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. 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.
  2. 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
  3. 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
  4. 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
  5. 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
  6. Breck
    Mar 11, 2010
    4
    Quite possible the worst final fantasy in the entire series. It shouldn't even be considered a true final fantasy. Nothing about this game is good, I returned it. Something that took 2 years to make, was delayed for ps3 for another 2 years and downgraded so they could put it onto 360. Pathetic. Besides that, graphics still are bad with ps2 style environments. Annoying characters, and Quite possible the worst final fantasy in the entire series. It shouldn't even be considered a true final fantasy. Nothing about this game is good, I returned it. Something that took 2 years to make, was delayed for ps3 for another 2 years and downgraded so they could put it onto 360. Pathetic. Besides that, graphics still are bad with ps2 style environments. Annoying characters, and the same damn plot you've heard 100 times. Unless your a 6 year old girl, avoid at all costs.… Expand
  7. 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.
  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. 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.
  10. 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
  11. DarkFire
    Feb 3, 2013
    4
    Had it not been for the original Supreme Commander this game would no doubt have been seen as fairly good. Unfortunately, despite the reasonable selection of units and structures, the immense scale of the original game is gone, leaving small maps over which victories are easily achieved in minutes. Gone are the experimental units that would take entire armies to destroy. InsteadHad it not been for the original Supreme Commander this game would no doubt have been seen as fairly good. Unfortunately, despite the reasonable selection of units and structures, the immense scale of the original game is gone, leaving small maps over which victories are easily achieved in minutes. Gone are the experimental units that would take entire armies to destroy. Instead experimental units, while powerful, are nothing like the game changers that they were in the original Supreme Commander.

    SC2 is a perfect example of what happens to a game that's dumbed down, scaled down and severely compromised in order to enable it to run on 5 year old console hardware. If you've played the original Supreme Commander or Forged Alliance then move along, there really isn't anything to see here. If you're new to the Supreme Commander franchise then buy the gold edition of the original game that comes with the excellent Forged Alliance add-on pack. Again, SC2 does nothing at all that wasn't done much better in the original game.    … Expand
  12. 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
  13. Nautiloidor
    Aug 11, 2016
    4
    Oh dear. I expected big things from this game, but I don't think I've ever been disappointed more by a game.
    It's dumbed down in every way: less units types, less progression, less tactics, less cool, less scope, less complexity, smaller maps. And it's ugly (the graphics are somehow worse that the previous game...?)! It lost pretty much everything that make SC-TA great.
    I imagine this    Oh dear. I expected big things from this game, but I don't think I've ever been disappointed more by a game.
    It's dumbed down in every way: less units types, less progression, less tactics, less cool, less scope, less complexity, smaller maps. And it's ugly (the graphics are somehow worse that the previous game...?)! It lost pretty much everything that make SC-TA great.
    I imagine this game is ok if you haven't played SC-TA. However, if you have, this game is just unplayable.    … Expand
  14. 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
  15. 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
  16. BobE
    Mar 2, 2010
    3
    This is very disappointing. They could have done so much more. It's a few innovations on top of a stripped down version of Supreme Commander. It looks okay, but I feel it's not as impressive as the Original. This sequel takes the 100+ units from the first game a reduces it to about 12. They took the 3 Tech tiers and reduced it to 2 (Standard or Advanced). There is no more This is very disappointing. They could have done so much more. It's a few innovations on top of a stripped down version of Supreme Commander. It looks okay, but I feel it's not as impressive as the Original. This sequel takes the 100+ units from the first game a reduces it to about 12. They took the 3 Tech tiers and reduced it to 2 (Standard or Advanced). There is no more formation, ability to control which way your unit point or any of that tactical type stuff in this game. The 4th faction from the expansion is gone. There are few differences between the remaining 3 factions. This is a Supreme Disappointment. It should have been a unique game, not affiliated with Supreme Commander. Reminds me of when they took base building out of Dawn of War.… Expand
  17. 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
  18. 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
  19. Travis
    Mar 3, 2010
    3
    I do not think this game should have been called Supreme commander. It takes away from the value of Sup Com 1 and Forged alliance. But if you never played the 1st or expansion. this game is a decent RTS. However if your looking for a Sup Com game. Just play the 1st.
  20. 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
  21. RebCom1807
    Apr 23, 2013
    3
    Personally, I'm one of those that is a bit.. All over the place when it comes to playing games. I played, and enjoyed, the original Supreme Commander and the Forged Alliance standalone expansion pack. That was how I was introduced to the series. That is how I know it, that is how I love it. And I still have yet to really master it.

    When I first saw SC2, I was rather interested. I    Personally, I'm one of those that is a bit.. All over the place when it comes to playing games. I played, and enjoyed, the original Supreme Commander and the Forged Alliance standalone expansion pack. That was how I was introduced to the series. That is how I know it, that is how I love it. And I still have yet to really master it.

    When I first saw SC2, I was rather interested. I thought it was going to be a proper sequel, like now Forged Alliance was, only bigger. I played the demo, and my hopes fell a bit. Instead of the drain-based economy that really made the first game (Lumping SC and FA in together here) unique, it had the much more typical cost-based system, where it only costs 'x' to make something. I can look beyond that, and I played more of it.

    I saw the planes not landing or having fuel. I can deal with that.
    I saw the 1-tier factory. I could kinda deal with that (If only because it offers some defensive options built-in).
    I saw the scale of the units. Was kinda bleh about it, but I kept going on.

    I saw the Fatboy 2. I thought it was going to be somewhat interesting. It wasn't all that special (And lacked AA.. Which, if you're making a supposedly improved version, why take that out? Just from a logic perspective..).

    Then I went and actually got it and played through the campaign. First thing people who played the first game (With or without mods) probably would notice that is off, even without seeing the horribly scrunched scale, is the unit cap. In the previous game, the cap went up to 1000 easily, 2000+ with mods. In this, it was about 250, I think maybe 500 max.

    I had a bit of fun with the fully upgraded tanks. I could accept the research tree thing for upgrading units (Even on the spot). I could accept the feel of it a bit.
    I liked the fact that Cybrans can have all sea units walk on land.
    I adored the unit cannon. And still do.
    I like the idea of transporting sea units. It works.
    I liked some of the ideas for the experimentals (The teleporter thing, the UEF Galactic Colossus, a Czar that is a bit more awesome).

    The fact that experimentals can be mass-produced without a massive Mass/Energy complex (In this case, a good number of powergens and energy->mass converters) and can be readily stopped by the basic defensive structures? I'm sorry, but no. You cannot, feasibly, march two or three Universal Colossi onto a decently-defended base and win like you could with the Galactic Colossi in the previous game.

    I sorely miss setting up a queue with a group of engineers and seeing them all work together on a structure.
    The maps that they brought back from the previous games just make the scale changes more obvious.
    It's a lot harder to tell where the map boundaries are when zoomed out all the way (And I kinda liked how, in the original, it looked like you were actually looking over a map of the battlefield rather than the battlefield itself).
    There are no SCUs anymore.
    The nukes feel a bit underwhelming (And there are no strategic missile submarines).
    The concept of experimental units is, I feel, tossed around lightheartedly. Some of the earlier experimental units are on the same scale as the units you can make in a normal factory.. And, in a lot of cases, are only slightly more effective.

    In the original, if someone were to be able to send experimentals somewhere repeatedly as soon as you destroyed one, then you were way too far behind the times. In this, there is a mission in the campaign where that kinda happens with the Aeon flying saucer experimental.. And especially so with the UEF experimental gunship. The latter of which being taken down easily enough by a few AA guns behind shields.

    You can't build add-ons to your commander like you could in the first game (Cybran ACU chest microwave laser, anyone?), and any expansion you make, factory-wise, is too easy to get fully set up, production-wise.

    At this point, this review is just a bullet-point ramble.. But, overall, if you are looking for a Supreme Commander game, play the original and Forged Alliance. If you're looking for a half-decent scifi strategy game, either get this or one of the Starcraft games. This, to me, feels like just more of the same. Especially when compared to the original Supreme Commander.

    There are some good ideas in here, and interesting expansions on things from the first game (the Cybran navy being a prime example). But it, in my eyes, simply does not live up to its name. You can't get the same kind of epic battles that you could in the original, and the units don't feel all that diverse.. If only because of the lack of variety in terms of what you have available.

    If you want to play a good sequel with the initials SC2, go to Blizzard.    … Expand
  22. Chaotic-Entropy
    Mar 21, 2016
    3
    It feels, to me, like Sup Com 2 should have preceded Sup Com, it's a giant step back from what made the original a success and a waste of all the best parts of the licence.
  23. CaptMescaline
    Jun 19, 2015
    3
    Lacks the depth of the original and simplifies everything by cutting out features that made the original so great. Go and buy Forged Alliance instead.
  24. 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
  25. 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.
  26. CraigA
    Mar 3, 2010
    2
    No and no. A decimation of what could have been a great franchise to appeal to everybody that didn't buy the original. Removes everything that was great about SupCom (and TA for that matter), and replaces it all with the same tired RTS mechanics you can find everywhere else. Skip it. Buy the original or Starcraft two in a couple of months. This title is without merit.
  27. 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.
  28. 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
  29. 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
  30. Kislen
    Mar 9, 2012
    2
    An extreme disappointment on every level. Graphics, sound, gameplay dynamics, scope, variety .. I was regretting purchasing the game within a couple hours after purchasing it and realizing how shallow and disappointing it was on virtually every level.
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 »