Hi all :D
I was wandering we have lack of games nowadays so i sawSTALKER:Call Of Pripyatand i never played anySTALKERgame..so can i just go for this third one without the others part ?
THX
STALKER:Call Of Pripyat
This topic is locked from further discussion.
Lack of games? You can't be serious. Anyways yes you can jump right in and play the third one, but I also recomened S.T.A.L.K.E.R. SoC.millerlight89
Agree 100% . You should play SoC first , BUT there is no real story that connects the games , so there is no big difference . Shadow of Chernobyl give very much info on zone , so it may be more interesting to play CoP , but thats just my opinion.
Aint the new one the best stalker game so far?dakan45That doesn't mean he should not go and play the other two. They are all good games.
[QUOTE="millerlight89"][QUOTE="dakan45"]Aint the new one the best stalker game so far?dakan45That doesn't mean he should not go and play the other two. They are all good games. I am asking wherever its better than soc? Soc was bettter than clear sky in my opinion! Yes it is the best S.T.A.L.K.E.R.
[QUOTE="millerlight89"][QUOTE="dakan45"]Aint the new one the best stalker game so far?dakan45That doesn't mean he should not go and play the other two. They are all good games. I am asking wherever its better than soc? Soc was bettter than clear sky in my opinion!
As much as i played i like it a lot more than CS , but i wouldnt say its better than SoC (but SoC has a place in my heart so im bias :S ).
You can play it without playing the others, altho you should consider playing SoC at some point.
To be honest, you might like CoP a whole lot more if you did not play SoC first tho, it is an amazing game, it is filled with wonder and exploration, but to me it did not impact as hard, because I allready knew what I was in for, because I had playied the others.
Its mechanics are far more ironed out, its pacing is pretty much consistant, you might miss some of the meaning of the game, therefore I think you should indeed play SoC at some point to grasp the understanding of what led to this happening.
Ah well, the intro does explain it, but there is a few questions raised when you play this and SoC (not as much Clear sky)
The shooting mechanics are aweasome too... buying/finding a very special gun, and kitting it out the way you want gives such a nice feeling, like it is YOUR gun, it belongs only to you, and you rely on it with your life ^^.
It really is a solid game, but I will warn you that it is wise to set the cooler on your gpu at a high rpm, since it will get quite hot on higher visuals (CoP made my gpu reach about 60 degrees on little over "Medium" with enhanced visuals, where borderlands maxed only crept up to about 50.
thx all for the advise ... may be i just wait for Metro they say these two games close :DmacroniaNot really, metro will be an easy linear game with alot focus on story and shooting. Stalker is more about survival and exploration. There will be times in stalker that you run out of ammo or your weapons jam and you have very little health, on the other hand metro 2033 wil be more like cod with more story and character!
i personaly have stalker soc and clear sky , both games are terrible imo , combat is boring and repetative , graphics are way outdated ... the rpg part of the game is quite horrible also ...
i dont know why this game is being praised so much , but imo it definetly does not deserve that 7.5-8 rating ...
Trust me, its by no means a bad game, but I have never played a popular game with more bugs. I mean there are bugs EVERYWHEREi personaly have stalker soc and clear sky , both games are terrible imo , combat is boring and repetative , graphics are way outdated ... the rpg part of the game is quite horrible also ...
i dont know why this game is being praised so much , but imo it definetly does not deserve that 7.5-8 rating ...
Farkeman
1. Weird AI glitches - check
2. Reload a game and an enemy stands right in front of you and shoots you in the head even before you get a chance to aim - check
3. Unintuitive mission design - check
4. Long segments of travel between missions - check
So why is this a good game? The effort they put into this really shows. The atmosphere is absolutely brilliant. I am totally willing to forgive all the bugs to play this game.
But don't let anyone tell you that this is a polished game or that good FPS/RPG. Its a weird FPS with some inventory - there is no RPG.
[QUOTE="dakan45"]There will be times in stalker that you run out of ammo or your weapons jam and you have very little healthchandu83
Why the hell is that a good thing? I don't mean to pick on you man, but you say some weird stuff.
Personally i dont think its a good thing, i would give anything to make stalker i bit more dumb down like borderlands and fallout 3. But anyway i am simply pointing out the major diffirence between Metro 2033 and stalker. That stalker is a hardcore survival game with many stabs to the player like bleeding, radiation, jam and other survival elements that the player will have to face. But metro 2033 is more like a linear generic shooter will health regenartion!
I thought that pc gamers liked the fact that that stalker is kinda, "survival" and not just another simple fps with health regenartion and accurate weapons. So now its not a good thing that stalker is like that? If thats so, its fine with me we can change the gameplay and make it more simplistic like bioshock. Infact i dont mind at all, such change will polish the gameplay a bit!
But wouldnt that kill the gameplay? Like it happen with deus ex which was amazing and deus ex invisible war?
[QUOTE="chandu83"][QUOTE="dakan45"]There will be times in stalker that you run out of ammo or your weapons jam and you have very little healthdakan45
Why the hell is that a good thing? I don't mean to pick on you man, but you say some weird stuff.
Personally i dont think its a good thing, i would give anything to make stalker i bit more dumb down like borderlands and fallout 3. But anyway i am simply pointing out the major diffirence between Metro 2033 and stalker. That stalker is a hardcore survival game with many stabs to the player like bleeding, radiation, jam and other survival elements that the player will have to face. But metro 2033 is more like a linear generic shooter will health regenartion!
I thought that pc gamers liked the fact that that stalker is kinda, "survival" and not just another simple fps with health regenartion and accurate weapons. So now its not a good thing that stalker is like that? If thats so, its fine with me we can change the gameplay and make it more simplistic like bioshock. Infact i dont mind at all, such change will polish the gameplay a bit!
But wouldnt that kill the gameplay? Like it happen with deus ex which was amazing and deus ex invisible war?
You really can't speak for all PC gamers here.
First off, I don't want the game tobe more simplistic. I just don't want the weird AI bugs.
I loved the vita chambers in Bioshock. It makes the game more fun for me. Like I said, after a long day at work, I come back home and I want to play a game for about 30 minutes, not try and prove my gamer skill. Bioshock is perfect for me that way.
I liked STALKER for entirely different reasons. Its a brilliant game that is marred with some very annoying glitches.
You know you can upgrade weapons and armour ? And wear artifacts to give rad, pysh,fire protection...? From the get go...?
I'm still in the begiining and I have a Vintar sniper rifle, a Spaz shotgun and a tricked out AK...all upgraded fully. ( My armor is also fully upgraded )
If anything the game is too easy...( except for those mercs...now that was fun)
You know you can upgrade weapons and armour ? And wear artifacts to give rad, pysh,fire protection...?OgreBYay, but the affects are to instant. What i mean is, sure you got a bulletproof armor but you are still bleeding like before, you just dont take as much damage. Sure the armor a offers more fire protection but the armor b is better in every way. Basicly what i am saying is that i would prefer if radioactivity was done like fallout 3 i think it would have been better. Not instant effects that go away with a rad away syringe and a medkit. Mainly it kinda annoys me that i have to press buttons after my encounter and heal, bandage and clear the radioenergy. It results into spending too much supplies. I thik it will be cooler if the anti radiation syringe either had either a lasting effect for some minutes or if you could use it before you go into radiation in order to be "a bit" protected from radio energy before you go into a radioactive area. Mainly this whole "heal", "heal", "heal" button mashing kinda annoys me. I would like to use medkits and bandages less often instead of keeping my eyes on the status bar and immediatly hit the magic healing button everytime i take hit. Because we all know that you take alot of damage in stalker games!
Trust me, its by no means a bad game, but I have never played a popular game with more bugs. I mean there are bugs EVERYWHERE[QUOTE="Farkeman"]
i personaly have stalker soc and clear sky , both games are terrible imo , combat is boring and repetative , graphics are way outdated ... the rpg part of the game is quite horrible also ...
i dont know why this game is being praised so much , but imo it definetly does not deserve that 7.5-8 rating ...
chandu83
1. Weird AI glitches - check
2. Reload a game and an enemy stands right in front of you and shoots you in the head even before you get a chance to aim - check
3. Unintuitive mission design - check
4. Long segments of travel between missions - check
So why is this a good game? The effort they put into this really shows. The atmosphere is absolutely brilliant. I am totally willing to forgive all the bugs to play this game.
But don't let anyone tell you that this is a polished game or that good FPS/RPG. Its a weird FPS with some inventory - there is no RPG.
I agree with our POV 100%...I REALLY wanted to like that game too but man it just frustrated the heck outta me at times.
Trust me, its by no means a bad game, but I have never played a popular game with more bugs. I mean there are bugs EVERYWHERE[QUOTE="Farkeman"]
i personaly have stalker soc and clear sky , both games are terrible imo , combat is boring and repetative , graphics are way outdated ... the rpg part of the game is quite horrible also ...
i dont know why this game is being praised so much , but imo it definetly does not deserve that 7.5-8 rating ...
chandu83
1. Weird AI glitches - check
2. Reload a game and an enemy stands right in front of you and shoots you in the head even before you get a chance to aim - check
3. Unintuitive mission design - check
4. Long segments of travel between missions - check
So why is this a good game? The effort they put into this really shows. The atmosphere is absolutely brilliant. I am totally willing to forgive all the bugs to play this game.
But don't let anyone tell you that this is a polished game or that good FPS/RPG. Its a weird FPS with some inventory - there is no RPG.
I agree 100%. STALKER is a fantastic game inspite of the annoying bugs.
Hi all :D
I was wandering we have lack of games nowadays so i sawSTALKER:Call Of Pripyatand i never played anySTALKERgame..so can i just go for this third one without the others part ?
THX
STALKER is not a game for everyone, in fact it isn't a game for most people ;). So I don't recommend it folks who've never played it, you should start witha demo if you can. Not sure if there is one available.I don't understand.....you should be floating in money...there are artifacts everywhere and after each blow out they are more. I have scavenged so much from dead bodies it isn't funny...antirads/food/med kits... I'm about to leave the first map...all my gear is totally tricked out...and I have almost 70k in money....32 medkits, 23 rad, 59 bandages and tons of other stuff....OgreBI dont understand how Having all that many and resources fixes the fact that you use way too many of those resources?
I have yet to have ammo issues. I guess if you have that problem you are using way too much ammo and should concentrate on aiming better. The bleeding does not need to be taking out of the game as it gives that realistic feel. If you were shot in real life do you think you would bleed? Of course you would. About the radiation thing, there are now radiation backs that keep you immune to the radiation for a period of time.millerlight89The ammo is just an example, i dont have that issue. The bleeding in clear sky was anything than reallistic, :lol: it was horrible. Everytime i take damage i bleed, even when falling from a ledge and taking falling damage. Plus the medkits did not have bandages you had to use bandages to stop the bleeding. How is that reallistc? Also what reallistic feel you are referring? The guns in clear sky where weak as hell, you only took a little bit damage and bleed. I dont understand how you take a low damage while wearing a bulletproof armor and you bleed? If you take alot of damage, that i can understand but a little? Are those fixed in call or pripiyat? Good to hear about the radiation, what about the gunplay?
[QUOTE="millerlight89"]I have yet to have ammo issues. I guess if you have that problem you are using way too much ammo and should concentrate on aiming better. The bleeding does not need to be taking out of the game as it gives that realistic feel. If you were shot in real life do you think you would bleed? Of course you would. About the radiation thing, there are now radiation backs that keep you immune to the radiation for a period of time.dakan45The ammo is just an example, i dont have that issue. The bleeding in clear sky was anything than reallistic, :lol: it was horrible. Everytime i take damage i bleed, even when falling from a ledge and taking falling damage. Plus the medkits did not have bandages you had to use bandages to stop the bleeding. How is that reallistc? Also what reallistic feel you are referring? The guns in clear sky where weak as hell, you only took a little bit damage and bleed. I dont understand how you take a low damage while wearing a bulletproof armor and you bleed? If you take alot of damage, that i can understand but a little? Are those fixed in call or pripiyat? Good to hear about the radiation, what about the gunplay? Your whole body was not covered in in armor. Anyways I have said all I wanted to about gunplay being better and such in my blog. I do not really care with your gripes about the game as it is a great series. It makes me no difference if you like it or not. If you try shooting enemies in the head they will go down in one shot. What were you aiming for their foot? S.T.A.L.K.E.R. is meant for the more hardcore FPS player, it comes with challenge which by the sounds of what you have said you want it to be simplified. Just go play an easier game.
this discussion went over to the general thing about stalker games?
if not then I can warmly reccoment the Exo armor in CoP O.o that thing is utterly insane fully upgraded. Can be bought from the very first settlement, and is the only in the series that can be upgraded to allow sprinting, and carry weight of around 100 kg O.o and can have space for 4 artifacts
Bought from the guy you saved in SoC (cant remember his name right now, he lives on the boat, and sells special versions of just about any weapon in the game)
When I found out about I kinda thought "wth" with my money, no need to look for other armors after that one... Another nice thing is that it helps for bleeding and health regen ;) quite nice indeed ^^
But yeah CoP sure does throuw around ALOT of money... Ive completed the first area map now and have just around 200k (been hunting alot of artifacts).
(well I have completed it once allready but taking my time with the world this time around, was baffled when I saw the exo being sold at the very start... had to go through hell and back (aka. pripyat). To find one last time -.- I feel slightly dumb right now :s)
[QUOTE="dakan45"][QUOTE="millerlight89"]I have yet to have ammo issues. I guess if you have that problem you are using way too much ammo and should concentrate on aiming better. The bleeding does not need to be taking out of the game as it gives that realistic feel. If you were shot in real life do you think you would bleed? Of course you would. About the radiation thing, there are now radiation backs that keep you immune to the radiation for a period of time.millerlight89The ammo is just an example, i dont have that issue. The bleeding in clear sky was anything than reallistic, :lol: it was horrible. Everytime i take damage i bleed, even when falling from a ledge and taking falling damage. Plus the medkits did not have bandages you had to use bandages to stop the bleeding. How is that reallistc? Also what reallistic feel you are referring? The guns in clear sky where weak as hell, you only took a little bit damage and bleed. I dont understand how you take a low damage while wearing a bulletproof armor and you bleed? If you take alot of damage, that i can understand but a little? Are those fixed in call or pripiyat? Good to hear about the radiation, what about the gunplay? Your whole body was not covered in in armor. Anyways I have said all I wanted to about gunplay being better and such in my blog. I do not really care with your gripes about the game as it is a great series. It makes me no difference if you like it or not. If you try shooting enemies in the head they will go down in one shot. What were you aiming for their foot? S.T.A.L.K.E.R. is meant for the more hardcore FPS player, it comes with challenge which by the sounds of what you have said you want it to be simplified. Just go play an easier game. I dont think its a hard game, its just has a very unpolished and unbalanced gunplay. From example its harder in the begining, thus unbalanced. Also some weapons seem very weak like the pistols, and it kinda annoys me when i burst and enemy, 2, 3 times and does not go down. A third burst will bring him down, but seriously it feels pretty unreallistic to unload 11 out or 15 bullets with the berreta in clear sky and the enemy is still alive. Same thing with the assault rilfes at a diffirent rate. I just think its not balanced well. However in soc the weapons felt much better. So my question is, is the combat more like soc or cs?
Being harder in the begining does not mean it is unbalanced. You work your way up to better weapons and better armor. Thus making the game easier, though how does this make it unbalanced. You are working your way up. Is it not common to find better stuff in games as you go? Yea, I think it is. Not all games hold your hand, some actually make you work for it and end then end it is much more gratifying. millerlight89I dont understand how being weak and work your way up till you get strong is balancing? Balancing will be if the enemies in the begining were easy in order to balance the gameplay and then get harder and balance it by your character getting better by getting better gear! You said it yourself, you get stronger thus making the game easier! Picture hard a the left side of the weight scales and the had as the right side of the scales. The game would be balanced if those scales had the same weight and the scales formed a line without any of the two weights getting heavier over the other. But what happens in stalker is the the right weight(hard) being heavier at the begining and the left weirght (easy) being heavy later on!! Basicly the difficulity feels random and unbalanced!
[QUOTE="millerlight89"]Being harder in the begining does not mean it is unbalanced. You work your way up to better weapons and better armor. Thus making the game easier, though how does this make it unbalanced. You are working your way up. Is it not common to find better stuff in games as you go? Yea, I think it is. Not all games hold your hand, some actually make you work for it and end then end it is much more gratifying. dakan45I dont understand how being weak and work your way up till you get strong is balancing? Balancing will be if the enemies in the begining were easy in order to balance the gameplay and then get harder and balance it by your character getting better by getting better gear! You said it yourself, you get stronger thus making the game easier! Picture hard a the left side of the weight scales and the had as the right side of the scales. The game would be balanced if those scales had the same weight and the scales formed a line without any of the two weights getting heavier over the other. But what happens in stalker is the the right weight(hard) being heavier at the begining and the left weirght (easy) being heavy later on!! Basicly the difficulity feels random and unbalanced! How the hell does it make the game unbalanced to begin harder and get easier as the game progresses? It is something different from the normal formula. I'm sorry you type all of this stuff out, but in the end I see blah blah blah blah blah. It is nothing more than you rambaling on and on. None of it really makes since most of the time. Example: Balancing will be if the enemies in the begining were easy in order to balance the gameplay and then get harder and balance it by your character getting better by getting better gear! This makes zero since. It might ot you, but in reality it comes out wrong.
[QUOTE="millerlight89"]Being harder in the begining does not mean it is unbalanced. You work your way up to better weapons and better armor. Thus making the game easier, though how does this make it unbalanced. You are working your way up. Is it not common to find better stuff in games as you go? Yea, I think it is. Not all games hold your hand, some actually make you work for it and end then end it is much more gratifying. dakan45I dont understand how being weak and work your way up till you get strong is balancing? Balancing will be if the enemies in the begining were easy in order to balance the gameplay and then get harder and balance it by your character getting better by getting better gear! You said it yourself, you get stronger thus making the game easier! Picture hard a the left side of the weight scales and the had as the right side of the scales. The game would be balanced if those scales had the same weight and the scales formed a line without any of the two weights getting heavier over the other. But what happens in stalker is the the right weight(hard) being heavier at the begining and the left weirght (easy) being heavy later on!! Basicly the difficulity feels random and unbalanced! Define harder, because I think the more accurate statement is that in the beginning of the game you have less options. This is such a basic gameplay design for many games. You start off weak in STALKER. You have horrible equipment, weapons, no supplies. So you have to run from encounters, you have to sneak to accomplish some objectives. As the game progresses you get better stuff, more medpaks, antirads, better ammo, artifacts for protection, suits to protect you from radiation. So your options increase on how you want to handle certain objectives. Balance does not mean you have an easy and simple go of things all the way through a game. In fact that is bad design because you don't have to think. This is an interactive medium after all.
Like I said, after a long day at work, I come back home and I want to play a game for about 30 minutes, not try and prove my gamer skill. chandu83Then you probably should have picked console gaming.
[QUOTE="dakan45"][QUOTE="millerlight89"]Being harder in the begining does not mean it is unbalanced. You work your way up to better weapons and better armor. Thus making the game easier, though how does this make it unbalanced. You are working your way up. Is it not common to find better stuff in games as you go? Yea, I think it is. Not all games hold your hand, some actually make you work for it and end then end it is much more gratifying. millerlight89I dont understand how being weak and work your way up till you get strong is balancing? Balancing will be if the enemies in the begining were easy in order to balance the gameplay and then get harder and balance it by your character getting better by getting better gear! You said it yourself, you get stronger thus making the game easier! Picture hard a the left side of the weight scales and the had as the right side of the scales. The game would be balanced if those scales had the same weight and the scales formed a line without any of the two weights getting heavier over the other. But what happens in stalker is the the right weight(hard) being heavier at the begining and the left weirght (easy) being heavy later on!! Basicly the difficulity feels random and unbalanced! How the hell does it make the game unbalanced to begin harder and get easier as the game progresses? It is something different from the normal formula. I'm sorry you type all of this stuff out, but in the end I see blah blah blah blah blah. It is nothing more than you rambaling on and on. None of it really makes since most of the time. Example: Balancing will be if the enemies in the begining were easy in order to balance the gameplay and then get harder and balance it by your character getting better by getting better gear! This makes zero since. It might ot you, but in reality it comes out wrong. I explained how, if that makes zero sense to you, wel i am speechless! Balance means that all possible benefactors are at the same state. If the ai makes more damage to you in the beginning thanks to the fact that they dont know what weapon innacuracy is but afterwards you get more accuracte weapons and you can now play just like them...well it aint balance, its actually unbalanced. The ai should be weaker and easier to kill in the begining for the game to be balanced. Also later on the game should be harder and the ai should be tougher, in order to balance the gameplay and not make it easier just because you got new toys!! They got those toys too, but the game is easier than before that both the players and the ai had bad weapons, Why? Because the game is unbalanced. Thats what i am trying to point out! Normally it should be harder as you progress than it was in the begining, not easier!
Stalker games are just nto for you Dakan. There is nothign wrong with the gunplay imo.
Its a more hardcore FPS then other games, its not for everyone as others have said. You said you want it simplyfied and made easyier in the begining and to fix the combat, well alot of the stalker fans love those aspects of the game.
There are alot of games that you start off really bad/weak and you get better as you upgrade or get better weapons (example is gothic series, Risen,etc..).
Just my two cents, Stalker games are not for everyone. You even said that you wish Stalker games where more like Metro/COD/Bioshock.. but they are not like those games, they are a little mroe hardcore, why should all series "dumb down" as you put it?
Some games im not the best at aiming either, it take s more practise, but I dont blame it on the game.. its just a differnt style that me personally im not as good at as other games. I think the gunplay in Stalker is fine, its jsut not meant for pray and spray arcadey gameplay.
[QUOTE="millerlight89"][QUOTE="dakan45"] I dont understand how being weak and work your way up till you get strong is balancing? Balancing will be if the enemies in the begining were easy in order to balance the gameplay and then get harder and balance it by your character getting better by getting better gear! You said it yourself, you get stronger thus making the game easier! Picture hard a the left side of the weight scales and the had as the right side of the scales. The game would be balanced if those scales had the same weight and the scales formed a line without any of the two weights getting heavier over the other. But what happens in stalker is the the right weight(hard) being heavier at the begining and the left weirght (easy) being heavy later on!! Basicly the difficulity feels random and unbalanced!dakan45How the hell does it make the game unbalanced to begin harder and get easier as the game progresses? It is something different from the normal formula. I'm sorry you type all of this stuff out, but in the end I see blah blah blah blah blah. It is nothing more than you rambaling on and on. None of it really makes since most of the time. Example: Balancing will be if the enemies in the begining were easy in order to balance the gameplay and then get harder and balance it by your character getting better by getting better gear! This makes zero since. It might ot you, but in reality it comes out wrong. I explained how, if that makes zero sense to you, wel i am speechless! Balance means that all possible benefactors are at the same state. If the ai makes more damage to you in the beginning thanks to the fact that they dont know what weapon innacuracy is but afterwards you get more accuracte weapons and you can now play just like them...well it aint balance, its actually unbalanced. The ai should be weaker and easier to kill in the begining for the game to be balanced. Also later on the game should be harder and the ai should be tougher, in order to balance the gameplay and not make it easier just because you got new toys!! They got those toys too, but the game is easier than before that both the players and the ai had bad weapons, Why? Because the game is unbalanced. Thats what i am trying to point out! Normally it should be harder as you progress than it was in the begining, not easier! PLease give me an example where the ai is "dumber" and "easier" to kill in the begining. Every game that I can think of the ai remains the same.
[QUOTE="dakan45"][QUOTE="millerlight89"]Being harder in the begining does not mean it is unbalanced. You work your way up to better weapons and better armor. Thus making the game easier, though how does this make it unbalanced. You are working your way up. Is it not common to find better stuff in games as you go? Yea, I think it is. Not all games hold your hand, some actually make you work for it and end then end it is much more gratifying. GooeykatI dont understand how being weak and work your way up till you get strong is balancing? Balancing will be if the enemies in the begining were easy in order to balance the gameplay and then get harder and balance it by your character getting better by getting better gear! You said it yourself, you get stronger thus making the game easier! Picture hard a the left side of the weight scales and the had as the right side of the scales. The game would be balanced if those scales had the same weight and the scales formed a line without any of the two weights getting heavier over the other. But what happens in stalker is the the right weight(hard) being heavier at the begining and the left weirght (easy) being heavy later on!! Basicly the difficulity feels random and unbalanced! Define harder, because I think the more accurate statement is that in the beginning of the game you have less options. This is such a basic gameplay design for many games. You start off weak in STALKER. You have horrible equipment, weapons, no supplies. So you have to run from encounters, you have to sneak to accomplish some objectives. As the game progresses you get better stuff, more medpaks, antirads, better ammo, artifacts for protection, suits to protect you from radiation. So your options increase on how you want to handle certain objectives. Balance does not mean you have an easy and simple go of things all the way through a game. In fact that is bad design because you don't have to think. This is an interactive medium after all. Right, i dont understand how putting someone to think in the begining but blast his way through later is balanced or even proper for a game. So in the begining you got weak and innacurate guns but the ai is much more accurate than you and more sucessfull at their shots. So "you have to think" and play the game with much more focus. But when you get better weapons the game becomes easier since those weapons are more "effective" at your hands than the previous ones and you got all those medkits and such. But the thing remains that your health does not run down as fast as it used to in the begining and you dont miss that often, you cause more damage to the enemies because you got better armor and better guns. The fact remains though that your enemies also have those things and there are tougher enemies, so why it does not get as hard as it was in the beginning? That said, i continye to think its unbalanced. I wouldnt say "you dont have many options" in the begining, i would say that you have to try harder in the begining and after you get some good gear you have to try less!!
PLease give me an example where the ai is "dumber" and "easier" to kill in the begining. Every game that I can think of the ai remains the same. millerlight89Yes, that too, the ai is just basicly the same, they see you they shoot you with the same accuracy. Only thing that changes is how much damage they cause to the player and how much damage they can take. But in stalker the first weapons are pretty innacurate so the player is innacurate but the ai has the unfair advantage by being more accurate and much more effective than the "human" player when it comes to combat, especially if the player is new to the game. However if the ai took less hits or the player more. they could easilly balance the unfairly had difficulity the game has in the begining![QUOTE="kozzy1234"]
Stalker games are just nto for you Dakan. There is nothign wrong with the gunplay imo.
Its a more hardcore FPS then other games, its not for everyone as others have said. You said you want it simplyfied and made easyier in the begining and to fix the combat, well alot of the stalker fans love those aspects of the game.
There are alot of games that you start off really bad/weak and you get better as you upgrade or get better weapons (example is gothic series, Risen,etc..).
Just my two cents, Stalker games are not for everyone. You even said that you wish Stalker games where more like Metro/COD/Bioshock.. but they are not like those games, they are a little mroe hardcore, why should all series "dumb down" as you put it?
Some games im not the best at aiming either, it take s more practise, but I dont blame it on the game.. its just a differnt style that me personally im not as good at as other games. I think the gunplay in Stalker is fine, its jsut not meant for pray and spray arcadey gameplay.
So you tell me that you would not like the game to be polished and balanced just like valve did with left 4 dead? You telling me you wouldnt want the pistols to be more effective and not having to unload more than half a clip on someone to kill him, so you thin moments like that in stalker gunplay are fine? You also telling me that you dont mind that you carefuly (not spray and pray) shot someone a few times and he did not die but then he shoots you once and most of your health is gone and you use medkit and bandages and attack again and then kill him and heal again? Now pay attention ,i am not saying that stalker is bad, in case i gave that impression. I actually like the game alot but the gunplay is not "fine" if it was fine, then i would have loved the game and had no complains about it. Thats what i am saying if they could polish/balance/dumb down/whatever-just fix-them...... those parts i would have liked the game much more!!Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment