Supreme Commander is out
Discussion
Yup, After winning against a "supreme commander" in a 1 vs 1 skermish. Then 4 of them in a 4 vs 4 I played my first on-line game last night, and it all went pear shaped 
I got my a
e kicked in about 30 mins 
Gonna have to keep practicing
Really love this game, because the maps are open you can try a range of tactics and dummies to pull your opponents out of shape
or at least that's what my opponent did to me
I got my a
e kicked in about 30 mins Gonna have to keep practicing
Really love this game, because the maps are open you can try a range of tactics and dummies to pull your opponents out of shape
or at least that's what my opponent did to me
Taking a small reprieve at the moment to play the C&C3 demo
My online experiences all come down to the same thing: getting my ar$e handed to me on a plate. I've got some very trick Cybran tactics worked out but I just can't work quickly enough (possibly due to having kids vying for my attention) to make them effective. I might eventually come up against a comparably skilled opponent but right now I feel like such a noob.
My online experiences all come down to the same thing: getting my ar$e handed to me on a plate. I've got some very trick Cybran tactics worked out but I just can't work quickly enough (possibly due to having kids vying for my attention) to make them effective. I might eventually come up against a comparably skilled opponent but right now I feel like such a noob.
Spot the understatement! I think SC is going to be the RTS game of choice for serious gamers for some time to come.
The auto ranking ladder in the gpg.net tool is great but makes it so hard to create a balanced game!
I played the beta for a while too (when I could get near my computer) and met some very good players who "went easy on me" so I could learn to fight back instead of being wiped out in the first 10 minutes. The first major lesson was just forget the pretty zoomed in graphics and get as big a view as possible and work from there.
One major gripe - wall sections count against your unit cap which can become a real pain if you are T1 spamming your opponent.
The auto ranking ladder in the gpg.net tool is great but makes it so hard to create a balanced game!
I played the beta for a while too (when I could get near my computer) and met some very good players who "went easy on me" so I could learn to fight back instead of being wiped out in the first 10 minutes. The first major lesson was just forget the pretty zoomed in graphics and get as big a view as possible and work from there.
One major gripe - wall sections count against your unit cap which can become a real pain if you are T1 spamming your opponent.
I was expecting great things from this game - but found it totally tedious. It's more an exercise in resource management and logistics than battling!
Yes, the experimental craft are great, and the commander has a great explosion when you destroy him, but it simply doesn't have the fun factor. A multiplayer battle on a large map can take upwards of two hours - and my team mate had time to leave the game to go and have his tea while I set up defences on his base and starting steamroller-ing the enemy! (Admittedly two 'normal' AI types. Should have know better having played them in SP mode).
I found the AI very poorly programmed - Easy and normal are both no challenge, while hard is totally relentless and butchered me every time (especially since I didn't know all the shortcuts) - where's the progression there?
A few friends installed it, even people who were TA addicts (I never played it) said it was a bit crap. I had more patience than most and gave it a few days of playing, then finally saw the light an uninstalled it.
However, I will say that if you enjoy the classic C&C type of experience, (which is has been usurped by far better RTS gameplay now I think) where you build up a massive army, send it over, chip a bit of defence away, your army gets destroyed, build up another army, send it over, and so on and so on then you will most likely enjoy this game.
On the plus side, the graphics are nice (if you turn it up to maximum pretty), but in any real sense the maps are so large you have to zoom out in order to control your advancing armies, so you can't actually appreciate them. I didn't find the game so demanding on your system either (except load times. Jesus wept.)
Another plus, the multiplayer works extremely well, with not much lag, and the game browser is pretty good. The netcode seems to be of a decent quality and run fairly efficiently too.
All in all a deeply unsatisfactory experience. I'd give it less than 5 out of 10.
Yes, the experimental craft are great, and the commander has a great explosion when you destroy him, but it simply doesn't have the fun factor. A multiplayer battle on a large map can take upwards of two hours - and my team mate had time to leave the game to go and have his tea while I set up defences on his base and starting steamroller-ing the enemy! (Admittedly two 'normal' AI types. Should have know better having played them in SP mode).
I found the AI very poorly programmed - Easy and normal are both no challenge, while hard is totally relentless and butchered me every time (especially since I didn't know all the shortcuts) - where's the progression there?
A few friends installed it, even people who were TA addicts (I never played it) said it was a bit crap. I had more patience than most and gave it a few days of playing, then finally saw the light an uninstalled it.
However, I will say that if you enjoy the classic C&C type of experience, (which is has been usurped by far better RTS gameplay now I think) where you build up a massive army, send it over, chip a bit of defence away, your army gets destroyed, build up another army, send it over, and so on and so on then you will most likely enjoy this game.
On the plus side, the graphics are nice (if you turn it up to maximum pretty), but in any real sense the maps are so large you have to zoom out in order to control your advancing armies, so you can't actually appreciate them. I didn't find the game so demanding on your system either (except load times. Jesus wept.)
Another plus, the multiplayer works extremely well, with not much lag, and the game browser is pretty good. The netcode seems to be of a decent quality and run fairly efficiently too.
All in all a deeply unsatisfactory experience. I'd give it less than 5 out of 10.
Edited by Tonsko on Monday 5th March 10:57
Doing the try before you buy option. Vmware + Win2k and it tells me to make sure the system meets minimum requirements. I'll build an XP machine to see if that's the case. Same story with CnC3 (Demo). Oddly enough, the error that spits out on a 2k machine says it's making Win98 calls to the kernel (doesn't bode well)... hence needs XP & Vista's emulation.
ThePassenger said:
Doing the try before you buy option. Vmware + Win2k and it tells me to make sure the system meets minimum requirements. I'll build an XP machine to see if that's the case. Same story with CnC3 (Demo). Oddly enough, the error that spits out on a 2k machine says it's making Win98 calls to the kernel (doesn't bode well)... hence needs XP & Vista's emulation.
Find that hard to believe...
its working fine on my Dual Core vista Ultimate x64 build and def using both cores.
And it uses 2 screens well also.
Think the game is great, not a huge advance gameplay wise on TA but its good to see it back in another guise.
i was expecting great things from this game,but ended selling it on ebay 24 hours later.
Personally i found the graphics extremely poor even on high setings. also the graphics were very monotone.
most of the time you spend zoomed out so units appear as a series of tiny dots which as mentioned previously is unsatisfying.
gameplay i found monotonous.
definitely try the demo first.
Personally i found the graphics extremely poor even on high setings. also the graphics were very monotone.
most of the time you spend zoomed out so units appear as a series of tiny dots which as mentioned previously is unsatisfying.
gameplay i found monotonous.
definitely try the demo first.
rich1231 said:
ThePassenger said:
Doing the try before you buy option. Vmware + Win2k and it tells me to make sure the system meets minimum requirements. I'll build an XP machine to see if that's the case. Same story with CnC3 (Demo). Oddly enough, the error that spits out on a 2k machine says it's making Win98 calls to the kernel (doesn't bode well)... hence needs XP & Vista's emulation.
Find that hard to believe...
its working fine on my Dual Core vista Ultimate x64 build and def using both cores.
And it uses 2 screens well also.
Think the game is great, not a huge advance gameplay wise on TA but its good to see it back in another guise.
Truth stranger than fiction Rich. CnC3 spits out an invalid kernel entry point being used. I googled the whole error message and that led to Microsoft's TechNet page detailing the exact error and the reasons behind it (summed up as Win98 kernel call in Win2k SP4), the only thing that can generate this message, I belive, from googling like crazy, poking around tech sites and such... is a Win98 kernel function being used in 2k. Makes me wonder if the programers put that in to make damn sure the thing won't fire up in 2k... Vista (x86 & x64 via WOW) and XP being able to return the correct value and the game cranking up it's real deal (other wise, it wouldn't be using dual cores... 98 wasn't SMP aware AFIC).
Supreme Commander however doesn't even give you that. It tells you to bugger off and make sure you meet minimum specs.
Tonsko said:
Grannies and suck eggs and all that, I presume you're using the Win2K ability to 'Run as Win98'? Or have I got the wrong end of the stick?
2K Doesn't have the emulation ability of XP.
Interestingly enough, WINE is now playing the Demo with Supreme Commander hot on it's heels
Looks like the SupCom issue is lack of PixelShader 2.0, but can be overidden by a command line option. Tonsko said:
Righ, so I did get the wrong end of the stick. You wanted XP emulation, not 98
Kinda. The game (CnC3) is making a Win98 call as it starts up, so yes you need the ability to emulate Win98 to play it. Hence Vista & XP only.
I'm guessing Supreme Commander has the same requirements.
Off topic, but I always did wonder how Microsoft was going to get the gamers to upgrade. Just found out
<small> Just upgraded... to wine 0.9.32... Jesus. Dawn of War is getting higher frame rates than when in Windows, as is HL2.</small>
Edited by ThePassenger on Wednesday 7th March 13:05
Tonsko said:
2K can emulate 98 can't it? You have to manually go in and change a registry key somewhere, or run an executable with a certain switch, but after doing so there's an option to 'run as Win98'. I'm sure.
However, as you 've got a VM, it's prolly as easy to set an XP one up.
However, as you 've got a VM, it's prolly as easy to set an XP one up.
I'm not 100% sure it can. The MS peice on the error message didn't suggest any way of making Win2k do 98 specific stuff. But yeah, I'll just use an XP disk + blank VM drive
Of course with wine 'nearly there' on getting SupCom working I might just wait for the next release or two and save the hassle 
Gassing Station | Video Games | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff