Reviews - Supreme Commander 2 Game

Nov 23rd, 2010 4 people agree 0 people don't

Could've been better. Storyline was'nt too great and graphics really took away from that awesome feeling that was in the 1st one and its expansion pack.

Mar 1st, 2011 4 people agree 1 person doesn't

Doesn't deserve the name of Supreme Commander, Would of been fine if it didn't have to live up to a great game like FA.

Dec 8th, 2010 3 people agree 1 person doesn't

its a good game but to small scale to actual being a supreme commander game

Nov 11th, 2012 1 person agrees 0 people don't

This game was such a letdown to me, but It is in my power to fix it, check out the Revamp mod Moddb.com

Oct 7th, 2012 1 person agrees 0 people don't

Not as Strategic... Or as interesting... Or as fun... But still has cool graphics, ok unit ideas (some pathetic unit names though - Airnomo ,wilfindja...Et cetera), and if assembled better i like the idea of researched, but overall it is a toned down version in all but graphics, and so should be called SUPCOM JR, and not be the sequel that is SUPCOM 2. (They should make a supcom 3 to become a REAL supcom successor).

Mar 4th, 2011 3 people agree 2 people don't

New players: don't even bother with vanilla version. Immediately download Revamp, and then play campaign to figure out how things work. You might even like the game, but torrent it first. If you like it buy it, if not, delete.

Coming from FA and SupCom1: don't even run the game until you've downloaded Revamp. Economy crashes are almost unavoidable if you play like you would in the original.

In case you didn't notice earlier, I'm really not advocating the vanilla version. The economy will crash, the units seem worse compared to the original supcom, and the gameplay, while similar, is also pretty terrible. Upgrade and tech system is awful. Don't buy unless you like RTS games.

Mar 27th, 2012 0 people agree 0 people don't

even not a supreme commander game its still good but the name must be changed

Jun 25th, 2011 1 person agrees 1 person doesn't

At first I was not really impressed at all; The campaign was boring and straight forward without any kind of strategic choices at all, the balance was horrible with com-rush as the only option in MP. During comp-stomp the AI was not fine tuned and was way overbuilding certain units etc.

In one year this game has been patch more than 20 times and are now a very good and solid game; The AI is probably the most advanced ever in a RTS, the map pool (incl DLC) are is great, but the best of all is that it runs great on a couple of years old laptop.

The game got pcgamers "best coop game 2010"-award and I maybe do not really agree, but the game need some kind of reward because it has evolved into a very descent and action packed RTS.

I think this game can been seen as a typical example of a game that was not finished before the release and then the gameplay tuning came too late to keep the player interest.

Feb 27th, 2011 2 people agree 2 people don't

realy awesome game, buy it!

Feb 9th, 2011 4 people agree 4 people don't

A terrible scaled down and downright boring version of the game.

Horrible and cheesy voice acting, and a campaign which doesnt feel any epic or "important" at all.