LucasForums (
-   Star Wars RTS Central (
-   -   Force Commander vs GB which is better? (

dookiebot 12-05-2001 10:11 AM

Force Commander vs GB which is better?
I prefer GB.

Darth_Rommel 12-05-2001 09:17 PM

Same here.

Pedro The Hutt 12-06-2001 12:17 PM

hmm.. I played FoCom, and the BG demo.. I felt like I was playing "AoE2: Star Wars TC"

Hannibal 12-06-2001 12:58 PM


Originally posted by Darth_Rommel
Same here.
You were and it was still better than Force comm.:)

Jedi_Prophecy 12-09-2001 12:30 PM

I've never played FC but i like GB, even if it is AofE 2

CaptainRAVE 12-14-2001 10:55 AM

I prefer GB :)....Force Commander sucks

SlowbieOne 12-19-2001 08:45 PM

I must say I liked both, however both fell short. I though FC had more potential tho. Too bad.:(

Brownboot 12-24-2001 07:48 AM

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...

RogueJedi86 12-28-2001 10:39 AM

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 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.

RogueJedi86 12-28-2001 09:42 PM

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)!

Antilles 12-30-2001 04:33 AM

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.....

Emperor Dan 12-30-2001 01:27 PM

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.

Chiles4 01-02-2002 12:39 PM

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. :atat:

Syren Mere 01-26-2002 03:38 PM

Galactic Battlegrounds :)

Rogue15 03-08-2002 09:44 AM

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. :D 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

EKaterin61 04-07-2002 12:59 PM

:atat: 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.

Rogue15 04-07-2002 01:11 PM

ya, i agree. :) I'd like a episode I force commander game, except based on the trade'd be pretty cool to play as a neimoidian and 'activate ze droids' :bdroid2: :bdroid2: :bdroid2: :bdroid2: :bdroid2: :bdroid2:

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:53 AM.

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LFNetwork, LLC ©2002-2015 - All rights reserved.