What's so good about STALKER?

Nothing?

Everything?

The game is only as good as you believe it is. Do you want another example?

What's so good about the move "Superbad"? If you ask me, nothing, it sucked. Others thought it was great.

In the end, we can tell you what we each thought of STALKER and why we liked/disliked it, but that's to each of our own personal likings. I enjoyed the atmosphere, that eerie feeling it gave the first time I ventured into a hidden Labratory or the very first time I encountered a Bloodsucker. Some things I disliked, the base weight carrying limit, the unmatched expert grenade throwing ability of the NPCs or the lack of AI the NPCs showed at times. The list goes on for both good and bad. Just because I liked or disliked the things I mentioned, doesn't mean you'll feel the same.

If you don't care much for the game, that's too bad because I thought it was a very good game and I've greatly enjoyed the series - I've enjoyed Clear Sky the most, though for my own reasons. Others will say that Clear Sky was the worst of the three - to each their own.

I only suggest to play a bit more, get a bit further into the game, if after a few more hours of play and you still don't like then I see no more reason for you to keep playing.

[QUOTE="MrGamer0101"]

Perhaps its the fact that it dont find interesting the game and its mythology, but the story was badly designed, everyone has said that but people seem to ignore it here. I specificly remember a bunch of people saying that there is no story in stalker apart from the story you make for yourself and honestly story in that game is all over the place. Picking up the bits and pieces in SoC and providing some further explanation wouldnt have helped the story alot.

[QUOTE="-GeordiLaForge-"]
Oh, and I played Fallout 3 before any of the sequels, so I only played part of the original STALKER.. Maybe I would like the newer ones better?SF_KiLLaMaN

Stopped reading there. That level is the best int he entire game with the best visual and sound design and the best atmosphere and scares and the second was POOP. A huge step down from the first game. I just lost all credabillity.

Hell, no way soc's story is better than cop, or the atmopsphere, the levels in cop are single handendly improving the atmosphere. I think ill put this argument to rest. Ill just stick to CoP and forget all about SoC.dakan45

Read my post again.

You're making an assumption that I thought the second was better, and you're assuming that I played through the entirety, I never did.

What I did say that I thought it was, OK. Did I think it was better? I didn't say did I.

Now STALKER's story IS better than CoP's. CoP is a mystery based around the helicopter crashes, with a horrible deus ex machina ending. Sterlok appearing with no foreshadowing, out of nowhere, at the last moment telling the player character 'oh anomalies move after blowouts'? That was horrible. The first is far better, difference here is CoP's narrative and structure is stronger, much more in the later.

Now, do play CoP, I don't care if you don't want to play or remember SoC.

But you're still wrong as you were to begin with, now that I've resolved the point about Condemned you assumed and were struggling with, go ahead and read the rest.

Played two thirds of Condemned on the PC, best bit was the abandoned department store of all the abandoned places. It was good, rided heavily on derilict inner city areas. The second was ok as well from what I played. Own DeadSpace on the PS3, it's a decent action game, its atmoshpere is reminiscent of Doom 3's corridors of jump scares, and every other sci fi horror, not to say it was bad, it just wasn't interesting in the slightest.

The gamespot example is one enforcing my point, don't think it's irrelevant. Furthermore STALKER's reputation for being atmospherically rich adds weight to my point; I'm stating it for a reason. You can yell at the top of your lungs but it doesn't change the consensus.

As I hope you know, this is basic debating, supporting your argument.

Hell please, go read.

http://tap-repeatedly.com/2011/01/17/alone-for-all-seasons/

It's not often a games atmosphere and richness can provoke that much introspection, STALKER obviously has it in spades.

Otherwise are you really? Well honestly I find that amusing. Stalker is a film that relies heavily on its visuals to tell its story, and it's a damn good film; it's considered to be Tarkovsky's best. If you don't like it, well that's a cool opinion of yours, as in regard to STALKER the game, your opinion isn't going to override the consensus and the reasons backing it up. Otherwise, no it's explained, even the deliberately vague (the meatgrinder anomoly, which is gets far more time and focus in the novel Roadside Picnic) to build the tension and atmosphere. The plot of all things isn't hard to follow at all, it's the least difficult compared to taking in the slow screenplay.

Metro 2033 was based on the novel Metro 2033. There are certain influences from Roadside Picnic and STALKER in it, however its focus is very much elsewhere. Metro 2033 the game doesn't capture the atmosphere of the book nearly as well as it could have, or should have, nor does it push into the books themes (it's which is far more philosophical). The film Stalker punctuates itself with philosophy at its climax, Metro 2033 the book has it as a prevalent theme, while the setting acts as the spine adding structure and context. Roadside Picnic is very much in between.

Those two are good books, if you don't mind the wonky translation of Metro 2033 it's worth a read, I enjoyed it much more than the game.

You're making it out as if STALKER is praised for being a perfect game.

No it's not, I don't think I've ever seen anyone say that.
It's a game that has some crucial flaws. Yes we know the segregated areas are smaller than they should be, and yes we know the plot is poorly told - it actually is a good plot, and it does brush on certain themes that its influential predecessors did, amoung other mechanical qualms.

However you're missing the point entirely. STALKER is a game that is incredibly rich in what it does, it's an absolute gem in standing out against other games today, in the sum of its parts, despite its flaws. There aren't shooters or many games that simulate an environment as it does, or encourage a multilayered level of interaction with the game world. Nor are there games that encourage emergent gameplay, and have such a rich and tangible setting to back it up.

STALKER is one of a kind.

CoP is a game that is by all means, mechanically better, and expands on STALKERs failings immensely, but it's a game that doesn't have nearly as interesting plot stringing together the game (CoP"s plot is actually pretty poor, the narrative isn't great either - the climax was well, so strikingly out of knowhere it's amazing), nor does it have the exact same tone, or mystery - setpieces like the Brain Scorcher.

You have the notion that a game has to score a certain mark in order to deserve praise.

You're missing the point, STALKER is well worth its weight that people praise it for what it is, and don't have to point towards a metacritic mark to establish how much worth they got out of the game.

Which is why other games like Mount & Blade get such a strong reaction from people, as well as praise despite having flaws and being critically downplayed, as with the ArmA games and a variety of others.

skrat_01

imo its the combination of fps with "more to it" than mere point and shoot, like inventory and wpn upgrades etc.

You need to venture out there and find artifacts, loot, enemies, potential friends. The game doesn't spoon feed you anything. At it's core, Stalker is game about a desolate part of the world with many an atmospheric moment. Not a whole lot is scripted either. Try being ambitious in the game because it will get boring if you...you know, don't actually explore the world.

And yeah, the enemies are difficult. You'll need to utilize lean and make sure you're not bleeding. Apart from fighting in intense shootouts, risking your life for artifacts, surviving at night and stockpiling food, there's not much more. It's an atmospheric survival game.

If none of that made sense to you, then this is not the game for you.