Why does everyone HATE Supreme Commander 2?

[@stormlordeternal7663]

5:55 Acksuahlly. You can build other factions' experimentals. The game never tells you this and I found it by random chance but when you capture a different factions' engineer you have to build that faction's research center. Then in the research tab, you will find a little arrow next to your faction icon in the menu. Click that arrow and now you have access to a new faction tech tree and are able to build all their stuff and research including experimentals. Again the game never mentions this and I've played it for years and only found out recently.

[@invictusaegis2653]

WHAT!

[@sekireialpha]

Please tell me youre joking

[@Sanman-ye9lu]

This is true Discovered it like 3 months ago

[@mischaprudon3316]

true

[@oscarnystrm6658]

indeed you can easily miss it.

[@JD-vj4go]

One thing I really like about this game was the pathfinding. I almost never had to babysit a unit or get it unstuck. They really made some leaps in pathfinding in SupCom2.

[@FreelancerCZ]

Reason why i stopped playing the first one, remember I was micromanaging a group of squadrons and they were refusing to do what I say.

[@Nessiechomp]

I basically refuse to play uef ground in supcom 2 anymore, because I swear fatboys always get stuck on everything

[@nametakerkillerarrgh5309]

Going from supcom 2 to tpa was brutal for that!!!

[@alphahex99]

If they ever manage to implement flowfield into FAF it would probably double its playerbase.

[@blackmark7165]

i actually do some experiment with having 2 massive formation and order them to go through each other, it went very smoothly ngl but do that in FA is will turn into huge mess

[@FuelDropforthewin]

one really minor thing that pissed me off with SC2 was the art direction of the Aeon. in the first game the Aeon were sleek and efficient. their design philosophy was elite specialists. each unit was designed for a single role and there was not an ounce of metal on it that did not contribute to that role. an example of this in forged alliance was the swift wind. while the UEF and Cyberons added fighter bombers to their roster, the Aeon were not having with any of this dual role nonsense and instead created an excellent fighter and a single use missile aircraft to fill the tactical roles. come SC 2 and every Aeon unit is multi role and covered in banners and aestetic flourishes. it's a complete reversal of the entire Aeon design philosophy.

[@darebrained]

I think it makes sense though with the lore in mind that the Aeon had to scale back into a "peaceful religion" in the fallout of FA. So they had to switch they approach to multi-role units as they wouldn't have the capacity to prepare as many dedicated units as other factions.

[@maxrander0101]

in the only piece of defense i can give the Aeon we play in 2 is a sub faction within the greater Aeon we were tricked into joining the so called guardians which we thought were the good guys when in truth they are the remains of the order and only want to return to endless war

[@adamofblastworks1517]

@@darebrained that makes a lot of sense.

[@adamofblastworks1517]

Their unit names were stupid too. Wtf kind of T4/experimental unit is named "Wilfinja?"

[@FuelDropforthewin]

@@darebrained Even if they switch to multi-role units, that doesn't explain the complete 180 on design philosophy from sleek and efficient to bulbus and ornate. Compare the "Wedoboth" with the Swift Wind design wise. One looks sleek and fast and aerodynamic, the other looks like it has never heard of wind resistance.

[@stormlordeternal7663]

I have to leave a comment here. Supreme Commander 2 was my FIRST RTS I ever played. I was very young and only Played FPS games and wanted to have a game where I could see the whole battle and army. I saw Supreme Commander 2 in a Blockbuster (Yes that long ago) and saw a cool robot on the cover. On the back, I saw giant armies duking it out and tried it out. It was incredible, creating giant armies and watching this spectacle of war play out before me. I was a kid and kind of dense so I played through the entire UEF campaign not knowing there was a tech tree so I didn't unlock any new units and only figured it out after replaying the final mission for the 5th time (I completed the mission several times before cus I played on easy and only realized when I accidentally misclicked on my controller. Yes a controller I played on Xbox 360) I love this game because it's what got me into RTS. The simple mechanics made it not to hard for stupid kid me to get into and enjoy the game. It was not until later I got the original Supreme Commander and then got overwhelmed by the depth and complexity, it was nothing like Sup Com 2. You have to admit though Sup Com 2 looked beautiful, especially with the colorful battles that went on. The biggest overlooked part however is the music. The music of Sup Com 2 is GODLIKE, perfectly illustrating the calmness as you build a base and factories churn out machines of war to the awe-inspiring battle scores as oceans of tanks and robots were shredded as skyscraper tall giant mechs fought with earth-breaking weapons. While now I like Sup Com FA because it's the current best form of Sup Com with large beautiful battles Sup Com 2 is a good game worthy of praise even if it is no doubt a terrible Sup Com sequel. Also, side note isn't it hilarious that in the original Sup Com the Monkey Lord is a cheap, quick to build, and the least powerful experimental while in Sup Com 2 it's the most OP BS experimental that is costly, takes forever to build, and shreds everything in its path capable of beating all the experiments in the game including the Universal Colossus in a 1v1.

[@pooperdooper3576]

Megalith* monkey lord doesn't beat a galactic colossus 1 on 1

[@cabz5872]

@@pooperdooper3576 re-read what he said

[@pooperdooper3576]

@@cabz5872 thank you, I'm stupid lol 😔

[@icarusjumped2719]

Yeah, had it been a stand alone game without the supcom name, i think it would have been great. But the chamges were too drastic to make it a good sequel.

[@familyjobe853]

me too it was my first game on Pc

[@glitchmaster2228]

There is actually a reason why SC2 was the way it was. A while back they tried to port SC1 to Xbox 360 to get more of a player base. However, while the port was done surprisingly well, the game was so powerful that it practically melted the console (I almost lost my 360 to it a while back). So in order for the sequel to run properly on console they had to drastically downscale everything from maps to units to ai. Which is why the controls and behavior of the game is so different from previous titles.

[@TheYdyp]

Sadly that fate has been shared around to most games these days as they feel like all are made with console first, we will port to pc later. Making them all feel watered down from what they could be. But then again who can blame them as console market sadly is a lot bigger then PC and making a game for PC is a lot more work due to the different builds out there. But then again I still enjoyed Supreme Commander 2, but then again I have always like the streaming economy since the first time I played Total Annihilations in my younger days. And yes Supreme Commander did a way better job because of its scale. Though I wouldn't mind a combination of the faction variety of Supreme Commander bound with the world scale of Planetary Annihilation that did scale up the battlefield but got rid of faction all together.

[@admiralhalo7293]

I never knew sc1 wad on xbox 360

[@Zade_95]

Me neither... It's like learning aoe2 was on ps2

[@glitchmaster2228]

I remember finding a copy in a Game Stop back in 2015 I think. Played 2 missions into the UEF campaign before noticing that it was getting dangerously close to melting. The AI in 2 was also so numbed down that you could literally win by turtling and nothing else. The AI sends units to attack certain prescripted areas with waves of increasing amounts of units and experimentals. The problem is that if you just fend off enough waves, the AI gets stuck with the unit cap and can't complete it's next wave. So you get a hoard of experimentals wandering in circles far enough away from your base because they don't have enough to be allowed to attack you and then you carpet nuke the AI base with very limited resistance. There was also the time I nearly got killed by 3 AI at once, but at the last moment I ejected my commander's head and flew it to the corner of the map with my last remaining flying fortress and just spammed aircraft at them till they died. They never once came after me. I spent a lot of time against the AI due to me not having any internet back then.

[@rustyzipper19]

Getting the 360 port of supreme commander 1 is one of the reasons I love rts to this day, especially now that I’ve been trying all the PC exclusive titles over the last half decade

[@samarmitage9993]

There was an interview with one of the devs that made supcom and he said when they got bought over by another company due to financial problems they were only given 2 years to make supcom 2 whereas the first supcom that they made took them 4 years.

[@StateOfTheMind11225]

I'm assuming that company that bought them was Square Enix.

[@samarmitage9993]

Yea @@StateOfTheMind11225

[@WTfire10]

@@StateOfTheMind11225Yes it was, and of course making it playable on a fucking xbox360 with low memory took some hits on the complexity

[@accone1740]

Well, as a veteran-ish of this game, and after watching the video thinking that it was going to be another supcom 2 bash video, im positively surprised! Thank you for not just hopping onto the hatetrain but seeing the game for what it actually is!

[@alphahex99]

😍

[@davidrhoney832]

Hey Zade - Love your content. Just wanted to point out at 5:15 you said Experimentals were coming out like Shermans in Detroit. That footage is actually an M3 Lee. Its an early production as it uses rivets - and when it was hit with a shell the rivets would sheer off and make hamburger of the dudes on the inside. I like SupCom 1 over 2. But SupCom 2 isn't as bad as everyone makes it out to be. At least its not like CnC 4. =\

[@Zade_95]

Goddammit 😂

[@thenotbestplayer1432]

tbh cnc 4 was bad but I had fun with the new mechanic's

[@Zach_M117]

I was looking for this comment about the Shermans. I could've even believed we were getting trolled by zade

[@empireofitalypsstimfromano5025]

I Didn't Think Someone Would Actually Point THAT Out, It Was Just Placeholder Footage. At Least It Wasn't Panzers

[@Nivek57]

Supcom2 UI and pathfinding was god tier. If you combine the UI and pathfinding with SupcomFa you literally have the perfect game.

[@marlo8850]

Supcom 2 UI is awful, supcom FA has the best UI

[@marlo8850]

@Jonathon J. Rockman that is a networking Limitation since communication between CPU Threads was hard back then

[@Zectifin]

every RTS needs the pathfinding of supcom 2. just not the gameplay.

[@KotalTotal]

For me, I love Supreme Commander 2, I grew up with it back when I was about 11 or 12yrs old. It was my first introduction to Supreme Commander overall and it was a random surprise gift from my grandma at the time for my xbox 360 that I used to play. I think the game on its own was awesome and it had a great story with amazing characters. I especially loved the uef campaign and the ending of it with the epic battle that took place.

[@Sokko325]

You can actually access a different factions tech tree if you build one of their science generators.

[@adams13245]

I wouldn't say the faction differences were only in the experimentals in Sup Com 2. The Aeon/ Illuminate didn't get boats and had more hover units allowing much of their force to be amphibious. Which was probably a bad idea, since it really kneecaps the variety of Aeon forces, but it is different. Just not a good difference. Also you could use multiple engineers to assist factories in making units or buildings. The problem was, since it didn't increase resource drain the amount of build time gained was a third of the last level. For example, if a unit took 27 seconds to build, one engineer would take off 9 seconds, while a second one would take off a measly 3. As for the defense buildings, I'd say the artillery were too good. Mid game artillery could reach across the map, and there was no drain on your economy for having them continuously fire. Combine that with cheap, long range radar, and maps like Corvona Chasm turned into massive artillery wars, especially with UEF. I think you hit the nail on the head that Sup Com 2 may be a bad sequel, when looking for something that builds upon Sup Com, but it's a good game when it stands on its own. I think some of the new experimentals have delightful mechanics, like the Cybran brain that either boosts your research or gives units extra xp. The game is different and I think too many people don't give it a chance.

[@galomir833]

aeon being amphibious was a bad idea ? meanwhile walker naval supremacy comming from the cybran whit a stream of heavy and powerfull naval unit or even the funniest use of naval unit, UEF and stransport, yes that SOMEHOW WORK they bring boat in transport ship to get them to other part of the sea

[@adams13245]

@@galomir833 I suppose I should've said getting rid of Aeon navy was a bad idea.

[@galomir833]

@@adams13245 yea make aeon player focus too much on air or land they dont have to think "what will i do ? go for naval ? land ? or air ?" they just have land or air to think about and that not great, because it was a lot of the thinking in that game, what will i do againt the ennemy

[@1989ElLoco]

Great video. You forgot two important things (if I didn’t miss them) 1. No custom map support 2. No mod support. Especially the first one is a huge downside of the game. Anyway I agree with you. SupCom 2 is a really fun game. It just shouldn’t have been the successor of Supreme Commander. I remember the reason why GPG went for the decisions for this game is because the game was hugely aimed at consoles. Man I started to hate conolifacation at that time. Same happened with the Crysis series. Crysis one was a pc masterpiece. Then Crysis 2 happened lol.

[@1989ElLoco]

Crysis 2 had a nice Hans Zimmer soundtrack though

[@Zade_95]

Ah you're right! I had a note about no mod support but decided to not include it because of the revamp mod. Maps is a big one though

[@flareos5152]

@@Zade_95 Supcom2 has loads of custom maps, and they are fully 3d, and it has the exact same mod support as faf. I have made both maps and mods.

[@nathane5287]

I haven't finished SC2 but one thing in my initial testing and watching this video that stood out was much more varied and "handcrafted" looking levels, environmental design looked in SC2 like more than just someone raising some terrain and lowering a bit here and there like it looks like in SC1, SC1 environments look so placeholdery and barren, one thing I love in stuff like C&C, look at how richly detailed the environments are in C&C3 for instance, with signs and streets and garbage lying on some sidewalk and decals placed with care and thought around the different locations that you're going to be fighting in.

[@anno-fw7xn]

the SC2 campin is great ( yes storie is a litte cringe but taht normal for rts) i like it even more than the first game.

[@alphahex99]

That's because technically the SC1 maps are 2D and you could only play around with the height and textures while SC2 maps are all 3D models where things can be on top of each other.

[@marlo8850]

I have tried to get 3d model maps into supcom 1 and I did get it working, there’s just one huge problem in the render pipeline that kills it, you can try it out on FAF, see for yourself, search for tournament dome on the FAF Vault.

[@empireofitalypsstimfromano5025]

​@@anno-fw7xnNo That's Not Normal For RTS, RTS Can And Will Have Some Of The Best Stories Ever Made

[@ThomasMurch]

As someone who hasn't played this game, it's good to hear you discuss its good points! I look forward to hearing where Dawn of War 3 falls on the "Tiberian Twilight - Supreme Commander 2" scale of Maligned RTS Sequels...

[@Zade_95]

So am I.... So am i

[@ninianstorm6494]

​@@Zade_95 history of false flags dnc/cia done to stay in syria? Ukrainian Officials Tried To SABOTAGE Trump 2016 kzbin.info/www/bejne/eHiqqZ9snalor8U when muller charge manafort for things nothing to do with russia hack but let podesta go for same reason =blackmail dc/Britain(thank Blair Iraq) to support blame russia to cover up fact 2 party system failed since mccain-hillary all did united fruit company scandal 2.0 but remain rich recall fbi never look at physical evidence just crowdstrike/hillary words, cia break glass 2017 inauguration with media claim russia stolen election george bush 14y ago said add ukraine to nato foreshadow nuland f eu coup 2014 support = 1. kzbin.info/www/bejne/pIW0ZHdnlpKdaJI 2001 pentagon memo kill occupy iraq to syria kzbin.info/www/bejne/lZ7Ve4V-rMeJfZo current ukraine gov is proxy since obama drew red line just like did in syria earlier arming rebels telling russia not to interfere while zelensky ethnic cleanse donbass region 7y= 2. kzbin.info/www/bejne/qpKclYqImKmIhqM 3. kzbin.info/www/bejne/f3PIg3Vtp7yelZo 4. left wing media give protest t-shirts to san quan mayor for lying about never receive maria supplies kzbin.info/www/bejne/p4rQdKePgapsoZI 5. dnc establishment kill 50 in vegas/portland, thugs attack with stand down cops san jose/charlotte, burn loot several months, sabotage afgan withdraw using russia bounty smear to give taliban equip, crash car in to wisconsin parade thanks to nbc follow jury bus smearing ritten house too kzbin.info/www/bejne/i6nSfWuqfbiUbck 6. ray epps-fake sole survivor from ritten house case 2.0/podesta 2.0 when you look at left wing msm collaborate kzbin.info/www/bejne/hZ-5eZukYtuai9k need to force city officials to lower inflation/living cost for all those making below 150k per year to prove daca worth it since for ages DC never lower living cost only print dollars to do more refugee crisis dnc smear looking into treat covid symptoms/travel bans but permit parades/riots, recall snitches get rewards? a. kzbin.info/www/bejne/ZmepqppqosZ_jck b. kzbin.info/www/bejne/hmKphoCafbplb8U

[@greatoverlordchikonmaster7226]

I feel like one of the best and often not talked about elements of SC1 is the sound design. You can instantly recognize the distinct sound of every weapon in the game, and some of the unique walking sounds as well. I'm not sure if this is the case in SC2

[@peterc504]

yeah sc2 sound sucked along with most of the music. While supcom sound and music were epic.

[@lethalbaconbacon2079]

I was sc1 and sc2 wait star craft 1,2 😂

[@peterc504]

@@lethalbaconbacon2079 I meant Supreme commander 2 not starcraft2. Star craft 2 was awesome

[@lethalbaconbacon2079]

@peterc504 both games are amazing just been replaying sup campaign

[@peterc504]

@@lethalbaconbacon2079 I've actually never played supcom or fa campaign lol not even the starcraft2 campaigns. I get locked into online and can't seem to do it

[@torrancerichter1469]

I do totally agree with you on it not being SC sequel, I play it like a stand-alone due to it's minimalistic easy play style.

[@IamElChapo]

I enjoyed SC2, especially playing with friends against insane A.I. Nothing beat being 5 mins in and hearing "strategic launch detected." 😂

[@Paisa231]

It's also worth to mention that why SUPCOM 2 didn't follow SUPCOM 1, was much due to economical difficulties. They didn't have time or money to invest in a project that cud do SUPCOM justice. I realy recommend Zades interview with Chris Taylor

[@adams13245]

Yeah, that could be a big part of it. I've heard, for all the praise it has gotten, Sup Com did not do well financially.

[@Paisa231]

@@adams13245 yup SUPCOM1 at the start had much difficulty with balancing, bugs but also the fact the game was RTS genre answer to 'Can it run Crysis'. It was very demanding! So that affected sales greatly. With FA the game was ready to become the perfect game it is today. But by then the name had quite some baggage and DOTA/LOL type of games was beginning to take the RTS arena.

[@danii7584]

@@Paisa231 adding to that one practically must mention that supcom2 was dumbed down because it was a console release

[@Paisa231]

@@danii7584 the other way around, dumbing down SUPCOM 2 allowed it alsoto be released on console aka target a bigger market :)

[@danii7584]

@@Paisa231 I doubt that, and it seems to me like you aren't aware of the multitude of problems/work that coding something for different architecture brings, let alone licensing to develop on xbox. you never "discover" that porting something might be convenient, it's part of the plan from the start, at least that's how it goes around 99% of the time. do you have specific info that it was different this time?

[@alphahex99]

Awesome video, got a few thoughts though... 05:10 Yeah experimentals in SC2 are easy to build and might seem underpowered if you're playing vs AI or noobs, but I think it's definitely better that they're no longer a jack of all trades and you actually have to support them and kite enemy units to abuse their range. If you just walk them into the middle of the enemy army/base expecting them to annihilate everything you will be disappointed. You have to use their strengths and if you do they basically make small land obsolete in the lategame. 05:46 Probably a decision to prevent people from building hundreds of engineers to assist one factory, lagging the game and cluttering the base instead of just building more factories 05:50 You can totally capture an enemy engineer, build a research station and in the research tab you will now see arrows (where the faction icon is I think) to switch between faction trees. The biggest plus of SC2 is flowfield pathfinding. I think the old pathfinding system in FAF is the only thing stopping me from dumping thousands of hours into it, because I always want to pull my hair out anytime I'm trying to harass somebody with bots, they get stuck on some random rock and the pros tell me "it's okay that just happens sometimes and you can't do anything about it". I've also watched FAF tournament POVs and it's crazy how much time pros spend working on their base. In SC2 you spend most of your time microing units and attacking, which is way more fun than memorizing tons of math to upgrade your mass extractors in the most efficient way while moving your buildpower engis around where they're needed while they're also getting stuck on every single little thing in the way. If you ever want to learn more about the game feel free to hit me up and I can get you into a lobby filled with top players all willing to teach and have some fun ^^ Thank you so much for making this video Zade. Hopefully you won't get too much hate from the FAF community for sticking your neck out x)

[@oditeomnes]

Most ground experimentals in SC1 you had to defend against tactic missiles. I loved t3 cybran bots for their redirecting ability for that. However I agree that flying eperimentals like Seraphim experimental bomber was total BS, ether your base gets nuked, or you have good enough AA to have you base flattened by a crashing experimental.

[@Albert_C]

Supcom 2 defence turrets are actually VERY devastating. It's actually much easier to turtle in 2 than FA due to the nerfing to T3 arty and reduction of shield cost. Also most Supcom 2 turrets' fully upgraded DPS match that of T3 units and some are even hiigher

[@KeeperOfTheSevenKeys.]

Don't forget that shields are much more effective too. Really important to not leave out is the UEF and Aeon each have building options for defensive fire too while Cybrans had more effective artillery, repulsion (or meatgrinder) magnets and nuke reflectors.

[@galomir833]

@@KeeperOfTheSevenKeys. cybran add the suicide builing no ? (what the point of that (unless an army is in your base and did not kill all your building yet))

[@KeeperOfTheSevenKeys.]

@galomir833 the point is pretty much just to prevent them from being able to overrun your base to focus priority targets, you have to kill the buildings from the outside first. It isn't really used primarily over favoring offensive or other structure upgrades though. One thing to note is that the point defense have a longer explosion radius than other buildings, so tanks will die to it donating at their max range.

[@galomir833]

@@KeeperOfTheSevenKeys. i remember ising the big red button once, was happy to find something like that and tested killed nothing in the range and made me think it was bad (i dont say it is, there are use, but i dont like it)

[@r1cosito]

Supreme commander 2 was actually one of my first, if not the first rts games I've ever played. Because of this it's been on a pedestal that's been untouched by any other games sense then. I abosutly loved that game and it single handedly dragged me into rts genre and because of this it will always have a special place in my heart (right next to C and C).

[@KlausWulfenbach]

I think some of the bitterness about SupCom 2 is that, thanks to the publisher change, for years it was the only one on Steam and SupCom 1 was difficult to get. But now both are easy to get so there's not really any reason for bad blood. Just a matter of preference. Oh, which one do I prefer? Both are on my bucket list. Yep. I'll get to both of them eventually!

[@lostsanityreturned]

If you haven't played both games (or in this case even one) it might be better to not make sweeping simplified generalisations as to whether people are justified in their dislike or not.

[@edhikurniawan]

I bought the DVD back then from Play Asia. SupCom FA. Now I'm worried if my DVD player will stop running. PC nowadays omitted DVD player. Also the patch is kinda hard to get.

[@nicholasvogel9783]

Strangely supcom 1 was super easy to get on steam as it was one of only 5 games to be part of a backwards key program (steam is not on the retail box (games for windows live version) but it will unlock), just enter your DVD key in steam and the game will unlock. This program was back in 2012 as I read it in an article and was blown away when it worked.

[@warcheddar4163]

@@edhikurniawan fyi you can buy external dvd players that pug into computers using usb ports, and they dont cost that much

[@edhikurniawan]

@@warcheddar4163 I still have my internal player. But my point is, not sure how long the tech last. Or my DVD last.

[@totaldramagamer5521]

Supcom 2 was a very weird game. Like, I remember playing it on the xbox a lot because my PC was garbage (even though I played SupCom and FA in my childhood) and it was enjoyable. However, there's definitely a lot to be desired with Supcom 2. Basically, if you want to play Supcom... you're not going to like Supcom 2. If you want to play a fun and cheeky rts game, then you'll enjoy Supcom 2. The biggest pro to the game is that they kept the tactical zoom and artillery is still hella fun to use. Also, I will admit, some of the experimentals were really fun to play with. I still remember my favorite experimental was the UEF unit launcher cannon thing. I would build 2-3 of those and send a bunch of units across the map ODST style. Super fun and never got old. Also the music was decent.

[@darebrained]

Me, who played SC2 before SC1: I actually prefer SC2... I mean the thing is SC2 went away from the massive scale of SC1 to being something of a middle point between classic SupCom and C&C, so I can see how people who liked the original Supreme Commander didn't enjoy it as it was a stark departure from what made SupCom great, though I think it is a fantastic game on its own merit.

[@StrikeNoir105E]

Not sure what you meant by SC1's "massive scale", but SC2 is more than capable of playing the same scales as SC1. The problem is that the competitive scene mainly prioritizes fast pace over large scale. But for skirmish or custom play, having 6 v 6 is definitely still possible.

[@anthonycopley792]

Another Issue with SoupCommander (that was ON PURPOSE) is that very obviously the guys (and gals) behind the story and technical details had NO CLUE. In Supreme Commander and Forged Alliance UEF were solid non-stupid competent forces that hated their enemies but NEVER for one second thought them incompetent, or themselves infallible. There units reflected this; solid dependable but kinda old~ish tech base Cybran were experts in adaptable sneaky asymmetric warfare with have energy weapon nano tech and anti-matter toys; again there stuff reflected this: fast adaptable and packing lethal energy weapon load-outs Aeon built their stuff NOT out of grey-nano-goo but out of quantum manipulated liquid metal, their tech was NEARLY otherworldly, but hobbled by the religious nature demanding they build their stuff 'perfectly'; so you get all the really odd exotic effect/weapons that are 'perfect' for their one role and nearly useless outside of it Seraphim were full bore floaty tech with quantum poof it exists now tech.. and a fetish for asymmetry; again their stuff reflects this And the story is obviously one of intelligent people fighting a war; they know the strategic situation. All the human factions are aware that the UEF is losing and the UEF is trying desperately to get their 'death-star but not' online before this inevitability happens. In Forged alliance Humanity has finally traded enough space (and lives) for time to reorient and face the Seraphim. Seraphim aren't stupid and have noted humanity's posture change and retaliate by building that quantum arch; again forces react to each other. But in SC2? UEF are dumb stereo type jocks saying things like UEF are superior and all that malarkey; never mind the main char is so horribly undisciplined as to contact his wife from a top secret base for a freaking 'hi honey how are you'. The UEF were a force to be feared: HINT it wasn't because they were a bunch of dumb meat-heads with no discipline or operational security Cybran have dumped all their nano-tech all the anti-matter and have gone full bore crazy; lets randomly stuff Seraphim DNA in a human and see what happens?!?! W.T.F? Aeon have somehow got the nano-tech? how'd that happen? they lost all their 'it floats cause I said so' tech and now have eye blinding hover tech that has been named by a 2 year old Seraphim... MIA And the story is just abysmal. Just the core of it the Terra-former IN THE AEON HOME SYSTEM?!?!? MISSED FOR A 1000 YEAR TIME PERIOD?!? IN A WAR WHERE STARSHIPS EXIST?!?!? - NO! just no, nope not a thing that makes any sense. This is completely never-minding that this top secret super project that is researching the thing (IN THE AEON HOME SYSTEM, ON A HABITABLE WORLD) has a UEF general in charge who absolutely would fail every psych-eval ever, did I mention this was a project LITERALLY IN THE AEON HOME SYSTEM?!?! Sure lets allow a top secret planet killer project headed up by the Klingon General Chang in.. SOL SYSTEM terra-formed mars; yes this is safe and nothing bad can happen here whatsoever. I still haven't even mentioned the UEF player character, or the Aeon wife who DID NOT act so (hint Aeon wife means a little tiny bit more than: oh she's Jewish or something as trifling as a mere modern religious belief). Or just how dirty they did every Cybran character; Player? less personality than cardboard, Brackman? survived 1000 years in a tank as a brain still sane... went nuts for 'lulz', Gauge? Complete psycho... and handed an ACU... because reasons. Somehow the Aeon are actually worse.. leaving aside he who is in a fantasy land due to his brain melting out of his ears; how is the player character supposedly out performing veteran ACU pilots? in the very first level it is EXPLICITLY stated that you are playing a noob; not new, not fresh from the academy, I mean full: 'what does this thingy do?'. There is wow you are an amazingly talented new guy, and then there is 'I put a random farm boy in a giant mech and said good luck when he asked how do I turn this on?'; Even if your last name is Skywalker and the force says you win there is still SOME training to make that happen. (well for more than one battle anyway, I will fully admit a lucky fool is dangerous) Is SC2 a game, yes it is. Is it a good game, no. It is merely an average RTS put out by a company (Square Enix) who came by and bought up GPG's stuff and produced pathetic knock-off stuff that looks superficially like it's name sake. SC2 is meh, in the shoes of a giant; and DS3 was a BAD Japanese style on the rails so hard that only one build per character was even playable (yeah you use the ricochet build see how hard locked in the boss fight that says you eat your own ricochets, there are others for other classes) RPG standing in the shoes of DS2; a game that I still think beats EVERY Diablo... (Ok, to be fair D2 gets mighty close)

[@curtisbrown547]

I can agree. It just baffles me that the people that made supcom FA would look at what they made and decide.. "You know what? lets make a sequel that appeals to NONE of our core fan base, and takes away well recieved features!" I swear the amount of series that have died on the hill of finding a "wider audience" really is sad...

[@Jack-he8jv]

it was the easiest game to get into even for idiots and due to that im sure many got into RTS due it like me. Supcom 1 was pretty hard and only neckbeards could get into it as their first RTS.

[@curtisbrown547]

@@Jack-he8jv ok, but it literally killed the supreme commander franchise.

[@mergele1000]

@@curtisbrown547 Yup. If they wanted to make a new easy to get into thing, great! Call it "Giant Robo Smash" or something, not "Supreme Commander 2". It is not a Supreme Commander game.

[@hozie6795]

@@Jack-he8jv I got into Supcom 1 when I was a literal child. I fucking sucked at it and my PC started chugging whenever the game got far enough that there were more than like 50 units on the map, but I nonetheless spent hours, mass-stalled, gradually waiting for my giant robots to finish on a map big enough that the AI wouldn't be able to rush me to death before I could get anywhere. I don't know if it was my *first* RTS-I think I maybe played AoE2 before it, I don't really remember the timeline-but it still left a huge impression on me, and it's my favorite RTS to this day.

[@ihatecabbage7270]

I can't run the first game, it took me ages before i finally able to play the first game. i play supreme Commander 2 with my bro, thus the 2nd game left that lasting impression than the first.

[@TheFirstObserver]

My biggest gripe with the series wasn't the terrible aesthetic changes (the graphics engine actually was superior, but the art style was a hell of a departure from the original visual themes, and the unit design was often atrocious), the smaller scale (flow field was groundbreaking at the time, but not worth the drop in map size when people were asking for BIGGER), the less diverse gameplay (a research tree with over half of its segments focused on small and barely noticeable improvements does not let you stretch around 35 non-experimental combat units to rival over 142+ unique units with custom weapons and abilities - even if many of those units look similar at first glance), or the butchering of the experimental class ( with most becoming cheap, spammable attempts to shoehorn in the missing unit diversity from the first game while losing all the exciting "oomph" of actually getting a real Experimental on the field). 😖 No, my gripe with the sequel was the complete disregard for the story, characters, and universe. The first game's story wasn't a masterpiece, but it did portray three uniquely "human" factions desperately trying to end an "infinite" war, and eventually survive the fallout of that ending. The timelines, character details, and planet information hosted on the original website painted a picture of a deeper and wholly plausible universe, and in the cutscenes and cinematics characters acted like mature, intelligent adults for the most part (Shut up, Fletcher). Even the science it described never veered too far into technobabble to really lose its grounding in reality! Then SupCom 2 comes along and throws all of that out. The Seraphim just...disappear, and rather than prepare for the return of that possible threat, humanity decides to spend 25 years destroying their gate network and disarming to the point all units are a fraction of the size and using T1 weaponry. Brackman, a character from one of the most-moral factions in the original game (and who sent commanders to protect enemy UEF civilians during the start of the Seraphim invasion, right after countless Cybrans would have died fighting UEF Commanders and before any formal treaties were signed), a man who was excited for the end of the Infinite War not only because his "children" would be free, but because he could finally die and rest in peace, was turned into a cartoon bad guy because "lol spiky bad." The UEF are jingoist assholes....and yeah, that's about right, but they were competent assholes - meanwhile in SupCom 2, they don't have a method to detonate or recall errant troops, and they don't even perform basic enough background checks to know one of their commanders has an Illuminate wife. AND THE AEON. They go from a mystical space religion which gives you LEGITMATE SUPERPOWERS, whose commanders multilayered voices are oozing with an unknown ethereal power that can brainwash genetically engineered super soldiers within seconds of listening, to a bureaucracy so incompetent, grumpy half-dead teenagers liberate an entire terrorist movement. 🤬 And the Aeon unit names. My God, those terrible names.😓 While the original Aeon's units had a tight design aesthetic evoking their theological and some what natural beliefs ( The Mirage, The Mercy, The Fervor, The Serenity, The Absolver, The Exodus, and The Tempest), the new units are almost all...jokes. Unfunny jokes. The "Wilfindja" sea hunter. The "Weedoboth" Fighter/Bomber. The goddam "Airnomo" Anti-Air walker. Puns so basic, no dad would use them, and an infant would find them childish. I mean, god, the original game is smart enough to suspend your belief and trick you into thinking giant robots fighting over planets makes sense, and the second game is so dumb you wonder how these civilizations function. I mean damnit, the tiers from the first game were an explainable part of the protocrafter/ACU phenomena, and in the second game "research" is painted as a cross-faction software bug that repeatedly wipes the ACU's hard drive before each mission. 😮‍💨 Listen, if someone wants to like the game, they can. It's an OK RTS in isolation. But when I was growing up, I fell in love with the universe of the original game before it even released, and the just callous disrespect for the setting, its characters, and frankly its audience will leave me forever cold to the sequel.

[@Pppplpsss]

5:15 that was not a sherman but a m3Lee, which was more of was predasestor to the sherman (great video bdw)

[@novaenon4317]

Tom Francis put it best: "A game that solved the accessibility issues of the first game, bought primarily by people who didn’t want them solved."

[@atlantiswolf]

On those maps, they are certainly smaller than SupCom 1 maps, but they are by no means small exclusively. Especially compared to its contemporaries at the time, like Starcraft 2 and Red Alert 3, the maps are rather meaty in scale.

[@Blox117]

what about c&c 4?

[@atlantiswolf]

@@Blox117 What about C&C4?

[@alexhousakos]

The sole reason I like to boot up the game, is the mindless fun. If I want to be challenged, I play Forged Alliance. My favorite fun in SC:2 is UEF with the long range artillery and simply watching the rain.

[@MrPicklerwoof]

One of the strangest sequels ever made. They actively made a game they knew was the complete opposite of what their entire userbase wanted and decided to go after the casual RTS market. Every SupCom fan is well within their rights to hate it. It's okay to hate something if it's justified!

[@MrProthall]

No, it isn't fine to hate the game. Because it's a fucking game. You can "not like" or not enjoy it, but hate is such a strong emotion for such an irrelevant thing.

[@rickyspanish4792]

Couldn't agree more! Such a weird decision. Why compete in another (crowded) sub-genre, when they already had a great monopoly going on in their own?!

[@MrPicklerwoof]

@@MrProthall Trying to dictate to others the depth of how they should feel about things is not cool. Go find someone else to try and control.

[@Hinokassaudifan1]

Machines collide still rings in my ear to this day ever since I heard it on ps3 KZbin back in 2013.

[@nepesaurio]

Frank Klepacki never fails to deliver he is such a beast, I love the ost he did for dune 2 in the genesis

[@CommanderBohn]

-Watered down. -Smaller scale. -Graphics look like a downgrade. -Smaller rosters. You see where I'm going with this... Few good things were the research mechanic and ACU upgrades making them powerful enough to fight Experimentals.

[@urulai]

A ton of units, huge scales, units I couldn't even name 90% of, does not a good game make. You can literally camp and artillery strike your opponent into oblivion. "WOW SUCH COMPELLING INTELLIGENT STRATEGIC GAMEPLAY!"

[@Deepkeel]

@Frumentarii Get this man a cross, he found a degenerate that belongs on one!(obligatory Fallout New Vegas reference.)

[@doppelrutsch9540]

@@urulai I prefer a game that has this option over one that doesn't. SupCom 1 had just so many different ways to win a game that was what made gave it complexity. You can overwhelm your opponent with a better unit composition and micro them well. You can nuke them. You can can snipe them with strategic bombers. You can snipe them with your own commander as Cybran! You can shell them with artillery. All of these options exist for you and also for the opponent so you have to keep all of them in mind in your strategy. That's way more interesting than a game where 95% of the optimal moves are known and the winner is just the one who has more of that ultimate meta committed to muscle memory.

[@jannesoltmanns6222]

@@urulai things like that are nessecary for supreme commander different from most other rts games you have an unlimited amount of ressources you can get. that gives you the ability to turtle up on your side of the map without being punished for it. T3 artillery and other gameneders punish such behavior and make sure a game can end with a winner.

[@mgDuckyyy]

SupCom has ACU upgrades where you can fight experimentals

[@Ughmahedhurtz]

I don't per se dislike SC2 (I enjoyed the campaign cutscenes and byplay) but one of the things that made SC1/FA so epic was the scale. Stacking some research centers to simply "unlock" experimentals doesn't have the same feel of investment. Felt too linear for me.

[@planetary-rendez-vous]

I can't hate the game. I learned about SupCom in a litteral Wc3 map. It was a big part of my childhood. Supcom was coming out so I'm like, well it looks so cool and the demo was COOL and free for my high school years. It was an easy, fun entry into RTS. I must have played the campaign many times and it was entertaining. I really like the different techs, pathfinding and animations were so smooth and immersive, the graphisms are great, the action is immediate and effective, not a mass of turtle shit. The ost is great. It suffers from having a predecessor. Though the actual design and gameplay is somewhat questionable though, but there's a lot of creativity. There's a lot of design flaws in gameplay design. It's frankly a bummer that Aeon decided to not make any navy anymore... It's still a very entertaining game.

[@damntoasty1210]

People forget, supreme commander was built partially for console players, so it couldn't ever have a chance at being nearly advanced as the first one and forged alliance

[@OzWolf03]

This game actually introduced me to the supreme commander series and strategy games as a whole.

[@phoenixyo9987]

I actually own the disks for all the Sup Com games, I feel so old lol. But I really enjoyed all 3 of them. Very much including Sup Com 2. Its MP was pretty fun, and I didn't mind the tech tree all that much, I will say that recently I played a game of it, and I didn't remember how fast paced it was, or how small the maps felt. I think in hindsight it having larger versions of the same maps would of been great. And more units overall could of made the tech tree a bit more interesting.

[@thegreatboto]

There with you on feeling old. I also own disc copies of all of these. Though, never really enjoyed SC2 that much and felt a bit disappointed at the time after I first bought and installed it. Though, Zade seems to identify my points of disappointment pretty well.

[@javierguardiola7122]

Play forged alliance forever, a pc client for fa they is still alive, it has coop campaign, that's what for me attracted to it

[@appocalypse2806]

So I have never played Supreme Commander 1, as around that time I was playing age of empires, empire earth, and other classics and honestly didnt hear about the franchise until me and my mates decided to all get Supreme Commander 2. And for that purpose we have all universally loved it, every single game, pvp or against the AI feeling like an epic struggle.

[@alexberridge8182]

I have to agree with some of the comments on this thread - SupComm 2 was the first RTS i got into and I spent hours on it, from the campaign to many many skirmishes. I had SupComm 1 on my xbox 360 but it was honestly too hard when i was younger. Now i'm 26 and back on SupComm 1 and i totally see the attraction. It's a fine line to run between being economically efficient and stalling, and tech tiers are so influential! Really enjoying it again.

[@RX782GP03]

the flow field ai thing is amazing, though its bad for experimentals who are supposed to stomp on small units.

[@StrikeNoir105E]

I mostly agree with everything in the video, and I'm sure most people have already laid out many obvious observations about Supreme Commander 2. But something I've not seen talked about in regards to the art style for Supreme Commander 2 is how much color plays into why it looks the way it does. The first game was very traditional RTS in the way it handled color: your particular faction had an immutable base color, which in SupCom's case is the light blue grey of the UEF, the Cybran's rusted dark grey, the Aeon's silvery white, and the Seraphim's chrome silver. Then you dedicate parts of the units to the faction color, in order to differentiate your units from your allies' or your enemies'. SupCom2 though decided to do things differently: for the UEF and Cybrans, they no longer have a base color, and instead your faction color determines the overall base color of your unit, so if your pick blue as your faction color all of your units and structures will look blue. The strangest thing is that SupCom2 has secondary color parts like with other RTS games, but the color for that is determined by your faction color and is unchangeable: If you pick blue as the faction color not only will your unit be majorly blue, but you'll have yellow as a secondary color, and you had no way of changing that secondary color to anything else. If you picked say pick red as your faction color your secondary will be white, if you pick yellow your secondary will be red, etc. (Now technically speaking the game still has a base color for units, like the UEF's dark grey, but they're relegated to a tertiary accent that only takes up a small part of the unit's color palette). Now consider how bright and vibrant the colors the colors used for the units are, with how the secondaries are almost always a contrasting color, and what happens is that your unit's details are drowned out by your unit practically being a single color, and the only break ups for the color are the secondary colors you can't change which are also bright and vibrant. This is one of the major reasons the units and structures for SupCom 2, at least for the UEF and Cybrans, look so "cartoony", even more so than the actual designs of the units themselves. At least for me, I came to this conclusion when I saw that there was a color palette in the game that actually gave units a more subdued color scheme: the white color scheme, which had dark blue secondaries. With that color scheme where the colors are less vibrant and more subdued, the unit's details suddenly "pop" out a lot more, giving an edge to them they otherwise don't have with other colors. The units now looked amazing, instead of oddly "cartoony". Now the Illuminate are the only exceptions to this, as they do have a traditional base color, mainly their dirty off-white, and then you choose a secondary faction color like in every other RTS. The Illuminate's art style in this case is not because of color but with the designs themselves, which other people have already talked about in this comments section.

[@jackydchemist]

SupCom 2 reminds me of HomeWorld and Homeworld: Cataclysm. Both good games designed not as sequels of each other but just as different games using the same universe for inspiration

[@TheThingInMySink]

Cataclysm subverted expectations in every right way, SupCom 2 did it in all the wrong ways, it's not a bad game but compared to FA or just regular SupCom it's just no match if you enjoy any amount of depth in your games.

[@ThatOneMan830]

I hate to be that guy, but it is possible to build enemy experimentals in SupCom 2. When you capture one you can build their basic buildings. This includes their research buildings, and building that gives you access to that faction’s tech tree. From there onwards you can use the capped Engie to build their factories, make more engineers and their own combat units, and any research points you gather can be applied between your tech tree and the other faction’s tech tree. From there you can get all their upgrades, including the experimentals, build the experimental factories, and rock and roll. That said this is fairly esoteric, I don’t blame anybody for not figuring it out. It took me a while to notice this myself. As for my thoughts on SupCom 2, I do enjoy it. It was one of the first RTS I played, albeit on Xbox 360, and I had a lot of fun. I have it and the predecessors on Steam, and the entire franchise kicks so much ass. That said I prefer the games that came before.

[@scoob6505]

The main reason I played SupCom1 was because growing up I had an Xbox360 and SupCom2 caught my eye and I loved my time with it. I've no doubt many concessions were made to get it to run on consoles (unit cap definitely) but it let young-teenager me enjoy one of my first RTS games. I prefer SupCom1 now but I enjoyed both equally during my time playing them.

[@z0ck3r]

SupCom2 feels like its made by someone who has only vaguely heared about SupCom1

[@MattZaharias]

Y'all should check out Beyond All Reason, it is basically Supreme Commander and Total Annihilation reborn into a free, open source and well made game with an active multiplayer community. There are even references to AKs and peewees in the game's own documentation/menus, though the units are named differently to avoid copyright.

[@PtaQ_Q]

Yeeeeeees

[@marlo8850]

It’s just a TA clone

[@thorveim1174]

Its really more total annihilation than supcom. In fact, you could say beyond all reason is close to being a remake of TA.

[@PtaQ_Q]

@@marlo8850 It is much much more than that

[@marlo8850]

@@PtaQ_Q right, its a decent looking TA clone

[@jamsheedsneed6257]

Having never played SC1, I really enjoy the 2nd game. It's one of my favorite RTS', because of the ability to do more wacky things. Doing chokepoint maps with a 5 dozen built artillery will never get old.

[@SabinStargem]

Speaking of a different kind of gamer, maybe a look into the Majesty series would be worthwhile? They are RTS games where you don't directly control the units. Instead, you set bounties on tasks, set up guilds, and basically hope your D&D delinquents manage to save the kingdom.

[@gamergarett]

I don’t hate it. I actually always really enjoyed it until I got a pc and tried FA. They dumbed it down so much tho, it honestly just makes me so sad what they did to Supcom 2.

[@jacobmoss6830]

It also has a small dedicated modding scene that blend the gameplay of one, with graphics of two with a weird blend of stuff.

[@alphahex99]

Yeah Revamp is weird. If you want to play FAF you can just play FAF instead of stripping away things that make SC2 unique and trying to make things work that the game was never designed for. A lot of the Revamp developers abandoned it and are working on Sanctuary now I think.

[@marlo8850]

Dedicated? Revamp mod is dead, the devs moved on a long time ago

[@SingletonD]

I still occasionally watch a SC2 game casting over at StealSpeaks KZbin channel. I don't hate it, I just don't enjoy it that much. Its a SC attempt at StarCraft.

[@DavidtheDoom]

Great coverage, totally agree. As a sequel to SupCom, totally rubbish. As a separate RTS-game? Pretty good. I think it is all down to expectations!

[@csongor242]

As someone who never played the first Supreme Commander, I really love Supreme Commander 2 and never understood why people hated it. Now I have some idea why. Still a good game though. Artillery goes brrrrr.

[@zekramnordran9526]

Ackthyually thats an M3 Lee/Grant at 5:15

[@dee5559]

Thank you for this. I tried supcom 1 (vanilla) but got overwhelmed, found it so long, slow, complicated, often not knowing what to do nor why I was losing. Looking at forged alliance, I thought "wow that seems even more complicated and tedious", and when looking in supcom 2's way, I only saw negative reviews so I thought "it's even worse". Maybe I should try 2 first and then go back to 1

[@Stukov961]

Nail on the head. It's a fine RTS, but it's a terrible SupCom. To me it's in the space of a Starcraft 2 sidegrade. It doesn't stand out from the pack in the way the original game does.

[@kelariusable]

I still cant help but feel that some aspects of the game, unit counts and map size in particular, were neutered specifically to get the game running on Xbox 360 hardware.

[@JD-vj4go]

It was a good game it just wasn't a good Supreme Commander game.

[@cpugwash7085]

This is exactly my thought on the matter as well. I quite like supcom 2 as it's own game, but it wasn't a good sequel to supcom 2. For my part, what I wanted from supcom 2 was, basically, supcom 1 but better optimised. Wheras supcom 2 was actually, if anything, even less optimised, a problem that was hidden but not solved by the massive scale down. (Which got rather cruely shown up when they released the DLC, since the performance went... badly downhill... then.) It's just sad, really.

[@TheOnlyGHOST1015]

Damn 😕 I'm really late to this party But coming from command and conquer generals my Favorite RTS I wanted to try something new so I just got this in 2024 to Now find out that the older ones are better what the heck 🤦🏻‍♂️

[@StealSpeaks]

Awesome video! Supreme Commander 2 is a fun game. Too bad they made it a sequel to Sup Com. The pathfinding in Supreme Commander 2 is phenomenal. Thank you for the video!

[@1989ElLoco]

Same pathfinding is used in planetary annihilation

[@StealSpeaks]

@@1989ElLoco Oh yeah?

[@1989ElLoco]

@@StealSpeaks Yes same guy did it. Sorian is his name afaik.

[@StealSpeaks]

@@1989ElLoco No crap? Is he the guy who made Sorian AI in FAF?

[@1989ElLoco]

@@StealSpeaks yea, he used to work for gpg

[@AridersLifeYT]

ive Always wanted this... Tech 4 Experimental Shields Tech 4 Experimental Base AA units Tech 4 Experimental Base defence gun Tech 4 Soldier, a small unit with devastating short range firepower.

[@joaneslopes7172]

For me, THE thing that sold me Supreme Commander 2 was, ironically, the scale. When time is short and life becomes a mess, you need to use your time efficiently. Speaking about entertainment, you have to get lots of fun without spending too much of the day, and then keep the life moving forward. I don't have the same free time as before, and it's not hard to see that games can be a huge time consuming hobby. I don't wanna stop playing them, I just want to enjoy every second. That's why roguelikes are fantastic for this, as fast paced RTSes.

[@RiffRaffish]

I think everyone that can be said about SC2 has been said already, it's a great game which is fun and satisfying to play. But if I were given the choice of a game that I know is good in SC2, for a more faithful sequel to Forged Alliance, I would most likely take that option.

[@lMrJackl]

I was only recently introduced to SC1 (about 2-3 months ago) and I've been loving it, playing on FAF. Soon after I picked up SC2 and played it for about 5-6 hours. I enjoyed it well enough, but I then went back to FAF. To me, the original is just so much more, with its grand epic scale battles. I would agree with what has already been said - SC2 is a good RTS, but a bad sequel.

[@rodrigopachaurivillafuerte9211]

Partially the same applies to another spiritual antecessors like Total Annihilation and its unofficial improvings but for the good: the TA Escalation version, the Balanced Annihilation 3D remake and now the Beyond All Reason. Seems like sometimes fans do things better than official developers.

[@fnors2]

​@@rodrigopachaurivillafuerte9211The reason fans (often, not always) tend to make better mods/remake is that, as fans, they know what made the game great. Devs, and mostly their corporate overlords, are sometimes disconnected from the fanbase.

[@markquavertune2003]

There should have been an expansion to Forged Aliance .In that there should have been unit types tiered between tech 3 and experimentals .

[@BlitzkreigNZ]

I loved SupCom 2, as the story was awesome (especially loved the UEF and Cybran story) the only downside to me was the lack of T3/Experimental units compared to the original one. The economy for one was much improved in my mind.

[@tiborcsendes5269]

I find the "story" one of-if not the weakest story i ever seen in any game. It really feels like "i only need 5 minutes to write it and I'm done".

[@zacido_games]

One thing from SC2 I would like to see on SC1 is the upgrades on factories. Adding AA and shields to them is nice.

[@Deckaio]

As you and other said, I was a good game ... but a bad Supreme Commander game. I really enjoyed it when it came out, but this was before I actually played the first one. I might have been more disappointed otherwise. Also, just to ruin your joke at 5:15, that's a M3 Grant and not a Sherman ;D

[@ferrusanimus4196]

Something I did say when those games originally came out (within 2 weeks of each other): "Supreme Commander 2 is the game you should try out if you are disappointed by C&C 4." SC2 is a good game on its own merits, and it went for action and accessability in a way the RTSes of a decade prior often went for (the one series which kept prominence was C&C and Total Annihilation at the time was and is loved for doing exactly that not). And it hits high notes in that area. It is just a really bad sequel to SC, not only forgoing the gameplay that people liked in SC1 (because it was different from those other RTSes), but also taking what lore there was and completely ignoring it past the cliff notes, taking away much what made factions and characters work as they did in SC1.

[@Glibbers]

You didn't talk about the pathfinding, that was the best part of SupCom 2! No more bumper cars! Reeeee Good video tho, because I pretty much agree. Also, the maps are really pretty in this game, especially compared to the first one.

[@Deepkeel]

If I recall correctly, my first SupCom game was the first one, on Xbox 360, dad thought I would like it. I didn't like it, I LOVED it. I later asked mom if I could get SupCom2 sometime after it came out, don't regret it, made a good number of friends on Xbox Live through it and Halo...most of them are gone now... Never had a good PC that could handle it or really any Strategy game, other than Sword of the Stars(which I never got to play any kind of multi-player in)

[@danii7584]

first supcom was never released on console afaik.

[@EsportsStoryteller]

Simplified beyond any reasonable sense

[@bobc2636]

Thank you for this video, it is nice to hear sc2 getting reviewed as it's own game rather than "the one that consoles messed up". That said I think one of the big reasons for sc2's bad rep is how easy it is to exploit with the reclaim/repair glitch. It put all multiplayer matches in the position of "use the exploit or lose". This problem persists to this day on xbox, and along with the anti nuke glitch that shot multiple anti nukes at one incoming nuke, it made for games that felt more like you lost to the games faults rather than to an opponent. Even with those problems i still feel it is the best rts on console, it has the ability to be fast paced while still giving the ability to have long form attrition games. Experimentals are powerfull but not game ending making swarms viable at the end as well as the beginning(along with my favorite, swarms of experimentals). Is it as good as sc1, i don't know, i never played the first one. I can say that it is not as good as my all time favorite, Total Annihilation, but still a good rts that never got the attention and polish it needed.

[@The23rdGamer]

The console version is pretty rough but the PC version fixes a lot of those bugs at least. There's a lot of balancing changes compared to the Xbox 360 version too though.

[@rodrigopachaurivillafuerte9211]

Have you heard about Total Annihilation unofficial mods and improvings? Try them, they are too great to try. The featured ones are TA Escalation, Balanced Annihilation and Beyond All Reason.

[@thewarlord3547]

5:14 That is a M3 Lee not a M4 Sherman.

[@STupidLord]

I've never played the first Supreme Commander, so I never knew the differences. SC2 wasn't my first rts, and it isn't my favorite. But I thought it was a decent game. (Fyi, I've only ever played it on the Xbox 360.) I have always been a fan of RTS games, there's a bunch of different ones I played. (Some less of an RTS than others.) I had played Generals, Zero Hour, Red Alert 1, Red Alert 2, Yuri's Revenge, and Tiberian Sun all before I ever heard of SC2. But I still have a fond memory of SC2 because it was a new, fresh experience coming from C&C. But I'm glad I saw this video and now know the difference between the two, thank you.

[@mdc123-v2v]

Because it took everything that made the original great and threw it in the bin. There's less variety in units, the cap is decreased, the energy system is simplified (not in a good way) leading to shield and arty spam, the tech tree is a bloated mess, the experimental units are less impactful and game changing (and they can be spammed) and gone are the epic scale maps with multiple fronts. The pacing is all wrong. The cherry on top was the fact they made it incredibly difficult and nigh-on impossible at launch to mod for. There is no defending Supreme Commander 2 as a sequel to Supreme Commander 1 and a relation to TA. It is an objectively bad game when compared to it's predecessors and was a cynical play at making the series faster paced and more RPM based to appeal to the nascent tournament scene back in 2010.

[@lostsanityreturned]

And if you want a fast paced easier to pick up smaller scale game... there are many rts that do supcom 2's style better imo.

[@mdc123-v2v]

@@lostsanityreturned Literally no one in the Sup Com community wanted that, hence why it was so poorly received.

[@qrangejuice8225]

SupCom2 was actually my introduction to the series. I played it without knowing any of the context, on *Xbox* of all things when I was like 9. I enjoyed the game, had fun exploring the different factions, and I think the scaled-down and simplified nature of the game helped a snot-nose brat get into the swing of it without getting overwhelmed.

[@ArachD206]

Great game, terrible sequel.

[@alphahex99]

Yup

[@5000Seabass]

Not the first RTS I’ve played (I’m a Warcraft 2 StarCraft kid), but it was my first Supreme Commander and I prefer it to the first game because of the faster pace and more accessible introduction. The game is definitely built with a different idea in mind. It’s more of a command and conquer pace, which makes sense because this was designed the same way as Red Alert 3, and both were made compatible with the Xbox 360.

[@beetheimmortal]

Supreme Commander 2. Probably my biggest video gaming disappointment ever, only possibly contested by Cyberpunk, but even that's stretching it.

[@mdc123-v2v]

Mine too. Up there with Black & White.

[@icyknightmare4592]

Unlike Supcom 2, Cyberpunk got better. It's currently beating COD, Apex, and Destiny 2 on Steam sales.

[@beetheimmortal]

@@mdc123-v2v Oh yeah, Lionhead... Molyneux and his comedy crew. I completely forgot about that one.

[@TheKill678]

I have played this game since I bought it in 08. The memories and the love I have for this game is immeasurable

[@Dirt1061]

Personally I loved Sup Com 2, but I played it first over the first one. I think the smaller scale gives it bigger mass market appeal (easier to handle).

[@alphahex99]

Instead of hard to learn hard to master it's easy to learn and hard to master. Most SC1 fans only play it for a little bit and that's why they get the impression it's "easier to handle" or "dumbed down".

[@aleksanderolbrych9157]

One very important comment to drop: What you showed when talking about the Sherman wasn't a Sherman but an M3 Lee. Thank you for coming to my WELL AKSHULYYY TED talk.

[@Zade_95]

AHHH GOOGLE LIED TO ME!!!

[@xyzero1682]

I only ever played 2, and thought it was a bigger/more fleshed out game. Thanks for the recomondation!

[@148crusader]

I haven't finished the video but Sup Com 2 was the first sup com I played then FA I liked FA more because the sheer scale of maps was insane from a game from like 2003-04? The simplicity and not having to deal with research, the streaming income was extremely unique for any RTS I played.

[@148crusader]

Omfg I never realized how retarded the Aeon unit names were in sup com 2. Lmafo

[@Jounzey]

"It's a bad sequel, but not a bad game" I could not have said it better myself. Sure, it did little to nothing to improve upon Forged Alliance, but what it brought instead was something that was very different while still keeping some of the essential basic framework for a fun RTS game. As what I believe to be a great example, I'm lightly autistic, and my brain can't handle that much happening at once. Still, I play RTS games because I love them. Supreme Commander, Total War, Stellaris etc. Forged Alliance proved too difficult for me to wrap my head around, with its tiers, large scale, and the staggering difference between the power of a T1 and T3 unit. This is where SUPCOM 2 turned out to be a lot better for me, with its fast-paced but fairly simple combat, its mechanics that allow you to easily recover from losing battles, as well as its research tree that removed what to me was a very overwhelming and stressful tier system. It's a smaller package, but it's exactly what works for my brain, and I'm pretty sure I've spent more than five times the hours in SUPCOM 2 than FA, because of this. They're both fantastic games in their own right, and some players just do better with one rather than the other :) Thank you for this excellent view on the games in comparison, Zade!

[@Zade_95]

Hey thank you for the kind words and for watching! Interesting reading your experiences and thoughts on it too

[@kotzebrecher]

It is the perfect gateway drug to Supreme Commander. I played 2 first, could not get into 1 at first because it has a much steeper learning curve. But Supreme Commander 2 disguises itself as your average RTS, while having core features that make the first game so special or at least teasing them. The scale, while nothing compared to SC1, already is massive compared to many other RTS. Long range artillery, factories that are supposed to be churning out units endlessly, queueing buildings without having the resources at the moment (which to my knowledge was actually patched in later), powerful experimental units. They all give you that taste of scale few other rts give, and if you like it you will at some point hear that SC1 supposedly has a much grander scale and try it. Oh, and not sure if all projectiles are fully simulated like in SC1, but at least some are. Few things beat the enemy desperately trying to launch a nuke at you only to have it collide with one of your air units that are currently wrecking his base. Sure, I lost my air fleet but he lost his base. Best thing about it that it happened while it actually was on screen for me and not suddenly nuke explosion on the map so I know for a fact that he did not try to nuke my air force and the nuke in fact collided with my flying fortress.

[@ChaosTicket]

Supreme Commander 2 is a decent enough game. I played it again last year. The issue is that it took out many of the things that made Supreme Commander unique and streamlined it to make something more like Starcraft. Supreme Commander 1 was really complicated, and that was a mixed blessing. Units could have many weapons and abilities that most Strategy Games lack. a Cruiser could have a Anti-Ship Gun, Anti-Air Missile, Anti-Ballistic Missile system, and a long ballistic missile launcher all at the same time. Usual games like the Command and Conquer games rarely allows units to have more than 1 weapons, like the classic Tanks dont carry any machine guns. In most strategy games unit tiers were far different from most games where higher technology units are often not worth it in favor of early rushes. In Supreme Commander the higher tiers blow away the lesser tiers to the point where the next tier unit is worth 10+ of the next lower tier. In Supreme Commander 2 the unit list is highly condensed and largely replaced by the tech tree upgrades. I remember the Fatboy from Supreme Commander 1 being a mobile base with Artillery cannons, anti-air guns, a landing pad, a shield generator, mobile factory, and it could move underwater. Most of the experimental units from Supreme Commander 2 are massively nerfed like the Fatboy 2 having barely above average range and losing most of its features. So you have smaller maps, fewer units, smaller armies, tedious Research grinding, and old units were nerfed.

[@asgarzigel]

Now for the real challenge: Do the same for Dawn of War III ;)

[@adams13245]

I think that'd be an interesting video. Especially considering how so many people think Relic is now the spawn of Satan.

[@sulaimankhuhro8717]

Each of these games are INCREDIBLE. One of if not the best RTS games out there. Supreme commander forged alliances is my favourite out of all of these personally, but I've played and replayed the trilogy so much i love all 3.

[@Navajy]

As a person who has never played the original. And grew up with the sequel. This is all very new to me

[@jonathankozenko]

I genunely kinda loved Supreme Commander 2 -- I would say I liked 1 more, and it's definitely no Forged Alliance, but by the time I finished all of the Skirmish maps and the Campaign (which had a surprisingly good Final Act) I was actually sad to leave it behind to dig further into my extensive backlog. I was able to sometimes build a dozen or so Experimental Units and unleash them like a horde of Godzillas onto a fully equipped and fortified enemy base, and watching all of this play out (at a steady 60FPS) was genuinely wonderful to behold.

[@darkborn3282]

I personally enjoy SupCom2 for what it is, although I couldn't really get into SupCom1 so I always just played SupCom2 since it has a playstyle I prefer over due to it's fast-pace and more simplistic and easy-to-learn design. I do agree with some points you make, like the game not being a good sequel to the original. While it may be a good game on it's own, it's definitely not a worthy sequel to it's superior predecessor. The Revamp Expansion Mod does address some key features that vanilla lacks such as tiers, more units and via which is a welcoming addition. While some of the explanations are valid on why SupCom2 became what it is, overall I think SupCom2 is simply a standalone game that was targeted to a different audience rather than people who played the original. Anyhow, great vid on explaining SupCom2 in detail and why many despised it. 👍

[@deusvulture5183]

It should also be noted that the co-op vs AI experience is phenomenal. The AI is really competent and fun to play against, especially for a 2010 game, and it can be easily scaled for mixed groups of player skill.

[@mischaprudon3316]

I pretty much agree with the vid, SC2 is not a sequel but more like another game in the series. It's a lot faster pased yet not like Rush Rush Rush, you can turtle, you can go full experimental. That's what I like about it, you can play how you want and while the units are more equel/same to other factions. They almost all have some chimmick that makes em just that bit different. 2 things tough. 1: You can research other factions stuff, just nick an engineer of another faction and make that factions research center. Now you can switch between the research of these 2 factions in the research tab (button near the faction icons). 2 The ai is different on pc compared to console; I got SC2 for the xbox for free and the ai feels like, it takes it's time to do stuff. While I recently got SC2 for free on pc and man the ai goes full sicko mode on ya. Just strange that the are so different but mabye it's cuz 1 is with mouse and keyboard and the other you have a controller. Good vid tough.

[@mrseryous8122]

This is the perfect video for this game. Spitting facts (except for the taking over an enemy engineer not allowing the recruitment of experimentals of other factions, which is actually possible by researching them with another factions research stations). I hate the game, but i don't hate playing it.

[@montypython5521]

I played sup com 2 first and love it, but having now played sup com 1 I can see why many people would be disappointed.