S.t.a.l.k.e.r.: Shadow of Chernobyl (impressions video inside)

[Pidesco]

Finally!

[Kaftan Barlast]

What happened to 1.2?

[Pidesco]

I think they only released a Russian version of 1.2.

[Spider]

Most importantly, the 1.3 patch adds support for a five button mouse. I'm tempted to patch and restart the game just for that, although I still haven't completed it the first time. So I'm still hesitant. I'm also not crazy about armor wearing down (I don't really like the weapons doing so either), but I suppose I could maybe live with that.

 

I do think it's a bit crazy to release patches that invalidates save games in this day and age. I haven't seen that happen since Fallout I think and there really is no excuse, imo.

[Kaftan Barlast]

Degrading weapons and armour is a really annoying feature, its good that its so easy to remove. Ive modified my game to get a more R6/GRAW type gameplay where everything is extremely lethal, its just a matter of editing files in notepad

[Slowtrain]

Degrading weapons and armour is a really annoying feature, its good that its so easy to remove. Ive modified my game to get a more R6/GRAW type gameplay where everything is extremely lethal, its just a matter of editing files in notepad

 

 

Doesn't that sort of make the whole trading thing useless though? It would seem to remove an aspect of gameplay that makes the game fun making it more of a standard FPS. I wish the trading thing had been more fundamental to the game, true, but you take what you can get. Anyway, its not like guns and armor are particularly rare. When one wears out, you find or buy another.

[Spider]

Having played a bit with the patched game, I got to say the degradable armor is really irking me. The weapons I wasn't happy about, but I could live with. Not because they were available to buy, but because you could always just loot new ones from your enemies. Armors are not nearly as common. Not only that, I find that the armor wears out much quicker than weapons. Or at least it becomes noticable sooner. It's probably because I have hard numbers for armor, while with the weapons there is only the feel.

 

It's fine with the low level armor. Merc suits et al. Hell, maybe even Stalker suits, but with them costing 60.000 it does force you to try and make money to a degree you didn't before the patch. I am not particularly fond of the thought, since I feel it'll make the game more of a grind. But if I find the unique armor in the Wild Territories (I think) again and have it wear down as normal armors do, I'll feel really cheated. I just don't like the idea of one of the nicer rewards for exploring just being temporary, nor do I like my characters gear to degress (ie being forced to switch to inferior gear compared to what I just had). It's like losing experience points in a rpg. It just feels wrong.

 

I've never been a fan of durability in any system. If I find cool stuff, I don't want the damn things to break. Realism be damned (besides, the rate at which things break down in Stalker is hardly realistic). If things can be repaired, maybe. But that sort of defeats the point of having it there in the first place, so I'd rather just not have it at all.

 

(also, in Stalker, the encumbrance limit is much to low. I find that with ammo and such I really don't have enough room for much to haul back and sell, which makes the whole bartering thing even more of a chore)

[Cantousent]

I pretty much agree with Spider in his every word.

[Pop]

If somebody could clue me in to how to mod out the item degradation I'd appreciate it. I rather liked it when it was prepatched and I could take a bit once in awhile to admire the gameworld without constantly worrying about how I'm going to keep my awesome armor from crapping out on me halfway into a deep expedition. I'd like to have those moments back without the bugs.

Edited May 13, 2007 by Pop

[Kaftan Barlast]

Downloading a mod which disables the degrading items and doubles the carrying capacity is quite necessary to enjoy STALKER. My mod does all that and also attempts to rebalance damage to more realistic levels. But since the game uses the same damage data for PC and enemies alike, and the game like to pit you against oerwhelming numbers of enemies, it makes it very very difficult. The "escort the veteran stalkers to chernobyl" mission also becomes unplayable because the NPCs doesnt have enough health and armour to make it to the end with that kind of damage

 

 

linkie comming soon

Edited May 13, 2007 by Kaftan Barlast

[Kaftan Barlast]

http://www.xn--holmstrm-t4a.net/pics/kaftanstalkermod.rar :D

[Tale]

If somebody could clue me in to how to mod out the item degradation I'd appreciate it. I rather liked it when it was prepatched and I could take a bit once in awhile to admire the gameworld without constantly worrying about how I'm going to keep my awesome armor from crapping out on me halfway into a deep expedition. I'd like to have those moments back without the bugs.

I have a mod collection that does this, and ONLY this. It took me a while to get the stuff together because people love to throw in weight, trader, rebalances, and/or repair mods into it.

 

Save this jpg and open it using winrar.

Edited May 13, 2007 by Tale

[Slowtrain]

I've always been a fan of item damage, even item loss and theft. Keeps the gameworld a bit more uncertain.

 

Anyway, before my last game crapped out I had about 6 suits of high-end armors stashed for my final run through Pripyat and CNPP. Never got there, but at least I was prepared.

 

I don't see the problem.

[Pop]

Thankee all.

 

See, I'd be all for purism and realism and all of that jazz, but I worry too easily about things like degrading equipment, to the point where it detracts from the fun of the game. I'm a defensive player in general. When I play Starcraft I just build turrets and research facilities and stockpile units until I'm absolutely sure I can make win in one hit. I've never won a war in a Civ game. It's just the way I is.

[Spider]

Good for you. But as you mention, you're a fan of the design. So our opinions clearly differ.

 

End game it may not be a problem, but for me it definitely is in the mid game. I've never gotten past the Yaktar research institute, so how the game looks after that I don't know. Currently I haven't even gotten that far, I'm on my way to Dark Valley now.

 

I just find that my armor is breaking apart too fast. Or to put it simpler, the game is simply much less fun this time through.

 

Example:

After taking care of the military raid that you run across At the Agoroporic (or similar) Research Institute I went to loot all the bodies. To my immense happiness I found a Merc armor (which is of course better than the basic armor I've been using until now). It starts out with virtually all resistances at 30%. Then I head down the pipes to find Strelok's hideout. When I emerge from those pipes, my armor is at 22%. I then clear up the Research Institute itself (there is a quest for something to give the barkeep) and proceed back through Garbage. There is of course a bandit raid at the hangar that I help with and then I head to the bar (and encounter another two bandits and a bunch of dogs on the way). When I arrive at the bar, my merc suit is at 14%. Luckily enough, I'm given a nice Stalker suit to replace it with, but still. I'm guessing that one will need to be replaced by the time I'm done with Dark Valley.

 

 

I just don't feel like being forced to replace my armor that frequently. Maybe I'll get used to it or maybe I'll give up and install a mod to get rid of the degradation. But I'm clearly liking the game a lot less now.

[metadigital]

I would expect that the degradation rate be factored into the difficulty level, or its own configuration, so that on the easiest setting it would be almost unnoticeable, or set according to individual wants.

[Slowtrain]

erhm, I haven't played too many fps games where armor doesn't wear out as it takes damage.

[Kaftan Barlast]

The thing about degrading equipment is that its essentially a Sisyphean task. Using Oblivon as a very good example; something breaks, you buy some hammers and fix it so all you need to think about is always having hammers. In Stalker you break, run to trader, replace. In both examples youre just going through a very tedious and annoying process just to maintain an equilibrium. Its like pouring water into a leaking cup.

 

 

So, the whole feature is really completely unnescessary. It might see like a good idea for realism, but it is really just bad game design when applied.

[Spider]

erhm, I haven't played too many fps games where armor doesn't wear out as it takes damage.

 

Yeah, but there is a huge difference in how it works in games like FEAR or Quake, compared to Stalker. Armor, in the first two games, works the same way health does and can be boosted in the same way. In Stalker, different armor is different gear that you actually quest to find. That's what makes it annoying in this game, while not so much in FEAR.

 

You like how it's done in Stalker. I don't. It really is as simple as that. It's still a good enough game.

 

(ironically, had the game had degradable armor from the beginning, I probably would have learned to live with it much faster. It's just having it imposed on you after having played without it that makes it so annoying)

 

Edit: I also agree with hat Kaftan said. Either it impacts the game in such a way that you're careful with using your best weapons (because they may break when you really need them) or it only adds tedium and doesn't really have any lasting effect at all. If it's the latter, then I just think it's a pointless addition.

Edited May 13, 2007 by Spider

[Tale]

I don't like it because it just gives me another task to worry about. During the section of the game between leaving the starting trader and getting to the bar, it's ridiculous to deal with. Going back to the first trader is a long walk and requires you to either deal with the military camp or go backwards through the electric field (which isn't designed for going through that way). It's just way too long a period of time with your armor about to crap out on you.

 

And I can't carry around several suits of armor. I can hardly carry enough ammo. Spare armor is just going too far!

 

But, since I've already beat it, I guess I should let the purist in me out a bit.

Edited May 13, 2007 by Tale

[Slowtrain]

well, I do agree that the whole armor/weapon wear and tear could have been better integrated into the game. As could the trading system. I guess I just prefer to play within the limitations set by the game rather than bypass them. Also, I do just like the fact that my best gun will eventually wear out if I use it all the time; it just forces me to think a little bit more as I play. Same with the limited inventory. After all, a game without rules isn't much of a game.

[Spider]

I also prefer to play with the limits set by the designers. I haven't modded away the wear and tear yet. And it's still only the armor that's really irking me. I was fine with the weapon degradation and the limited inventory. As you say, weapons wearing down adds another tactical dimension to the game. You have to think whether or not you need to use your power weapon in every situation. But the armor doesn't do that. You can't exactly run around with different armors. So the armor wearing down just adds tedium, not tactics.

 

Again, had it been implemented from the start, I probably would have minded it a lot less.

[metadigital]

Maybe the designers are aiming to make the realistic point that combatants (read: the PC) need to avoid being hit by enemy fire?

 

Sort of an enforced stealth modus operandi.

[Kaftan Barlast]

Maybe the designers are aiming to make the realistic point that combatants (read: the PC) need to avoid being hit by enemy fire?

 

Sort of an enforced stealth modus operandi.

 

 

Then they wouldnt have had weapon damage so low or implemented artefacts with +600% health "

[@\NightandtheShape/@]

The thing about degrading equipment is that its essentially a Sisyphean task. Using Oblivon as a very good example; something breaks, you buy some hammers and fix it so all you need to think about is always having hammers. In Stalker you break, run to trader, replace. In both examples youre just going through a very tedious and annoying process just to maintain an equilibrium. Its like pouring water into a leaking cup.

 

 

So, the whole feature is really completely unnescessary. It might see like a good idea for realism, but it is really just bad game design when applied.

 

I disagree... Stalker has an emphisis on realism, well it's trying to recreate a more realistic experience. I am not claiming that it does.

 

The relationship is nothing like that of oblivion as a weapon that is damaged is more likely to misfire, and it also increase general difficulty by making it a bad idea for the player to keep using the same weapon over and over.

 

Removing the weapon damage rebalances the game in favour of the player, so much so it risks breaking one of the apparently core game mechanics as the player fights with weapons often clearly.