GameBanshee Forums

Hey i was just wondering if anyone has heard of either of these two games? If so do u think my computer will be able to match or succeed the requirements? I have a Nvidia 7800 GS, 1.5Gb RAM, AMD Athlon XP 3000+@2.17Ghz.

I've heard of both Crysis and S.T.A.L.K.E.R. Also been keeping tabs on both those games. As for the system requirements, I'm not sure since it's not announced for either game yet at this moment.

I participated in Fileplanet's multiplayer open beta run of STALKER this weekend. I am amazed to see such a nice looking game run so smoothly on my computer in this day and age. Not since Half Life 2 have I had the pleasure of being surprised by such smooth framerates.

It looks decent. I'm seeing a lot of geometry (I'd say at least double of the average Half life 2 outdoor scene, possibly quite a bit more), which seems to be compensated a bit with lower resolution textures than what most modern games use. However, this is where the engine really shines. Upon drawing closer to a wall or object, a layer of detail textures is added on top which looks really pretty. Good ol' fashioned detail textures! Trust me, it works.

Unfortunately there was no landscape LOD present in the Beta. I could look a few hundred meters past the walls, which unfortunately ended in a Fog of War just below the horizon. Still, if the technology used in this beta is any indication (the terrain was still quite vast) it will probably be a smooth sailing on full landscape detail too.

So the engine is good, the multiplayer experience 'works', but how the singleplayer campaign is going to work out is still anybodies guess. There was a map of a portion of the world. I don't know how many of these portions there are (I've read in previous interviews the game world has been divided in several zones which load separately), but the (huge) multiplayer map was located in a fairly small area of that one zone. There are some towns and other buildings here and there and the wilderness between them seems quite vast.

This game has definitely caught my attention.

(edit, my system specs:

- Athon XP 3200
- ATI Radeon 9800xt, 256 mb
- 1 Gigabyte of memory

It's a safe bet this system won't be able to pull Crysis, hence my interest in this game.)

Well, I'm not really looking forward to Crysis since as I've mentioned previously, I'm not into island-hopping (hence, the reason why I avoided Far Cry). I'm also looking forward to S.T.A.L.K.E.R. more, even though I didn't play the multiplayer beta in Fileplanet.

I just had my first few hour of STALKER gameplay this weekend, here some impressions. They're a bit chaotic.

Very interesting title, sharp graphics and very good system performance. I'm wondering if it can't be be considered an RPG along the lines of the Deus Ex titles. Comparing it to System Shock would be pushing it though, there isn't much character customization here. You can get some damage-property specific resistances (chemical/electrical/high impact/heat etc..) and all 'augmentation' artifacts have pitfalls. Combining different ones allow you to balance out the negative effects of these artefacts. Weapons can be modified and react quite well when in use. Vehicles were cut from the game, very sad. The enemies around you coordinate, sometimes verbally. Don't expect Call of Duty situations here, just the occasional surprise when the enemy manages to organise a defence. Then there is the movement of the various factions (wildlife, stalker/military groups, zombies) through the game world. While this has been advertised in various interviews and through gameplay footage as fairly 'natural' proceedings, they always are set locations. You don't find large groups of animals trekking from one part of the zone to another in search of a home. Once one of the spots opens up, they spawn near the exits of your area and begin to move in. They'll assault it if another group is already resident.
The mission/quest system is too simple. The main quest is gripping, but the sidequest 'jobs' you pick up are all along the lines of either retrieving or destroying an object or person. There is a lot of text though, long notes to read and interesting dialogs with various characters. Only those who participate in the main quest have all their lines voiced, and I think it works better that way.

To be honest, there is one other word that has been on my mind a lot since I first crawled out of the junk yard where you start the game. Fallout. The theme and setting definitely work from the 1st person view, but that's nothing ground breaking. The various environmental hazard and damage types are actually a lot like what I've come across in Fallout (I'm not just talking about the radiation here - that was actually pretty absent in Fallout). Unfortunately in spite of that, the RPG system is weaker than that of Oblivion, let alone Morrowind. You always resort to the same type of counter measures, there is no real depth to that. Whether you want to play a scavenger, a radiation specialist, a scientist type who can counter biochemical threats, or just a grunt, you go through the same hoops to get there. And from what I've been able to see, all of what could be those little defining roleplaying characteristics start to overlap toward the second half of the game. If this game could have played a little bit more like System Shock, Bethesda would have had their work cut out for them.

*Note: I don't actually want a 1st person Fallout game, but it just seems to me like Bethsoft is heading in that direction. If we can't alter that course, we might as well hope they'll at least do it right.

I've just completed Stalker for the first time. I'll try not to stretch this post into a review since Tricky said most of it.
I really liked the game. It stands out as a shooter as well, but the RPG elements really add to the game's depth, especially the inventory management. I can't describe how good it felt to have finally encountered a shooter (despite the RPG elements, Stalker is still mainly a shooter) which pays such attention to the player's inventory. Also, the game has multiple endings (seven, if I recall correctly), so if you get a mediocre enging after your first time through (which is inevitable, since it depends on how much money you have, and money is really easy to get in this game - fortunately, this balance issue has been fixed in the patch), don't sweat it.
The atmosphere is simply fantastic, be it huge open areas with rusty car wrecks and abandoned villages or old Soviet underground facilites, this game does an outstanding job in providing a post-apocalyptic feel.
Also, as Tricky stated, the game reminds of Fallout on more different occasions, which really can't be bad. *mild spoiler*

Spoiler

Not to mention a great hommage to F2 - a Gauss Rifle that uses 2mm ammo, hehehe.

*spoiler end*
The game has its glitches, but I'll quote one of the NMA members (he'll recognise himself if he'll ever be reading this, hehe) to shorten this paragraph - Bugs can be fixed, but ****ty design is forever. Stalker, obviously, has the former but lacks the latter.
In my opinion, this is one of the best games in the last several years. I'd even be so bold to put it in the same category with games such as Deus Ex and System Shock 2 (despite Stalker's lack of character development), but it's still too early to tell.

Heh, it seems I've stretched it a bit too much. Ah well. :laugh:

I'm playing S.T.A.L.K.E.R. right now and I must say that it's actually quite good. I admit that I haven't gone far into the game but my first impression is that it's good. Enemy AI is smart and able to take any opportunity to flank you (though they sometimes do bone-headed things like clumping together and not move, making it easier to kill all of them with a single grenade). The A-Life technology powering the game's AI also deserves some credit as you will notice mutants fighting against Stalkers, rival Stalkers fighting among each other and etc. Nice touch indeed.

The environment in the game look convincing and does portray the post-apocalyptic mood very well. There are RPG elements in the game (item management, dialogue choices, etc.) but it doesn't impact the game that much. It's still a shooter at heart and I'm quite content at that. There are still some technical problems in the game such as performance issues and a few bugs but it doesn't affect the overall playing experience (for an open-world game, I actually find it much more stable compared to games in a similar vein like Gothic 3). Hopefully, they will be ironed out in due time.

You know, everone is talking about performance issues while I have had none. What's up with that? I can turn most of the graphical tweaks on at a resolution of 1024.768, and my close to four year old computer has absolutely no problems with it.

Tricky wrote:You know, everone is talking about performance issues while I have had none. What's up with that? I can turn most of the graphical tweaks on at a resolution of 1024.768, and my close to four year old computer has absolutely no problems with it.

That's because I'm using the 'Dynamic Lighting on objects' graphics level in the game. Sometimes it's smooth, sometimes it's not. If I switch my graphics option to 'Static lighting', then yes, everything will run silky smooth even with everything turned on to the max. This is due to the fact that this option uses the DX8 renderer while the other options, including the 'Full Dynamic Range' option, uses the DX9 renderer as what I've read from an article in FiringSquad ([url="http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/stalker_mainstream_3d_performance/page4.asp"]link[/url]).

P.S. I did some tinkering around a few days ago and found out that 'Full Dynamic Range' will reduce the game's performance considerably while providing much more realistic graphics. According to the FiringSquad [url="http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/stalker_mainstream_3d_performance/"]article[/url], even the most powerful cards couldn't even provide decent frame rates at that level.

I can't even select that. The game must mistakenly think a 9800xt doesn't qualify as DX9 hardware.

Tricky wrote:I can't even select that. The game must mistakenly think a 9800xt doesn't qualify as DX9 hardware.

That's odd. Your card is DX9 capable. Why is it not possible to access the other options? My card is a Geforce 6600 and I was able to access those graphical options.

I have heard of both, and Stalker is now on store shelves, so you can check out the specks on your own, but as for Crysis, I doubt that a DirectX 9 card will do the job. You will most likely need to buy an 8K series card to do that job.

DesR85 wrote:That's odd. Your card is DX9 capable. Why is it not possible to access the other options? My card is a Geforce 6600 and I was able to access those graphical options.

Well the 9600xt cards were the very first of ATI's DX9 line. The 9800pro and XT were basically souped up version of the 9700 with DX9 support similar enough to the 9600xt to allow them to hand out Halflife 2 preorder tickets along with both cards. So we're not really taking about different core architecture or generally much of a higher generation video card here. I know there are small differences with first the X300's. Different shader level support comes to mind, I'm sure there are other things. Perhaps it just supports DX9 to some extend

It's OK though. On my computer Stalker still looks just about as pretty as the first versions of Valve's Source engine.

SGOG wrote:I doubt that a DirectX 9 card will do the job. You will most likely need to buy an 8K series card to do that job

DirectX is a compulsory application programming interface installation for Windows games, not a hardware serial number. There is currently no higher version available.

Tricky wrote: DirectX is a compulsory application programming interface installation for Windows games, not a hardware serial number. There is currently no higher version available.

Well, there is DirectX 10 and I recall that Crysis does support DirectX 9 and 10. It's just that the only cards that support DirectX 10 are the Geforce 8 series at the moment (hopefully, ATI will have cards that suppord DX10).

I'll be damned. Why doesn't it say that on [url="http://www.microsoft.com/windows/directx/productinfo/overview/default.mspx"]the main DX page?[/url]

Oh well. That's what you get for not signing your life away to Windows Update.

Tricky wrote:I'll be damned. Why doesn't it say that on [url="http://www.microsoft.com/windows/directx/productinfo/overview/default.mspx"]the main DX page?[/url]

Oh well. That's what you get for not signing your life away to Windows Update.

Only Windows Vista have DirectX 10 (and that is the only Windows that support DirectX 10). Not sure if there will be one for Windows XP.

In that case SGOG's claim still doesn't matter because Stalker has been aimed at XP since launch. Only now are they trying to make it more Vistas compatible. I doubt I require Vistas/DX10 to see graphic effects in game that doesn't support it that well.

Sorry for not bringing this up before but there is this certain mod that improves the overall performance in S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Shadow of Chernobyl. It's called Nivenbro's shaders and can be found at this [url="http://www.thefloatingpoint.org/main/news.php"]site[/url]. Exact download link can be found [url="http://www.thefloatingpoint.org/main/download.php?list.4"]here[/url]. It really did improve the performance for me.

The Crysis demo was released a couple of days ago. I gave it a run yesterday, just to see if my system would hold together. At first it wouldn't run, but I became a bit suspicious as my computer didn't actually lock up and I saw some text come and go. Then I remembered all those HD videos that Crytek released, they were too much for my computer to handle. Hence I decided to check out the movie directory in the Crysis installation. It was pretty big. Among these files I found a 1 kilobyte video file, probably containing a black screen or a tiny logo or something. I replaced every video file in the movies directory with that file. Surprise, it worked. Heh, I love it when I'm right.

So I ran the game again on minimum settings and I was stunned yet again. It ran. Few physics, pathetic LOD, but it ran. It virtually looked like the old Farcry, although the textures looked somewhat washed out. Most them didn't look half bad though, especially those on the NPCs I encountered. But yeah, sorry DesR85, it is indeed Farcry-ish island hopping all over again. Little suprise there. I read the next Farcry is going to take place in Africa though, so maybe that's more up your alley.

This game must really look beautiful on the higher settings, but I didn't try to push my luck. They're using a novel approach to in-game cinematics where a sort of flyby demo starts running the moment you run near a special area (usually a radar waypoint). Well, except you don't 'fly'-by, the game takes control of your 'camera' and walks you around a bit as you look around and react to what happens around you. The camera backs down a bit when it is surprised and it will nod to the NPC's that are talking to you, stuff like that. I thought it was amusing more than realistic, but I can see how this solves the problem of getting the players attention in the right direction at the right time (if you played the Halflife 2: Ep.1 commentary tracks you probably know they went through a great deal of trouble trying to pull that off without forcing the player into a certain direction.)

I'm proud my single-core pre-Athlon ATI 9800 setup was able to pull this off at a nice framerate. I might yet get this game simply because I enjoyed Far Cry in a similar manner.

Crysis is an amazing game,I love it,but it need to elevated qualities for my pc.