Supreme Commander 2

 PC
User Score
6.2

Mixed or average reviews- based on 834 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 423 out of 834
  2. Mixed: 111 out of 834
  3. Negative: 300 out of 834
Buy Now
Buy on

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
view
per page
  1. bjj8383
    Feb 20, 2011
    4
    Very disapointing compared to the original. Forged Alliance had the perfect level of complexity, and SupCom2 is dumbed-down thinned-out shell of a game intended for a completely different audience than the original. It's a sequel in name only.

    While the storyline in the original isn't exactly an award-winner, SupCom2's is one-dimensional, trite, and doesn't make a lot of sense.
  2. Whinis
    May 9, 2011
    4
    This is not the sequel to Supreme Commander or even to Total Annihilation. While It takes it Units and tactics from those games its strategy has been greatly diminished. Instead of the large fights of 1000's of units over maps that can take hours to just explore, you are left with a unit cap and smaller maps to try and encourage you to finish fights faster. The tech tree and controls ofThis is not the sequel to Supreme Commander or even to Total Annihilation. While It takes it Units and tactics from those games its strategy has been greatly diminished. Instead of the large fights of 1000's of units over maps that can take hours to just explore, you are left with a unit cap and smaller maps to try and encourage you to finish fights faster. The tech tree and controls of the original were done away with for a much simpler and easier to understand system that seems to try and bridge to gap between keyboard and control however you are left with a system that while easier to control on the console leaves the computer feeling like a children's game with few options. What is ever worse is the tech tree. Instead of progressively stronger tech units and structures that require you build the lower tech version first. You are left with a single tech level except you have a tech tree you "research" with research points. You don't get progressively stronger units or structures but rather just improve the old. Also the research points are from research buildings that with only a handful will allow you to get all the tech within the first 5 minutes of the game.

    This game is a perfect example of Developers Simplifying games so that the console with a controller can play them while forcing the computer to play the console version. You are left with a game that neither console nor computer gamer enjoy. Hopefully the Supreme commander 3 will go to the computer users again which paid for the first one rather than alienating 2 groups of gamers.    … Expand
  3. Nasher
    Nov 28, 2010
    4
    If you want the best of Supreme Commander, get Forged Alliances. Give this one a miss.

    Everything about it is a step backwards, including the graphics. It's nothing more than a sub-par, generic RTS with a supreme commander label on it.
  4. Camd
    Jan 3, 2011
    2
    I have owned this game since March 2, 2010. If you own the previous game Supreme Commander Forged Alliance your probable going to be disappointed. The Ideal the new version of the games are always superior in map size, strategy, variety of units and structures is clearly wrong with Supreme Commander 2. ***Pros. Ai works a little better then Supreme Commander Forged Alliance. Has some neatI have owned this game since March 2, 2010. If you own the previous game Supreme Commander Forged Alliance your probable going to be disappointed. The Ideal the new version of the games are always superior in map size, strategy, variety of units and structures is clearly wrong with Supreme Commander 2. ***Pros. Ai works a little better then Supreme Commander Forged Alliance. Has some neat technologies like Flow field path finding (movement of units), Noah unit-cannon. The game runs fast and smooth, even for a very low end computer. The maps, units, structures look more real, even though it has a cartoonish look to it. It seems like I am always either scratching or losing a disk, with Steam all my software is in one spot. Makes moving my games to my next computer easy. There's a lot more patches with Supreme Commander 2, and with Steam it updates automatically. ***Cons: The Game seems to be dumb down, the maps are very small. **Maps. The largest multiplayer maps in Supreme Commander 2 is only a little bit larger than the smallest size multiplayer maps in Supreme Commander Forged Alliance. By comparing what you can build in both version, Supreme Commander 2 maps size are 5, 10 km maps( the useable space is less because they put a lot of scenery in it.) , compared to Forged Alliance maps size are 5,10,20,40,81 km maps. Total multiplayer maps in Supreme Commander 2 is 26 maps(no users made maps though) compared to Forged Alliance 56 maps, plus many more users made for it. Some of the maps do have certain unique look to them though. Some Supreme Commander 2 maps were taken from Forged alliance, but they are small, detail is ok to bad, and you are very limited what you can build on them! How the game was made, there probably won't be any new maps. **Economy. The game still has economy, but doesn't serve any real purpose anymore because the mass and energy you create goes into imaginary unlimited storage unit. Energy you use isn't the same like it was in forged alliance. For instance, shields you build taps its energy from a imaginary energy source. The energy you get from the power generators is like another form of mass, its only used to build things. In Forged Alliance has real touch of a economy, what things need power, where are the mass extractors. Where do I put the Mass Storage and Energy Storage units. **Unit variety. The number of units and structures types have been reduced. In Supreme Commander 2 you no longer have Spy planes, Engineering Station, Air Staging Facility, Stealth Field Generators, Tactical missile defense, mass storage and energy storage units, Mass Fabrication Station that creates mass slowly. In Supreme Commander 2 you have only one type of Power Generators, mass convertors that create mass by pressing certain keys you can transfer some of your energy into mass at one time. New to Supreme Commander 2 is the Research Station, I think is a bad idea. In very short period of time you can have everything unlocked in the tech tree. **Game Play. Mine hunting is gone. Even turning off the mass convertors at the begging of the game, it's like stretch out your main base, the maps are to small! Finding more mines and protecting them was part of the fun, gone now. You only have one type of shield now, it has a small shield area and it doesn't use any power now. Shields no longer fail, unlike Forged alliance if a power generator gets blown up. Maps are so small and so few, there is no longer any sneak attacks and only a choke point where you focus all your attacks. There is no real strategy any more, just build your main base and start building units. Even though I think the AI has been improved over Forged Alliance, the AI in Forged alliance is more difficult because the units, structures, maps are more complex and how you collect mass and energy. I heard that the creator of this game wanted to simplify the economy, but shields, large guns, nothing requires energy to operate, really? Forged Alliance Mod Manager has a option that determines how the resources are collected even one where resources mean nothing, amongst other things. You could have put a Mod Manager in Supreme Commander 2 , did you really think that would make things to confusing, really! ** Suggestions to the THQ/Square Enix. If you can't bring back big maps and a true drain-system economy to Supreme Commander 2, It would be nice if you would do something like a DLC pack for Forged Alliance. Even though the modding community did a good job making maps, mods, and made a great Ai for this game. They don't have the understanding in changing the source code and making use of a multi-core processor. Supreme Commander 2 should have been made for a PC and then make another version for the gaming console boxes with changes you think is necessary for it.When Supreme Commander 3 comes out, I am going to do a lot research first, I am not going to be fooled again!… Expand
  5. nnxnny
    Mar 2, 2010
    4
    Supreme Commander 2 is to SC 1 what a waterbaloon fight is to the first World War. The whole game has been completely dumbed down, all those nice features whom I have come to like since Total Annihilation have been removed for the sake of making it more mainstream. Would not buy.
  6. ChuckS
    Mar 3, 2010
    1
    This is Supreme Commander for Dummies. Everything good and innovative about Supreme Commander and its excellent expansion Forged Alliance has been removed, leaving a poor standard RTS clone reminiscent of 1992's Dune II, but with a worse UI. The innovative and realistic economy system in SupCom has been replaced by the arcade-style, unrealistic system used by most other games. The UI This is Supreme Commander for Dummies. Everything good and innovative about Supreme Commander and its excellent expansion Forged Alliance has been removed, leaving a poor standard RTS clone reminiscent of 1992's Dune II, but with a worse UI. The innovative and realistic economy system in SupCom has been replaced by the arcade-style, unrealistic system used by most other games. The UI has been dumbed down with many features and settings removed, leading to more tedious clicking. SupCom 1 and FA may have been ahead of their time, in that the largest maps required a powerful PC to play; but then again that made it future proof. This version requires less computing power to play, simply because it is a simple, dumb game with way fewer units and a reduced scale and ambition. Magic in SupCom2: SupCom2 features mystical forces of magic that instantaneously transmute your existing units into having an extra gun, or air defense, or other upgrades, no matter how far away they are from your base. These magical forces are not explained in the manual. The "research centers" producing the bizarre and unrealistic "research points" are somehow related to these magical effects, but oddly you can spend lots of time obtaining research points (i.e., "researching") without specifying *what* you're researching... Then later, you select an upgrade and magically, time shifts backwards and you were actually researching that upgrade the entire time. That form of magic in SupCom2 I'll call "temporal magic." The upgrade is then instantaneously applied to all existing units, apparently by The Force, midiclorians, invisible and infinite-speed upgrade drones, or perhaps simply "upgrade magic." Supreme Commander was an excellent and ground breaking game; Supreme Commander 2 has almost nothing in common with it and doesn't deserve the SupCom name. It simply has no depth, no learning curve, no room for error or growth, and absolutely isn't fun to play.… Expand
  7. FelixS
    Mar 2, 2010
    1
    Being a huge fan of Supreme Commander, I really looked forward to this. Of course, I exptected that it would be dumbed down, but I didn't think it would be so incredibly bad. The story they hyped so much is total shit and seems like it was written by a firstgrader and the voice acting is ridicolous. The Gameplay is slow and feels like every other strategy game out there. It Being a huge fan of Supreme Commander, I really looked forward to this. Of course, I exptected that it would be dumbed down, but I didn't think it would be so incredibly bad. The story they hyped so much is total shit and seems like it was written by a firstgrader and the voice acting is ridicolous. The Gameplay is slow and feels like every other strategy game out there. It doesn't have the unique feel of the original SupCom. The Experimentals, which could change the outcome of the game in SupCom 1, are nothing special. A few standard tanks can destroy one. You don't have to pay attention to your economy anymore. Three or four energy generators already produce more energy than you'll ever need. The research mechanic could have made the game very interesting. But you can just spam Research Centers (which are very cheap to build) and after a short time you have enough research points to research EVERYTHING. The only redeeming feature of this game is the Strategic Zoom it inherited from the original SupCom.… Expand
  8. KannedFarU
    Nov 4, 2010
    4
    It's a good RTS, but there are just fundamental things this game really lacks, and it's actually retrogressing from the original. I also feel like I'm really tied down to my base. I am focusing less on the battlefield and more on setting off my mass converters. Where in SC1, mass converters just created mass if you had enough power. I can also understand making the maps a bit smaller, butIt's a good RTS, but there are just fundamental things this game really lacks, and it's actually retrogressing from the original. I also feel like I'm really tied down to my base. I am focusing less on the battlefield and more on setting off my mass converters. Where in SC1, mass converters just created mass if you had enough power. I can also understand making the maps a bit smaller, but now they're too small. Really congested simply makes your battles look larger, not that they really are larger. And the experimentals are total crap. They cost almost nothing, and they're quality is what you paid for. Experimentals were super expensive in SC1 but when you saw one walking towards your base, you knew that stuff was about to get real ugly real fast. These exps might as well be made of aluminum and fire plastic projectiles. Total garbage, I guess the idea was to overrun a base with a large group of experimentals.

    I'd normally give an RTS of this quality a 7/10 rating, but because I was so disappointed in the retrogression from a game I truly loved, this gets a 4/10. Robbed me of my hopes, and backstabbed all your fans.    … Expand
  9. Gabbo
    Aug 1, 2011
    2
    Horribly disappointing. I saw the new graphics and hoped it would be like the original only updated and advancing the story/new units/concepts. (age of empires approach). What I got was a simplified version with less concepts, strategies, and units. in trying to reach those who found the game too complicated, they made it outright dumb. small maps, small armies, and a TERRIBLE TERRIBLEHorribly disappointing. I saw the new graphics and hoped it would be like the original only updated and advancing the story/new units/concepts. (age of empires approach). What I got was a simplified version with less concepts, strategies, and units. in trying to reach those who found the game too complicated, they made it outright dumb. small maps, small armies, and a TERRIBLE TERRIBLE campaign. most fights were rock-paper-scissors style, which was left behind for good reason with most developers. Experimental units are no longer awesome, they are now slightly impressive. That all being said, everything does look way cooler with graphics upgrade, but then you get to see how bad they made the game clearer...
    hopefully they make a third but learn from this mistake.    … Expand
  10. bhtechmech
    Dec 27, 2010
    2
    SUCKS! horrible childish story line dialogue. Ruined my experience. and who needs water units when you have air im sorry, Star Craft had it back in the day.
  11. PeterE
    Mar 3, 2010
    0
    This game is not in the least a successor to Supreme Commander (and Forged Alliance). The story isn't great, but I wasn't expecting it to be. What I was expecting, however, was a game that took the same essence of Supreme Commander and refined it. Supreme Commander 2 instead took the originaly, emptied out the substance and complexity, and put itself out there as a successor This game is not in the least a successor to Supreme Commander (and Forged Alliance). The story isn't great, but I wasn't expecting it to be. What I was expecting, however, was a game that took the same essence of Supreme Commander and refined it. Supreme Commander 2 instead took the originaly, emptied out the substance and complexity, and put itself out there as a successor when all it really can claim to be is a dumbed down version meant to be somewhat playable on consoles. That isn't a sequal - its a perversion of the original.… Expand
  12. AllenB
    Mar 3, 2010
    2
    I found it to be VERY disappointing. It's step backwards in graphics. The models are good, but the textures are aweful. The queueing system is broken as it forces you to have the required resources available at queue time rather than at build time. So no queuing up your build orders. There is no save game option in skirmish. And the one thing that the franchise is known for, I found it to be VERY disappointing. It's step backwards in graphics. The models are good, but the textures are aweful. The queueing system is broken as it forces you to have the required resources available at queue time rather than at build time. So no queuing up your build orders. There is no save game option in skirmish. And the one thing that the franchise is known for, it's epic scale, has been shrunk down to small maps and quick games. All in all, not worth the asking price. Wait until it hits the bargin bin.… Expand
  13. Shawn
    Mar 3, 2010
    4
    There is almost nothing similar between Supreme Commander: Forged Alliance and Supreme Commander 2. As I played through the SC2 demo, I became more and more disappointed as the game progressed, astonished at how much Square-Enix had changed the game. Yes, you still have your commander and your engineers. Yes, you still get to build buildings and such, but the similarities end there. You There is almost nothing similar between Supreme Commander: Forged Alliance and Supreme Commander 2. As I played through the SC2 demo, I became more and more disappointed as the game progressed, astonished at how much Square-Enix had changed the game. Yes, you still have your commander and your engineers. Yes, you still get to build buildings and such, but the similarities end there. You don't get to "Tech up" your buildings like you once could in SC:FA, and you no longer can upgrade anything without research points, which in all honesty is a direct rip-off of the home city points from Age of Empires. I came into the game expecting it to be a better version of the Supreme Commander I loved, but all they did was change it for the worse.… Expand
  14. ChaseM.
    Mar 2, 2010
    0
    Split the fan base in two, indeed. I despise everything about this title as it to me feels a fake and cheap imitation of the former. All the luster of the first game is gone and in its place is a dull plastic coating. This is not Supreme Commander 2, this is a hideous knock-off. Or worse yet: "Supreme Commander: Children's Edition".
  15. KulS.
    Mar 2, 2010
    2
    Could be a good game on its own. But it is very toned back from origional SupCom. The graphics quality is polished, but overall 'meh'. Leading to difficulties distinguishing units and buildings. The maps are significantly smaller. The units have less 'wow' to them. And overall the game feels like a step in the wrong direction. I'm sad I payed for it.
  16. Trevor
    Mar 2, 2010
    3
    If you are a fan of the original SupCom and/or Forged Alliance, and are expecting something similar from this game, you will probably find yourself very disappointed. Make sure you try the free demo before buying, as it will give you a good idea of what you can expect. This game is an *extremely* simplified version of the original SupCom, and differs from it in many ways. The traits that If you are a fan of the original SupCom and/or Forged Alliance, and are expecting something similar from this game, you will probably find yourself very disappointed. Make sure you try the free demo before buying, as it will give you a good idea of what you can expect. This game is an *extremely* simplified version of the original SupCom, and differs from it in many ways. The traits that made SupCom a unique and epic game are all but gone, and what is left is a fairly generic RTS which would likely only hold a person's attention for a short time. If you're looking for a simple, non-challenging RTS, then give this a try. If you want something as epic as the original SupCom, my advice would be to look elsewhere.… Expand
  17. BrettB.
    Mar 2, 2010
    3
    If this edition was actually the first Supreme Commander, I'd be pretty impessed but since it's actually a sequel, I'm sorely disappointed. The story isn't anything special, the voice acting is horrible, the economy system and micromanagement has been dumbed down waaaaay too much, and the feel of the "Epic Strategy" from the first one is almost nonexistent. If this edition was actually the first Supreme Commander, I'd be pretty impessed but since it's actually a sequel, I'm sorely disappointed. The story isn't anything special, the voice acting is horrible, the economy system and micromanagement has been dumbed down waaaaay too much, and the feel of the "Epic Strategy" from the first one is almost nonexistent. Unfortunately, this is an attempt to make a great game with a small community of followers more appealing to the "masses." Poor choice on Chris Taylor's part.… Expand
  18. RastaHempMan
    Jul 20, 2011
    0
    Utter disgrace. Chris Taylor better be losing sleep. Every aspect of this "game" is stripped, butchered and neutered compared to SupCom 1 & FA. All the little things - and even some big things - of the predecessor that made that game great are gone. Adjacency bonuses, gone. Tech I, II, III, gone. A bada** look and appeal, gone. Plain and simple, if you have not played supcom1/FA, this gameUtter disgrace. Chris Taylor better be losing sleep. Every aspect of this "game" is stripped, butchered and neutered compared to SupCom 1 & FA. All the little things - and even some big things - of the predecessor that made that game great are gone. Adjacency bonuses, gone. Tech I, II, III, gone. A bada** look and appeal, gone. Plain and simple, if you have not played supcom1/FA, this game might seem somewhat fun and cool. If you have, however, played the predecessor, you instantly see that this new installment has been produced with the one goal of making it more palatable for 4-year-olds.

    All the economy and strategy that made this game what it was, has been pulled out and replaced with a nice little tech tree. awww, cute. I feel as though i could keep rambling for years how "upset" i am with this game.    … Expand
  19. RJV
    Aug 3, 2011
    3
    After playing Supreme Commander and Sup-Com Forged Alliance I was amazed, they were some of the best games I had ever played. My friend, who feels the same way, told me that Supreme Commander 2 was terrible in comparison, So I decided to download the demo before I bought it. I'm glad I did, because I hated the two campaign levels the demo offered. I don't need to play any more to make aAfter playing Supreme Commander and Sup-Com Forged Alliance I was amazed, they were some of the best games I had ever played. My friend, who feels the same way, told me that Supreme Commander 2 was terrible in comparison, So I decided to download the demo before I bought it. I'm glad I did, because I hated the two campaign levels the demo offered. I don't need to play any more to make a verdict. The graphics might be a bit better, interesting experimental units are plentiful, and the research tree is an interesting idea, but that is about all the pros. They completely messed up almost all of the good things about Sup-Com and Sup-Com FA. This game might be enjoyable for someone who hasn't played the first two games, but veterans of the prequels will find themselves turning back to the originals.… Expand
  20. daman
    Mar 2, 2010
    3
    This game seems to be a crappy XBox port with little resembelence to Total Annihilation or SupCom. The game has a cheap and crappy 'arcade' feel to it, the whole game has been scaled back with minimal unit choice, simplified resource system and a crappy research resource all aquired periodically. The demo has buggy path finding (worse than TA) and is not very interesting to This game seems to be a crappy XBox port with little resembelence to Total Annihilation or SupCom. The game has a cheap and crappy 'arcade' feel to it, the whole game has been scaled back with minimal unit choice, simplified resource system and a crappy research resource all aquired periodically. The demo has buggy path finding (worse than TA) and is not very interesting to play. If you are looking for a (possibly balanced) RTS game to play multiplayer, this may appeal to you though I find it not very enjoyable to play.… Expand
  21. eds
    Mar 3, 2010
    4
    Was looking forward to a great PC RTS, but got one that seems overly simplified for either non strategy vets and/or consoles. Extremely limited number of units and base defenses make no sense for a game series that prided itself on an interesting variety of weapons choices. New economy requires the presence of the resources in order to even queue up units and structures. This actually Was looking forward to a great PC RTS, but got one that seems overly simplified for either non strategy vets and/or consoles. Extremely limited number of units and base defenses make no sense for a game series that prided itself on an interesting variety of weapons choices. New economy requires the presence of the resources in order to even queue up units and structures. This actually creates more production micromanagement issues as factories pause and builder units cannot be tasked with building out a whole base at one time. I found myself constantly having to deal with stalled engineers in the middle of a hole in my defenses or a screen of fighters that has dwindled down to nothing from a paused factory. This means less time thinking strategically about combat! Smaller map size and lower unit cap removes that epic feel of the first two games. The relative lack of defensive power also renders many of the experimental units less useful as a tool to wreak havoc among your enemies and a reason for them to focus significant firepower to stop them. This trend to dumb down content to please a broader audience/more markets is something we have seen all too often: Deus Ex I => II, F.E.A.R. (first trilogy) => F.E.A.R. II, and much of the missing character development options and story in games like Mass Effect 2. Broadcast media seems to slowly be learning their lesson as more creative, interesting and "no apologies" programming does well on cable channels while the networks struggle to keep a shrinking audience with fare designed to draw the most eyeballs in the shortest time. Rarely are shows that are even slightly outside the box given the chance to develop their characters and grow an audience. The game publishing industry should take a hint and give players who are sticking to their PCs an interesting, and creative experience that stimulates more than the adrenaline gland and actually makes us use our brain. Leave the rest to the consoles.… Expand
  22. PatT
    Mar 3, 2010
    0
    This is not Supreme Commander. This is just a generic regurgitation of ever other RTS you have ever played. Gone are the varying units, gone are the hordes, the illuminate doesn
  23. DennisV.
    Mar 3, 2010
    3
    If you are looking for the combination of a Michael Bay flick and an RTS, you will be served well. If, however, you are looking for a worthy successor to Supreme Commander, you best look elsewhere. Unfortunately Supreme Commander 2 has as much to do with Supreme Commander as Operation Flashpoint does with Unreal Tournament. They're both RTS games... and that's it. Pretty much If you are looking for the combination of a Michael Bay flick and an RTS, you will be served well. If, however, you are looking for a worthy successor to Supreme Commander, you best look elsewhere. Unfortunately Supreme Commander 2 has as much to do with Supreme Commander as Operation Flashpoint does with Unreal Tournament. They're both RTS games... and that's it. Pretty much everything else is significantly different. The pace, the economy, the units, the map size, etc. All of it. It is nothing like Supreme Commander. It's VERY unit focused with very little base-building. The pace is much higher, the maps and weapon ranges smaller. Experimentals are much cheaper relative to normal units and much weaker. The economy is now a Red Alert-style buy-before-you-build economy instead of a buy-as-you-build economy and is not infinitely expandable as there are no mass fabricators. There are no more tech-levels, all units and buildings are of the same tech-level. Instead they get stronger and better by spending research-points that affect all units/buildings of one type on the battlefield instantaneously and all units/buildings produced from then on. What you end up with is an RTS game that is focused on creating a short intense experience based on units. Which is much closer to Command & Conquer and Starcraft then Supreme Commander. Conclusion: If they had called it Robot Wars instead of Supreme Commander 2 it wouldn't be bad at all, but they didn't. They made a game that was supposed to be a successor, but ended up having nothing to do with what came before. To all the reviewers saying Supreme Commander 2 has made a change for the better: You obviously don't understand that there are people out there that didn't think 99% of the game was flawed and had to change. Just because you like C&C/Starcraft-style RTS games doesn't mean the entire world does. 95% Of the changes aren't "changes for the better", they are just changes.… Expand
  24. Sneetches
    Aug 22, 2013
    4
    TL;DR Very disappointing sequel that chose to streamline gameplay rather than add even more depth to an awesome RTS. This game is "Supreme Commander" in name only.

    So basically, SC: FA was something different from the rest of the pack, I knew this when I first played SC. It had an amazing amount of depth for an RTS and things like Tiers, the Economy system, and the huge amount of    TL;DR Very disappointing sequel that chose to streamline gameplay rather than add even more depth to an awesome RTS. This game is "Supreme Commander" in name only.

    So basically, SC: FA was something different from the rest of the pack, I knew this when I first played SC. It had an amazing amount of depth for an RTS and things like Tiers, the Economy system, and the huge amount of gameplay styles always had me coming back. SC2 is like being taken from an Olympic sized pool and being thrown in the 1" Kiddy pool. No more tier upgrades, no more GIGANTIC maps, and no more economy management. Experimental units really don't feel like they have that same "awe" because they can literally die within 3 seconds of meeting a fully upgraded commander.

    Overall, just take all the good out of SupCom and leave it with an incredibly basic shell that resembles every generic RTS out there. Supreme Commander 2 is a very disappointing wait that could have easily fixed some of the flaws with the original and FA while adding even more depth, but they chose to fixate on the word "streamline" instead.    … Expand
  25. MSCowboy
    Jul 25, 2013
    2
    Let me tell you a story.

    Imagine for a moment that Valve released Half Life 3. A long stretch of the imagination, I know, but do your best. Now imagine that Half Life 3 were a cover based shooter with two weapon slots and regenerating health, pitting you against faceless nameless human enemies in droves with meager justification for killing them. Now, it might be a perfectly good    Let me tell you a story.

    Imagine for a moment that Valve released Half Life 3. A long stretch of the imagination, I know, but do your best. Now imagine that Half Life 3 were a cover based shooter with two weapon slots and regenerating health, pitting you against faceless nameless human enemies in droves with meager justification for killing them.

    Now, it might be a perfectly good generic modern military shooter. Knowing Valve it most certainly is. But that's not going to do much to slow the march of the lynch mob out for Valve. A few people who didn't play or didn't particularly understand what made the previous Half Life games great might give it some fairly positive reviews. But the people who did play and understand the games that came before do not care how well made it may be. Because that's not what Half Life is. You don't get to destroy a franchise by forsaking what it is built on to deliver a generic, money grabbing, 'for wider audiences' game and then walk away with positive press. If you want to do that, you give it a new name.

    That's essentially what Supreme Commander 2 is. Judged on its own merits alone, it's a decent RTS, forgotten within the year but good enough to say nice things about as it passes. But Supreme Commander 2 does not have the luxury of being judged on its own merits. What it is, is a systematic destruction of an IP that delivered something literally no other game in existence could match. Supreme Commander 2 scaled down, dumbed down, made itself generic to broaden appeal.

    Supreme Commander 2 is a decent game. It also marks the dead end of a franchise that had done what none other did, one that carried infinitely more potential than this, potential which is now thrown to the wind. When a game is both of these things, you do not focus on the former, as that will not benefit anyone. Do not support this game. Give your money to Forged Alliance.    … Expand
  26. brenodobbin
    Oct 30, 2013
    0
    Sou fã do Supreme commander1, mas com esse artificio de ganhar Xp, ficou horrível o game, agora em poucos minutos de jogo vc já consegue ter armas nucleares.
  27. ChuckFarley
    Aug 19, 2010
    0
    The user rating does not yet seem to reflect the criminality of this release. This game is to SupCom what Fisher Price is to Lockheed Martin. Fans of the original will surely (as i did) vomit with rage and disappointment within moments of commencement, delete the game and destroy the disc.
  28. JoshuaT
    Mar 3, 2010
    4
    While the single player game hasn't lost much, the multiplayer ranked matchmaking service is now entirely missing. Multiplayer has always been the basis of the Supreme Commander experience and this latest release is almost totally lacking. No lobby chat, no ranked ladders, strange new resource management systems, and much weaker experimental all add up to a disappointing game, much While the single player game hasn't lost much, the multiplayer ranked matchmaking service is now entirely missing. Multiplayer has always been the basis of the Supreme Commander experience and this latest release is almost totally lacking. No lobby chat, no ranked ladders, strange new resource management systems, and much weaker experimental all add up to a disappointing game, much degraded from previous releases.… Expand
  29. Chris25152001
    Aug 16, 2010
    1
    Supreme Commander 2 is a lower spec lower fun game compared to Supreme Commander 1 Forged alliance, it has alot less buildings and pulled away from what made the 1st one so good. 1st one has massive maps and alot of them plus you can make your own maps, this one has 20 maps with no ability to create your own maps and no downloadable content , just seems to me they haven't put the work orSupreme Commander 2 is a lower spec lower fun game compared to Supreme Commander 1 Forged alliance, it has alot less buildings and pulled away from what made the 1st one so good. 1st one has massive maps and alot of them plus you can make your own maps, this one has 20 maps with no ability to create your own maps and no downloadable content , just seems to me they haven't put the work or effort into this compared to the last one. if you want a good budget buy get the Supreme Commander 1 with Forged Alliance and it won't let you down and keep you entertained for months.… Expand
  30. RobinWatt
    Mar 3, 2010
    4
    Piss poor game, terrible AI, terrible restructure of a classic game. New tech tree is wasteful. Removal of core functionality from previous games is disappointing. Graphics are poor even at highest resolution and quality settings. Resource management redesigned from lego complexity to building with baby building blocks. I won't buy this game until its $10 or less and will stick with Piss poor game, terrible AI, terrible restructure of a classic game. New tech tree is wasteful. Removal of core functionality from previous games is disappointing. Graphics are poor even at highest resolution and quality settings. Resource management redesigned from lego complexity to building with baby building blocks. I won't buy this game until its $10 or less and will stick with Total Annihilation and Supreme Commander 1.… Expand
prev
Page:

Awards & Rankings

59
#59 Best PC Game of 2010
26
#26 Most Discussed PC Game of 2010
56
#56 Most Shared PC Game of 2010

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
77

Generally favorable reviews - based on 54 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 37 out of 54
  2. Mixed: 16 out of 54
  3. Negative: 1 out of 54
  1. games(TM)
    70
    This is a purist RTS with old-school communists values, where there's power in numbers. [Issue#95, p.122]
  2. Eurogamer Italy
    80
    Supreme Commander 2 is a hybrid between Total Annihilation and the first Supreme Commander: it has the accessibility of the former and the immensity of the latter. Probably the best “classic” RTS until today, though it has nothing special to grant it a long future.
    Read full review
  3. SpazioGames
    85
    Supreme Commander 2 is the result of how, through prudent choices it's possible to convert a title suited almost exclusively to a niche of fans of the genre into a game for everyone. With the recent release of strategic games such as Napoleon: Total War and the imminent arrival of Starcraft II and Command & Conquer 4, all the fans of strategy games have something to have fun with and we are confident that the new creation from Chris Taylor can succeed in carve out its space, thanks to this new dynamic and intuitive formula .
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »