Interview: Chris Taylor on Supreme Commander 2, publisher Square Enix and RTS on consoles
Showcasing his team's upcoming RTS, Gas Powered Games CEO Chris Taylor sat down with us at E3 2009 to discuss Supreme Commander 2, console RTS releases and the concepts that didn't work in the original title. Prior to our lengthy chat, Taylor demoed the planned 2010 RTS on hardware we were told was a two year old PC with a new video card.
In our short demo we had the opportunity to see advancements made to the game's engine, including new shader and texture technology that Gas Powered Games created in-house. According to Taylor, a major goal for the team at Gas Powered was to create a high performance game, that will "run on 2, 3, 4 maybe 5 year old hardware." While Taylor admits the original title asked for a lot of processing power -- especially in later areas of the game -- the sequel will look better while actually using less polygons than units in the first Supreme Commander.
Even in its Alpha build state, Supreme Commander 2 was an impressive title to watch. But how has the series evolved and how will Gas Powered Games improve the franchise? Check after the break for our complete interview Gas Powered CEO, Chris Taylor.

They actually were expanding into the western market and they found us and we were quite thrilled. We were like, "It's a great pleasure to enter into a relationship with them." So, we were quite excited.
"I felt bad the developer who did the Xbox 360 version just did not have the time or the resources. It was a hair on fire mission." |
Well, one of the things that we took as a queue from Square Enix was the way they embrace character and story. We were all into that, so that was easy. When we asked them, "How should we develop our game to work with their philosophy?" They said, "Don't do that because we want you to do what you do. You make games for the Western market and we're interested in making games for the Western market." So, if we changed... we would be missing the point.
Which was terrific because that meant we could do what we loved to do, make great RTS games -- with the notion that the game was probably going to be well received in North America, in Europe. Countries like Germany -- because we already have a lot of momentum in those markets with our games and if we try to change them in anyway we'd be moving away from the goal. Which is to produce games for those markets.
Going back to Supreme Commander (the original, published by THQ), how would you measure that game's level of success?
Some people measure a game's success based on the units sold. The more accurate measure is its revenue. "Did it make money or not?" Of course it was -- I would argue -- quite successful. But we believe the success in this industry comes from continuing to evolve your games and to make them better and to build a momentum with your customer. Keep delivering more and more, building on things that they love. So, I think looking ahead to the future is where the excitement is right now for Supreme Commander.

Supreme Commander was very well received on PC. On the Xbox 360 it didn't fare as well. What is it about the Xbox 360 version of Supreme Commander 2 that you're going to change to bring it up to the same quality bar that you're setting for the PC version of the game?
Good question. One of the things, I felt bad the developer who did the Xbox 360 version (Hellbent Games) just did not have the time or the resources. It was a hair on fire mission.
Now, we're taking our time with the Xbox 360 version, focusing on all the things that worked and things that didn't work. Getting it right. We're doing it in-house and giving it a lot more time and a lot more resources. So, we're pretty bullish that it's going to be a really nice evolution in console RTS and I would be very surprised if it didn't do as well as the PC version.
"The nerd in me died a little bit ... they were cool concepts that didn't quite work." |
There were some things -- and when someone asked me the same I said "The nerd in me died a little bit" on a couple of the things. Because they were cool concepts that didn't quite work. 'Coordinated Attack' didn't quite work, a little too much for this kind of game. We've taken the economy and we've improved it so that players can't get snookered early on. Those who aren't quite familiar with the game end up "mortgaging their future," so to speak and finding themselves in a bad place so they can't recover from it in time to enjoy the game. So, we're making that a lot easier and it's a big change that I think will really help the game.
The technology, the hardware penetration, is going to go a long way to allow the game to perform on a wider range of hardware. But, we liked a lot of our innovations like the dual screen, we liked our big maps and big crazy over-the-top battles with lots of units. The massive energy model. All of those things, keeping them and continuing to expand in many ways onto what we love.
The three tech levels was an area that we said, "Let's go to our tech tree upgrade system." We think that's a better way of approaching. You know, it gets you kind of the same thing but in a way better style. Like, you don't burn through three different levels of tanks, you take one tank through those evolutions. So that, we think is a big improvement. And it will play better on the Xbox 360, frankly.
And the engine scales well on the Xbox 360? You're showing the PC version here at E3.














Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Snowblind @ Jun 9th 2009 7:12AM
Not sure how I feel about this being on consoles.. Halo Wars worked because it was completely designed from the ground up to be a console game.
SwiftRanger @ Jun 9th 2009 7:34AM
Hey Xav, the link in this article to the second part doesn't seem to work (it's something with the date in the link, still on 6/8 for part two, it has to be this: http://www.joystiq.com/2009/06/09/interview-chris-taylor-on-supreme-commander-2-part-two/ )
Premature ejaculation man @ Jun 9th 2009 7:41AM
Thanks. Me being the goldfish I am, continued to click the broken link...
-.-
Xav de Matos @ Jun 9th 2009 12:18PM
Thanks. This article was supposed to hit on an earlier date and was moved... and we didn't fix that hyperlink.
Premature ejaculation man @ Jun 9th 2009 7:46AM
I'm interested. I didn't play the first one, but the sound of mass unit battles is very nice =p
One thing I hate though in all games is mechs (ok, with the exclusion of Metal Gear ;), they just don't make any sense to me. Why go to the effort of building a robot which mimics bipedal form with all the motorisation when you can build something that hovers with lasers or has wheels...
Dark Virus @ Jun 9th 2009 7:59AM
Chris has sold out...
I hate the new economy system. I don't believe this is a 2 year old PC, it's more like a 2 year old SUPER COMPUTER.
He just took all the beautiful things i loved in the original Supreme Commander and GUTTED them.
Xiphias @ Jun 9th 2009 9:13AM
I also think the economy being changed is a bad move. In the original Such a huge element of the game was build orders and how you developed your economy. That was a large part of success in the game, and added another level to just the combat decisions.
Also I don't like the idea of using a tech tree... I liked having to build the next tier factory to build engineers to build the buildings etc from that tech level...
I really hope it hasn't been too dumbed down from SupCom 1...
Einhanderkiller @ Jun 9th 2009 11:01AM
I think it's too early to say it's been dumbed down (aside from the economy, that is). We haven't even seen real gameplay yet.
Dummy00001 @ Jun 9th 2009 3:05PM
"Even in its Alpha build state, Supreme Commander 2 was an impressive title to watch. But how has the series evolved and how will Gas Powered Games improve the franchise?"
My take on major improvement they should do: drop all the crap, copy-past all from Total Annihilation and do NOT screw up with graphics. It's RTS - graphics shouldn't be in a way of gameplay.
Ian @ Jun 9th 2009 4:19PM
there you go thats a game that needs a sequel. total annihilation was an AWESOME game and was fucking awesome (needed to be said twice). that game just kicked ass.
Ian @ Jun 9th 2009 4:21PM
ahh i see there were a few... well it still needs to be brought back!
Randy D @ Jun 9th 2009 3:08PM
I'm really excited for this game, and I believe him when he said he's running on 2 year old hardware. All he's saying is he's running a core 2-based CPU, probably something like a Q6600. As for the video card thing, honesltly, how much is a good modern video card now adays? 200? 250 bucks?
Thing is, supreme commander still looks awesome, the battles are still epic. If they can maintain the same level of visual fidelity with a more distincitve art style and optimise the performance of the engine then there's no reason this game can't scale to older hardware.
I liked what he said about the game being the most fun when a lot of things were blowing up, and the battles were epic and trying to get people to that point. My favorite battle from Sup Com were 5 or 6 fronts strong (two air battles, a HUGE sea battle, land units crossing in and some experimentals hitting on the sides...ahh memories).
About the only thing that has me worried is the economy thing. The economy was brutally hard to master in SupCom, and I feel like that ballancing act (do I produce or do I expand?) was what gave the game a huge portion of it's depth. Still though it was really hard to learn -- my friends and I used to regularly play with the 2X resource MOD on just to speed the game up, getting us to the epic battles quicker, without removing too much of the depth. So who knows how the reballanced ecnomy will turn out.
Upgrading units is a good idea -- it simplifies the game flow and removes redundant units (a tech 1 and tech 2 tank are the same thing, but the tech 2 one is more powerful, with greater range and armor. Why shouldn't that be an upgrade?) So now it's a simple matter of "This is your tank, this is your artillary, upgrade them as you go". It also keeps those units viable. It does remove some strategies however -- for instance sending a bunch of tech 1 interceptors over a base in the late game to keep the AA busy while a tech 3 experimental bomber flys in. If you don't have a really cheap flyer then you can't easily do this type of thing.
Anyway I'm rambling here, but I can't wait for this game!
Einhanderkiller @ Jun 9th 2009 7:25PM
HD 4870 and GTX 260, which are pretty high-end, are like $150. The GTX 275 can be found for around $230.
jnyjb @ Jun 9th 2009 5:34PM
I would kill for this to be on PS3. I had the original on my PC but it barely ran on that. I love Supreme Commander and Total Annihilation and it would be a dream come true if any made their way to the PS3...
*sigh*