Reply With QuoteBad.multi-platform
Good.technology developed by GSC
I prefer they own engine for the game than trying to adjust some generic one, because I'm almost sure the latter would fail.
http://www.gsc-game.com
GSC Game World announces S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 - the official sequel to best-selling game series - in development now. A completely new multi-platform technology developed by GSC will make the core of the game.
The game is scheduled for release in 2012.
Bad.multi-platform
Good.technology developed by GSC
I prefer they own engine for the game than trying to adjust some generic one, because I'm almost sure the latter would fail.
ground floor
Told y- wait what? 242 damns a game because it'll be on the consoles?Originally Posted by 242
That meme is getting old. And for everybody who didn't see this coming, you ought to just head back under your rock.
I saw this coming, but I still think multi-platform is bad for this game.
I'm not disagreeing. I'm saying it shouldn't be a surprise to anyone at this point. Especially when GSC announced that they were certified to develop for the X360 back in 2007.
Maybe they'll realise their core audience is on PC and ensure that's the best version. It'd be almost revolutionary for a developer to do that, but these guys seem like the sort to know which side their bread is buttered.
So it's probably going to come out in what, 2018?The game is scheduled for release in 2012
If you want to make any money these days. multiplatforms where it's at. Only problem I can see is inventory management - losing that would really kick stalker in the teeth. But Fallout 3 did it pretty well, and at least multi-platform might make sure it gets released bug-free this time. All in all not surprised, but still looking forward to it.
This. I imagine they need the console dollar to keep afloat but what the fuck would I know
Well, they kept their word about CoP...
Call of Pripyat was not monotonous. Nor were the others really, unless you decided to do the randomly generated quests which served no purpose.
I see you know as much about video games as you do about economy
I hope S.T.A.L.K.E.R 2 don`t such monotonous as previous chapters and addons...
P.S http://www.ttlg.com/forums/showthread.php?t=131946 I find that thiad about STALKER 2,too...That it??
WOWWW !!!!
USA president playing stalker !!!!!!!!!!!111
what
Considering that there're only 5 or 6 Xbox 360 devkits in Russia and/or Ukraine (I may be exaggerating. But not by a lot.), this seems likely.
The amount of unrealistic wishful thinking you people will endulge in just to ignore some of the harsher facts(like the one that a game being released both for PC and consoles will be built for the latter) never ceases to amaze me.
Bioshock Infinity will be awesome!
This will eliminate the inventory as it was before. Now you will carry a set amount of AntiRads, Bandages and Healthpacks and one body armor. You'll be able to carry two weapons, a sidearm and primary weapon.
Body armor degrading will be removed and you can perform basic upgrades to the weapons.
Thats the inventory stuff over, that just a prerequisite for working with the controller and reducing the complexity of a couch game.
The flatness and recoil of the weapons, etc. basically the complexity of the weapons has to disappear because you cannot aim with a controller, it makes no sense to have these weapon attributes, hence why weapon upgrades must be basic. It'll be a halo shooter. Try and imagine aiming like in stalker, etc. trying to predict where the enemy will be and moving a crosshair the size of a pixel in front of said enemy to compensate for the weapon, impossible!
It'll be a completely different game with the stalker storyline and perhaps atmosphere, gameplay will be a different shooter altogether.
I have a x360 and I think it's great but it's not the console fault that the company needs to maximise it's profits. In a civilised world man would make a game and choose the best platform for it.
in a civilised world, man wouldn't need money
Fallacious argument. It is our role as gamers to ensure the living standard of developers of games we love. Ideally, should they go out of business it's either because they become greedy and therefore don't deserve to continue, or because we fail providing enough revenue and they die(1). Such is the logic of art(2).
Selling your soul as a way to survive is still selling your soul. In a civilised world man would stop buying games when they start sucking or being made for money.
Of course, my opinion is based on the fact that I won't believe development costs in Eastern Europe have progressed so much in so little time. What they could do three years ago, they can still do today. I'll accept being wrong on that account upon proof.
(1) and economically dying once or twice in your life is scarcely a bad thing
(2) would you go "a man needs money" on a graphic artist who used to produce vibrant and original paintings, and later diluted his own specificity with more popular techniques and formats so he could reach more people? I sure would not.
I'll write an essay on how being demanding and having high standards is the only way to call oneself a man another day, but that's the crux of the problem.
Last edited by Briareos H; 31st Aug 2010 at 05:08.
Why don't you try economically dying once or twice in Ukraine and see how fun that turns out to be?
If you want them to churn out something on the same level of Stalker: SoC or Clear Sky or CoP, sure. If they're simply redoing SoC for the consoles and rebadging that as Stalker 2, I'll accept the 'sold their soul' argument.Selling your soul as a way to survive is still selling your soul. In a civilised world man would stop buying games when they start sucking or being made for money.
Of course, my opinion is based on the fact that I won't believe development costs in Eastern Europe have progressed so much in so little time. What they could do three years ago, they can still do today. I'll accept being wrong on that account upon proof.
As it stands, just because a PC developer moves towards developing for consoles, it doesn't automatically equate to them 'selling their souls'. There are currently nearly 80 million current-gen consoles out there, discounting the Wii. It's basic common sense.
Let's not go with the 'games are art' analogy again. Right now, games and movies are products, regardless of whether they're art. And they have to be sold. Your second footnote's working off a fallacy on its own.
I've never seen games that way and hope I never will. I can't believe you would say that on these very forums.
(no need for the usual "like it or not games are products" reply, with that logic everything is a product)
It all comes down to question of how well STALKERs sold and how well GSC is doing financially. If the games sold reasonably well(reasonably = enough to cover the expenses and to make next game, not Call of Duty style 50 million preorders), they're selling out. If they sold badly(SoC might have been successful but after CS not many people were interested in CoP) they don't really have a choice.
Since I don't know how GSC is doing I won't comment on whether they're selling out or not.
All I know is that STALKER 2 will suck
Posting Permissions
