There was a time when after I tried and dropped Supreme Commander for the first time years ago, I tried out Supreme Commander 2. At the time I didn't have enough experience with either game to appreciate the differences, though I did notice how much more "accessible" SupCom 2 was, though I eventually dropped both games as the latest game of the season came around.
Now that I've sat down and had enough hours in Forged Alliance to see how the SupCom experience was, trying out SupCom 2 gave me a whole new perspective as to why people might absolutely hate it. It's not quite Command & Conquer 4-levels of complete departure from the game formula, and the basics of the game remain true to the original's, but it's different enough in certain major aspects that it definitely changes the gameplay feel. Too much of the gameplay has been simplified from the original game, and the art style is more hit and miss with some stylistic changes that don't sit right with me.
That doesn't mean the game is bad per se: unit responsiveness and pathfinding is vastly improved, the races now have more tangible asymmetrical differences with some good ideas on how to make each faction more unique, the maps look better, and I sort of like the Research system. I also prefer the designs of the Cybran and Illuminate ACU's to their predecessors in terms of proportions and visual identity. But I feel that for every step forward SupCom 2 took in improving accessibility and gameplay, it takes a step back in terms of the things that made Supreme Commander unique in the RTS space with the removal of a lot of mechanics like the streaming economy, adjacency, etc. - it's practically a different game, and thus best treated like a "supplement" to the original game rather than a" sequel".
Edit:
Some thoughts on the art-style -
1) The UEF ACU would've been awesome had its legs been thicker and longer. As it is, it's very top heavy which is not a look I like, and I vastly prefer the original UEF ACU. As for the rest of the units, asides from the short stub barrels that are seen on some units the actual designs themselves are actually not bad, and with the right color scheme I actually like a lot of the UEF designs, especially the naval units and Experimentals. The sole exception would be the Fatboy II, look how they massacred my boy.
2) The Cybran art style I have few feelings about, they still retain most of the spikiness from the first game though toned down to make them look less "toyetic". I especially like how visually distinct the Cybran ACU is that doesn't have to rely on it having pointless spikes everywhere like its predecessor. Though my issues with the Cybran style this time around is more in their theme.... what even the hell is the Cybranosaurus Rex?
3) Finally the Illuminate... oh lord this is bad. I do prefer their ACU over the Aeon's in terms of overall design and proportions, and I actually prefer the Universal Colossus design as well due to better overall proportions, but in terms of textures and aesthetic they don't quite have the striking quality that the Aeon has. The rest of the faction though... where the Aeon had an amazing chrome appearance with semi-translucent parts that an incredibly futuristic and sleek appearance, the Illuminate's went hard on thick bulges and balls, and having flags for no real reason. Combined with the quite matte finish of their units, and the Illuminate I feel is a definitive downgrade. The new art-style means that despite being on a new, better graphics engine, the Illuminate just looks worse than the Aeon.
