S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2: Heart of Chornobyl

[ciox]

STALKER's A-Life was never that complex though. From what I remember once creatures were too far from you, or in another level, they were turned into abstract pieces of data, like numbers in an array.
These abstract pieces had very simplified pathfinding and behavior, and would perform a kind of RPG auto-battles to determine who won if they bumped into enemies, if they survived anomalies, and stuff like that. This is what made it possible for you to leave a level and then find all the stalkers dead while you were away. It's also why you sometimes found weird stuff like 15 perfectly cloned mutant corpses sitting in a circle. This abstraction is what made A-Life possible on old hardware.
Anyway, there's no reason why you couldn't do this stuff in Unreal, it would probably work the same way.

 

[Drakortha]

The developers would sooner spend their resources developing a 1st-Person cutscene where the player character is fighting off a Snork with a knife, rather than develop something like a-life. Because a cutscene fits better into their dumb trailers and it's more easily consooomable.

 

[Baron Dupek]

STALKER's A-Life was never that complex though

and yet concepts like this are nowhere to be seen in other games
almost like devs were not capable to make something like this... or anything that would make gameplay interesting

 

[Hace El Oso]

STALKER's A-Life was never that complex though. From what I remember once creatures were too far from you, or in another level, they were turned into abstract pieces of data, like numbers in an array.
These abstract pieces had very simplified pathfinding and behavior, and would perform a kind of RPG auto-battles to determine who won if they bumped into enemies, if they survived anomalies, and stuff like that. This is what made it possible for you to leave a level and then find all the stalkers dead while you were away. It's also why you sometimes found weird stuff like 15 perfectly cloned mutant corpses sitting in a circle. This abstraction is what made A-Life possible on old hardware.
Anyway, there's no reason why you couldn't do this stuff in Unreal, it would probably work the same way.

Yeah, it’s great. What else is there?

Anyway, there's no reason why you couldn't do this stuff in Unreal, it would probably work the same way.

And yet, nobody will ever do it.

 

[Gerrard]

STALKER's A-Life was never that complex though

and yet concepts like this are nowhere to be seen in other games
almost like devs were not capable to make something like this... or anything that would make gameplay interesting

It's almost as if it didn't add anything of worth to the gameplay, autist.

 

[Iucounu]

STALKER's A-Life was never that complex though

and yet concepts like this are nowhere to be seen in other games

I already mentioned ARK Survival Evolved, but The Long Dark also has a kind of faux A-Life. Animals will mostly roam within the small area where they spawned, but gradually move spawning location any time the player goes in and out of buildings (the latter loads separate mini levels), thus giving an illusion of long term migration. In addition to this, wounded animals seem to flee in semi-random directions (not sure about how that works, it seems they usually die in similar locations anyway). Bears and wolves may pick up your scent, close in on your location, and once seeing you start stalking you directly. Sometimes a wolf may (randomly?) get close to a deer or rabbit, start chasing it and sometimes kill it.

almost like devs were not capable to make something like this... or anything that would make gameplay interesting

I guess most studios lack the ambition, just like they no longer bother to make their own engines. Maybe it's also considered a waste of money on average players, that rush through every game they play without replaying any of them. But if you want people to keep replaying and recommending your games even after 15 years (like original Stalker) I think it's worth the investment.

 

[Ol' Willy]

The closest thing to A-life is AI in grand strategies like Civ or paradox map painters

 

[deuxhero]

X4: Foundations does simulate the entire world, down the supply chain for the lowliest fighter. There's simplified calculations if the player is far away, but the AI does build and can have their supply lines targetted.

 

[TalesfromtheCrypt]

From the trailers, it looks like Stalker with updated graphics alright. I don't really get the hate. These days, it's probably a safer bet to assume it will be shit, but I didn't see anything particularly jarring.
SoC was a great game, but it was a mostly linear story romp with some repetitive side missions added for flavour. A-life was pretty basic and didn't add that much to the actual gameplay, it's probably not that hard to recreate it in Unreal.

 

[TalesfromtheCrypt]

Watched latest trailer, realized that they're using American voice actors and not Ukrainian actors speaking English with a Ukrainian accent.

Total fucking bullshit.

I'm a Ukrainian American who has never been to Ukraine and the main appeal of the original games were the genuine Ukrainian atmosphere, almost as if I was visiting Chernobyl and Pripyat in-person.

It doesn't make sense to use American voice actors in this context, it's about as bad as American movies that hire British actors to play a European character, regardless of whether they're from Brittain or not.

Fuck, I would accept American voice actors doing their best to speak with a fake Ukrainian/Russian accent, LOL... But I'll settle for using Ukrainian audio in-game with English subtitles!

Why would the characters speak English with a Ukranian/Russian accent?

When non-english speaking characters speak English in movies or games, they are not actually speaking English in-world. You are supposed to assume they are speaking in their native language, the use of English is just a device for the audience to understand the dialogue. So adding an accent to the dub is kinda dumb, although I agree it adds atmosphere.

I assume they will add a subtitle system to the game this time, so for maximum atmosphere you could just play it in Ukranian with English subtitles.

 

[Hace El Oso]

A-life was pretty basic and didn't add that much to the actual gameplay, it's probably not that hard to recreate it in Unreal.

So then, surely it’ll be included, right? Right?

 

[TalesfromtheCrypt]

A-life was pretty basic and didn't add that much to the actual gameplay, it's probably not that hard to recreate it in Unreal.

So surely it’ll be done then, right? Right?

I have no fucking clue man, at least they claim so on the website?

A-Life 2.0 life-simulating system builds a holistic live environment where player's actions have an impact on the world of the Zone.

The game might turn out shit for all I know, but I haven't seen any substantial complaints yet.

"The trailers show only scripted cutscenes" -> Yeah, I hate cinematic trailers too, but they really don't tell us anything about the gameplay and how often these cutscenes will occur.
"I just want to explore the zone, not follow some story" -> Fuck off Anomaly fanboys, the original game was mainly story driven. If anything, I assume the zone will be bigger and more open than in SoC.
"Difficulty will be dumbed down" -> Again, fuck off Anomaly fanboys. The original game was never some hardcore survival game, it was mildly challenging at times on master difficulty.
"Too much shooting, the game looks like CoD" -> the original Stalker was non-stop shooting
"It won't have A-Life" -> How the fuck can we know, the devs claim it will have.
"Why are they speaking English without accent" -> Just play the game with original VO and subtitles instead of using the english dub with silly accents.

Also, it seems many detractors are Vatniks who are butthurt the game won't be available in Russian/sold in Russia or some shit? I thought hohols were corrupt untermenschen that need to be exterminated, why would you want to play anything made by them?

 

[Konjad]

"It won't have A-Life" -> How the fuck can we know, the devs claim it will have.

but the dude responsible for it is dead, so whomever picked it up after him will have some work to get back to it

 

[Onionguy]

"It won't have A-Life" -> How the fuck can we know, the devs claim it will have.

but the dude responsible for it is dead, so whomever picked it up after him will have some work to get back to it

The guy responsible for A-life is Dmitriy Iassenev. Yes, he went to war, but as far as I know, there is nothing on him being dead. You must have confused him with Volodymyr Yezhov.

 

[Iucounu]

SoC was a great game, but it was a mostly linear story romp with some repetitive side missions added for flavour. A-life was pretty basic and didn't add that much to the actual gameplay,

A-Life is what makes freeplay (and replay) interesting. The actual quests (like "Bring the leg of a boar") are just excuses for the player to go out in the Zone and experience the A-Life. If you just play it for the actual quests you're missing 90% of what the game is about.

it's probably not that hard to recreate it in Unreal.

It shouldn't be, if the will and know-how is there. But all those cheesy cutscenes cost money too, and most game developers today seem unable to customize third-party game engines.

 

[Iucounu]

"The trailers show only scripted cutscenes" -> Yeah, I hate cinematic trailers too, but they really don't tell us anything about the gameplay and how often these cutscenes will occur.

If all these cutscenes were only made for marketing they don't make much sense to me, so I assume they'll be used in the game too. And (unlike the more vague, dreamlike cutscenes in SoC) it seems these are mostly used to deliver dialogs for specific quests, so in a worst-case scenario every single quest will have one.

"I just want to explore the zone, not follow some story" -> Fuck off Anomaly fanboys, the original game was mainly story driven.

No, in SoC you can freeplay as much as you like and explore much of the Zone (even many areas ahead of the plot) while ignoring the main story. Furthermore, much of the backstory and lore is only revealed by exploring and talking to random NPCs, something players rushing through the game will miss completely.

If anything, I assume the zone will be bigger and more open than in SoC.

Yes they claim it will have all the previous games' levels, and then maybe also new areas in between these levels. That may sound good for marketing, but it's a lot of space to fill with content.

"Difficulty will be dumbed down" -> Again, fuck off Anomaly fanboys. The original game was never some hardcore survival game, it was mildly challenging at times on master difficulty.

It can always be made dumber, especially if the goal is to help console gamers.

"It won't have A-Life" -> How the fuck can we know, the devs claim it will have.

I believe it when I see it. That marketing so far focuses on cutscenes may say something about the type of game GSC wants to make, or the type of consumer GSC is targetting.

 

[TalesfromtheCrypt]

Iucounu No, of course they did not create these scripted story sequences just for the trailer. Obviously they will want to replace the simple, text based dialogues with these scripted moments at least for major story events, to bring it up to what is considered the modern standard for these kinds of games. I also I prefer the way the original games did it.

My hope it that these scripted sequences and the dramatic talking will take place mostly in major story moments and not disrupt the in-between, moment to moment gameplay too much. Those story trailers obviously condense the scripted sequences.

 

[Harthwain]

"I just want to explore the zone, not follow some story" -> Fuck off Anomaly fanboys, the original game was mainly story driven. If anything, I assume the zone will be bigger and more open than in SoC.

Bullshit. You could take a break from the main story and just explore the Zone. In fact, most of my playtime was focused on me just wandering around (S.T.A.L.K.E.R. had great atmosphere that suited exploration). You could finish the story part really quickly if you beelined for it and it wasn't even that good (I'd call it serviceable, at best).

the original Stalker was non-stop shooting

True, but Stalker at least had semi-realistic take on shooting compared to more mainstream shooters out there (bullets could go off target, you had headshots, different ammo for different weapons, etc.), at least before you were in the endgame. You also had some light survival elements (I am including anomalies in that).

 

[TalesfromtheCrypt]

"I just want to explore the zone, not follow some story" -> Fuck off Anomaly fanboys, the original game was mainly story driven. If anything, I assume the zone will be bigger and more open than in SoC.

Bullshit. You could take a break from the main story and just explore the Zone. In fact, most of my playtime was focused on me just wandering around (S.T.A.L.K.E.R. had great atmosphere that suited exploration). You could finish the story part really quickly if you beelined for it and it wasn't even that good (I'd call it serviceable, at best).

the original Stalker was non-stop shooting

True, but Stalker at least had semi-realistic take on shooting compared to more mainstream shooters out there (bullets could go off target, you had headshots, different ammo for different weapons, etc.), at least before you were in the endgame. You also had some light survival elements (I am including anomalies in that).

I must have played a different game. The locations in SoC were too small and had too little non-story content to offer meaningful exploration. It was a nice break of pace to loot stashes or do some side missions between the story progression. But the idea that exploring the zone was something substantial that you could do alternatively to the story seems absurd to me. It is not like in open world rpgs where you can ignore the MQ and still have tons of meaningful content. All underground "dungeon" locations were also story-gated and story-related. All side-quests are trivial „fetch that“ or „kill that“ affairs.

I actually hope that they make the zone significantly bigger in Stalker 2.

 

[soutaiseiriron]

Bullshit. You could take a break from the main story and just explore the Zone. In fact, most of my playtime was focused on me just wandering around (S.T.A.L.K.E.R. had great atmosphere that suited exploration). You could finish the story part really quickly if you beelined for it and it wasn't even that good (I'd call it serviceable, at best).

i did most of the side content in SOC out of force of habit and all of it was utterly meaningless. CS and COP were a little better though. stalker never struck me as a game that functioned at all as an open world walking sim. if anything i began to hate the walking sim part since SOC had no fast travel and the meaningless side content forces you to cross 2 loading zones each time. the only fun exploration that stalker had was around buildings and figuring out the goofy jumps to find secret stashes.

True, but Stalker at least had semi-realistic take on shooting compared to more mainstream shooters out there (bullets could go off target, you had headshots, different ammo for different weapons, etc.), at least before you were in the endgame. You also had some light survival elements (I am including anomalies in that).

what mainstream shooters are you even comparing it to? crediting a FPS game with anything resembling a realistic gun with having bloom/spread and headshots is like crediting a lake for having water. the bullet spread is also so fucking fake in SOC because all of the low tier rifles will shoot the same as a makarov so long range combat is impossible and you can't hit a torso at 50m without 2/3 bullets missing, even while crouched and still (oh and crouching also magically decreases the bullet spread by like 50%)

 

[Harthwain]

I must has played a different game. The locations in SoC were too small and had too little non-story content to offer meaningful exploration.

I guess that depends on what you mean by "meaningful exploration" or "little non-story content". I just liked getting into various places. And the number of locations was large enough to provide variety, even if locations themselves weren't big (I would still consider them to be reasonable in size though):

https://lost-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Zones

But the idea that exploring the zone was something substantial that you could do alternatively to the story seems absurd to me. It is not like in open world rpgs where you can ignore the MQ and still have tons of meaningful content.

It wasn't an open world game, but you could walk between hubs freely (granted, up to a certain point) without needing to concern yourself with the main quest. There were also optional quests to spice the exploration:

https://stalker.fandom.com/wiki/List_of_optional_missions_in_Shadow_of_Chernobyl

i did most of the side content in SOC out of force of habit and all of it was utterly meaningless.

If by "utterly meaningless" you mean "it had no impact on the main story", then I agree. But that should be expected by most games that are narratively driven (including RPGs, by the way, games that pride themselves on player's choice). Shadow of Chernobyl wasn't supposed to be as player/faction-driven as it was originally intended. Clear Sky and Call of Pripyat tried to actively do something more meaningful with the concept of dynamic factions, although the results were mixed at best.

stalker never struck me as a game that functioned at all as an open world walking sim. if anything i began to hate the walking sim part since SOC had no fast travel and the meaningless side content forces you to cross 2 loading zones each time. the only fun exploration that stalker had was around buildings and figuring out the goofy jumps to find secret stashes.

Well, like I said before, I simply enjoyed walking the Zone and checking out places. I would struggle to name another game where I was as excited to explore dark areas with a flashlight as I was with S.T.A.L.K.E.R. Throw in anomalies and mutants/zombies, and it can be pretty interesting experience. Hell, even fighting regular Stalkers was fun to me in that game.

what mainstream shooters are you even comparing it to? crediting a FPS game with anything resembling a realistic gun with having bloom/spread and headshots is like crediting a lake for having water.

I had Battlefield: Bad Company 2 in particular in mind. I stopped playing Call of Duty after the first game.

the bullet spread is also so fucking fake in SOC because all of the low tier rifles will shoot the same as a makarov so long range combat is impossible and you can't hit a torso at 50m without 2/3 bullets missing, even while crouched and still (oh and crouching also magically decreases the bullet spread by like 50%)

I will take fake bullet trajectory when firing at long distances over being able to land hits precisely where you are aiming without regard to what kind if weapon you are using. The fact that I had to adjust my aim and control my fire was something I actually liked about S.T.A.L.K.E.R. Hitting enemies in the head for the insta-kills in order to conserve ammo was another interesting aspect of it (especially if you were using NATO weapons, because ammo to these guns was less commonplace than ammo used by the Warsaw Pact weaponry).

 

[Ol' Willy]

what mainstream shooters are you even comparing it to? crediting a FPS game with anything resembling a realistic gun with having bloom/spread and headshots is like crediting a lake for having water. the bullet spread is also so fucking fake in SOC because all of the low tier rifles will shoot the same as a makarov so long range combat is impossible and you can't hit a torso at 50m without 2/3 bullets missing, even while crouched and still (oh and crouching also magically decreases the bullet spread by like 50%)

- every bullet is physically simulated, no hitscan shit
- bullet drop
- ricochets (you can kill people with ricochets too)
- penetration values for different ammo types
- bullet velocities
- grenade physics: game engine actually simulates shrapnel from grenades

Spread and damage distribution for weapons are bollocks, but this is the input values by the choice of game designers because MUH BALINCE, the core system is nothing but solid

Few things more satisfying than headshot with Vintorez against moving target from 100m

 

[Silva]

"I just want to explore the zone, not follow some story" -> Fuck off Anomaly fanboys, the original game was mainly story driven. If anything, I assume the zone will be bigger and more open than in SoC.

Bullshit. You could take a break from the main story and just explore the Zone. In fact, most of my playtime was focused on me just wandering around (S.T.A.L.K.E.R. had great atmosphere that suited exploration). You could finish the story part really quickly if you beelined for it and it wasn't even that good (I'd call it serviceable, at best).

the original Stalker was non-stop shooting

True, but Stalker at least had semi-realistic take on shooting compared to more mainstream shooters out there (bullets could go off target, you had headshots, different ammo for different weapons, etc.), at least before you were in the endgame. You also had some light survival elements (I am including anomalies in that).

I must have played a different game. The locations in SoC were too small and had too little non-story content to offer meaningful exploration. It was a nice break of pace to loot stashes or do some side missions between the story progression. But the idea that exploring the zone was something substantial that you could do alternatively to the story seems absurd to me. It is not like in open world rpgs where you can ignore the MQ and still have tons of meaningful content. All underground "dungeon" locations were also story-gated and story-related. All side-quests are trivial „fetch that“ or „kill that“ affairs.

I actually hope that they make the zone significantly bigger in Stalker 2.

SoC is really like that.

But CoP changed it and infused the kind of exploration you're talking about.

 

[Iucounu]

Is some mild trolling taking place in the thread? It's a known viral marketing tactic to post intentionally silly things, in order to provoke corrections and reactions from other members. Just curious, please don't stop.

 

[Iucounu]

I must have played a different game. The locations in SoC were too small and had too little non-story content to offer meaningful exploration. It was a nice break of pace to loot stashes or do some side missions between the story progression. But the idea that exploring the zone was something substantial that you could do alternatively to the story seems absurd to me. It is not like in open world rpgs where you can ignore the MQ and still have tons of meaningful content.

Thankfully SoC is not filled with soulless set pieces and relationship drama in every corner, that's exactly the kind of content that makes me avoid certain games, like The Witcher 3.

I think the main fun in exploring SoC (besides the joy of sight-seeing) is finding all the high-end artifacts, rare NPC dialogs about the lore, and sometimes unique loot in NPC stashes (along with the nice stash descriptions in SoC and CS, sadly missing in CoP). Some players also like to track NPCs wandering around the Zone (such as Wolf or Poker). And of course being able to shoot things without restrictions (somewhat removed in CS).

It also pays to return to previous areas multiple times, since they often change both due to the A-Life mechanics and sometimes after certain main story events. For example, if you help Freedom against Duty in Army Warehouses, the Bar area becomes a completely different experience with the now hostile Dutyers (but of course you need to go back through the Bar area in order to notice this). Another example is the side-quest https://stalker.fandom.com/wiki/Protect_the_rookie_camp_from_the_Mercs which is only available after doing the X18 lab mission, so if you continue directly to the Bar after Dark Valley you'll miss it.

All underground "dungeon" locations were also story-gated and story-related.

But you can at least return later, perhaps to loot stashes that were not available to you the first time (like the Vintar in the X16 lab).

All side-quests are trivial „fetch that“ or „kill that“ affairs.

The fun often happens on your trip to the quest location. The journey is the point, not the destination, the fetch quests themselves are just an excuse to make you move your character around.

I actually hope that they make the zone significantly bigger in Stalker 2.

I fear that may result in fatigue already after your first 100 hour game, ruining the fun of replays. Not many games make you want to start a new 100 hour run right after the previous one.