaturity amongst supcom fans.) I just feel the need to defend a game that is simply not defended enough. Hell even most of the Supcom players on this forum don't have the guts to defend the game. I actually do, because when I got Supreme Commander, I finally, after all these years, have found the one fucking RTS game that is -just- right for my playstyle. This is, mind you, after playing C&C Red Alert, C&C Generals, Empire at War, Universe at War, Dawn of War, War Front: Turning Point (oh sweet God what wasted potential that game was...). The only game that came closest was Warzone 2100, and I only play Empire at War (with the massively game changing Phoenix Rising mod, seeing as the original game was an insult to everything that was Star Wars canon) because I am am and was a raging Star Wars geek for everything involving the ships, and this gives me just what I want in RTS format.
So to put it simply, I defend Supcom because well, would you be pissed if the one RTS game that fit -your- particular play style was bashed unfairly? Sure you would.
Just be glad I'm actually maturely debating and not screaming "OMG SUPCOM ROXXORS HOW CULD YOU".
Edited by Kacen, 04 June 2009 - 01:20 AM.