GallantDragon wrote:
Both of you, calm your tits.
FAF is the community saying 'we're not just going to whine, we're going to revitalize this awesome, massively underrated gem of a game'. As far as I'm concerned this makes FAF freaking AWESOME.
Both of you, calm your tits.
FAF is the community saying 'we're not just going to whine, we're going to revitalize this awesome, massively underrated gem of a game'. As far as I'm concerned this makes FAF freaking AWESOME.
I've already payed my tributes to FAF. But it makes me angry that there is only 1 community for such a great game
However, I have noticed an increase in users, for instance there were 600 yesterday, let's try to get that up to 1000. tmrkz wrote:
Flynn I really don't get your point here :
We all know SupCom was not a success in terms of sales compared to C&C or Starcraft , less appealing overall, harder, hard-demanding hardware, less advertised and so on.
BUT
If we go back to 2007 we had success games like Warhammer 40'000 Dark Crusade , World in Conflict , C&C 3 !!!
Where are them NOW ???? What is their multi scene offering ??? THEY ARE DEAD !!! Of course they' ll have some diehard fans but nothing more.
6 years IS actually old. VERY OLD. The only exceptions I remember here for RTS are Starcraft and CoH which truly are the most succesfull brands in rts maybe
I find quite obvious that FA is no more supported , and even if our game is often sold at few bucks it doesn't sell a lot. It was not that famous years ago , why people should "bother" buying it now. People want fresh games. People doenst' like RTS like years ago. MOBAS captured the attention of hundreds of thousands of players ... Kids play fps , shooters , sims ...
we are a niche .. live with it
lately we are having 600 users online in the european evenings... I would be already happy if we could keep those numbers , but they can increase further with the advent of Galactic War
AH... last example .... Sins of a solar empire Rebellion .... out in 2012 .... a good & wellknown rts brand ..... well you have three four matches going on a the same time...no more... so why do we complain....we are fine this way
The point I want to address in your post is that you say 6 years is old. Maybe for some games, not for SupCom. As we all know, SupCom was built WAY ahead of it's time. Such was the forward vision of Chris Taylor, that, only now are we seeing rigs capable of exploiting SupCom to it's true potential. Don't forget, a lot of us are playing SupCom on out of date/low spec computers, so when those of us have the money to spend on a new rig it will give SupCom a new lease of life to us. For example, my laptop struggles to run the game on most bigger maps and it will be at least two years before I can invest in a new system. That is going to be like a rebirth for SupCom for me, two years from now.
Your other point about people wanting new games. I do not understand that mentality. If it wasn't for SupCom TA should still be my "go to" RTS. I want a game that can last infinitely; that is what Chris Taylor's RTS games provide. The depth of SupCom's surface has only just been scratched. On top of that I still don't consider 2007 to be "years ago".
Don't forget, SupCom is on Steam as well which pretty much gurantees more players. If they are too dumb to understand SupCom then we don't want they anyway.
Statistics: Posted by Flynn — 22 Jan 2013, 11:43
]]>
