Supreme Commander 8.7 Gamespot Review !

Just a heads up for those who haven't played the demo and think it will run on older computers; I've got the demo and am running it on an athlon 64 3000 @ 1.98 gHz, 1gb ram, 6600gt, and vista, and it has frame rate issues on the lowest settings. Its fine near the beginning of a game, but the further you get, and especially near the end, as you get more units, its starts to lag, and this is on the relatively small skirmish map that's included in the demo against one ai.dave22768

Steep hardware requirements? I have a 4 year old CPU, a 2 year old graphics card, and 2gb of RAM (3.6ghz P4, 7800GT) and I run it at medium-high settings with no problem. The sound's lovely as well. Underscored.Sketchbaz

Man don't you even dare thinking your system is "underpowered" for one second. You have a very good CPU (way above req's) and the GPU is, maybe not the best out but it's definately an excellent one, with great performance on every game.

You can't say the requirements aren't steep with a computer like yours.

Just a heads up for those who haven't played the demo and think it will run on older computers; I've got the demo and am running it on an athlon 64 3000 @ 1.98 gHz, 1gb ram, 6600gt, and vista, and it has frame rate issues on the lowest settings. Its fine near the beginning of a game, but the further you get, and especially near the end, as you get more units, its starts to lag, and this is on the relatively small skirmish map that's included in the demo against one ai.dave22768

Actually his CPU is weak compared to a vast amount of other CPUs availible. just because its 3.6ghz doesnt make it good. SupCom almost requires a dual core as well.

The main things you need for this game are a FAST cpu and a lot of ram. You dont need anything more than decent in the video card area.

Steep hardware requirements should be taken into consideration.

If some people can't run a game the way it's supposed to be just because they can't spend a couple more hundreads of bucks for their system, it means it has a shortcoming. The ultimate game is a game that appeals to everyone, and if some are 'discriminated' for their systems, the game doesn't appeal to the whole gaming market (or even the genre market) and thus can't be rated as the same game that runs perfectly on all systems.
You simply can't say "this game rocks and if you can't run this game it's your problem." The problem is with the developer, denying the customer from enjoying the product. And I'm not saying requirements should be like P1 CPUs and Geforce 4 cards, but atleast make the graphics level go way down for the matching people. It won't be the same graphic-expereience, but the gameplay expereience will be the same.

Supreme Commander = Total Annihilation (but with a different name)

I mean, be honest: any of you TA veterans out there, you know how this game is 99% identical to TA.  Thats not a bad thing, but this game is hardly innovative or "revolutionary."  The only different thing about it is the resource collection and army and map sizes (but all three of those were the meat and potatoes of TA)

I tried the demo .. I think it's an oridnary RTS with larger maps and different units , nothing more .

Also the graphics doesn't look that amazing .. it has the same quality of C&C Generals graphics in terms of Model details and textures quality .. the only difference is using SM2 to render the terrain and water in case of Sup Commander !

why the heck does people think 8+ is a bad mark! What, it flops because it got a 8.7, that doesn't make any sense, how the hell is 8.7 a bad score!

"Well, yet another example of gamespot dropping a pc games score for a silly reason. I no longer read their reviews because of this. Oh and by the way c&c will score about 7 or 8 on the pc on gamespot but i bet the 360 version gets over 9. Buy one of the many pc game mags for a real review that isn't done by console loving, pc bashing idiots. Why not review the games on a high spec system then using a grading system, 1 being a low spec and 5 being high, give the game a grade. This will let people know the system requirements without affecting the score. "

Just tell me, why are you assuming things, the game isn't out yet and you predicted that it will get 7 or 8 on gamespot? thats just ridculous. Stop betting, you will lose! They are NOT bashing anything. Theres already a feature, that tells you the system requirements of this game or go to the gamespace and click on tech info, heck why not go to the review and click on review guidelines! So if the score will change into grades, then 8.7 will get an "A", that means its excellent not a flop score or some crazy assumations!

why the heck does people think 8+ is a bad mark! What, it flops because it got a 8.7, that doesn't make any sense, how the hell is 8.7 a bad score!

ElendilElessar

Supreme Commander is no Half Life, its not even a CoH!
basersx

[QUOTE="basersx"]
Supreme Commander is no Half Life, its not even a CoH!
3SecondGrenade

[QUOTE="ElendilElessar"]

why the heck does people think 8+ is a bad mark! What, it flops because it got a 8.7, that doesn't make any sense, how the hell is 8.7 a bad score!

basersx

That is really crappy. The game is barly playable in 1280x1024 in medium with a 7900GS!

basersx

well thats odd...i have a 7900gs and i run it in med-high at 1680x1050. and it is no where near unplayable :|

Video card makes a BIG difference for all but low settings!





That is really crappy. The game is barly playable in 1280x1024 in medium with a 7900GS!

http://www.legionhardware.com/document.php?id=617
basersx

WAIT! cnc will be beter.zonetroperalpha

Ya, totally agree.

I think the hype killed SupCom for me.  I know its a good game, but it just doesnt bring anything new to the table.

Any Total Annihilation veterans have any opinions out there?

[QUOTE="3SecondGrenade"][QUOTE="basersx"]
Supreme Commander is no Half Life, its not even a CoH!
basersx

WAIT! cnc will be beter.zonetroperalpha

To Ein: I did not condemn the game I just said I had played way to many RTS games lately leaving me with almost no desire for another one. SC is no doubt a very well done RTS that a lot of people will enjoy even if it’s not very original.basersx

But like a lot of games it has received way too much hype ahead of its launch and I think you are seeing that a lot of people are finding its not living up to its hype. Add to it people crying because they don’t think an 8.7 is high enough and that is just absurd!

Also the fact that it looks like its going to be a system hog like MSFS-X, Splinter Cell Double agent, GRAW, etc and I think you can agree that this game deserves some real criticism for a lot of reasons. An 8.7 already seems like it was generous and the fact that people are complaining that it’s not higher makes the game an immediate target for criticism.

To Ein: I did not condemn the game I just said I had played way to many RTS games lately leaving me with almost no desire for another one. SC is no doubt a very well done RTS that a lot of people will enjoy even if it’s not very original.basersx

But like a lot of games it has received way too much hype ahead of its launch and I think you are seeing that a lot of people are finding its not living up to its hype. Add to it people crying because they don’t think an 8.7 is high enough and that is just absurd!

Also the fact that it looks like its going to be a system hog like MSFS-X, Splinter Cell Double agent, GRAW, etc and I think you can agree that this game deserves some real criticism for a lot of reasons. An 8.7 already seems like it was generous and the fact that people are complaining that it’s not higher makes the game an immediate target for criticism.

I was not talking to you and I don’t care what you think. Drop it or I will report you for abuse. Constantly calling me "immature" and “childish” is a form of a personal attack and violates the TOS. I have not said one negative thing about you personally, just the game. If you can not refrain from personally attacking users you do not agree with you do not belong on this board!basersx

Flop lol I knew it COH FTW.Axecident

well Ive been playing SC... i must say, I'm not impressed.

Maybe it was all the hype, but once you get past the graphics and the 2000 units, its pretty much a straight forward RTS.

Its not  a bad game by any means, its just not the second coming of Christ.

And to be honest, i prefer DoW.

Steep hardware requirements should be taken into consideration.

If some people can't run a game the way it's supposed to be just because they can't spend a couple more hundreads of bucks for their system, it means it has a shortcoming. The ultimate game is a game that appeals to everyone, and if some are 'discriminated' for their systems, the game doesn't appeal to the whole gaming market (or even the genre market) and thus can't be rated as the same game that runs perfectly on all systems.
You simply can't say "this game rocks and if you can't run this game it's your problem." The problem is with the developer, denying the customer from enjoying the product. And I'm not saying requirements should be like P1 CPUs and Geforce 4 cards, but atleast make the graphics level go way down for the matching people. It won't be the same graphic-expereience, but the gameplay expereience will be the same.

SunnySimantov

Well, the game is what everyone expected: Total Annihilation with a few interface upgrades and a new, shinny graphics engine.

And the thing is - that's good!

I'm buying a new machine next month, then I'll be able to play it in medium/high specs :)

Well, the game is what everyone expected: Total Annihilation with a few interface upgrades and a new, shinny graphics engine.

And the thing is - that's good!

I'm buying a new machine next month, then I'll be able to play it in medium/high specs :)

Nodashi

  IDK see my entire beef after playing it wasn't very entertaining.. I would have much rather have seen a massive space battle with thousands of units, not land..  Hopefully Homeworld 3 will be released some day.