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. TimothyD.
    Mar 2, 2010
    10
    SupCom2 is a great follow up to Supreme Commander, keeping a lot of the epic feel of the game, while going towards a more standardized economy. It really is superior to the original.
  2. FernD
    Mar 2, 2010
    10
    I loved TA and still play it. Supreme Commander 2 took everything from the first and combined it with TA. I think modern rts players and new generation gamers should really take some time to take in this classic remake of one of the best games to have ever been made. Also, modern rts games just might have to step it up big time.
  3. ThomasM
    Mar 3, 2010
    10
    I'm a real fan of supcom.Yesterday I played the demo and I was suprised it was better than the most ratings I had looked.It is still a very revolutionary strategy game , I would say it's the best strategy game at the moment.But the biggest acclamation to Chris Taylor and his team they get for a very interesting story!!! The graphic system is amazing.I thought the camera in the I'm a real fan of supcom.Yesterday I played the demo and I was suprised it was better than the most ratings I had looked.It is still a very revolutionary strategy game , I would say it's the best strategy game at the moment.But the biggest acclamation to Chris Taylor and his team they get for a very interesting story!!! The graphic system is amazing.I thought the camera in the first game was the best what is possible in the next years but now I am in the better know and ey look at the hardware condition they optimize it so well that the game is provided to much more people than the first game was provided... Myself had bougth the game a few weeks after release in europe but I could not realy play the game it sucked... Last year I "excavate" supreme commander and I could use the game on a high level and it became my favorite game , I bougth the addon and only played supreme commander for some month... ;) I hope the game will be such good lor much more better ;P like in my current view :) Greetings Thomas ps.my english is not the best but it's my 3rd language and I'm more a mathematician.… Expand
  4. JoeH
    Mar 3, 2010
    10
    First of all, fantastic game! Though it differs from it's predecessor I thoroughly enjoyed the changes. Matches are now quicker and every bit as exciting. With the streamlined econ, you're allowed to focus more on cranking out units and watching the clash of armies. Also of note, I am delighted with the new research system as it forces you to commit to your strategy and allows First of all, fantastic game! Though it differs from it's predecessor I thoroughly enjoyed the changes. Matches are now quicker and every bit as exciting. With the streamlined econ, you're allowed to focus more on cranking out units and watching the clash of armies. Also of note, I am delighted with the new research system as it forces you to commit to your strategy and allows for greater variety between games.… Expand
  5. cambria
    Mar 29, 2011
    10
    This game is excellent, more diversity than starcraft, more unique tech trees per race, and overview mode / rotating / zooming camera elements make this game FAR BETTER than the average user may rate. 90% of the negatives are SC1 fanboys, I've never played it. Judging this game OBJECTIVELY (which none of them seem to want to) yields the following facts: 1 The AI is vastly superior toThis game is excellent, more diversity than starcraft, more unique tech trees per race, and overview mode / rotating / zooming camera elements make this game FAR BETTER than the average user may rate. 90% of the negatives are SC1 fanboys, I've never played it. Judging this game OBJECTIVELY (which none of them seem to want to) yields the following facts: 1 The AI is vastly superior to starcraft's, not to mention fully customizable. 2 Alliances are set before match, so you won't have any idiot backstabbers at the end. 3 All AI and players can be grouped in any team, making teams complete with AI, players, or both. 4 The graphics are decent. 5 The campaign is pretty much a lengthy tutorial, but is not without it's merit. BOTTOM LINE? EXCELLENT GAME! Lots of online fun to be had, and while lacking a battle.net style interface, there are plenty of players willing to make friends! Give this game a try and you will love it if you love RTS, but if you are a fanboy of the first one? Well, you probably already committed to hating this. And the subsequent < 4 score is probably already here. Your loss.… Expand
  6. pete312
    Oct 30, 2010
    10
    I'm very surprised at the amount of negative reviews. Ive played all versions for years (way over 100 hours each one) and they all are great. My favorite one to play *is* SC 2 because the experimental units dont take an age to build like in SC 1 and they are not godlike as they are in SC 1 (they can be beaten with enough normal units). There has been a lot of attention tot balanced yetI'm very surprised at the amount of negative reviews. Ive played all versions for years (way over 100 hours each one) and they all are great. My favorite one to play *is* SC 2 because the experimental units dont take an age to build like in SC 1 and they are not godlike as they are in SC 1 (they can be beaten with enough normal units). There has been a lot of attention tot balanced yet diverse units within the factions. There are innovative units like the BFG Big Friendly Gun to convert enemy units to friendly and the grinder magnet thats very effective. Units dont get locked up bumping into each other when moving in big groups and scenery is awesome. So I think there is lot of advancement to SC2 and a must for the fan of the series.… Expand
  7. Gunship
    Nov 6, 2010
    10
    I have played though the campaign and even got hold of a second copy on Steam for my son. Both the Single player as well as some good online fun makes this a great game to play. like C&C or StarCraft you are sure to like this game too. This weekend on Steam its up for $5, you really can't go wrong! and the DLC pack is good buy too :) Enjoy !
  8. The_Silent_One
    Jan 5, 2011
    10
    I am mid 30's, married with 2 kids, I don't have near the time to game that I used to, so when I find a game I like, it usually lasts me a year or 2. (Supcom & Supcom:FA lasted me 4-5 years). I bought this game shortly after it came out. I was a big fan of TA, Supcom, & Supcom:FA before it.

    What made Supcom (Supreme Commander) one of the few games that I've played over the last 3-4 years    I am mid 30's, married with 2 kids, I don't have near the time to game that I used to, so when I find a game I like, it usually lasts me a year or 2. (Supcom & Supcom:FA lasted me 4-5 years). I bought this game shortly after it came out. I was a big fan of TA, Supcom, & Supcom:FA before it.

    What made Supcom (Supreme Commander) one of the few games that I've played over the last 3-4 years is that I could jump into the que for 1v1 without having to arrange my schedule to meet up with friends etc. (It was also a great game and improved on Total Annihilation)

    After I bought Supreme Commander 2, I played it once or twice but it was different than Supcom:FA and there was no skirmish ladder when it was released. Therefore it was a lot more work to get into games. So, I went back to playing Supcom:FA. However, one of the last Supcom:FA 1v1's that I played, the guy I kept getting matched up wtih complained that Supcom:FA didn't have as diverse strategy as Supcom 2.

    This stuck in my head for a number of months until I decided to give Supcom 2 another chance. First of all, the 1v1 ladder has been initialized although it has been simplified somewhat. The main thing is that it allows relatively quick matchups for games. Second of all, (and most importantly), I have been pleasantly surprised to find that it actually does have more diverse strategy than Supcom & Supcom:FA and this is a good thing! Supcom and Supcom:FA give more weight to unit spamming and aggressive tactics. I'm not a unit spammer by nature and one of my main frustrations with Supcom/FA was losing on small maps to players who were simply more aggressive with unit spamming and/or always used a race that was suited to small map unit spamming.

    I started playing Supreme Commander 2 in earnest last weekend. Nobody can deny that there are less units and the game does not have the depth that Supreme Commander / FA had. However, I think I would have a hard time going back to FA now that I have been playing Supcom 2 for a week. I can't speak for it when it first came out, but at this point in time, it may be the best multiplayer rts out there. I never would have believed that simpler is better in RTS games, but in this case it is. Somehow the developers have managed to shed dead weight fromt he first Supcom. Games feel faster. There is more back and forth in a game. Some games in Supcom were back and forth, but a lot end up with one player steamrolling the other and once it starts to happen, there is little that can be done stop it. In this game, there is more variety of ways to win.

    For example, I just played a game, where I lost everything but my commander. I ended up losing, but I have my opponent a good run for his money and managed to last about an hour after I had lost everything. That would never have happened in Supcom or Supcom:FA!

    I can't speak for the single player part of this game. I haven't played any. I only ever played a handful of missions for supcom and supcomFA over 5 years. If you want to know about that, you'll have to ask someone else.    … Expand
  9. Balthazzar
    Feb 16, 2011
    10
    The only flak this game receives comes from SupCom:FA fanboys. None of them care to admit the credit it deserves for being:
    -easy to learn / hard to master
    -offering more diverse strategic choices -being unparalleled in its design (from the simplistic GUI to the details of models/effects) -offering a hell of a lot content. Above average for the mainstream RTS. Don't compare it to    The only flak this game receives comes from SupCom:FA fanboys. None of them care to admit the credit it deserves for being:
    -easy to learn / hard to master
    -offering more diverse strategic choices
    -being unparalleled in its design (from the simplistic GUI to the details of models/effects)
    -offering a hell of a lot content. Above average for the mainstream RTS.

    Don't compare it to SupCom:FA. It's not a sequel like Starcraft 2 is to SC:Broodwar. Its a game for tacticians rather then strategists.    … Expand
  10. MonkeyD_Luffy
    Mar 31, 2011
    10
    This game is really great only the limit for the units is to low....
    It's good that there are only two ressources.
    The AI is good too.
    Well only the multiplayer(number of online games) and the unit limit is a problem...
  11. smk123
    May 27, 2013
    10
    I have no idea what all the fuss is about with the game scores I played the original quite a lot, and I liked it, but personally I find the sequel to be more fun. Yes it's simplified and the scale isn't as vast, but if that isn't to your taste just play the first game, this game is much easier to just pick up and play without having to devote a lot of time to learning its intricacies.I have no idea what all the fuss is about with the game scores I played the original quite a lot, and I liked it, but personally I find the sequel to be more fun. Yes it's simplified and the scale isn't as vast, but if that isn't to your taste just play the first game, this game is much easier to just pick up and play without having to devote a lot of time to learning its intricacies. Even if you prefer the original there is no denying the battles in SupCom2 are immensely satisfying to watch, the graphics are very nice and the sounds are awesome. If you like a faster paced RTS this game is definitely for you, unlike the first… Expand
  12. how-hiGh
    Jun 19, 2011
    10
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. an awesome game with polished game mechanic, optimized graphics and good balance. I totally love strategical zoom, and really missing it in other RTS games. My favourite RTS.… Expand
  13. wazzy
    Jul 4, 2012
    10
    This game is a lot of fun for my and my friends, we play this at minimum once a week still. The theme and style of the game is very neat and it's easy for new players who know nothing to pick up tricks easier. Very happy and I hope to see a number 3.
  14. NiteOfDoom
    Mar 6, 2013
    10
    HE HE, im a huge fan of RTS and this is certainly my favorite, at least until PA. It does get boring when you become one of the best in the world at it, but until then the game is amazing. Maybe if ididnt play it as much as i did i would give it a 9, but this game is simply too epic on many levels!
  15. Red-Rocket
    Jun 23, 2013
    10
    it oozes production value and has good gameplay. The campaign story was bland but mostly makes up for it with mostly good missions. Multiplayer is still alive and intense.
  16. Mbdelta
    Jun 14, 2013
    10
    A must have. Supreme Commander 2 is a masterpiece of futuristic strategy gaming. This game has a enjoyable campaign and an even better multiplayer experience.
  17. cookieclicker
    Oct 9, 2013
    10
    this game is awesome but I only played the first mission before my step father took it back he got it the day it came out. we loved forged alliance. this game is still awesome from what I read even if it is a "shell of the original" that's right i'm quoting u bjj8383
  18. Buckedpeach9
    Jun 9, 2014
    10
    I've been playing this game for a year now and i still am not bored of it, it like hmmm will my nuke hit there base or be blasted out of the sky or is there a army of planes hiding in that area i can't see always makes me want to play again
  19. darkassassin408
    Oct 16, 2014
    10
    this game is the best real time strategy for xbox 360 that i have played so far. this game has non stop action. i love that there are more than one way to defeat an opponent. plus you can use land, naval, and air units. this is the first RTS game that i have played that has naval units, which is great. keep up the good work guys. i really hope that there will be a 3rd one, looking forward to it.
  20. DOge123demon
    Jun 3, 2022
    10
    beautiful graphics, good sound, beautiful characters, good plot, long gameplay duration
  21. DevonL
    Mar 3, 2010
    9
    There are some realism problems with the game when, for example, the ACU pushes a Megalith 2 experimental out of its way. I love the fast paced gameplay, not to mention the turtle favoritism...if you know how to play the game you can get a good turtle going and be nearly unbeatable...if not unbeatable. Is this not the purpose of a turtle after all? The research tree adds a level of There are some realism problems with the game when, for example, the ACU pushes a Megalith 2 experimental out of its way. I love the fast paced gameplay, not to mention the turtle favoritism...if you know how to play the game you can get a good turtle going and be nearly unbeatable...if not unbeatable. Is this not the purpose of a turtle after all? The research tree adds a level of re-playability to the game that is a big improvement from the stale t1 t2 t3 exp...progression that was the same for every single game SC:FA. Overall there could be some improvements but Ill give it a 9 for multiplayer awesomeness.… Expand
  22. AlanG
    Mar 2, 2010
    9
    As a die-hard fan of the original Supreme Commander, I had high expectations for SC2. I was disappointed by a few changes in this new incarnation, most notably the lack of unit variety and a limited tech tree. However, many improvements have been made that outweigh the drawbacks to this game. The performance has been heavily optimized so that the game runs silky smooth, even when As a die-hard fan of the original Supreme Commander, I had high expectations for SC2. I was disappointed by a few changes in this new incarnation, most notably the lack of unit variety and a limited tech tree. However, many improvements have been made that outweigh the drawbacks to this game. The performance has been heavily optimized so that the game runs silky smooth, even when thousands of units are active in a game. The AI is better than the original, but still prone to misguided decisions that make single player a breeze. It's the multiplayer where this game really shines, and where the lasting replay value is to be found. The game has been streamlined and the learning curve has been greatly reduced from the original, and unfortunately this has resulted in a restriction of some of the strategic depth of the original. However, as has been a tradition with its predecessors, SC2 is almost certainly going to receive added variety in the form of DLC or expansions. Dont buy this game if you just want to play the story mode or single-player (try the demo first), but if you enjoy highly strategic RTS multiplayer, and don't want another "click-fest," then this may be the game for you.… Expand
  23. Damon
    Oct 17, 2010
    9
    What a great strategy game, I got it on super sale on Steam and its probably the best $15 I've ever spent. Graphics are good, lots of units to choose from, many different strategies. Everything you could want from a RTS game and more. I'd give it an 8 as of a month ago but with the latest patches and new maps, definite 9. If it was a bit faster and had a few more techs, I'd be close to perfect.
  24. RCIX
    Oct 27, 2010
    9
    Supreme Commander 2 is an exciting and fast-paced RTS game with many unique and innovative features. It features a blend of tactics and strategy, with a passable story. While there have been some bugs, development of the game continues (as evidenced by the latest patch altering the way the economy works, and the recent DLC patch). The performance is improved across the board from theSupreme Commander 2 is an exciting and fast-paced RTS game with many unique and innovative features. It features a blend of tactics and strategy, with a passable story. While there have been some bugs, development of the game continues (as evidenced by the latest patch altering the way the economy works, and the recent DLC patch). The performance is improved across the board from the prequel, as well as the look. The AI is far improved from the first game, as GPG went so far as to hire the maker of a popular AI mod to improve that aspect of their development.

    Battles are fluid and snappy, with a variety of technologies available to turn the tide of battle. The factional differences are astounding, and end-game fights can break several hundred units. The online community is small but dedicated, and there are players of a variety of skill levels.

    Die-hard fans of the first game will not find much to like in this though; the battles are smaller and the game simply is far different. Verdict: Would Buy    … Expand
  25. kidd_sadam
    Feb 20, 2011
    9
    This is a great game. I just love the experimentals, monster cannons.. It is classis C&C game type and its awesome! I don't like the first SupCom but SupCom2 is great! It's simple for understanding, you have many strategies, best zoom.. I think, its one of the best stragy ever (not story and single campaign). I like it more than StarCraft II. For me, this is a strategy of year 2010 :) ButThis is a great game. I just love the experimentals, monster cannons.. It is classis C&C game type and its awesome! I don't like the first SupCom but SupCom2 is great! It's simple for understanding, you have many strategies, best zoom.. I think, its one of the best stragy ever (not story and single campaign). I like it more than StarCraft II. For me, this is a strategy of year 2010 :) But its not for single players, but multiplayer is great and awesome and a like it.. I recomandet for any strategies fans.… Expand
  26. Mideaa
    Jan 4, 2011
    9
    Awesome game. At first I was really really disappointed because it was so different from SupCom1, but later when I played it at lan parties with friends I learned more about it and it was great fun! In addition it has good support and since the October updates (incl. DLC) it has become even better and got more missing functions from SupCom1 added.
  27. Mikester7
    Dec 22, 2010
    9
    A great game to play with friends, and one of the only RTS that is dedicated to creating epic battles. I haven't played the first one and I assume its different, but coming into the series for the first time, I was defiantly impressed by Supcom2. Creating and joining games seems to be hassle free and there isn't a huge amount of bugs which is a bonus.
  28. bricky
    Jan 7, 2011
    9
    Although its been downsized in scale and mass i found this game extremely fun with an immersive singleplayer. the only reason i can think that lots of people are giving it bad reviews is because its different to the original. Im almost 100% sure if this was given a new name and advertised as a tactical strategy game it would be raved about by everyone.
  29. rando0333
    Jan 8, 2011
    9
    i havent played the first supreme commander i have only played Supreme Commander 2 Demo and i realy like the demo i do not care about story or voices i care about those units and the massive explosions and huge machines and so on, i have played demo and i like this game only bad thing is that the camera which shows faces when they talk is so lame
  30. GGsGameReview
    Feb 17, 2011
    9
    I was a huge CnC Generals player until I could no longer get LAN games to work properly. Thus my search for a better RTS began. Though I didn't play the first one. I did play Total Annihilation years back. This game topped my expectations and was a great buy. 9/10 because like generals the units didn't start moving the INSTANT you told them to. Otherwise well made, well done Gas Powered Games!
  31. DarthRevan
    Jul 8, 2012
    9
    Supreme Commander 2 is a fantastic strategy game. Very balanced and very fun. It has a bunch of different ways you can play, whether it be land-forces, air-forces, sea-forces, structure-based, or ACU-based. It also has replay capabilities where you can view what you, a friend, or an enemy did. It has a great multi-player game system where you can exclude certain items, change team colors,Supreme Commander 2 is a fantastic strategy game. Very balanced and very fun. It has a bunch of different ways you can play, whether it be land-forces, air-forces, sea-forces, structure-based, or ACU-based. It also has replay capabilities where you can view what you, a friend, or an enemy did. It has a great multi-player game system where you can exclude certain items, change team colors, game mode, and fog of war. The graphics are also beautiful. I don't understand why everybody else didn't enjoy it as much as I did.… Expand
  32. awesomekid06
    Feb 24, 2013
    9
    other than the campaign, I honestly think this is the best strategy 'futuristic' game besides XCOM, and the multiplayer is great!
  33. BenA
    Mar 2, 2010
    8
    I really enjoyed this game. I'm a huge fan of SupCom1 and Forged Alliance, so I had to compare SupCom2 to those titles. Purists will probably complain, because Chris is trying to make SupCom2 less of a niche RTS and more mainstream. This has it's ups and downs when compared to the old games, but I feel that SupCom2 has achieved what Chris was trying to do. Judging SupCom2 based I really enjoyed this game. I'm a huge fan of SupCom1 and Forged Alliance, so I had to compare SupCom2 to those titles. Purists will probably complain, because Chris is trying to make SupCom2 less of a niche RTS and more mainstream. This has it's ups and downs when compared to the old games, but I feel that SupCom2 has achieved what Chris was trying to do. Judging SupCom2 based on its own merits, if you are not familiar with the old games, you will really enjoy SupCom2 and I highly recommend trying the demo out available on Steam.… Expand
  34. Mehve
    Mar 3, 2010
    8
    A fairly big departure from first-gen SupCom - the maps are just as big, but the economy and infrastructure aspects have been heavily minimalized and dumbed down, while the experimental units have been neutered further still. Expect lots of whining from the purists over this. I miss those parts myself, but it's a game-changer, not a game-breaker, and it makes the game a lot more A fairly big departure from first-gen SupCom - the maps are just as big, but the economy and infrastructure aspects have been heavily minimalized and dumbed down, while the experimental units have been neutered further still. Expect lots of whining from the purists over this. I miss those parts myself, but it's a game-changer, not a game-breaker, and it makes the game a lot more accessible. A lot more unit variation between factions now, which helps keep things interesting, imo. For what it's worth, the campaign storyline is more interesting than the original and FA (although the same can be said for Charlie Brown's teacher), but it's still rather sparse and nothing to write home about.… Expand
  35. TomV.
    Mar 2, 2010
    8
    As a believer that Supcom 1 was the best RTS to date, Supcom 2 is an interesting sequel. Lots of new options, new resource management and upgrading. However, depth has been lost, and some of the grand feelings that you got in the original from nurturing your economy or upgrading your tech have been lost. Its up to you to decide whether you will like the new system, its definitely worthy, As a believer that Supcom 1 was the best RTS to date, Supcom 2 is an interesting sequel. Lots of new options, new resource management and upgrading. However, depth has been lost, and some of the grand feelings that you got in the original from nurturing your economy or upgrading your tech have been lost. Its up to you to decide whether you will like the new system, its definitely worthy, but do not expect a boosted version of Supcom 1. Instead, dive into a new research tree and find new ways to beat your opponents' strategies in a more accessible, more arcade-like style! (and keep your copy of Supcom 1)… Expand
  36. MikeS
    Mar 27, 2010
    8
    Buggy, laggy, and not fun. Yet another game that imitates a MMO in order to charge a monthly fee yet offers no incentive or motivation to actually team up to accomplish a task. Why are there games that do more for multiplayer while not charging a fee? Cryptic excels at squandering potential when it comes to game design.
  37. Ed1
    Dec 12, 2010
    8
    Supreme Commander 2 is very different from its predecessor. One the one hand it seems simpler than part 1 and less epic, but if you play it for a while you'll see that it has depth as well. Unfortunately it's hard to find an opponent for a ranked game. Many people seem to stick to Skirmish, which is not surprising since the AI is unbelievable. I've never seen the computer throw platoons atSupreme Commander 2 is very different from its predecessor. One the one hand it seems simpler than part 1 and less epic, but if you play it for a while you'll see that it has depth as well. Unfortunately it's hard to find an opponent for a ranked game. Many people seem to stick to Skirmish, which is not surprising since the AI is unbelievable. I've never seen the computer throw platoons at me that indeed find the weakest place in my defenses.… Expand
  38. PLANETX
    Mar 13, 2012
    8
    A fun RTS overall. It may not be the best out there and has common issue of being unbalanced, but it's still a bucket of fun. Once you get passed the main issues, the game really becomes a fun simple RTS and is the best RTS for casual players. It doesn't take as much time to learn and do well at as other RTS games, and you don't have to be totally there to win. It's fun, it's simple, it'sA fun RTS overall. It may not be the best out there and has common issue of being unbalanced, but it's still a bucket of fun. Once you get passed the main issues, the game really becomes a fun simple RTS and is the best RTS for casual players. It doesn't take as much time to learn and do well at as other RTS games, and you don't have to be totally there to win. It's fun, it's simple, it's easy to get into, and above all it's well worth the money. I say for anyone who likes RTS games needs to buy Supreme Commander 2, it may not be as strategic as other RTS, but it sure is one of the best out there.… Expand
  39. Dobsy
    Nov 20, 2011
    8
    Although not as good as the first SupCom, SupCom 2 has it's moments. The economy has been dialled back and some of the automation of the units has been handicapped and this is a shame. However the units are fantastic and really open up new tactical opportunities. The graphics may not be as good as the first one, but this just opens it up to a wider range of players. If it's you're anAlthough not as good as the first SupCom, SupCom 2 has it's moments. The economy has been dialled back and some of the automation of the units has been handicapped and this is a shame. However the units are fantastic and really open up new tactical opportunities. The graphics may not be as good as the first one, but this just opens it up to a wider range of players. If it's you're an RTS fan, this is a quality game in it's own right, and you should not be put off my other peoples comparisons to it's predecessor. However if you are a fan of the original, I would advise caution as you may find some of the changes not to your liking.… Expand
  40. sadistiko
    Dec 22, 2011
    8
    Interesting game. I like it to play with friends in multiplayer. DLC also give some interesting units. They say this game isn't so well balanced, but I thing it's ok. Every faction have some advances.
  41. WingedAnomaly
    Nov 23, 2012
    8
    Overall, really quite enjoyable - second to the original SupCom, this is probably my favourite RTS. I do miss the layers of nuanced complexity that lofted the original stories above the competition, but SupCom 2 is still an enjoyable, rock-solid, and gorgeous RTS.
  42. Blackstar0_0
    Jun 24, 2012
    8
    Supreme Commander 2 is a very solid and fun RTS game. While the story may be lacking, the multiplayer and skirmish modes more than make up for that. It is very easy to learn but very hard to master. In battles you will constantly have to adapt to what is happening. A max unit cap of 1000 makes for huge scale battles. Judge this game as a standalone title as it has very little to do withSupreme Commander 2 is a very solid and fun RTS game. While the story may be lacking, the multiplayer and skirmish modes more than make up for that. It is very easy to learn but very hard to master. In battles you will constantly have to adapt to what is happening. A max unit cap of 1000 makes for huge scale battles. Judge this game as a standalone title as it has very little to do with the previous 2 games. Overall this is a great RTS and if you are a fan of the genre I would recommend this game to you.… Expand
  43. anggadaz
    Oct 27, 2015
    8
    The game is strategy that can build base and army. The futuristic concept is great. The graphic is great. The game rule and story is not bad. The game is good for real time strategy game.
  44. SevenThunders
    Jul 7, 2014
    8
    I've owned all of these titles starting with total annihilation. Yes forged alliance is a more complex game, that requires a lot of strategy, but this is still a darn good game and it has a couple of improvements over forged alliance.

    In particular the game doesn't crash or slow to crawl when there are a thousand units on the map. A lot of the strategy has shifted to how you manage    I've owned all of these titles starting with total annihilation. Yes forged alliance is a more complex game, that requires a lot of strategy, but this is still a darn good game and it has a couple of improvements over forged alliance.

    In particular the game doesn't crash or slow to crawl when there are a thousand units on the map. A lot of the strategy has shifted to how you manage your tech. tree, which is different from forged alliance, where an upgrade required a new building.

    After playing it quite a bit, I find I rather like the simplification, and I can still deploy some of my favorite strategies, like turtling or "towering" with long range artillery.

    There are still some flaws though. The balance isn't always right. Some experimentals are not worth building because they are either too weak or too expensive. I am not entirely convinced that the races are balanced either. Nevertheless the game should be enjoyable for any real time strategy fan.    … Expand
  45. Captain_Chaos
    Jun 22, 2016
    8
    2/13/2012: While most argue that SubCom 2 doesn't measure up to it's predecessor and certainly not to Total Annihilation, I try to judge games on their own merits when I can and on it's own, SubCom 2 is a competent RTS. The story is far smaller in scale then the first game, following the stories of three childhood friends on different sides of a three-faction war. It's nothing to write2/13/2012: While most argue that SubCom 2 doesn't measure up to it's predecessor and certainly not to Total Annihilation, I try to judge games on their own merits when I can and on it's own, SubCom 2 is a competent RTS. The story is far smaller in scale then the first game, following the stories of three childhood friends on different sides of a three-faction war. It's nothing to write home about, but it ties the missions together well and features a few good twists. More importantly, the game itself is very fun to play. It harkens back to an age where battles in RTS were more about sheer size and broad strategy instead of tactical rock-paper-scissors with everything being a hard counter to something else. If an RTS can keep me playing instant action modes because the actual gameplay was just that fun, I judge it a good game. I don't generally play against anyone in RTSes, but I'm sure it has value as a competitive game, again, probably not on the level of the first but nonetheless fun to play.… Expand
  46. Giero
    Jan 4, 2023
    8
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  47. BrendanA
    Mar 3, 2010
    7
    As a fan of the original I'm crying on the inside about all the changes they've made though I can understand their reasoning. Overall not a bad game but it can't hold a candle next to the original.
  48. Ell678
    Nov 7, 2010
    7
    Make no mistake, this is not Supreme Commander 1+. The game has changed dramatically since the first installment, and some would argue it is barely recognisable as a continuation of that series. However, it is still a worthwhile game in it's own right.

    First of all, this is an RTS with a lot of units. I cannot emphasise 'a lot'. The unit cap is 500, but with your army nearly constantly    Make no mistake, this is not Supreme Commander 1+. The game has changed dramatically since the first installment, and some would argue it is barely recognisable as a continuation of that series. However, it is still a worthwhile game in it's own right.

    First of all, this is an RTS with a lot of units. I cannot emphasise 'a lot'. The unit cap is 500, but with your army nearly constantly fighting on the front, by the time you build enough units to reach that cap you have pretty much already won. In 4v4 the action begins nearly instantly and never stops - with hundreds of air units, ground units, naval forces and artillery all entering the fray. This is war. One thing to consider is that the most recent patches have changed the economy system to be more like the original - making some of the complaints about the economy null. As I speak, my copy is re-installing to see the difference, but I can still say this is a good game, before or after the change.

    Despite the fact this is a watered down version of the original, this is still enjoyable to all but the most die-hard SupCom fans. Some other reviews have nailed the bad points to this game, so for the sake of keeping it short, I won't reiterate. My advice? If you like an RTS with a lot of action, the biggest depth being what you send at your enemy, where and when, you cannot get much better than this.    … Expand
  49. barry2680
    Feb 6, 2011
    7
    A good RTS, don't be too put off by the negative reviews, it ahs a easy to grasp interface and there are many tactics and strategies to use. A lot more variety than meets the eye, but you need to play a bit before you get a hang of the tactics, hardcore RTS fans may be a bit diappointed as the original was a lot more complicated and intricate, but where the complexity has been reduced theA good RTS, don't be too put off by the negative reviews, it ahs a easy to grasp interface and there are many tactics and strategies to use. A lot more variety than meets the eye, but you need to play a bit before you get a hang of the tactics, hardcore RTS fans may be a bit diappointed as the original was a lot more complicated and intricate, but where the complexity has been reduced the tactics have been sharpened. Its not the best RTS but its not too bad either, would have done a lot better for itself it had launched as a seperate game rather than a sequel.. Campaign is rubbish but multiplayer is okay. Don't get hyped up or put down this game is okay.… Expand
  50. OOa007
    Jan 13, 2020
    7
    Made supreme commander 1 run a little better but made the game as a whole WORSE WHY????
  51. Dco326
    Jul 30, 2022
    7
    Okej je igrica ali mi grafika nije nesto, prica je razbacana svuda zivo i iskreno zanimljiviji mi je i bolji bio prvi deo ovaj mi je i spor iskreno ista prica non stop kad gradis jedinice gradjevine itd.
  52. JoshuaS.
    Mar 3, 2010
    6
    Original was an amazing game. Supcom 2 is very water down 13 units per team instead of 50 some in the original. Economy model was changed and this is what used to set supcom apart love it or hate it, I'd wait till this is under 20$ to pick it up as it feels like 1/2 of the original game.
  53. thequillguy
    Apr 14, 2011
    6
    Engaging enormous engines of war in battle should be more difficult than this. It certainly was in the original - and much loved - supreme commander. The difficulty, for some, is that while the game looks the same, the economy itself is inherently different. http://teachergamer.blogspot.com/2011/04/supreme-commander-2-review.html

    For starters, unlike the original it is difficult to run    Engaging enormous engines of war in battle should be more difficult than this. It certainly was in the original - and much loved - supreme commander. The difficulty, for some, is that while the game looks the same, the economy itself is inherently different. http://teachergamer.blogspot.com/2011/04/supreme-commander-2-review.html

    For starters, unlike the original it is difficult to run short of mass and energy - the two resources needed to power the production of units. This is coupled with the emphasis on upgrading a few core units, rather than producing, and memorising, a plethora of the-same-but-a-bit-different tanks. I still remember now an old friend telling me, during a mutliplayer of medieval total war, that he intended to build his army from as many different, and obscure, troop types as possible, thus as to ensure that I didn't have a clue what I was fighting, or how to counteract it. Such beardiness has been devastated in Supreme Commander 2. Instead what you have is an engaging game that allows the easy(ier) building of experimentals - skyscraper robots capable of destroying an army single-handed. Their names are as ridiculous as their power - King Kriptor, for one!

    Admittedly, if you had dedicated a substantial amount of time to perfecting your build orders to the second, then this game will frustrate you. If you had an inherent knowledge of how the dozens of different basic units counteracted each other, then this game will feel like an imposter. Indeed, the smaller maps (often strangely cramped due to extra scenary) will tone down the epic feeling for those expert at the original. For me, though, it is perfect. Having stalled on the tutorial for several months, I managed to give the game a morning. In those few hours, I had won skirmishes will all the sides (which feel, and look, genuinely different), unlocked all the experimental units and progressed in the campaign. I have tried some multiplayer, and enjoyed the epicness of it all (something served by an incredible soundtrack.) For those on PC, this game has also regularly dropped to £2.50, which is a farcical price. You simply must own this game for that amount of money. Very incisive descriptions of why the game feels 'broken' to the experts of the original exist, but suffice to say that if, like me, you play many different genres, this is a wonderful addition that allows you 20-60mins of intensely satisfying RTS at a time.    … Expand
  54. SoulSurgeon
    Feb 5, 2012
    6
    I really want to like this game. Graphics are beautiful. Easy to play. In all fairness, I have never played online against human opponents. I own Supcom 1...but hardly played it....I did play this game a lot for a while.

    I love Aritllery in this game...when no one I was playing against was using it. Then, it sucked. The Ai is really bad. Depending on the **** level..either the    I really want to like this game. Graphics are beautiful. Easy to play. In all fairness, I have never played online against human opponents. I own Supcom 1...but hardly played it....I did play this game a lot for a while.

    I love Aritllery in this game...when no one I was playing against was using it. Then, it sucked. The Ai is really bad. Depending on the **** level..either the Computer players are really easy, or brutally tough. I found a cheap exploit in the game where you rush tech to Heavy Gunships and then you tear apart the enemy bases. My friends saw me doing this...so when I got bored of it because I knew it was boring and cheap..they started doing it..which is a lot more boring than doing it myself. Tried very hard to learn different ways to play this game...Navy, Air Force (Naval Artillery is FUN!) etc.....but found myself opting out when my friends asked me to play with them.    … Expand
  55. CrusherTM
    Dec 23, 2012
    6
    This game is two different poles of gameplay. One pole is an excellent skirmish mode, the second - the multiplayer, or rather its absence, because there are no servers for a long time (at peak times of the two servers).
  56. aecsuter
    Oct 11, 2022
    6
    I found this game a little better than 1 and forged alliance in its gameplay, graphics and story, but after a little while it starts to get tired.
    There was some evolution in the graphics, with a little more detail in the models, scenarios and shots / explosions, but they are the same units.
    The story of the campaign follows the events of the previous games and despite the good    I found this game a little better than 1 and forged alliance in its gameplay, graphics and story, but after a little while it starts to get tired.
    There was some evolution in the graphics, with a little more detail in the models, scenarios and shots / explosions, but they are the same units.
    The story of the campaign follows the events of the previous games and despite the good characters , much better than being a mute like the previous games, the plot is weak, and doesn't go very far.
    The gameplay had a good improvement in fluidity, but I felt that it missed out on the evolution of new powerful units. But with the new mechanics it became much faster and more fun to do things.
    Overall I think it's worth knowing because it's very cheap on sale, but don't get your hopes up too high.    … Expand
  57. KoshN
    Mar 2, 2010
    5
    Disappointing, take all that was awesome about SupCom and delete it. It may speed up the system, but the U.I. is TA Level, especially after SupCom and then F.A. give me flip out panels, the ability to zoom in so far I can almost see the dudes in the buildings. I could forgive if the map was the whole world, as I was expecting after the initial SupCom hype. But I'm a Fan Boy, so Yeah, Disappointing, take all that was awesome about SupCom and delete it. It may speed up the system, but the U.I. is TA Level, especially after SupCom and then F.A. give me flip out panels, the ability to zoom in so far I can almost see the dudes in the buildings. I could forgive if the map was the whole world, as I was expecting after the initial SupCom hype. But I'm a Fan Boy, so Yeah, I have Pre-Ordered and sit, awaiting the unlock. Dammit.… Expand
  58. paul_a_uk
    Aug 28, 2010
    5
    Was really looking forward to this game when I heard it was being worked on BUT disappointed from day 1.

    The things that made first Sup Com, then Forged Alliance brilliant and challenging have been either taken out or restricted. Itâ
  59. solitas777
    Apr 1, 2011
    5
    This game has a serviceable interface and mediocre game-play. I mistakenly bought it hoping it was going to surpass or equal the original. What made it stand out from other RTS in the previous version is now gone here. This is a poorman's starcraft, why buy this game when SC2 obviously did the same thing but even better? The story is boring and so aren't the missions, it might have to doThis game has a serviceable interface and mediocre game-play. I mistakenly bought it hoping it was going to surpass or equal the original. What made it stand out from other RTS in the previous version is now gone here. This is a poorman's starcraft, why buy this game when SC2 obviously did the same thing but even better? The story is boring and so aren't the missions, it might have to do with the Japanese developer Square Enix, uninteresting characters and uninteresting cinematics. Lacked imagination. To get online to play requires being online all the time. It's annoying and frustrating, especially when I got the game on day 1 and couldn't even connect to the servers. Avoid this game like the plague and don't say I didn't warn you.… Expand
  60. Invader-Nik
    Oct 8, 2013
    5
    This game is not as good as the first two, but it does have some pros and it has some cons.
    Pros:
    >The graphics are less dull than the ones in SC1 and FA >When destroying aircraft over water, the wreckage of the planes sink to the bottom and leave wreckage on the sea floor. Same with boats. In SC1 and FA, too much bullets hitting a plane midair makes it disappear while if they hit the    This game is not as good as the first two, but it does have some pros and it has some cons.
    Pros:
    >The graphics are less dull than the ones in SC1 and FA
    >When destroying aircraft over water, the wreckage of the planes sink to the bottom and leave wreckage on the sea floor. Same with boats. In SC1 and FA, too much bullets hitting a plane midair makes it disappear while if they hit the water they just generally disappear. Boats in FA and SC1 sink straight through the floor (Which I found really annoying).
    Now to the cons.
    >Experimentals are absolutely pathetic. In the original games, building an experimental was something to be celebrated. The Megalith II and Soul Ripper II are absolutely weak compared to their stronger ancestors.
    >Nukes are also pathetic. In the original games, they were game changers, being able to end an entire army with the launching of a bunch of nukes at a base. In SC2, they are generally pea bombs.
    >The maps are far tinier than the originals. For example, Seton's Clutch was a big map in FA and SC1, but has become incredibly tiny in SC2.
    >In the originals, you had the ability to create MASSIVE armies and spam them. In SC2, that has been taken away from you since they lowered the max unit capacity from 1000 to 500.

    In all, SC2 is a good game for beginners, but if it is a challenge you want, get Forged Alliance, that is much more complex and strategic than this.    … Expand
  61. theirrelephants
    Sep 20, 2016
    5
    A very dumbed down sequel. They stripped out features instead of adding them, there's way less unit variety and they did away with proper tech research entirely. Instead they added a childlike simple 'research' resource that you can use to upgrade existing units.

    Just play Supreme Commander: Forged Alliance. This is not a proper sequel and never will be.
  62. orangetayo
    Jan 6, 2013
    5
    A disappointing 5. This game strips away complex strategies of base building and army structuring in favor of simple engagements of math. You generate energy, and harvest mass, in order to build your base and construct units. A third resource, research, generates slowly over time (or quicker with research facilities) and can be used to upgrade the effectiveness of your structures,A disappointing 5. This game strips away complex strategies of base building and army structuring in favor of simple engagements of math. You generate energy, and harvest mass, in order to build your base and construct units. A third resource, research, generates slowly over time (or quicker with research facilities) and can be used to upgrade the effectiveness of your structures, units, or even unlock new ones. In short, Supreme Commander 2 has taken away all of the elements that made Supreme Commander unique, and replaced them with... nothing.

    It would be unfair to review a title that considers itself the continuation of a prior game, without comparing it to it's predecessor. Supreme Commander 2 is a weaker strategy game in almost every aspect compared to the original Supreme Commander. There are fewer units, it demands less strategy and brain power, the maps are incredibly small, and all units feel expendable. The game quickly becomes throwing as much crap at your enemy as you can, as quickly as you can, however you can. Supreme Commander required you to measure your attacking plans and balance your units against theirs.

    Supreme Commander 2 is Supreme Commander Lite. The battles are intense, but short, and lack any feeling of worth. The maps are beautiful, but incredibly tiny. And your arsenal is extremely limited and one dimensional.

    This game is not worth purchasing if you enjoyed the original, what a disappointment.    … Expand
  63. Jantu
    Aug 8, 2013
    5
    This game is disappointing as a 3 installment of the supreme commander series, and from that stand point I wasted some money. However, the game, if viewed as a different game, unconnected from supreme commander, is decent. This game would have done much better if it had a different title, in my opinion
  64. Godspeedthunder
    Feb 25, 2020
    5
    If you have never played supreme commander 1 then this game is probably a 7. If you have then this game is probably a 3. It's a shame that follow up games usually take all of the things that made the first game good out, and usually replace them with poor alternatives. This game on the other hand just took them out and didn't bother replacing them. And the sound effects and graphics don'tIf you have never played supreme commander 1 then this game is probably a 7. If you have then this game is probably a 3. It's a shame that follow up games usually take all of the things that made the first game good out, and usually replace them with poor alternatives. This game on the other hand just took them out and didn't bother replacing them. And the sound effects and graphics don't even seem as good either imo.… Expand
  65. 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.
  66. 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
  67. 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
  68. 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
  69. 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
  70. 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
  71. 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.
  72. 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
  73. 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.
  74. 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
  75. 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
  76. 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
  77. 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
  78. 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
  79. 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
  80. 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
  81. 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
  82. 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
  83. 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.
  84. 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
  85. 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
  86. 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.
  87. 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.
  88. 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
  89. 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.
  90. 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.
  91. 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.
  92. 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
  93. 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
  94. 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.
  95. jsmithbeer
    Apr 2, 2013
    2
    For a sequel, this is a major disappointment. The first game was fantastic. In this sequel they made it playable on consoles. As such it's dumbed down. It's pretty much Command & Conqueror. Something which Supreme Commander 2 shouldn't have gone for. It is the reason why I liked the first game.

    I was really looking forward to this game. I suppose if you just want a C&C style game this    For a sequel, this is a major disappointment. The first game was fantastic. In this sequel they made it playable on consoles. As such it's dumbed down. It's pretty much Command & Conqueror. Something which Supreme Commander 2 shouldn't have gone for. It is the reason why I liked the first game.

    I was really looking forward to this game. I suppose if you just want a C&C style game this will do. But if you want something which is taxing (but not like Total War where you have civilisation planning) the first one with the expansion pack is in another league. 10/10 for the first game, 2/10 for Supreme Commander 2.    … Expand
  96. 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
  97. wraith10
    Jun 24, 2014
    2
    The original game (with or without the expansion pack) is way better than this one. In SC2 there's hardly any difference between factions in terms of strategy and game-play. Graphics is crappier too. The only thing that is better is the research tree.
  98. 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
  99. 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
  100. 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
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 »