Supreme Commander

a review of Supreme Commander
a videogame developed by chris taylor
and published by thq
for Microsoft Windows and the microsoft xbox 360
text by Carl Bohlin

3 stars

Bottom line: Supreme Commander is “is to the original warcraft what a modern bullet-hell shooter is to the first gradius.”

Supreme Commander takes the RTS genre to its logical short-term conclusion. Want to build 100 amphibious tanks? Okay, just queue that stuff up and you’ll have them in a few minutes. Want to give them all orders at once? Sure, absolutely no problem. There is no upper limit to the amount of units you can have selected at any one time. Want to tell all of your warships with legs that maybe they should head over there for a while, even though they’re scattered all over the (motherhecking insanely gigantic) map? You just zoom out enough that you can see the entire map, which is terribly easy and rewarding, select every unit on the field, click on the warship icon, and there you go!

User empowerment through enhancements to the interface, though, is what this game is about: Taking away all the dumb limitations that hem the strategic thinking and innovation of the player in. The game is like comparing the tabbed, spell-checking, greasemonkey’d, fasterfox’d, adblocked Firefox to the rest of the genre’s Internet Explorer 3.0 for Palm and it’s incredible how easy, fun and rewarding it is to use the tools they’ve given you.

Supreme Commander is a game that really, truly wants to make the people who play RTS games ask themselves just what in the hell it is that they’ve been putting up with for all these years. The standard user interface for this particular genre is still trying to respect the limitations set down by games with a lower resolution than my cellphone. It is like intentionally making paper an inch thick because we used to write on stone tablets — which is kind of puzzling, and makes you wonder if these people actually understand what it they’re making. If they ever play their own creations, or just keep making them as some kind of weird tribute to the games that they liked when they were kids. Take Starcraft for one: The player can only select a tiny amount of units at once, he can only give them a single order, and if he wants to be competitive against even the dumbest AI, he will need to constantly micromanage them. The base-building is slow, inefficient, and needs constant looking after, even though it would be terrible easy to give the player more of an indirect, hands-off building tool. Think something more along the lines of planning the base, and then creating some engineers to do it for you, without needing constant input from you. Instead you are forced to both plan the base out in your mind, give tiny, stupid orders to your builders, and just generally micromanage everything to a terrible degree.

Clearly, this was something that shouldn’t, couldn’t last. Not in such a technophilic environment as game design.

Enter Gas-Powered Games, and let none who experience their creation tolerate anything less than what they have created from now on. And yet, I am afraid that it will be remembered as more of a Dragon Quarter than a Goldeneye. Something that could have shown the entire genre it was spawned from how to save itself: To become something that it should always have wanted to become, yet was ignored and cast away because not enough people bought it, or really got what it was trying to do. This game deserves better than that — but then again, so did Dragon Quarter, and, well, that didn’t mean nothing at all.

I could talk about the individual units, the way there are a million avenues of attack, the way everything plays off of everything else, and how you need to constantly balance your needs with your offensive wants — but that’s not really important here. What’s great about the game isn’t the balance, the units or how you actually play it. I mean, it IS really great, and it’s actually incredibly well done, but none of those things are as innovative and powerful as what the UI achieves. The interface is an amazing example of punctuated equilibrium in game design, how the evolution of a genre can stand still for a long time and then shoot forward at a huge speed with the release of a single game, just because of a few designers reinventing the steering wheel, so to speak. That’s exactly what the RTS genre needed at this point in time, and if their ideas and thoughts are heeded, we are going to see some really interesting things happen to it in the near future, as soon as the lessons of this pretty insanely great piece have been absorbed.

–Carl Bohlin


9 Responses to Supreme Commander

  1. i’m still interested in playing this sometime. i used to play a lot of starcraft, and most of my complaints about that game revolved around the interface.

    write more articles like this, carl.

  2. While _Supreme Commander_ may at first appear to be highly original, it was really inspired by another, much older, game: _Total Annihilation_, released in 1997 by Cavedog Entertainment (which was soon to be absorbed by Gas-Powered Games). This game contained most of Supreme Commander’s “innovations”, including mass selection and orders, queuing multiple units to be built, and more.

    You may find the wikipedia article to be of interest:

    Great site!

  3. Well yes, it’s totally a spiritual sequel to Total Annihilation, but I feel that a lot of the features added in SupCom were enough to make it graduate from something pretty neat to something entirely revolutionary.

    Like the zoom! The zoom is great!

    Or hell, the ETAs they give you for orders.

    Mainly what I’m trying to get at is that I just love me the hell out of both this game and Total Annihilation, and that the latter should be played with Daft Punk’s Discovery on repeat.

  4. supreme commander is about as far away from innovation as you can get. its a half-hearted attempt at modernizing total annihilation. instead, you guys should be praising company of heroes. relic is clearly the only company interested in pushing RTS forward at this point in time.

  5. Oh really? How so? I mean, I loved me the hell out of both TA and SupCom, and I think I consider the latter better by quite a large margin. It seems like almost all of the things that are being done here are things that the original WISHED it could do, but couldn’t, due to insufficient hardware. I mean, I’m not claiming some kind of direct link between the quality of a game and the quality of the hardware it was designed to run on, but I think it would be a bit silly not to at least believe in an indirect link between the two.

  6. Somes: I love Relic and they’ve done a lot for the RTS genre but saying Company of Heros is their opus seems a bit ignorant. CoH is basically a polished WWII mod for Warhammer 30k. Also, I think Relic did much more for RTS with Homeworld than they did with Warhammer or CoH.

    That being said, I don’t think Supcom did “revolutionary” things with their UI. No limit on unit selection? Try Rise of Nations. Want super fancy zoom? Try Homeworld. Want queue control for unit builing? Try Homeworld 2. Supcom did very nice things with queue control for both base development and offensive/defensive resource control, but that’s really the extent of their revolution.

  7. uh I never said that CoH was their crowning achievement. Its just their most polished effort in terms of gameplay. I agree that homeworld is even more impressive, for its excellent use of story and artistic beauty.

  8. The person who did this review clearly never played Dawn of War.

    I never played SoupCom, but I certainly won’t need to in order to review it. Here were my impressions from watching the first trailer for it last year: it’s the Madden ’05 for RTSs, or the RTS for Madden ’05 players. Couldn’t care less.

    I guess carl will get around to playing Company of Heroes in another couple of years.

  9. “And yet, I am afraid that it will be remembered as more of a Dragon Quarter than a Goldeneye. Something that could have shown the entire genre it was spawned from how to save itself: To become something that it should always have wanted to become, yet was ignored and cast away because not enough people bought it, or really got what it was trying to do.”

    I don’t know what a Dragon Quarter is (though I am Googling as we speak), but this bit in particular reminds me of another game that tried to fix the RTS, and succeeded, and got ignored by everybody but the critics for its troubles: Sacrifice, a game that I cannot stop talking about (because even now, seven years or whatever later, nobody has fricking obsoleted it yet). Sacrifice took the opposite tack from Supreme Commander: Instead of bringing actual S into the RTS, it focused on a new T, “tactics”. RTS games are really about tactics to a great extent, as the review points out; and the nature of the tactical actions they foster tends to be really nitpicky and unpleasant for… well, grown-ups outside Korea I guess. In Sacrifice, you are just running around and doing stuff that feels totally natural, bringing in another creature, casting an attack spell, running off to pick up a soul, just being a wizard and matching your actions perfectly to the scale at which they are significant. It’s a great, great game. Review it. Play it. Love it. Then cry because nobody makes games like this.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *