Supreme Commander: Forged Alliance

 PC
  • Publisher: THQ
  • Release Date: Nov 6, 2007
User Score
8.9

Generally favorable reviews- based on 289 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 253 out of 289
  2. Mixed: 17 out of 289
  3. Negative: 19 out of 289
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. Geoff
    Apr 9, 2008
    7
    I really love SupCom, for all the reasons posted by other reviewers allready. The UI improvements are the biggest change to me, and nothing could help more in a heated online game fight to control your forces. If you are a single-player gamer, id say definatly pass on this expansion. The AI has some issues where it takes up vast vast amounts of your system resources, and since I wont get I really love SupCom, for all the reasons posted by other reviewers allready. The UI improvements are the biggest change to me, and nothing could help more in a heated online game fight to control your forces. If you are a single-player gamer, id say definatly pass on this expansion. The AI has some issues where it takes up vast vast amounts of your system resources, and since I wont get into my systems specs here i'll just say I built my own super-system for $6000 in December '07. SupCom FA bogs down horribly in single play on any system, where as the original SupCom does not. Seems like some internal software issue they havent worked out yet, according to the forums and my personal programming experience. Multi-player is awesome, and the new units are a whole lot of fun, not to mention a lot of the new balance changes to keep players from spamming lots of engineers to end a large map game. However, if you are running a high-end system like me, you will be disappointed with this game in another way. The graphics have been toned down a lot, and the game no longer supports DX10. Might not seem like a big deal, but after viewing the comparison screen shots & FRAPS videos first hand, on max settings it doesnt hold up to the original SupCom. Check the web, there are some comparison shots. Understandably, it was toned down to match the average game player. Was a bit silly to cater towards a small percentage of the market with higher-end systems. For a single-player gamer, and/or someone with a high-end PC looking for good graphics, id reccomend the original SupCom. The new software makes it is playable, but not very enjoyable. 5/10 for them. For the multi-player strategist, id definatly reccomend it (no-AI players or you'll shoot yourself in the foot online!), because its the best thing since sliced bread, 10/10 for them.… Expand
  2. DominickM.
    Dec 22, 2007
    7
    I like the changes, but continue to dislike the single player campaign. This is one of the few games that I can't complete single player for; not because its difficult, I'm a TA vet so SC is cake, but rather, its so god awfully dull. I'm just not interested enough to care. To put this in perspective, I'm a Hearts of Iron 2 player, and a huge fan of all strategy, both I like the changes, but continue to dislike the single player campaign. This is one of the few games that I can't complete single player for; not because its difficult, I'm a TA vet so SC is cake, but rather, its so god awfully dull. I'm just not interested enough to care. To put this in perspective, I'm a Hearts of Iron 2 player, and a huge fan of all strategy, both turn based and RTS. This is the first series whose single player truly just doesn't grip me. Multiplayer rocks though.… Expand
  3. RadarE33
    May 12, 2011
    5
    A rather sad expansion to a great RTS. FA is to Homeworld 2 as Supreme commander is to the original Homeworld, in that you will spend most of your game time repelling invasions and rebuilding, and not actually playing the bloody game. Only until you build experimentals do you actually stand a chance at pushing forward... and at this point, the campaign missions are over in a hurry.A rather sad expansion to a great RTS. FA is to Homeworld 2 as Supreme commander is to the original Homeworld, in that you will spend most of your game time repelling invasions and rebuilding, and not actually playing the bloody game. Only until you build experimentals do you actually stand a chance at pushing forward... and at this point, the campaign missions are over in a hurry. Speaking of experimentals, there is not one mission where you don't fight an experimental, or have to repel an experimentals early in the game. Resource management is just as stupid to manage in FA as it was in SupCom; however, it is even more so in FA as the enemy loves to rush, and without adequate resources in the first place, you will be unable to defend yourself. Being able to choose a campaign and go through that faction's unique story and struggle has disappeared in favor of a single, similar story (and missions for all three factions) with the option to be different factions during said mission. The only difference in these missions might be one objective. The Dev's have unlocked the tech tree for you (no progressing as you complete the campaign anymore) and have given free rein on how the player approaches the mission. But given the amount of rushing that the A.I. does, the only choice is to spam units of your own, turtle, or build experimentals. Tactics have gone the way of the Dodo, and brute force has taken it's place. In regards to the story, it's worse than the original. Unlike the original, battle plans on how to defeat the enemy are not discussed; it's just "go here, turtle up, steamroll the enemy, and gate off planet". Other story elements are weak and predictable and don't convey much of a story, let alone a unique FA universe. Just "oh no! we're losing! hold the line!" like many other sci-fi stories that have come before FA. The A.I. is horrible, often targeting the same three defenses over and over again. Often, it will take 20 failed raids before the A.I. realizes the strategy isn't working, and will spam new units against another section of defenses until it slowly realizes once again that said strategy isn't working. Because the A.I. is too stupid to target wall sections, all one has to do is build a wall surrounding your base and laugh as they sit there like hungry puppies at a door. Once tech 2 turrets are up, you can snipe said puppies. And don't get me started on performance. The damn game requires modifications to run properly on multi-core systems; otherwise you get massive slow down. Modifications help to alleviate this problem and turn an average game into a good one; however, i must judge the game on what the Dev's did, and not what modders can do.… Expand
  4. TurtleBurger
    Mar 22, 2014
    6
    The game is great, but there are so many issues that ruin it in many ways. First of all, if you have units attacking, they will not move if there's an obstacle in their way and will attack hills, walls, etc. This results in the pointless and frustrating loss of units. Second, The fog of war effect is sort of poor in some regards. For an example, one of my enemies sent a Galactic ColossusThe game is great, but there are so many issues that ruin it in many ways. First of all, if you have units attacking, they will not move if there's an obstacle in their way and will attack hills, walls, etc. This results in the pointless and frustrating loss of units. Second, The fog of war effect is sort of poor in some regards. For an example, one of my enemies sent a Galactic Colossus at me, and started shooting my commander. I had no clue what it was because its laser beam not show up on the screen (it just looked like my commander was dying randomly). Another very annoying thing is the fact that missiles cannot be destroyed with tactical missile defense systems, unless they're "tactical" missiles. The amount of times I've had the AI turtle in their base spamming air transports, missile launchers, and turrets is insane. I swear, the only air vehicles they ever make are air transports. Lastly, your AI "allies" screw you over all the time. I have had them send engineers straight off the bat to take all my extracting points and hydrocarbon plants. They also love spamming engineers, Tech 1 tanks, etc in your base. When the AI puts their units on your factories, they stop producing units. Just imagine it. You're defending your base from a spam of armed air transports, missile launchers, and Tech 1 assault bots. After you kill them, you notice two of your mass extractors were destroyed, and replaced with a Tech 3 mass extractor your ally put there with that engineer that's blocking your factory production, causing you to lose buildings and units. Of course, you can reclaim their units, but it takes forever to reclaim their Tech 3 extractors. Most of the time I get carried away and forget I sent an engineer to destroy the mass extractor they stole, and then come back later to see them rebuilding it. In general, this game is wonderful, but these are crippling issues.… Expand
  5. pawq
    Jan 30, 2021
    7
    A great continuation of SupCom, but somehow I expected to be blown by this game a bit more! I'm still in awe of the seamless zoom transition between micro-control of individual units or buildings and icon-based macro-control of the whole map (and everything in between), but somehow the rest of the gameplay felt like it was lacking a little flair. Though at the same time I'm having troubleA great continuation of SupCom, but somehow I expected to be blown by this game a bit more! I'm still in awe of the seamless zoom transition between micro-control of individual units or buildings and icon-based macro-control of the whole map (and everything in between), but somehow the rest of the gameplay felt like it was lacking a little flair. Though at the same time I'm having trouble pinpointing what exactly I didn't like, apart from all factions being virtually identical in terms of units and base mechanics (with the exception of a few top-tier units that were different for every faction). Overall a very solid RTS, but not one I'd be tremendously excited to go back to.… Expand
  6. Shimmeywill
    Apr 3, 2020
    6
    A solid RTS with good spectacle and decent tactical requirements. A strong title.
  7. aecsuter
    Sep 20, 2022
    6
    As an expansion it's a good departure from the previous one, keeping the same graphics and a few but welcome improvements in gameplay.
    The expansion's story looked a lot more promising than it ended up being and it's super short.
    I recommend getting the game if you liked the first one on a good promotion because it's very cheap.

Awards & Rankings

36
#36 Best PC Game of 2007
30
#30 Most Discussed PC Game of 2007
52
#52 Most Shared PC Game of 2007

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
81

Generally favorable reviews - based on 35 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 31 out of 35
  2. Mixed: 4 out of 35
  3. Negative: 0 out of 35
  1. GameSpot
    85
    What's impressive is the amount of stuff that developer Gas Powered Games has managed to squeeze into the standalone expansion in relatively little time.
    Read full review
  2. AtomicGamer
    84
    Of course, I think THQ and Gas Powered Games probably realized early on that their fan base has been dwindling, so this seems more to be an honest effort. It's damn good, but it's just not quite enough to rekindle interest in their game.
    Read full review
  3. PC Gamer
    92
    For SupCom owners, Forged Alliance is a must-have expansion. [Holiday 2007, p.70]
See all critic reviews »