| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
CombatWombat
Joined: 22 Feb 2007
Posts: 11
|
 Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 9:50 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Going to have to side with the learning curve as being the primary issue.
Many other games have struggled with tiny player bases for the same reasons.
Tribes. (1)
The entire flight-sim genre (now basically defunct)
The average idiot wants a game that makes him feel special: Linear consolized crap that is impossible to lose at. (and costs the developer $20 to put out).
Bioshock and Fallout3 are going to be ruined by designing for the lowest common denominator. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
The_Green_B4stard
Joined: 22 Feb 2007
Posts: 112
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 9:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
when i play against just my friends - i never crash
when i play ranked games - i never crash
when i play offline - i never crash
when i play custom games with random people - i often crash. Its nothing to do with supcom, its down to retards who insist on playing even through their sub-par connection or early bronze age PC. Freeze at start of map - a common incidence in custom games vs faceless players. Random lag during a game with clear evidence of who it is on ren_shownetworkstats - a common occurence.
The sync system is like playing football at school and the teacher makes the disabled kid play on your team. Yeah its fun for him and fun for you and fun for the other team but it would be even more fun if the spacker didnt always pick the ball up and run with it causing the game to stop (random lag) or insist on playing in goal and then having a spaz-attack complete with downs wailing unless he gets to play in that position (freeze on startup)
i think thats half the problem, people try custom to get their skills up before ranked, have a hard time getting a game without all the above and then just stick the game on their shelf and never play it again. The sync system is really good, its just 1 person with weak hardware will ruin the entire experience
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mendeh1
Joined: 22 Apr 2007
Posts: 17
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 9:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CombatWombat wrote: | Going to have to side with the learning curve as being the primary issue.
Many other games have struggled with tiny player bases for the same reasons.
Tribes. (1)
The entire flight-sim genre (now basically defunct)
The average idiot wants a game that makes him feel special: Linear consolized crap that is impossible to lose at. (and costs the developer $20 to put out).
Bioshock and Fallout3 are going to be ruined by designing for the lowest common denominator. |
after a bunch of people in here have stated they like supcom because they cant micro units, i would hardly claim this game is for the gifted gamers out there. yes, it requires a lot to figure out how to build an economy but there is nothing mentally taxing about the rest of the game. micromanaging units is what seperates a good player from a bad one. a bad player could copy any strategy but if they dont have the micro to back it up they wont win. when it comes to units in supcom, it is all about macro and even a bowling ball could do that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
brent_w
Joined: 23 Feb 2007
Posts: 1370
Location: Columbus, Ohio, US
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 10:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| kashik wrote: | | brent_w wrote: | Seriously though, the Dual core stuff is BS,
I've been playing a single core P4 with HT ever since I got the game, and I run just fine online.
1v1, 3 way, or 2v2 all work, as long as it doesnt get into billions of units
and i've played a few 5 ways, and even a few smooth 3v3s.
So take your dual core bs and stick it where the sun don't shine ... |
First of all, SupCom is an epic game. As an epic game many people like to play big games (huge still isn't viable yet for most people on GPGNet yet). Single Core is fine for smaller games, but Dual Core+ is absolutely essential for bigger games.
Billions of units? Do you mean 500 or 750 unit cap?
The truth is, using a sinlge core you are going to kill the game speed in anything 3v3 and above with a unit cap above 500. So really epic games are not viable on a single core machine and what people say about dual core and quad core machines is definitely not BS.
So what if you can tolerate a slower game speed, doesn't change the fact that this game hates Single Core. |
I don't get a lower gamespeed ... at the most hectic parts of an average 2v2 I "might" go down to -1 ... if its REALLY hectic ...
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mendeh1
Joined: 22 Apr 2007
Posts: 17
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 10:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The_Green_B4stard wrote: | when i play against just my friends - i never crash
when i play ranked games - i never crash
when i play offline - i never crash
when i play custom games with random people - i often crash. Its nothing to do with supcom, its down to retards who insist on playing even through their sub-par connection or early bronze age PC. Freeze at start of map - a common incidence in custom games vs faceless players. Random lag during a game with clear evidence of who it is on ren_shownetworkstats - a common occurence.
The sync system is like playing football at school and the teacher makes the disabled kid play on your team. Yeah its fun for him and fun for you and fun for the other team but it would be even more fun if the spacker didnt always pick the ball up and run with it causing the game to stop (random lag) or insist on playing in goal and then having a spaz-attack complete with downs wailing unless he gets to play in that position (freeze on startup)
i think thats half the problem, people try custom to get their skills up before ranked, have a hard time getting a game without all the above and then just stick the game on their shelf and never play it again. The sync system is really good, its just 1 person with weak hardware will ruin the entire experience |
i got my computer in february. it has no problems playing this game at 1680x1050 on high settings. i crash playing against AI offline and playing custom. please explain your "theory" to me again. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Antisocial
Joined: 28 Feb 2007
Posts: 2
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 10:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Have to agree completely here.
SupCom is like TA in the fact that its seems destined to be a "cult" game. Much Like TA was, and as 215 eluded to, a decent base of players dedicated long term.
Great post, and pretty much right on in all aspects. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The_Green_B4stard
Joined: 22 Feb 2007
Posts: 112
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 10:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mendeh1 wrote: |
i got my computer in february. it has no problems playing this game at 1680x1050 on high settings. i crash playing against AI offline and playing custom. please explain your "theory" to me again. |
Its no theory, its just my personal experience. I have never crashed outside of a custom game vs random people.
Thats at least 1-2 games a day vs friends only , my ranked games you can see below (about a week out of date, gg gpg) and a couple of random customs a night which sometimes are successful and sometimes arent.
_________________
Last edited by The_Green_B4stard on Mon Apr 23, 2007 10:10 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mendeh1
Joined: 22 Apr 2007
Posts: 17
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 10:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The_Green_B4stard wrote: | | mendeh1 wrote: |
i got my computer in february. it has no problems playing this game at 1680x1050 on high settings. i crash playing against AI offline and playing custom. please explain your "theory" to me again. |
Its no theory, its just my personal experience. I have never crashed outside of a custom game vs random people. |
i just think that writing this off as a hardware problem on the users end when a lot of people have the same issues doesnt make much sense. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Betajab552
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 91
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 10:09 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| CombatWombat wrote: |
The average idiot wants a game that makes him feel special: Linear consolized crap that is impossible to lose at. (and costs the developer $20 to put out).
|
Haha that was what i was trying to say, but with a bit more politically correct approach. 
But i think it's a shame that it has to be like that. In the world of RTS-games SupCom is the best game for long that try to break the trend to make more and more stupid games. There are no room for people that wants to go hardcore. Except in SupCom, and i think the existance of hardcore players frightens "average idiots". Yes there will always be hardcore players in any game, but the more it takes to get to the top the less people will try.
Sure i liked to play WoW, C&C Generals or C&C Red Alert 2 (before supcom arrived), but i never felt the competition. Just some multiplayer fun in order to have something funnier to do than watch TV. Actually, the most competitive game of those three is WoW, and the difficulty there was to convince players that they didn't had to leave or that they didn't suck when something went wrong. I became good at that, i saw possibilities when others saw defeat
Alot of ppl talk about StarCraft in this thread. I just want to add to the discussion that i think it's more popular due to easier learning curve. The difference in Starcraft between good and bad players is mainly the amount of practice to get a high APM, Actions per minute. Not really about strategy but more like training of reflexes and fast thinking. Sure SupCom is also about that but not nearly as much.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The_Green_B4stard
Joined: 22 Feb 2007
Posts: 112
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 10:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mendeh1 wrote: | | The_Green_B4stard wrote: | | mendeh1 wrote: |
i got my computer in february. it has no problems playing this game at 1680x1050 on high settings. i crash playing against AI offline and playing custom. please explain your "theory" to me again. |
Its no theory, its just my personal experience. I have never crashed outside of a custom game vs random people. |
i just think that writing this off as a hardware problem on the users end when a lot of people have the same issues doesnt make much sense. |
alright fine, i'll write it off as an issue with the sync system.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FunkyKong
Joined: 25 Feb 2007
Posts: 965
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 10:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CombatWombat wrote: | Going to have to side with the learning curve as being the primary issue.
Many other games have struggled with tiny player bases for the same reasons.
Tribes. (1) |
I'm going to put this bluntly, since it's how I feel:
I'd rather play a good game with a small playerbase, than a decent or poor game with a large playerbase.
My computer isn't "teh leet SupCom stomper"; it's single core, it's three years old; I have an AMD Athlon 3000+ and an AGP Geforce 7600 GS. Hardware isn't an issue that's severely limiting this game, though optimizations don't hurt.
The game wasn't tough for me to learn; in fact it's pretty straightforward. There are tons of strategies to develop and some still undiscovered of course, but that will always change in any RTS. The basics are simple: balance your economy with your war effort. Play through the campaign and you have a decent starting point for online play; it's not great, but at least you have a grasp of the units and buildings. Visit the forums and read a few threads; there's some great info from resource management to starting builds to unit discussion; the "Strategy of the Week" has a **** ton of excellent info for new players on all factions.
I was one of the folks who played Tribes 2. I played it up until it died, and small community or not, I enjoyed every game of it. Would it have been better if the gameplay was sacrificed to let in more people? I don't think so, and that's my opinion here. I'm all for improving Supreme Commander, but not if it means dumbing it down or reducing it's scope. The game has been out for a few months; give it some time before proclaiming the end of times.
_________________
Everything You Ever Wanted To Know About UEF ACU Tactical Nukes |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
greatmighty
Joined: 02 Mar 2007
Posts: 150
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 10:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I just want to throw in that I think it feels like a a game of dots because the icons pop up WAY earlier than they should, you never get to see large battles because as soon as you get to a good camera distance it's nothing but dots.
_________________
Shoot First
Aim Later |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Watch this topic for replies
|
You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You can edit your posts in this forum
You can delete your posts in this forum
You can vote in polls in this forum
|
© 2002-2007 Gas Powered Games Corp. All Rights Reserved. Gas Powered Games is the exclusive trademark of Gas Powered Games Corp.
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
