[SpardaSon21]

So basically if we have Supreme Commander 1 + FA, there's not much reason for us to get this?  I mean, we really aren't missing much, considering multi is "meh" and the story is atrocious.  What did anyone expect though, they got creators of JRPG's to help write the story.

[Ace]

The first game had a cheesy but fun plotline... this just sounds... ugggh.

[Ransom]

What did anyone expect though, they got creators of JRPG's to help write the story.

Everything I've heard indicates Square was only a publisher. Even Final Fantasy in its worst moments would be vastly preferable to this mess.

[starbug]

Everything I've heard indicates Square was only a publisher. Even Final Fantasy in its worst moments would be vastly preferable to this mess.

They were also hired to write the storyline, Chris Taylor thought that they could write a much better storyline than GP could.

I wonder who is doing the storyline to Dungeon siege 3 and this Medieval/fantasy RTS that they are doing??

[Starman01]

I wonder who is doing the storyline to Dungeon siege 3 and this Medieval/fantasy RTS that they are doing??

According to what they made sofar, probably the 2nd grade of the town's elemental school (not sure what it's called, I mean the school were the very young kids start )

[TrashMan]

Everything I've heard indicates Square was only a publisher. Even Final Fantasy in its worst moments would be vastly preferable to this mess.

I wouldn't go THAT far. FF is a benchamark for bad writing after all.

[Colonol Dekker]

I dunno, Magitech armour, Slave crowns, SOLDIER, Genova project, the Mako cannon. They were all cool.
 
Also Gunblades. I want a Gunblade.

[Ransom]

They were also hired to write the storyline, Chris Taylor thought that they could write a much better storyline than GP could.

Could you source this?

[Mikes]

They were also hired to write the storyline, Chris Taylor thought that they could write a much better storyline than GP could.

Could you source this?

I read that in one of the early early prerelease announcements too ...  no idea if there's any truth to it and sadly i can't find the article anymore either.

Looking at the end product however, i would say it's absurd to believe Square actually "did the story" for Supcom2 ... or well, if they did, then they really must have just sent the intern over to GPG and called it a day (LOL).  

[starbug]

Could you source this?

PC Gamer UK, i can't remember what issue it was but there was a preview of the game and an interview done, were Gas powered Games went with Square to write the storyline for the game and GPGs worked on the engine and put that into the game.

[Ransom]

Fair enough, I suppose. If that's the case, I'm baffled that their combined efforts somehow managed to spawn writing worse than either company's previous work. Especially since the issues that plague this game's narrative are completely different from those of Square's titles.

[Titan]

Ok, this aside, I have heard rather good things about this. I'm not a multiplayer person, and I honestly am not very good at these games, despite the fact that I love them. However, I heard the GPGnet has been replaced by steam.

Should I consider buying it once it goes down in price, even though I don't use steam?

[General Battuta]

There's nothing wrong with Steam, it works fine and it won't rootkit your computer.

[NGTM-1R]

I dunno, Magitech armour, Slave crowns, SOLDIER, Genova project, the Mako cannon. They were all cool.
 
Also Gunblades. I want a Gunblade.

See, you're confusing "cool" for "tightly plotted" or "practical" or "good".

You can have Superman fighting twin clones of Hitler in the future, but that doesn't mean the story's going to be worth a damn.

I think this basically demonstrates that Square has no concept of how to write this sort of storyline. You can get away with a lot screwier plot twists in a Final Fantasy game because there are no guiderails of expected conduct or competence in those settings. As the Illuminate wife line's reactions demonstrate, this is not the case for people in the military piloting ten-story-tall death machines.

[Colonol Dekker]

Story for me regarding supreme commander was always just a formality, a decorative box for what was, in my consideration a huge three front battle filled  strategy cake. It was in my mind as necessary as the story in Total Annihilation. Sure it would have been a series of unsecured skirmishes without. But that's all any campaign map in an RTS is.
 
I bought the first because I loved TA, I was hoping SC2 was more of the same. If it isn't i'll wait til it's cheaper.
 
 
How's skirmish by the way?

[Mikes]

Story for me regarding supreme commander was always just a formality, a decorative box for what was, in my consideration a huge three front battle filled  strategy cake.
...

...
How's skirmish by the way?

Fully agreed ... and for TA (pretty much no story) and SC1 (very little story) that was true.
As far as SC2 goes... no story would have been better than THIS. It sticks out like a sore thumb. It's so bad that it can't even easily be ignored (lol).

Well, to say something positive to for a change... for people who liked SC1 and like strategy on a grand scale in general, this is still a good game and is still way WAY different from C&C or Starcraft etc..
SC2 just doesn't compare all that favorably when you compare it to SC1.

What aggravates this comparison is that there are maybe 2 or 3 maps total in multiplayer where you can still fight battles on an at least "decent" scale (i.e. compared to SC1 maps... about 15x15 or so). All the other maps are outright TINY with little or no room to maneuver at all...   (i.e. when your commander can walk into the enemy base 1-2 minutes it always ends in some kind of cluster**** rush and most of these games are over in 5-10 mins tops ...)


And Skirmish... well, let's say it is definitely a Multiplayer game. The AI is beyond stupid

[Titan]

And Skirmish... well, let's say it is definitely a Multiplayer game. The AI is beyond stupid

What do you mean 'stupid'?

My problem is that I want an AI to play MY way, not one that plays how OTHER people that play the game play it, IE, THE RIGHT WAY.

[Mikes]

My problem is that I want an AI to play MY way, not one that plays how OTHER people that play the game play it, IE, THE RIGHT WAY.

The AI offers no challenge whatsover. It doesn't matter if you walk over and kill it in the first few minutes of the game or if you defend against its puny assaults and put it out of its misery later (lol).

[Ghostavo]

Just played it yesterday and I have to say, it's bad.

The skirmish maps are really really small, the AI is as dumb as a rock, and the game fells slower as a whole, although I like the introduction of research.

In a related note, the pathfinding algorithm is the worse I've seen lately. An RTS released in 2010 that requires you to guide your units through a path so that they don't get stuck? Really?

[mxlm]

Ninja necro action!

Okay, so the campaign? Is hilarious. It's totally worth playing through just to see what, y'know, professionals are capable of producing when they set their minds to it. Same deal with the unit names. I dearly wish Yahtzee had reviewed it.

The gameplay? Well. All I can say is I really don't understand the consternation the shift to a faster pace generated. Haven't played too much Forged Alliance, but--and I think this would be true if I went back to TA--it's waaaay too slow. And unlike, say, Civilization or X-Com or Master of Orion or Crusader Kings or whatever, there's nothing here that justifies the time requirement. It's rather like Sins of a Solar Empire in that respect. So I'll go ahead and call 2 a substantial improvement on 1.