Bethesda gains rights to STALKER, proceeds to turn it into horseshit

FALLOUT: STALKER

Also can't wait for the all American Voice Over team with their accents try to impersonate Ukranians
 
I feel that Bethesda very well could mess this up, but a Stalker title on one of the most easily modded engines out there? If Bethsda messes it up, I'm pretty sure the awesome Russian modders will fix it.
 
The article says that they have the right to the name, but cant extend the universe. Maybe they are just getting rid of competition to make room for the next Fallout.
 
They're going to remake it on the Gamebryo engine and replace A-Life with Radiant AI.
 
As long as they make a good world map the fans can fix everything else.
 
Can't say I'm surprised, but who knows it could be done well.
 
It can't be any worse than the previous games.
 
Not long ago everyone was raving about Bethesda's latest (?) title - Skyrim (which wasn't really that much better than than the hated-by-all Oblivion, which I enjoyed BTW).

This could go both ways with equal probability IMHO.
 
Unfocused said:
Not long ago everyone was raving about Bethesda's latest (?) title - Skyrim (which wasn't really that much better than than the hated-by-all Oblivion, which I enjoyed BTW).

This could go both ways with equal probability IMHO.
Click to expand...
I never understood the Oblivion hate. Everyone was crazy about it when it was released, it won all these awards. Now it's the biggest piece of shit apparently? I still play it from time to time. Skyrim is better, sure, but they both suck in comparison to Morrowind :D

This game is going to be like all of Bethesda's games. The Fallouts and Elder Scrolls, just with a STALKER theme instead of post-apocalyptic or medieval. Which could work well. Fallout 3 and New Vegas were fun as ****. So were Oblivion and Skyrim.
 
I dont remember many people saying Oblivion was great, ever. At least, not here. Of course, everyone still played it for dozens/hundreds of hours, but most people here said it was not very good.

Also, its humorous to me that you say "stalker theme instead of post-apocalyptic". Thats like saying you're going to eat an apple instead of a fruit.

Also, I got bored quickly with Fallout 3 and New Vegas both. I think the setting just doesnt do it for me, and the gameplay bored me after like 5 hours. Stalker's setting was better, but the reason the game was good, for me at least, was that it was hard and fairly realistic in terms of gun-play. I dont expect Bethesda to hold to that though. None of Bethesda's games have ever been anything but a walk in the park in terms of difficulty.
 
The reason people went wild over Oblivion was the same reason they went wild over Skyrim and the same reason they went wild over Fallout 3 - it's a big world with a lot of stuff to do, but it takes a bit of actually playing the game to discover that it lacks coherence and depth, and that none of what you can do actually means anything.
 
I think Oblivion was very good, yeh it had a lot of flaws but I think it was better overall than Skyrim. I enjoyed the former more anyway :) And yeh I got bored quickly with Fallout 3, the setting was just too vast and uninteresting, I had absolutely no joy exploring and there weren't even any joinable factions despite the fact that the player is introduced to them. I also wasn't the biggest fan of the VATS system to be honest, I think it took a lot of the challenge out of the combat.

Still, this could work well, I think it would be foolish to call Bethesda rubbish as game developers. Given their work on Fallout 3, I guess it would make sense for them to work on a game like STALKER. The previous games were decent but they just lacked so much polish and for me they fell far short of what they should have been really.

Krynn72 said:
None of Bethesda's games have ever been anything but a walk in the park in terms of difficulty.
Click to expand...

You do realise there was a difficulty meter that you could increase at any time during the game? I played Oblivion with the bar half way and I had a lot very challenging moments, I can't even begin to think how hard it would have been with full difficulty =P
 
Krynn72 said:
Also, its humorous to me that you say "stalker theme instead of post-apocalyptic". Thats like saying you're going to eat an apple instead of a fruit.
Click to expand...
Didn't even realize what I said untilI re-read my post :D

I meant it's like a different take on the same thing I guess. Stalker is more realistic and gritty and shit, Fallout is alot more cartoony and humorous.
None of Bethesda's games have ever been anything but a walk in the park in terms of difficulty.
Click to expand...
I'm actually currently playing through New Vegas on PC, and on the hardest difficulty it is pretty damn hard I gotta say. Not the hardest game, but it's a challenge.
 
The first thing I do with Bethedsa games is set the difficulty to the max. Thats the only way its even semi-enjoyable. At default its like you're a demi-god by level 10.
 
Krynn72 said:
The first thing I do with Bethedsa games is set the difficulty to the max. Thats the only way its even semi-enjoyable. At default its like you're a demi-god by level 10.
Click to expand...

Well you're obviously a much better player than I am =P
 
My impression is that Skyrim gets a lot more hate than Oblivion. As it should.

The only way I can enjoy Fallout 3 and New Vegas is going melee-only. Combat is challenging but has no strategy, but at least it's fun as hell and you have loadsa caps from selling all ammo you have.
 
Edeslash said:
Combat is challenging but has no strategy, but at least it's fun as hell and you have loadsa caps from selling all ammo you have.
Click to expand...
I thought this too. Get it for PC and don't use vats. It's so much more fun aiming with iron sights and a mouse and keyboard (that is if you are a PC gamer). Makes it more challenging in close quarters too.
 
But STALKER isn't good in a conventional sense, it was fun to a small audience of PC gamers that included the elite, loud forum master-race, but sold like shit next to its budget. Maybe they'll make it competent and approachable. Not that it's their specialty.
Fiscally it's an awesome investment, like Fallout.
given: Tightly manage budget and labor to fit a cookie cutter formula for FPS/RPG blends.\
1. Buy old game Franchise
2. Gut Depth and difficulty.
3. Don't alter name except minimalist changes. Add "reloaded" or "vengeance" or something. Ideally just give it the same name. Reinvent the entire IP as yours.
4. Tell sweaty, hungry obese master-race that their game will still have the same complex infrastructure but also be more approachable!
5. Add approachable interface, QA and tack on some CoD style multiplayer if we're lucky.


Yay![?]


Typical non-gamers didn't latch on long for a reason, yet they seem to now be munching on the Elder Scrolls franchise.

It'll get the cookie cutter that Fallout did, slicing off limbs of the precious IP dribbling blood sinewy bits all over the diehards. But in the end, they'll play and enjoy the game that comes out and forget their nostalgia is being ****ed with.


The Best trick now is just "free2play" MMO or shooter though, I suppose. Low budget potentially massive profitable reboots with nostalgia and familiarity to preserve at least a breaking even in sales.
 
Stigmata said:
The reason people went wild over Oblivion was the same reason they went wild over Skyrim and the same reason they went wild over Fallout 3 - it's a big world with a lot of stuff to do, but it takes a bit of actually playing the game to discover that it lacks coherence and depth, and that none of what you can do actually means anything.
Click to expand...

This. Seriously this. It took me around 160 hours of Skyrim to figure this out, but this.
 
BabyHeadCrab said:
The Best trick now is just "free2play" MMO or shooter though, I suppose. Low budget potentially massive profitable reboots with nostalgia and familiarity to preserve at least a breaking even in sales.
Click to expand...
A DayZ clone from Bethesda...

Dear lord.
 
Edeslash said:
My impression is that Skyrim gets a lot more hate than Oblivion. As it should.

The only way I can enjoy Fallout 3 and New Vegas is going melee-only. Combat is challenging but has no strategy, but at least it's fun as hell and you have loadsa caps from selling all ammo you have.
Click to expand...
If by challenge you mean god awful shooting mechanics and controls that make aiming a chore then yeah, it's a challenge.
 
Tollbooth Willie said:
If by challenge you mean god awful shooting mechanics and controls that make aiming a chore then yeah, it's a challenge.
Click to expand...

But the melee is shit-bad too. Maybe you're think your XHardcoreX for playing through in melee but the game is designed for that to be a viable way of doing combat. It's similarly easy, dumb as all **** and terribly unresponsive.

Haha I've never played a Bethesda game with tolerable shooting or combat mechanics. It's all so floaty. Enemies don't so much as flinch. As soon as the proverbial health bar reaches zero the enemy just collapses into a rag-doll with no animation whatsoever. It's pathetic. BUT SLOW-MOW DETH CAMZ obviously redeem Skyrim, rite?

Let's just brofist on how Bethesda's internal studio has anal butt children with Gamebryo and makes bad gaems.
 
I don't know man I mean I enjoyed watching a guy get hit in the f*cking mouth in slow motion with an axe in Skyrim.
 
Yes, I didn't mean that melee-only combat would be truly more challenging - it's nothing but running close to your enemy and spamming M1 and stimpaks. A lot of things just mess you up completely. Like Deathclaws.
 
Stigmata said:
The reason people went wild over Oblivion was the same reason they went wild over Skyrim and the same reason they went wild over Fallout 3 - it's a big world with a lot of stuff to do, but it takes a bit of actually playing the game to discover that it lacks coherence and depth, and that none of what you can do actually means anything.
Click to expand...

Most games are like though. A lot of what you do on it may be a lot of fun but it doesn't exactly mean anything.
 
Right, but meaning is rather subjective in games, so it's more about whether the game makes you feel like you've accomplished something. Most games now try to achieve this by slapping on achievements and an arbitrary level grind.
 
It's a free to play game, is it supposed to be game of the year? I don't see how that game has anything to do with The War Z. There have been terrible games using the source engine. Do those shitty games mean CS and HL2 are bad? Not at all. Your logic makes zero sense to me.

That game looks like a fun game for a free one. Battlefield Heroes looks similar to it and DICE had a hand in making that (the Alpha I believe). They also made countless other awesome awesome games. BF3 for instance. According to your logic, since they made BF: Heroes which isn't GOTY quality, that means BF3 sucks. Pretty sure BF3 has millions of players and is growing in popularity and shows no signs of stopping, really.

It's sort of dumb to look on a developers past titles. Every game is different.

As for your argument about it using the same engine: Look at the unreal engine and how many games it has made. Look at the Source engine. The engine means nothing, it's just how the devs utilize it.
 
Dog-- said:
It's sort of dumb to look on a developers past titles. Every game is different.
Click to expand...

Bullshit.
Dog said:
This game is going to be like all of Bethesda's games. The Fallouts and Elder Scrolls, just with a STALKER theme instead of post-apocalyptic or medieval. Which could work well. Fallout 3 and New Vegas were fun as ****. So were Oblivion and Skyrim.
Click to expand...

As far as the engine goes, I was merely making an observation. A bad game using a certain engine doesn't mean that another game using the same engine will be bad as well. But there's not really enough information on the War Z to make a real judgement as far as it's quality. Since so many people seem excited about it I'm inclined to be pessimistic and doubt it will be a decent game. I guess we'll find out.
 
Alright, you did get me on that. Touche. Those games are pretty similar. Mostly because Bethesda lacks creativity, but my point you quoted was crushed :cry:

I usually am pessimistic about every game that gets released too. Mostly new games are shit. Over hyped shit. But they are finally doing a game that we've all been waiting for, and I'm genuinely excited about the concept. IGN has been covering it, and it's getting pretty huge. Maybe that's just the kind of stress they need to make it actually good, hammer out all the bugs, etc, etc.

I hope, anyways.
 
Fallout too easy? ITT people who've never heard of realistic weapons damage mod.

I don't see how this news is particularly terrible, considering STALKER 2 just got scrapped.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top