Thanks everyone.

I wish I could give you all karma.

It doesn't sound like multiplayer is anything to brag about.

I'm going out to buy a Chipotle burrito and maybe Masters of Orion 2 with the money I'd use to buy SupCom2; while I get my multiplayer fix with adding another 20 hours of playtime in Warhammer 40K DOW2.

-Othello

SupCom:FA is the greatest game ever and you should get it

Sure, there is nothing wrong with not liking the game as what it is. The game doesn't change if the name changes. Not buying the game simply because it's not named something else, even though you seemingly like it (otherwise you wouldn't think of buying it in the first place?), is idiotic, wouldn't you agree on that?

Nope.

If you have to ask, then you'll never understand. Return to your foolishness. 

Thx, for the insightful discussion...

Not lookin for one.

Who's saying you can't?

As already said, you shouldn't listen to just a few opinions from some users, who are frustrated about the game because they expected it to be something else. At least not solely.

As with all the previous iterations, Multiplayer is where the game shines. Even if you don't like Multiplayer, skirmish is still fun, especially with the new AI improvements. Sorian (a modder who worked on the Sorian AI for SupCom/FA who now works at GPG) improved it quite a bit. He even made an "AI Overlord" which controls and coordinates all present AIs in the game, so that the AI will fight against their enemies together, instead of just acting independently from each other.

Stupid quotes...

It's just too bad you can't save your skirmishes. Who the h*** thought that was a good idea? It's been a staple of RTS's for years.

I know this has already been explained to you in other threads, and you obviously didn't get it, but I'll give it one more shot. Because of the name, it gets compared to the original, its as simple as that. Smart developers don't dramatically change up popular series, because the fans expect a similar experience to the original. If Starcarft II were a space based real-time 4x like Sins, the fans would be (rightly) outraged. But if it wasn't Starcraft II, and instead was unrelated, or a spin-off (Starcraft: Revolutions or whatever) it wouldn't matter, because it wouldn't be Starcraft II.

There's the old saying "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." Bad grammar aside, that is generally a pretty good axiom to follow. GPG however, ignored this advice, and gave a gaint "Up yours!" to all of the fans of the original. They removed (just about) everything that set the original apart. If they hadn't used the SupCom IP, they could have done whatever the **** they want to the game, and it wouldnt' have mattered as much.

Oh, and you mentioned Sorian and modding. That can't happen any more. In another brilliant decision on GPG's part, modding was for the most part removed from SupCom2. Then maybe there would have been hope someone would mod it to be a real sequal to SupCom1/FA, but no, we can't have that happening. So no more community-created improvements to the AI.

And to cap everything off, because of the decision to use Steam, you can't return the POS that is SupCom2, so whatever money you spend on it is lost to you forever.

It's Steam so... dud.

They would not rightly be outraged. It would just be another unjustified nerd rage. It's awful enough that StarCraft II is so similar to its predecessor. This attitude you are showing here is, quite frankly, very narrow minded.

 

As already said, K&C might get a similar fate. It's a completely new IP, but some fans are already setting their mind into things, seeing it as the "true Supreme Commander 2" and pointing out what K&C should have that SupCom2 didn't etc.

And if K&C does not get everything they imagined, they will again be disappointed, even though it's a completely new IP. Just because of the narrow mindset they share with you and Teseer.

 

This is a publisher decision, not a developer decision. Square Enix makes all the big decisions for the game.

Modding is possible, you can even play Mods online, but at the current state it's not very useful, since it's not implemented like in Demigod for example.

 

 

Btw. if you want to hurt Steam, you should buy Supreme Commander 2

This is the fallacious argument Strawman -- no one said the game changes because the name changes.  What they're saying is that the game was advertised as a sequel and in their opinion really wasn't -- false advertising, unmet expectations, playing falsely on name brand recognition, etc.

This is also the fallacious argument Strawman.  He said he won't buy it because it "...falls ridiculously short..." of being the successor to the game he loves above all other.

If anything is idiotic it's claiming he seemingly liked the sequel.

This is what he said that you replied to:

"I'm not going to buy a game that promises to be a successor to the game I love above all other games and falls ridiculously short."

It's pretty clear he liked the original game but not the sequel, which he describes as falling "...ridiculously short."  How from that you gleaned he "...seemingly liked..." the sequel is beyond my ken.

 

Nick-Danger: no that part of my reply was in regards to what Teseer said here:

He was saying, that if the game had a different name, he would have bought (thus meaning that he apparently liked it, otherwise he wouldn't think of buying it in the first place, I assume).

It's supposed to be similar, that's the point of a sequel. It's what is expected of a sequel. Why the **** would you mess with something successful. How is it narrowminded? If they want to do something new, do a spin-off, that way they don't tarnish the series. Why is it wrong to expect a similar experience to the original in a sequel?

They wouldn't have that problem if they hadn't completely F***ed up SC2, now would they? And it doesn't help that everything they've shown so far of K&C makes it look like a reskinned SupCom2. King=Commander. They like to mention how the game will have big huge units that dominate the battlefield (remind you of something? *coughexperimentalcough*). And they're always going on about the "Epic Scale" etc, etc.

If K&C isn't awesome, you're darn right people will be disappointed, because that will be three duds in a row for GPG. Granted, Demigod is actually pretty good, but it still had a bad launch, and terrible support from GPG (Stardock's support for it, on the other hand, is excellent). I have yet to see anyone anywhere refer to K&C as the "true Supreme Commander 2."

And who chose the publisher? I'm sure there are tons of companies who would have been willing to publish SC2.

You know what's fun? Not agreeing with someone and calling them Narrow Minded, lmao.

 

No, for 2 reasons:

First:

Go reread your post #28.

OMG_Teseer said in post #22: "I'm not going to buy a game that promises to be a successor to the game I love above all other games and falls ridiculously short."

You quoted that in your reply #28.

I responded to your post #28.

If you meant to reply to what OMG_Teseer said in post #17 then please do so, not another post where he specifically and clearly said he thought the sequel fell ridiculously short -- which certainly sounds like he didn't like it.

Second:

You selectively quoted him in his post #17.  Here's the entirety of that post:

So at best he thinks there's nothing wrong with the game and it's the false advertising that he dislikes -- dislikes enough to hurt himself face-palming.  Gleaning from that post that he seemingly likes the sequel is a stretch, especially when combined with his post #22.

And what he said in post #17 doesn't obviate your fallacious argument Strawman -- no one said the game changes because the name changes.  The point has been false advertising, trying to ride the coat-tails of the original and failing to do so, unmet expectations, etc.

And, as an aside, thanks for the interesting opportunities to exercise my rhetoric, as it gets rusty with disuse!

 

Of course it's not wrong to expect something similar. The problem is that players, or, well, humanity in general, often get outraged about things that they did not expect. If everyone ever just catered exactly to what people expect from the past, there would be no progress, no change, no evolution of any kind. I can't believe that you really want StarCraft II to be exactly the same as StarCraft I? Only prettier with, on the surface, many little improvements? And what about StarCraft III or IV, if there is ever going to be one? You really want that to be the same, over and over again?

Humans are creatues of habit, yes, but that's not always a good thing.

 

Not at all. GPG always struggled with finding Publishers for Supreme Commander. Chris Taylor went to a lot of publishers for Supreme Commander 1 until he finally landed at THQ, who were willing to publish this niche market game. Even though the support we received for SupCom/FA was not that great, especially after the release of Forged Alliance, we should still be thankful that THQ picked it up, otherwise it might have never seen the light.

It was similar with Supreme Commander 2. Due to the bad economy and the fact that the Supreme Commander franchise is not really a big money machine, finding a publisher for it was not easy. Square Enix picked it up in their venture of stepping into the western market. But they knew that they had to streamline the development in order to be profitable, so Square Enix made a very tight schedule and a very tight budget (which resulted in the not so optimal release).

 

@Nick-Danger: I only said "seemingly", I didn't say it was a fact that he likes the game. It would be just incredibly surreal, if he enjoyed the game once he plays it, but can't, simply because it's called "Supreme Commander 2" and not "Generic Strategy Game 2".

Hehe, no problem . Though I have to say you used the word "fallacious" a lot.

I'll say it again. If you don't understand, you never will. 

I'd say keep bein' a scrub, but you don't need me to tell ya to.

Ah, the "you are a scrub" argument, we finally landed here.

Never wanted an argument. Never wanted to talk to ya. Just making sure you understand you're a scrub.

No one forced you to...

 

It gets even better

Yes it does. 

When you're a little douche-cock, one is inclined to return in kind.

Not at all. You should always try to avoid feeding trolls.

So you were trolling then?

Not surprised. 

Well, I was assuming that you are considering me a "troll", since you called me a "litte douche-cock". And I thought one might describe a troll in such a way.