Jump to navigation

S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Shadow Of Chernobyl Comments by Jim Rossignol

19 March, 2007

In the zone.

Read entire article.

Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!

first 50 | Comments: 51-100 of 156 in total | next 50 »

Poster
Comment Low-scoring comments hidden. Log in to see them!
PearOfAnguish
19/03/07 @ 12:30
#51
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Hey, Mr Reviewer Person, did you figure out a way to repair weapons?
ruckus
19/03/07 @ 12:36
#52
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
My new pc comes soon so I'll either get this or Company of Heroes. Probably this though (plus the fact that Amazon have reduced the film Stalker to £9.99).
spongebob
19/03/07 @ 12:39
#53
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I have a feeling this one will get 6 or 7 at the most on EDGE. Hopefully there will be a demo because I am still not sure if I want to spend money on a game that might not run on my computer... Grr..
Adam_T
19/03/07 @ 12:45
#54
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
The sky look awesome on that last screenshot,

sounds like it was rushed out though, ahh well.

Behold the patch process!
Adam_T
19/03/07 @ 12:47
#55
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"has doubts too, as this is after all a Thq game."

You've not played Company of Heroes or any of the Dawn of War series I'm guessing?
gaselite
19/03/07 @ 12:47
#56
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
The way the review describes some things like the foundations of the concept or the atmosphere sounds brilliant. Definitely worth trying out for me. Thank god for new comp soon :D
UncleLou
19/03/07 @ 12:49
#57
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Of course it's not finely polished. It was an extremely ambitious project that went through several serious changes during the development. It's a bit of a wonder that it got released at all, and even more so that it is , from all we've read so far, very, very good. I'd rather play an ambitious, unusual game like this with a few rough edges than the next finely polished, linear generic game.

Reducing the score because of a lack of polish (or reducing it even further, if it has been reduced) would be criminal, and a completely wrong signal. Unless the game is somehow broken, of course, which the review doesn't sound like at all.

We need this kind of game, let's be gald that stuff like this still gets made at all, not punish it because it's not perfect.
Edited 1 times, most recently on 19/03/07 @ 12:50
zoidberg
19/03/07 @ 12:57
#58
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I've just played it. GET OVER IT. this is not Boiling Point. this is just unfinished ukrainian semi-crap. It should've been finished and released 3 years ago. It's bloated and unpolished, thanks to probable lazy-ness, lack of money or plain bad designing. It's not the "lack of time" because they had plenty of it.
kuzanagi
19/03/07 @ 12:58
#59
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
@UncleLou

+1 - Preach on brotha!
bcolter
19/03/07 @ 13:06
#60
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Again 8/10... Even with problems? I understand the story/atmophere aspect, but there are many problems highlighted in this review. I doubt that I would have been as tolerant.

That said, I am very interested in the game, but I'll wait until after the first major patch.
PearOfAnguish
19/03/07 @ 13:15
#61
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
8/10 is quite reasonable. It's a lot of fun and that shines through any rough edges.

And again, a patch will only solve minor problems, it's not going to fix the story.
urban
19/03/07 @ 13:16
#62
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
oh good.
Caimbeul
19/03/07 @ 13:22
#63
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"What is important is ."

ie: the things that are important actually are.
smelly
19/03/07 @ 13:24
#64
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I normally hate fps games, i find them all to be too samey and dull. But for some reason i like the idea of this, unfortunately i dont think my pc will be able to cope :-(
Quine
19/03/07 @ 13:33
#65
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"There's something different about Stalker. It's almost as if the most important aspect of it is not combat, or interaction, or story-telling, but survival."

Wow- imagine a game where you *definitely* want to avoid some of the fights...
UncleLou
19/03/07 @ 13:34
#66
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Ambition never wastes time.

Who said they did?

Ambition goes unusual, untrodden paths, with a higher risk of taking a path that might not lead anywhere and having to return, looking for another one. ;p
UncleLou
19/03/07 @ 13:37
#67
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Anyway, FWIW, EG's review was the "worst" so far. It got a "9" in Gamestar and Games TM, and several times an "8.5" in other British and German printmags. Not saying they can't be all wrong, but so far it doesn't sound like it's a game that's burdened with overwhelming problems at all.

I for one am really looking forward to it again, after having pretty much forgotten it for years.
WrongShui
19/03/07 @ 13:42
#68
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
How is 8 bad?

Explain.

Is it because its 2 less than 10 or 1 less than 9?
UncleLou
19/03/07 @ 13:43
#69
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Not sure if you mean me - I only used "worst" in comparison to the other scores I know of. An 8 sounds good to me.
smelly
19/03/07 @ 13:49
#70
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
>How is 8 bad?


Wait a minute.. did i just read that correctly? People are moaning because it's 8/10? Wtf?
ZuluHero
19/03/07 @ 13:57
#71
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
i think that's his point.
Introspectre
19/03/07 @ 14:01
#72
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Damn. I really wanted this to be crap. That would have been funny.

Oh yea, will my PC run this?
redcords
19/03/07 @ 14:10
#73
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
the line that stood out to me from the review was:

"there's almost nothing to care about"

A lot of the other stuff sounded very interesting, in particular the atmosphere. But if you don't care about it then why play?

Reminds me a bit of what Pathologic was trying to achieve, in all it's broken potential.
Garibaldi
19/03/07 @ 14:11
#74
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Yes, as others have called for, let's have the specs of the P.C that was used to review this! My 3500+ and 6800GT are nervous at the game's imminent arrival.
Azazel
19/03/07 @ 14:26
#75
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I'd rather play an ambitious, unusual game like this with a few rough edges than the next finely polished, linear generic game.

tru.dat
UncleLou
19/03/07 @ 14:27
#76
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Wait a minute.. did i just read that correctly? People are moaning because it's 8/10? Wtf?


They're moaning because the score might be too high, not too low.
BremXJones
19/03/07 @ 14:27
#77
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I reviewed it for Gamer UK and gave it 87%.

(Think review goes online tomorrow)

I'd have given it an 8/10 too on EG. It's not a nine, but it's a damn good eight.

KG
MrWonderstuff
19/03/07 @ 14:36
#78
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Ah Mr Gillen? How did you find the performance? Not much has been said in any reviews about this (ie PCG, PCZone, Eurogamer).
BremXJones
19/03/07 @ 14:40
#79
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Performance was okay, basically. It's fairly demanding, but it's not Supreme Commander.

I mean, I was initially playing it* on a shitty machine (P2.6, 1 Gig, 9500 or something) and with stuff turned right down - and still looked okay. Had to turn it *right* down though.

(Were I to call, I think the memory is going to be the issue. You'll want at least 1 Gig.)

My general rules of games reviews is to only talk abouts something if it's an issue. By it not being mentioned you can generally assume it's not a problem, at least compared to the more obvious ones.

KG

*Before swapping to a better one.
Edited 2 times, most recently on 19/03/07 @ 15:27
stoopidgreg
19/03/07 @ 14:40
#80
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"I'm going to leave this for now but I'll definitely pick it up once Play.com start selling it for £19.99! :)"

you can get the limited edition for £18 with delivery on http://www.blahdvd.com
stoopidgreg
19/03/07 @ 14:45
#81
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
seems blahdvd don't list the limited edition anymore, i must have been lucky when i preordered it a couple of days ago :D

you can still get the normal one for £17.99 though

link here
Introspectre
19/03/07 @ 15:00
#82
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
You know times have *really* changed when a 7800 is "shitty".

MrWonderstuff won't be a happy bunny.
ZuluHero
19/03/07 @ 15:17
#83
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
MINIMUM SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS:
Microsoft® Windows® XP (Service Pack 2)/Microsoft® Windows® 2000 SP4 ; Intel Pentium 4 2 Ghz/AMD XP 2200+ ; 512 MB RAM ; 10 GB available hard drive space ; 128 MB DirectX® 9c compatible card/ nVIDIA® GeForce 5700/ATI Radeon® 9600 ; DirectX® 9 compatible sound card ; LAN/ Internet connection with Cable/DSL speeds for multiplayer ; Keyboard, Mouse. ;

RECOMMENDED SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS:
Intel Core 2 Duo E6400/AMD Athlon 64 X2 4200+ ; 1 GB RAM or better ; 256 MB DirectX® 9c compatible card/ nVIDIA® GeForce 7900/ ATI Radeon® X1850.


does that help anyone?
BremXJones
19/03/07 @ 15:28
#84
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Introspectre: Sorry - was wrong. Was a ATI 9700, not a GeForce.

KG
Introspectre
19/03/07 @ 15:37
#85
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"Introspectre: Sorry - was wrong. Was a ATI 9700, not a GeForce"

Well, they both have a 7 in the name. I can see why you got confused. :p
Flightrisker
19/03/07 @ 15:48
#86
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
STALKER review? I never thought I'd see the day.


Tomorrow: Duke Nukem Forever.
smelly
19/03/07 @ 15:51
#87
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Is there a demo anywhere i can try to see if this runs on my pc?
smelly
19/03/07 @ 15:52
#88
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
>You know times have *really* changed when a 7800 is "shitty".


Yeah.. about 3 years worth of time! That's long enough amount of time for microsoft to release 2 consoles in!
fawe3
19/03/07 @ 16:49
#89
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
As far as I know its optimised preaty good for medium end pc's. Probably a little worse than hl2, but its not gothic 3 or supreme commander.
Edited 1 times, most recently on 19/03/07 @ 16:52
Prey
19/03/07 @ 16:57
#90
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Stalker has yet to get a -80% review score. I'd say that means GSC done good.

Now where's that damn review copy THQ promised me? >:(
Leonaedas
19/03/07 @ 17:27
#91
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Nope, no demo for STALKER, but there is a MP Beta ongoing at present.

Regarding performance, you obviously get the best out of the game with a kick-arse PC, but there's a huge amount of scalability in the options.
sajtion
19/03/07 @ 17:28
#92
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
i guess it failed just short of spectacular. it's very good game but it's not polished and it's irritating as hell
GitSomE UK
19/03/07 @ 17:47
#93
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Wasn't sure about this but I'm going to go for it the whole "didn't know what I was doing one minute to the next in the story" sounds pretty cool especially considering the environment it was set in.

After all if you knew what you were going to do and where you were going I think you'd lose the suspense. The thing I didn't like about HL in it's various forms was you were on rails no matter how good it looked. I felt I was steared from one set piece to another.

Guns - Check
Chernobler - Check
Spooky weird shit - Check

SOLD!
smelly
19/03/07 @ 18:23
#94
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I *want* this.. but im worried it might be another fear..

Hmm.. ah well.. soddit.. lets give it a bash..
thefilthandthefury
19/03/07 @ 19:07
#95
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Sounds bloody brilliant! Can't wait to get my hands on this one.
MrWonderstuff
19/03/07 @ 19:43
#96
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
The MP is good fun but hackers are rife (well in the beta anyhow). I hope the full game doesnt suffer likewise.
Prey
19/03/07 @ 20:20
#97
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Aye, I think the MP deserves a bit more credit than the review gave it though tbh. Been playing the MP Beta a while now and games can range from mass manic bloodshed to slow distant sniper duels. The vast amount of cover make for some awesome games of cat & mouse, that's for sure. Plus it's highly addictive and just as instantly accessible as Counter-Strike ever was.

From what I have exprienced of the MP, and what this review tells me about the SP - S.T.A.L.K.E.R. sounds like it should be one hell of a worthy package considering the long wait. And that will do me just fine.
zendragon
19/03/07 @ 20:22
#98
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Sounds fresh and cool. Good.
dryden555
19/03/07 @ 21:20
#99
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
rumor has it that turning off dynamic lighting greatly increases framerate without making the game look terrible
MrWonderstuff
19/03/07 @ 21:52
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Yea it does. In fact the different between dynamic (directx 9 mode) and 'static' (directx 8 mode) is around 40fps. You miss out on the bump mapping and nice shadows but it runs smoother than butter and looks sharper than a pin.

IMHO I think the directx 9 renderer is badly implemented.

first 50 | Comments: 51-100 of 156 in total | next 50 »

Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!

Advertisement

X View gallery