User Reviews (51 - 61 of 80)

Show these reviews first:

Highest Rated
Lowest Rated Newest
Oldest Most Helpful
Least Helpful

A Supreme Dissapointment

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 2 / 7
Date: August 26, 2007
Author: Amazon User

I was a big fan of Total Annihilation when it came out a few years ago.It was innovative in RTS arena and very original. So I was first to get this one.

Let me just say this upfront, it was the biggest let down ever.

Why?

a) I have a 2.8 Intel with 1.5 gig ram and 7800 GF card yet the game was tottally unplayable on any map except the little tiny islands!!

I had to turn the graphics to low setting to get the game to a decent playable FPS.

So unless you have a dual processor with latest Video card this is not even worth looking at.

b) The game itself:

3 races that are amazingly so similar. Almost same tech tree.
The game is just your average RTS game. The only thing unique about it is the HUGE battles you can have on MASSIVE maps! That will not happen unless you have power rig PC.

So unless you have a high end dual or quad processor comp and LOVE massive battles, I'd skip this one.

A Supreme Disapointment!

Supremely Commandeered by Hype

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 1 / 2
Date: July 23, 2007
Author: Amazon User

The game IS over-hyped. I've been playing RTS games and turn-based strategy games since the days of Harpoon, Starfleet II, all the Blizzard games, and all those great Microprose titles (Master of Magic and Master of Orion I and II) as well as Total Annihilation, Alpha Centauri, and Age of Empires. And I'm an avid chess player, meaning I go to tournaments, study chess books (I own about 150 such), and, in short, am not one to turn down a good STRATEGIC, thoughtful challenge just because of a bit of a learning curve.

I realize some ADHD players, or younger guys perhaps loaded up with two liter bottles of some pepped up pop, will be disappointed with Supcom because its focus is strategic (rather than on tactical melees filled with eye-candy). Okay, fine. Supcom aims to be a different sort of RTS.

But besides being a "new step in strategy gaming" (emphasis on the "strategy"), a chief reason I bought the game was that there were all these rave reviews and awards. Two days later, after six to eight hours of frustrating play and four or five hours online trying to figure out why I wasn't having any fun with "Supcom," I took the game back to the store. Thank goodness the store in question was willing to take the game back for store credit!

I realize this early surrender might signal that I'm not a very hardcore strategy gamer (the game's true intended niche audience I guess). My counter would be that in this day and age, if you are going to rewrite RTS gaming (good on you!), then you need to 1) create a game that keeps people wanting to play for ten to twelve hours straight, at least during that all important courtship phase of initial exhilaration and learning; 2) be sure your program will work with what you state as the recommended system requirements. I don't see how the game would be playable if someone buys it based on the minimum requirements. That's just treating paying, well-intended customers shabbily and inviting a lot of angry user posts. And 3), the tutorials and campaigns need to be fun and well designed, stepping the user confidently and enthusiastically into the further complexities of the gaming system. Don't just toss new users into the campaigns of an admittedly "drier" version of RTS gaming, with minimal tutorials and manual, and expect them to spend the time required to learn the nuances of the game's controls. They need proper support, especially if you are only being half-hearted about storyline, character, music, and other "atmospheric" qualities of game play.

In the end, I felt ripped off because of what seemed to be the misleading claims (for me anyway) of the recommended and minimum system requirements stated on the game box. I've had to walk away from cool looking games before because they were, at the time, out of my then current computer's league. No big deal. I'd check for the game after my next system upgrade.

Anyway, my system (3.2ghz dual core, 1 gig RAM, Radeon X600 256MB HyperMemory vidram) meets or exceeds the "recommended requirements" of the game, and while I didn't have to shut the music off (which on one board was seen as a plausible fix (!) for the game program's slow operation on some systems), I did have to minimize graphic functions. Even then the game at times got choppy on screen--jumpy screens and over-shooting or under-shooting with the mouse when sliding up or down screen or zooming.

The lack of fine mouse control drove me bonkers (I use a laser mouse with wheel and have no trouble on other games I play) and this frustration was reiterated with the much celebrated zoom feature, which sounds great, but in practice I was over-zooming or under-zooming so much that I was losing time just modulating control of the darned zoom. I thought, why couldn't they have just created a few discrete zoom "steps"? I don't need so much scalability in the zoom. I'd zoom up for a close-up of a patch of grass, over-shooting the level of zoom I wanted, and if I zoomed out too much all the forces were jammed together as little over-lapping triangles. What's the point of the mini-map anyway?

As far as the tech trees of the three "races" go (they are all human), I didn't see that much difference. I played the UEF and the Aeon Illuminate in single player mode and found their stories uninvolving and their units not all that distinguishable. The land, sea, and air combinations were cool enough, but so what? TA did that. AC did that. Lots of games have done that. Using the shift-key to issue orders to groups of units is a step in the right direction, and I liked the idea of coordinating attacks with different units. But the game is so slow to develop, so abstract (triangles with line and dot combinations to distinguish them?!), the battle units so small, and the mouse and command issues so problematic, that I was left underwhelmed by the game and could not see what all the fuss was about. Who cares if you can direct 200 triangles toward your opponent's 100 triangles?

I really don't dig the idea of the robot army. You are the only human transported to the planet and you "spray on" different buildings from downloaded design templates. So then you have this rather heartless class of machines directed by you and the opponent. Sure, in the end, "it's all just electrons on a screen," but imagination and setting do count for something. For example, why couldn't the Aeon Illuminate BE the aliens and why couldn't they have designs that really reflected a different technology, different unit designs, and a radically different philosophy of war? Why couldn't the game have been more and better?

maybe, it's the best of what available right now

4 Rating: 4, Useful: 1 / 2
Date: October 21, 2007
Author: Amazon User

this game with all its flaws (factions have similar units, bad unit path finding,poor campaigns, no human units except the ACU and the list continues). However, it has super huge maps and very larg number of units on screen. its kinda like the Total War games but with scifi setting. in case if you like playing skermish games; C&C3 and age of empires; they lose their appeal quickly. It runs smoothly on my quad cpu + geforce 8800gtx so I have no issues when it comes to performance.

Great game, but make sure your computer can handle it first.

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 1 / 2
Date: October 21, 2007
Author: Amazon User

Supreme Commander is not an ordinary RTS, it is war simulation software. All projectiles are checked many times per second to determine when and what they hit. Units can be moved in formations. And Land, sea, and air units can be ordered to perform simultaneous attacks with each other.

The graphics are decent on low, and gorgeous on high. Warning, modern graphics cards may not be able to handle high settings and dual monitors. This game was designed with the future in mind.

Single player is fun, although you may get bored with the campaigns after a while. The online multiplayer is great, especially custom team games.

If you already have a high power computer and are looking for a game that can leverage that power, then Supreme Commander is a great game to have. Slightly older computers can still run it, albeit at reduced graphics and unit levels, but it is still fun with the lower settings.

Important! Make sure your computer meets or exceeds the minimum requirements before buying this!

Great for Quad Core Computers

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 1 / 2
Date: October 23, 2007
Author: Amazon User

I just bought an Intel quad core 6600 chipset with 2 gig ram and the latest NVIDIA graphics processor. I bought this game because (in addition to liking strategy games), this is one of the few out that is quad core enabled. I read bench mark tests about the performance of this game being much faster on quad core than dual core. It is absolutely true.

I picked the biggest map possible and the game did not bog down at all!

A word of caution though, for "normal" games, my understanding is that quad core makes no difference as two of the cores sit idle.

If you like this game and think that the trend is towards quad core enabled games, then a quad core computer will really enhance your enjoyment.

Good stuff - but update the game!

4 Rating: 4, Useful: 1 / 2
Date: November 01, 2007
Author: Amazon User

The game is pretty cool, although I have to say it crashed a couple of times on the last mission for the UEF. Not sure if MS Vista was to blame (most people would say yes) but get the update patches before you start your campaign! Once you update the game your save games cannot be played again.

Oh yes - the update patches could be a bit hard to find. But it's on the game's forums online, NOT the THQ webpage!

Otherwise I think this game is pretty good if you love to mass build units and storm the enemy. Nonetheless, I still prefer Starcraft or Warhammer 40k as I think there is more strategy involved.

Supreme Commander reigns supreme

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 1 / 2
Date: November 08, 2007
Author: Amazon User

The game play at first may seem like it is very strait forward and without much variety but as you progress you will find new ways to do things that are unquie and set this game apart from other RTS games, beyond the graphics. Each faction has the same basic tech trees, but the units are not the same. Each faction plays differently.

The only flaw that Supreme Commander has in my book is the steep system requirements, but with the 8000 Series dropping in price and intels relatively expensive quad core you don't have to fork over that much to be able to run this game.

Multi-player experiance is very fast paced and there are many different tactics that you can use to win.

Solid game if you like RTS games then don't pass this one up. It is even better now with the resently released expansion.

real user

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 5 / 34
Date: March 04, 2007
Author: Amazon User

I'm fed up with companies writing reviews to their own games. I've had this poc for 3 days now and can't figure out why I haven't deleted it yet.

SC is a perfect example of a company getting too focused on a single aspect and neglecting the rest of the game. The graphics are mediocre, if you zoom in they're ok but you are forced to keep the map zoomed out the majority of time simply to observe adn control the whole mess. Speaking of control, there isn't much in this game. The units scatter and take their time to respond to any command.

In my opinion this is/was a waste of complete waste of money, and I'm annoyed I can't return it.

Supreme POS!

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 2 / 9
Date: March 31, 2007
Author: Amazon User

Im not sure what the designers were trying to accomplish with this mess of programing but a game wasnt it! The controls are sluggish, meaning you order a unit to move and it takes a few moments for the unit to even respond. There really is no acutal skill needed to play this. Simply build up your defences, gather resources, then produce a horde of units to attack the AI en masse. The maps are WAY too large and the graphics are mediocre since you are forced to keep it zoomed out to keep an eye on the various happenings on the map. The system requirements are to much, I have a computer that is more than capable of handling it, but for the quality of game, the requirements seemed quite excessive. The game is also filled with flaws the greatest and the most serious was the fact that it caused my computer to crash and automatically restart when I tried to launch the game. I thought my computer was about to go, when i found forum after forum of people describing the exact same problem. In short enormous waste of money on a game that takes up and enormous amount of hardrive space and produces nothing but enormous disappointment.

Supreme Commander is good.

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 2 / 9
Date: May 13, 2007
Author: Amazon User

This game is pretty good. It's a little hard to get used to with the controls if you are used to C&C games. The graphics are pretty good. The game story is kind of short. I would buy this game again if I had to.

Review Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next 

Actions