Re: STALKER 2 nears...

On Fri, 26 Jul 2024 10:19:30 -0700, Justisaur <justisaur@yahoo.com>
wrote:

On 7/26/2024 3:06 AM, JAB wrote:

On 25/07/2024 16:24, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:

>
STALKER 2 has a release date. September 5th, to be exact. (I don't
know exactly when this was first announced, but it's news to me) but
it's September 5th of this year. That's right around the corner!
>
I'm not /incredibly/ excited about the game, but I can't say I'm
entirely without interest either. I didn't adore the first STALKER
like did so many others; it was unpolished, its AI didn't live up to
the hype, the difficulty curve was incredibly uneven, and the overall
experience was spotty. Still, you could see the brilliance of the game
lying underneath, and even if I didn't really enjoy playing it, I
could admire STALKER for its ambitions. Not to mention its dour,
Slavic mood and setting. "Clear Sky" and "Call of Pripyat" were gave
this original formula a much needed polish; they still had a lot of
rough edges but were more streamlined, more fun experiences overall.
>
I can't deny that the politics surrounding STALKER 2 aren't
influencing me either. Developed by a Ukranian team, I'd probably buy
the game just to show my support of their struggle in the real world.
That they've actually managed to get the game (nearly) out the door at
all is a miracle (even if most of the actual development is taking
place in Czechia).
>
That said, from what little I've seen of STALKER 2, I can't say it's
left me very impressed. Sure, it looks prettier, but it also feels
blander. I'm not sure this is entirely the fault of the developers;
the original STALKER stood out because there were few games that did
what it did, were set where it was set. Nowadays, there are dozens of
FPS/survival games that ape the original's formula, and the sequel
lacks that feeling of novelty because of it. But overall, watching the
STALKER 2 trailers, I'm reminded a lot more of "Call of Duty" than its
predecessors.
>
I'll still get the game, though; I'll still play the sequel. Given the
real-life situation, I may even break my own rule and buy the game day
one.
>
Anyway, it's only a month (and a little bit) to go. After twelve
years, what's a few more weeks?
>

 
I'm interested, with a touch of excitement, but like you it is one of
those games that stood out so much due to it wasn't like a standard FPS
in either it's gameplay or setting. It's always been a problem if you
have a game where part of the enjoyment is that's it's refreshing. A
sequel just can't replicate that.
 
It's was certainly somewhat unpolished, to say the least, although the
compliant about the AI kinda passed by my at the time as I wasn't, and
still aren't, really into following games news. If I had to pick one
thing that was the most negative it would be the 'aggressive' re-spawns.
I still have nightmares over the rail yard acting as a transition point
between areas. Did no one think is it really a good idea to make the
player fight a hard battle every single time.
 

>
I don't remember anything about the AI either.  I liked the rail yard.
I thought it was genius so you really had to think about if you wanted
to go back or not.  (All assuming I'm remembering correctly, it's been
awhile.)
>

Overall though, I very much enjoyed it with the combat being more than
just run in guns blazing and how it captured a feeling of exploring a
desolate, almost alien, wasteland with an RPG like feel to the whole
experience.

There was a lot of hype about the game's 'AI-Life', where the monsters
wouldn't just sit around waiting for the player, but move about and
'live' in the gameworld, interacting and hunting with other AI as
necessary. There was some of this in the game, but it wasn't very
convincing, and the artificiality of their movements actually
detracted from the overall experience. If it didn't ruin it
completely.   

   [I remember failing a quest because some random monster killed
    a questgiver long before I even knew I was supposed to meet
    up with him.]

Various patches -and the sequels "Clear Sky" and "Call of Pripyat"-
toned down the AI-Life somewhat, making them act more predictibly and
realistically. But there was a lot of hype around the first game about
the incredible, revolutionary AI that would present us with a living
world. Hype the game utterly failed to live up to.

The combat AI itself was fine; I just didn't find the combat all that
novel. Sure, the gunplay was more lethal than you'd get in something
like "Half Life" or "Quake", but even that wasn't so remarkable; we'd
already had games like "Ghost Recon" that toyed with the idea of
one-shot/one-kill lethality. Plus, a lot of the difficulty from the
game came not from the AI, but from the inaccurate weapons you're
given at the start.

I also /really/ disliked how the game's world was divided up into
discrete (albeit large) levels. It really detracted from the game's
openess, and totally destroyed any sense of immersion when you ran
into an invisible wall.

STALKER wasn't a bad game in any sense, but neither did I find it all
that exciting. It didn't really offer up much that was new (other
than, perhaps, its setting and tone) and its rough edges were quite
evident -especially at release. I certainly didn't think it at all
lived up to any of the pre-release hype. It was a fine B-list game...
but no more than that.

Still, the original STALKER was ambitious, and regardless of how well
it achieved its goals, that game definitely had a big influence on the
genre. I'm not really sure I can say that much about its long-awaited
sequel. The most exciting thing about STALKER II seems to be that it
exists, not anything it does.

But, with the sequel not being out yet, who can say for sure. I guess
we'll see in November.