lfnetwork.com mark read register faq members calendar

Thread: Force Commander vs GB which is better?
Thread Tools Display Modes
Post a new thread. Add a reply to this thread. Indicate all threads in this forum as read. Subscribe to this forum. RSS feed: this forum RSS feed: all forums
Old 12-05-2001, 10:11 AM   #1
dookiebot
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Force Commander vs GB which is better?

I prefer GB.
  you may: quote & reply,
Old 12-05-2001, 09:17 PM   #2
Darth_Rommel
argh
 
Darth_Rommel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Somewhere in Canada
Posts: 4,838
Same here.


#9[/size]
Darth_Rommel is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 12-06-2001, 12:17 PM   #3
Pedro The Hutt
Jedi Knight
 
Pedro The Hutt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Indu San
Posts: 3,044
hmm.. I played FoCom, and the BG demo.. I felt like I was playing "AoE2: Star Wars TC"
Pedro The Hutt is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 12-06-2001, 12:58 PM   #4
Hannibal
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally posted by Darth_Rommel
Same here.
You were and it was still better than Force comm.
  you may: quote & reply,
Old 12-09-2001, 12:30 PM   #5
Jedi_Prophecy
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Eire
Posts: 14
I've never played FC but i like GB, even if it is AofE 2


You must feel the Force around you
Jedi_Prophecy is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 12-14-2001, 10:55 AM   #6
CaptainRAVE
Jedi Rave
 
CaptainRAVE's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 4,271
I prefer GB ....Force Commander sucks


The force will betray you to me.
CaptainRAVE is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 12-19-2001, 08:45 PM   #7
SlowbieOne
 
SlowbieOne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Cloud City, Bespin
Posts: 702
I must say I liked both, however both fell short. I though FC had more potential tho. Too bad.
SlowbieOne is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 12-24-2001, 07:48 AM   #8
Brownboot
 
Brownboot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Home...
Posts: 2
Question Hmmmm.....

First of all I would just like to say Hi... Hi...

Anyway, I think that FoCom was a great game. It looks way better than Gb looks. I really fell like they kinda just did a really bad job on the graphics for Gb(1 point FC). However, only being able to play two different army types sucked, so Gb is better there, even thought all the armies are almost identical. In AoE the groups had real apparent strengths and weaknesses (1 point Gb). Scaling is really screwed in Gb, too, but we will count that in the graphics... Also, multiplayer for FC is really not fun. The lag gets tremendous when you try to build a medium sized army. Also the 80 units thing is goofy. Better researching and technology makes the game way funner. (2 points Gb) Multiplayer for the AoE engine is really stremlined, and the simple graphics make it run easy...

All points added I would have to say that Gb is really better than FC, even though I think I liked FC better in the SIngle Player sense...


Brownboot is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 12-28-2001, 10:39 AM   #9
RogueJedi86
 
RogueJedi86's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: A cozy BT-7 Thunderclap
Posts: 524
Current Game: Star Wars: The Old Republic
10 year veteran! 
Force Commander was better. It was in 3D!!!!!!! And you got only units that were in the movies(in general like for the empire, except for the 2 artillaries and that's about it). Each race has units unique to their side,not just a generic trooper,mech destroyer,and fast fighter. Like Rebs has infiltrators(to counter the AT-AT's and really piss off an imperial player) and heavy troopers,while the Imps have PT's,Dewbacks,and scout bikes. And the units could do far much more than in battlegrounds.
Like stormies could actually get off them(cuz hey they're just bikes you can get off like in the movies). . In GB,the units have been cemented and strapped to them seats....so no recreating the speeder chase in GB unless they make a new hero unit thing for Luke and Leia on Speeder Bikes.Oh and dewbacks actually shot laser blasts,not just some crappy flamethrowers(if humans can sport blaster why not big dewbacks?) And Speeders actually have tow cables(I mean you seem them shoot at AT-AT armor,the lasers has no effect). They also has secondary fuction. So a trooper that's efficently microed can take out 2 or more stormies before he dies(there's one set for stun). Battlegrounds has no secondary fuction (which makes no sense). I had only one gripe about Force Commander....the AT-ST didn't use it's concussion grenade launcher(on the right side of its head) as a secondary weapon....not complaining,the ST was really powerful.....just one minor gripe. Oh and the artilllery addition made the game practically a battle over who's artillery had greater range. That's my 25 cents.


"Sir,we are beginning our search for these rumored 'underwater villages'.They will not stay hidden for long". -Battle Droid Commander OOM-9!
RogueJedi86 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 12-28-2001, 09:42 PM   #10
RogueJedi86
 
RogueJedi86's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: A cozy BT-7 Thunderclap
Posts: 524
Current Game: Star Wars: The Old Republic
10 year veteran! 
Uh....come on guys am I right? garindan,ain't I right? Any other loyal Force Commander fans? It actually had an original storyline for once(unlike most games,like Rebellion and Battlegrounds)!


"Sir,we are beginning our search for these rumored 'underwater villages'.They will not stay hidden for long". -Battle Droid Commander OOM-9!
RogueJedi86 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 12-30-2001, 04:33 AM   #11
Antilles
 
Antilles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Taipei, Taiwan
Posts: 73
I agree with RogueJedi...FC is much cooler...the Y-wing will fly pass and bomb(not stop and shoot green ball)...Speeder will take ATAT down with cable(not shoot)...and the size!!!...u can pack 5 ATAT in one "troop-carry" shuttle!...

What lucas should do, are:
1.Make FC expanded set: Enhance the engine, add new unit(like Jedi or Bounty hunter), add new species(like Wookie or Gungan or...)
2.make FC 2 : Battle of Naboo: Add Royal Naboo and TF....with SW-story line!...would it be cool watch AAT become 3D?

That will be better.....


Money is what I care and want and need and desire and dream and ...........never had...
Antilles is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 12-30-2001, 01:27 PM   #12
Emperor Dan
 
Emperor Dan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 40
Dude, FC is in 3D, that takes care of most of your problems. A 2D game can't have dismounting units. Who cares anyway?

GBG is a MUCH better game overall. The multiplayer rules, and that's ALL that really matters. Single player is okay, but once you've beaten it (FC was EASY!!) there's no point in playing the game. FC really lacked in the multiplayer department. It also was really buggy.

Now, GBG isn't exactly Star Wars realistic, but it's FUN. FUN matters.
Emperor Dan is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 01-02-2002, 12:39 PM   #13
Chiles4
 
Chiles4's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: a galaxy far, far away
Posts: 226
I think it's almost pointless to compare a 3D combat game to a 2D game. They're just too different. People who are more 2D RTS-oriented will prefer GB, people who don't play 2D RTSes will prefer FC.

I personally don't play 2D RTSes because of the grapical quality. I would hope that the gameplay of GB would be better than FC but I thought the "in-your-face" 3D combat of FC was awesome. So really, I'll never be able to make a comparison between the two.
Chiles4 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 01-26-2002, 03:38 PM   #14
Syren Mere
 
Syren Mere's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Ireland
Posts: 7
Galactic Battlegrounds

Syren Mere is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-08-2002, 09:44 AM   #15
Rogue15
Reconnaissance Specialist
 
Rogue15's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 18,383
Current Game: The Old Republic
Roleplayer 10 year veteran! 
Force Commander.

It felt WAAAAAAAAAAAAAY more real. Like how the buildings and troopers wouldn't 'just appear' they'd come down from landing crafts. You can give names to troopers, take them through the campaigns. Also the vehicles and troops earned ranks, and got better at firing. I also liked the few upgrades that gave the units better firepower, armor, and speed. And Force Commander is PERFECT for screenshots. just look at my sig, i'm getting revenge on the people who cheated to get past Escape from Fest in Rogue Squadron. mwahahahhaa Force Commander is REALLY fun to play since it's 3d. I mean, it's strengths are more than its weaknesses. I like skirmish the most. It's really hard playing a 4player empire ffa. fun, but HARD (game lasts really long too). The units movements are perfect too. Also, the units have secondary functions, and I like hearing my troopers reporting to me when i click on them, and also being able to put at-aas down around the enemy's base and wipe out their landing crafts. Force Commander is very fun, but like one of u said, you cannot really compare force commander and galactic battlegrounds since they both have about the same amount of strengths and weaknesses


Battle is a pure form of expression. It is heart and discipline, reduced to movement and motion. In battle, the words are swept away, giving way to actions-- mercy, sacrifice, anger, fear. These are pure moments of expression.
Rogue15 is online now   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-07-2002, 12:59 PM   #16
EKaterin61
 
EKaterin61's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: United Kindom
Posts: 8
I really like Force Commander, The graphics are great

Only thing is I think Battle Grounds has the edge here and is significantly better to control and play. While Focom is harder. I would like to see I Force Commander II built on a NEW Engine and improved game play all around. Maybe even an Expansion Pack. I notice there was a section for senarios but no senarios exist or seem to have been made for the game for additional Missions which could have expanded the game further.

BG is better though, but NOT because of the graphics. I think Focom's graphics which much better. Perhaps if they actually (Lucas Arts) merged the two games to gether in terms of Game Playability and graphics like in Focom they would get an all round better strategy game.
EKaterin61 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-07-2002, 01:11 PM   #17
Rogue15
Reconnaissance Specialist
 
Rogue15's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 18,383
Current Game: The Old Republic
Roleplayer 10 year veteran! 
ya, i agree. I'd like a episode I force commander game, except based on the trade federation...it'd be pretty cool to play as a neimoidian and 'activate ze droids'


Battle is a pure form of expression. It is heart and discipline, reduced to movement and motion. In battle, the words are swept away, giving way to actions-- mercy, sacrifice, anger, fear. These are pure moments of expression.
Rogue15 is online now   you may: quote & reply,
Post a new thread. Add a reply to this thread. Indicate all threads in this forum as read. Subscribe to this forum. RSS feed: this forum RSS feed: all forums
Go Back   LucasForums > Network > Star Wars Classic Gaming > 2. Star Wars Gaming > Star Wars RTS Central > Force Commander vs GB which is better?

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:00 PM.

LFNetwork, LLC ©2002-2011 - All rights reserved.
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.