No doubt.  The general rule is the folks that played supcom1:FA don't exactly love/like supcom2.  If all you want is a SP game that you can get 20-30 hours out of, you won't be disappointed at < $10. I really doubt that many folks will play this and decide this is the game they want to stick with for the next few years, though. 

it's consolized, ie bad. it's worse than FA, anyway.i recommend picking up the first one. now that advancements in processor technology has made it playable, heh.

eww even though i got it for 3.75 its just to dumbed down the tech tree was nice idea but doesn't make up for what is lost from sup com 1.

need to find my FA cd key and try it out on my 6 core cpu...

If you have an i5 with a gf-220 video card then Sup-com1/FA is the way to go. IMO 100% better than Sup-com 2.

Sup-com2 is way too dumbed down IMO. The loss of scale, detail, and pathetic campaign. It seems they made the game for folks that cant handle sup-com 1. I stopped playing because i just couldnt handle how bad it was IMO. Now that i have a box that can handle sup-com1/FA i am really enjoying it.

Dont take our words for it. Try it, and see for yourselves. It may not be our cup of tea, but it may be yours.

It has definitely lost a lot of the style and a lot of the fantastic scale that people loved in TA and Supreme Commander. That said, it is easily worth its bargain bin pricing. It is a perfectly average game, which is something that people forget simply because it was the sequel to a truly fantastic game. I've paid much more for games I have enjoyed much less.

I'm simply waiting for Elemental: War of Magic to go on sale.

-.-

Just got it on steam, haven't played it yet

the main problem i have is what they did to the resource system they just got rid of that and have to make you pay for the whole thing none of the upkeep stuff to built things anymore which really makes stuff annoying and hard.

this game simply put supcom2 is just worse then supcom1 though it doesn't slow down after 1 hour....

Well, a friend of mine purchased this on Steam during it's Sale and gifted me a copy.  I've played enough of it to now have a very educated opinion, far more so than my hour or two with it previously.

It runs much better than the previous entries, however it comes at cost; it's simply not as impressive visually.  From the Unit designs to the overall level of detail, it simply feels a generation behind it's previous entries and doesn't compete with other RTS games of today.  This also comes into play with the maps; they're far smaller.  Playing on Finn's Revenge, one of my favourite maps from the original, I was surprised just how small the map really was.  This, unfortunately, plays into the strategic element of the game: it all but removes it.
Supreme Commander was all about strategy as opposed to tactics: in fact, I believe the original pitch for Supreme Commander contained the line "strategic focus through virtue of scale".  The maps were so big you needed radar towers, refueling stations and ferrying Transports to keep a well thought out assault together and as a result your focus was on the bigger picture, tossing around 20 or 30 units instead of micro-managing smaller number of units as per other RTS games.  None of this applies now.  You still have those options, however simply building Land Factories and pumping as many of the cheapest Tanks you can get works flawlessly.  If the enemy builds air, simply build mobile AA guns.  The tactic of churning enough Gunships to survive the enemies defences to snipe out their Commander also works just as well if not better.

In playing multiplayer, the games tended to end within 15 to 20 minutes, long before any of the bigger options were available due to the time release function of the research tree; the longer you play, the more options you have.  Again, the use of strategy didn't really apply; the initial build options are very limited, and yet the researched units aren't better enough to warrant thinking of them; you're better with general upgrades for health, armour and damage and making hundreds of smaller tanks than skipping those upgrades to get 'better' units.

Ultimately, SupCom 2 doesn't do enough at either end of the spectrum.  There isn't enough options for Micro-management similar to Starcraft II and not enough options for strategic play similar to the original SupCom.  There isn't enough flexibility in Build Orders to warrant tactical decisions and not enough scale to warrant strategic decisions.  It just doesn't have enough "thinking" moments.  I hope that SupCom 2 sells well enough for a SupCom 3, and that SupCom 3 resembles SupCom 1 moreso than SupCom 2; I'd like some strategy in my strategy game.

I had SupCom2 uninstalled for the last couple months. I just never played it. The other day I found out about the DLC, and it was on sale for $2.50 so I decided to go for it. The DLC and the last couple patchs since I last played it help the game a lot, although the first is still without a doubt a better game.

Personally I don't mind the new art style all that much. No, it's not as impressive as the first, but if it allows me to huge battles on giant maps without too much of a hit on performance, I'm OK with that. Unfortunetly, you can't really have huge battles on huge maps any more, so the performance boost is pretty much worthless. As others have mentioned, the maps are so much smaller than before. I loved Seton's Clutch before, now tiny. The giant 81 km x 81 km maps that literally took some units half an hour to cross are gone (granted, those slowed your computer down like none other, but damn they were fun).

There's a lot of new experimentals that in theory are pretty cool, but because of the way SupCom2 treats experimentals they're rather forgetable. The DLC adds some very interesting ones, but I'll get to that later. They just lack the sense of accomplishment awe that they had before. It used to be that five Fatboys could probably get you through all but the most hardened defenses and you'd probably do a lot of damage to their base. Now, five Fatboys might get to fire on the opponents outer defenses, but they would have to be playing terribly if you got any farther than that.

And there's the fact that they're a much smaller investment. You used to have to dedicate a large portion of your economy to them, have lots of engineers assist, and they took a very long time. An unassisted Tech 3 engineer took something like 2 and a half hours to build a Mavor (you could certainly find ways to make that faster, but still). In SupCom2, I'm not even sure that there are any that take over 6 minutes. The same can be said about nukes.

As I said earlier, the patchs and DLC help a bit. Some previous patch changed the economy to be a bit more like SupCom1's. It still isn't flow-based, but you can now queue up construction without having the resources, which is so much better than before. The DLC adds some new maps, one of which is almost big enough to be reministent of SupCom1. It also adds some new experimentals, most significant of which is the return of the Monkeylord. Unlike the ****ed-up remakes of the Fatboy and Megalith, it is actually the Monkeylord. It looks almost unchanged from SupCom1. It's also probably one of the strongest, and the closest you can get to a SC1-style experimental.

The Cybrans also get this thing that redirects incoming nukes and sends them back at the launcher, which is a lot of fun. The UEF get an experimental shield generator, a naval destroyer (rather useless IMO), and mobile, deployable artillery (which I haven't used much yet because most maps are small enough that regular artillery works just fine and on the bigger ones my allies always nuke everyone before I can use it). The Aeon (I refuse to call them the Illuminate) get some new toys too, but I'm not really sure what they are because I never play as them because the bad puns annoy me too much.

Overall, SupCom2 would, by this point, be considered a solid game IF it wasn't Supreme Commander. It is not worth the full $50 I paid for it when it came out, but its full price in now something like $15, which would make it worth it, IMO. As Zehdon said, I hope that SupCom3 is more similar to SupCom1 than SupCom2, because 2 is not what Supreme Commander should be like.