Support NeoGAF

[SonOfABeep]

Besides, what was so complex about the stalker games?

It's not like you're entering in math formulas to finish missions. From what I recall it's mostly go to this location and retrieve this or activate that while shooting monsters or other dudes along the way and avoiding environmental hazards.

There's dialog and an inventory/barter system but if that accounts for this "PC-only depth" then there's no problem for consoles.

I see a bunch of PC gaming elitist come to make assumptions and feel sorry for themselves. Put down the pitchforks, guys. You've got legit complaints with Dragon Age 2, that's a load of shit, but this one, I think will be fine.

Especially funny is the "well they'll put in a morality system" thing. The first game did have a morality system! And multiple endings based on what you did and how you helped people through the game.

 

[Stallion Free]

Imagine if they did a straight port of Stalker from PC when it was released. It would have received horrible reviews from console magazines/console gamers.

 

[SonOfABeep]

Imagine if they did a straight port of Stalker from PC when it was released. It would have received horrible reviews from console magazines/console gamers.

How much of a straight port are we talking?

Including all the crashing problems and poor performance issues that weren't really resolved until the fans modded the game heavily?

Then yeah, it probably would have received more poor reviews than it already did. PC gamers tend to be more tolerant of technical issues, but they were a consistent theme, looking at press reviews for the first stalker.

From an objective point of view, it suffers so many technical flaws that I would normally caution against purchase. However, from a subjective perspective, I enjoy the setting and ambience so much that I recommend it despite the bugs and inelegant performance.

It's a good game that has many bugs and doesn't seem to be appropriately optimized.

It's amazing that a slightly buggy game that was originally slated for a 2003 release can provide such fantastic gaming. It's almost scary to think just how influential S.T.A.L.K.E.R. could have been, had it been released 3-4 years ago with completely polished code.

A messy amalgamation of storylines and side-quests, coupled with poorly executed Quality Assurance and archaic game saving, STALKER is about as radioactive as plutonium, and should be treated as such - behind thick lead-lined walls of concrete. The lead-lined walls being a metaphor for the high spec required to play the game at a decent performance.

 

[tok]

The STALKER series is my favorite of all time, particularly with the extra love the Complete mods gave the first two games.

Hearing they are multi-platform is really bad news for me because it can only damage them. They are admittedly rough around the edges, difficult (Call of Pripyat is an order of magnitude easier than the first two) and confusing if you don't put in some time.

I see only two options here... They will simplify the game to appease the mainstream or they won't and the game will bomb horribly and they'll have problems finding a publisher for the next one.

The whole series lacks the polish that is expected from a console game, but to me that has become part of the games charm. Its odd and random but the AI also gives a very strong sense that the world goes on whether you're there or not. Anyone who has played the game and watched AI soldiers fighting animals or bandits half a mile away through binoculars can attest to this. The game is only going to lose something by going through the cookie-cutter process of adapting it to resource limited consoles.

If that sounds PC-snobbish I apologize. Far Cry 2 disappointed, I'm worried about Crysis 2 and now this. My favorite games series are being knee-capped one by one.

 

[Stallion Free]

How much of a straight port are we talking?

Zero technical issues, just the exact same gameplay. It would have been rejected as needlessly complex.

 

[Loxley]

I don't quite get why people are concerned about the game's sales. Metro 2033 was multi-platform and sold very well for THQ, with the majority of sales coming from Europe and on the PC (which they predicted).

Also, the 360 version of Metro 2033 felt identical to the PC version, it didn't feel like any sort of concessions were made for console audiences, I mean that felt like one Ukranian-ass game. It's about as close to a STALKER-like experience as the consoles have gotten, so it can work.

I'm just saying chill out and wait for some gameplay to show up.

 

[Scipius]

Yes, I think Metro 2033 would be a good example to follow. Let's hope they also follow its example in providing a fully Russian voiced game with proper subtitling.

Let's hope they do get a European publisher though; these are still a bit more in tune with the PC crowd than most North American publishers. I suspect Steam will have a major role to play anyway. Being a Ukranian developer, we can at least be certain it won't be a GFWL game.

 

[Shaka]

GAF seems like a minefield to post in sometimes!

 

[Zaraki_Kenpachi]

Awesome!

Never played the first one.

You mean first three?

 

[Technosteve]

So multi-platform + previous rumors of Crysis engine = S.T.A.L.K.E.R 2 is Crysis engine? or is this PC and Mac multi platform =D

 

[tok]

Yes, I think Metro 2033 would be a good example to follow. Let's hope they also follow its example in providing a fully Russian voiced game with proper subtitling.

Let's hope they do get a European publisher though; these are still a bit more in tune with the PC crowd than most North American publishers. I suspect Steam will have a major role to play anyway. Being a Ukranian developer, we can at least be certain it won't be a GFWL game.

See, this is where you lose the STALKER faithful because I see Metro 2033 as an example of how it all went wrong compared to STALKER. Same kind of vibe, but tiny levels, absolutely linear, lots of scripted scenes that took you out of the action and checkpoint saves.

All it did right was look like STALKER. It felt like Doom3.

 

[Lostconfused]

See, this is where you lose the STALKER faithful because I see Metro 2033 as an example of how it all went wrong compared to STALKER. Same kind of vibe, but tiny levels, absolutely linear, lots of scripted scenes that took you out of the action and checkpoint saves.

All it did right was look like STALKER. It felt like Doom3.

Right except the thing is the game turned out the way it did because the devs wanted to make it that way not because it was a multiplatform title.

 

[SonOfABeep]

Zero technical issues, just the exact same gameplay. It would have been rejected as needlessly complex.

well, you're entitled to your opinion but I think that the technical issues were the only real problem in the first stalker and there isn't a whole lot to simplify.

Most of the missions are straightforward go to point a and get or activate object B type of stuff. Even this precious PC sacred cow used a minimap/compass that pointed you to your next objective if you chose it on the regular map.

Bartering and trading items is pretty standard RPG fare, nothing more complex than oblivion did around that time on consoles. Dialog choices are usually not more than 4-5 choices with only 1-2 actually advancing the conversation.

What about stalker is so deep and complex that a console market couldn't handle it? I see a lot of people complaining but nobody really explaining why the game is so deep and complex. More than anything the first one had the illusion of an open world, but you were moving though a fairly linear environment that was very big, but not fallout or morrowind big. If i remember right it wasn't even a streaming full open world, but large maps that were connected by gated areas that loaded the next map, right?

CoP and Clear Sky were more open, but the original was a little more linear of an experience.

 

[Gorgon]

well, you're entitled to your opinion but I think that the technical issues were the only real problem in the first stalker and there isn't a whole lot to simplify.

Most of the missions are straightforward go to point a and get or activate object B type of stuff. Even this precious PC sacred cow used a minimap/compass that pointed you to your next objective if you chose it on the regular map.

Bartering and trading items is pretty standard RPG fare, nothing more complex than oblivion did around that time on consoles. Dialog choices are usually not more than 4-5 choices with only 1-2 actually advancing the conversation.

What about stalker is so deep and complex that a console market couldn't handle it? I see a lot of people complaining but nobody really explaining why the game is so deep and complex. More than anything the first one had the illusion of an open world, but you were moving though a fairly linear environment that was very big, but not fallout or morrowind big. If i remember right it wasn't even a streaming full open world, but large maps that were connected by gated areas that loaded the next map, right?

CoP and Clear Sky were more open, but the original was a little more linear of an experience.

Pretty much.

Zero technical issues, just the exact same gameplay. It would have been rejected as needlessly complex.

This is another typical example of retardness from PC-exclusive fanboys. I've been playing PC games for more than 20 years and my first console was a PS3. And I've waited for the original STALKER since it was announced, getting dissapointed with the constant delays.

So basically, I've been a PC gamer all my life. I fail, however, to see what exactely is so "complex" about STALKER. There's absolutely NOTHING specially complex about it. The only thing that can prevent an equal console release may be a technical one, if even that. The rest is as basic as anything else to have graced consoles this gen.

PC Fanboysm is as fucking stupid and retarded as console fanboyism. You should all go drown in a maelstrom of brown shit.

 

[Sinatar]

Pretty much.



This is another typical example of retardness from PC-exclusive fanboys. I've been playing PC games for more than 20 years and my first console was a PS3. And I've waited for the original STALKER since it was announced, getting dissapointed with the constant delays.

So basically, I've been a PC gamer all my life. I fail, however, to see what exactely is so "complex" about STALKER. There's absolutely NOTHING specially complex about it. The only thing that can prevent an equal console release may be a technical one, if even that. The rest is as basic as anything else to have graced consoles this gen.

PC Fanboysm is as fucking stupid and retarded as console fanboyism. You should all go drown in a maelstrom of brown shit.

If you're a lifelong PC gamer then you'd play STALKER and not wait for some console port.

 

[ghst]

Pretty much.



This is another typical example of retardness from PC-exclusive fanboys. I've been playing PC games for more than 20 years and my first console was a PS3. And I've waited for the original STALKER since it was announced, getting dissapointed with the constant delays.

So basically, I've been a PC gamer all my life. I fail, however, to see what exactely is so "complex" about STALKER. There's absolutely NOTHING specially complex about it. The only thing that can prevent an equal console release may be a technical one, if even that. The rest is as basic as anything else to have graced consoles this gen.

PC Fanboysm is as fucking stupid and retarded as console fanboyism. You should all go drown in a maelstrom of brown shit.

there was nothing specially complex about system shock 2.
there was nothing specially complex about deus ex.
there was nothing specially complex about thief.
there was nothing specially complex about f.e.a.r.

 

[Gorgon]

If you're a lifelong PC gamer then you'd play STALKER and not wait for some console port.

I did, day one. As well as the other 2. I thought that was clear from my post?

there was nothing specially complex about system shock 2.
there was nothing specially complex about deus ex.
there was nothing specially complex about thief.
there was nothing specially complex about f.e.a.r.

So what exactely is so complex about STALKER that would make our "poor consolite cousins" tremble? Or even FEAR, or DEUS EX, or THIEF (my favourite series)?

 

[Y2Kev]

I played Stalker at 800x600 with everything set to low on my shitacular Mac through bootcamp just to get to experience it. One of a kind game. Loved it...really scared the crap out of me, but not just because it was a scary game. Having that kind of freedom at your fingertips is sort of overwhelming.

 

[ghst]

So what exactely is so complex about STALKER that would make our "poor consolite cousins" tremble? Or even FEAR, or DEUS EX, or THIEF (my favourite series)?

i don't know, ask the people who ruined those games especially for them.

 

[830920]

I don't think it's about STALKER being a super complex game, but it does have that old-school "you'll figure it out" design philosophy that at least to me is an important aspect of the game. Western console games usually go out of their way to hold your hand and ease you into the experience to a degree where it feels you're just following instructions and that's the type of design philosophy I don't want to see in STALKER.

I'd liken it to a movie where the director has confidence in its audience and don't feel the need to be explicit about every plot point.

 

[FLEABttn]

there was nothing specially complex about system shock 2.
there was nothing specially complex about deus ex.
there was nothing specially complex about thief.
there was nothing specially complex about f.e.a.r.

The list could go on for quite some time.

Ex-PC exclusive devs talk about server browsers like they're as complex as organic chemistry. There's nothing specially complex about server browsers, but guess what console games tend not to get?

 

[Gorgon]

i don't know, ask the people who ruined those games especially for them.

Some of those devs have regreted those changes. Some even stated it was a misjudgement of the console market.

Anyway, the point is that it was a dev choice based on market notions. Those hold as much value as Michael Patcher stating that Westerns don't sell in Europe and that RDR would bomb.

Thief 3 suffered more from techincal aspects than any design filosophy change. As for DEUS EX (I suppose you mean the new one?), do you think that if the game was PC exclusive those changes woudn't be also in place? You're naive if you think that.

Devs want to increase sales regardless of platform . Even PC exclusive games will see those changes taking place (the few that are left) because there's also an expanded market to capture in the PC platform.

 

[Stumpokapow]

Some of those devs have regreted those changes. Some even stated it was a misjudgement of the console market.

Anyway, the point is that it was a dev choice based on market notions.

You're exactly right that most of the changes people are complaining about are more about how devs judge the console market and less about the technical limitations of consoles.

But the thing is, that's exactly why people are complaining. No one who is complaining cares why their games get dumbed down, just that they get dumbed down.

On a technical level there are only a few issues; small level sizes in Deus Ex 2 and Thief DS are both a direct result of console memory limitations being designed around. Still, like you said, the majority of what people are complaining about are dev choices rather than set-in-stone facts.

 

[subversus]

I played Stalker at 800x600 with everything set to low on my shitacular Mac through bootcamp just to get to experience it. One of a kind game. Loved it...really scared the crap out of me, but not just because it was a scary game. Having that kind of freedom at your fingertips is sort of overwhelming.

wow, that's the spirit

 

[Gorgon]

I don't think it's about STALKER being a super complex game, but it does have that old-school "you'll figure it out" design philosophy that at least to me is an important aspect of the game. Western console games usually go out of their way to hold your hand and ease you into the experience to a degree where it feels you're just following instructions and that's the type of design philosophy I don't want to see in STALKER.

I'd liken it to a movie where the director has confidence in its audience and don't feel the need to be explicit about every plot point.

Not sure I agree. I really never felt lost for lack of direction in STALKER. I also never felt any overwhelming sense of freedom like Y2KEV mentioned. In fact I was a bit dissapointed, like so many others, with the significant linearity of the game, which had as a big selling point it's free-ended, sandboxish nature.

It does feel rough and unpolished, and that more than anything else is a potential problem in the console space.

 

[Dennis]

You should all go drown in a maelstrom of brown shit.

Thats not nice.

You can say your piece without that.

Not sure I agree. I really never felt lost for lack of direction in STALKER. I also never felt any overwhelming sense of freedom like Y2KEV mentioned. In fact I was a bit dissapointed, like so many others, with the significant linearity of the game, which had as a big selling point it's free-ended, sandboxish nature.

It does feel rough and unpolished, and that more than anything else is a potential problem in the console space.

You can roam large areas of the map from the beginning and enter areas where you basically have zero chance of survival. The game doesn't tell you that - it just lets you die. And die again.

STALKER is the opposite of the handholding we get in console games. The game assumes you can learn on your own.

 

[Gorgon]

Thats not nice.

By "YOU" I was refering to Fanboys in general, and what is wrong with fanboysm. I was not refering to anyone in particular.

Sorry if it felt that way, english is not my mother language.

 

[kittoo]

wow, that's the spirit

Man I played Half life 2 on Intel 845 integrated graphics. Can beat that?
Though I played it again and again on 8800, GTX 470 and will play again on GTX 570

 

[subversus]

I don't think it's about STALKER being a super complex game, but it does have that old-school "you'll figure it out" design philosophy that at least to me is an important aspect of the game. Western console games usually go out of their way to hold your hand and ease you into the experience to a degree where it feels you're just following instructions and that's the type of design philosophy I don't want to see in STALKER.

I'd liken it to a movie where the director has confidence in its audience and don't feel the need to be explicit about every plot point.

you know what? You can turn off tips in most of games. Also western console games holds your hand during tutorial section and then lets you go free if we're talking about open-world games. I'm more than fine with that. I actually think that it's good game design when I don't need to look into the manual every fucking second just to get things going. I need game to explain me tools and then let me explore. I don't know any western open-world console game that holds your hand after tutorial (I haven't played RDR though, so I don't how it is done there). And STALKER isn't going to be another COD, that's all.

 

[Gorgon]

You're exactly right that most of the changes people are complaining about are more about how devs judge the console market and less about the technical limitations of consoles.

But the thing is, that's exactly why people are complaining. No one who is complaining cares why their games get dumbed down, just that they get dumbed down.

On a technical level there are only a few issues; small level sizes in Deus Ex 2 and Thief DS are both a direct result of console memory limitations being designed around. Still, like you said, the majority of what people are complaining about are dev choices rather than set-in-stone facts.

I disagree. I would say that that is what people should be complaining. However, reading this thread, what I feel is that there are more people actually believing that console players in general are not smart enough to play STALKER (direct consequence of the game beying "too complex") than actually a reasonable preocupation with technical compromises. It even seams that people in general actaully believe that to put these games on consoles they have to be simplified for "consolites"!

I don't have any problems with people fearing technical compromises. I also don't have any problems with PC-exclusive players fearing that the devs are going to dumb gameplay down because the devs believe they should do it. However I do feel sad when people actually belive that it's invitable because it has to be done or else the others won't "get it".

 

[Gorgon]

You can roam large areas of the map from the beginning and enter areas where you basically have zero chance of survival. The game doesn't tell you that - it just lets you die. And die again.

STALKER is the opposite of the handholding we get in console games. The game assumes you can learn on your own.

Ever played the Kings Field series on the Playstation? It did all that far before STALKER ever did. And it was a console game. STALKER is the opposite of the handholding that we get in ALL GAMES REGARDLESS OF PLATFORM. But it's not the only one, neither are those exclusive to the PC.

But lets not exagerate that "non-leveling-up" feature as if it made the game abnormaly difficult or inacessible. There's nothing in STALKER that makes it unmarketable on the consoles. Just our own misconceptions.

 

[tok]

Right except the thing is the game turned out the way it did because the devs wanted to make it that way not because it was a multiplatform title.

Someone else suggested it be done like Metro 2033, not me.
I was just saying why it represented everything that is wrong with multi-platform gaming and wouldn't be a good model for STALKER.

To the people saying STALKER isn't complex... This is partially true, but its very freeform in regards to side missions and also very resource intensive. Perhaps the new engine will remedy that, perhaps the GSC programmers aren't the great code optimizers a company like Crytek or id are and it will be a stuttering mess the consoles.

My main fear is that they will design it down to the console level to prevent that and we'll wind up with a hobbled game like Far Cry 2... Flashes of greatness, but flawed and with all the soul polished right out of it.

The thought of finding 50 Anomalies for a trophy gives me douche chills. I'd say Far Cry 2 was the perfect example of how PC games get ruined by going multi-platform, but I think that had more to do with the change in creators than anything.

 

[bhlaab]

It's not that STALKER is complex, it's that its extreme level of hardcore gameplay is what makes it fun and interesting. Expanding their market to consoles is generally indicative of a loss of such hardcore elements.

-Bullets with trajectory and weapons having a (more) realistic (than most) sense of fiddlyness that would completely fall apart with console auto-aim

-Bleedouts and invisible anomoly fields

-Control scheme with leaning, prone, multiple ammo types, multiple fire modes, and an inventory that doesn't pause the game while in use. Not condusive to controller layout.

-Monsters and enemies that can kill you in three (or less) hits

-Being tailor made for an eastern european audience, giving it a unique "for us by us" perspective that games with global aspirations lack

-Not feeling the need to over-explain itself so that everybody can 'get it'. Very little in the way of tutorials-- trust in the player to figure things out on their own.

 

[FLEABttn]

You're far too focused on the why and the PC fanboy strawman.

I don't care why ex-PC exclusive games get dumbed down when they are brought to consoles. However, when not merely ported to consoles but designed from the bottom up with the notion it will be on a console almost always necessitates a dumbing down of systems or technical things.

It could be technical issues.
It could be input issues (100+ button keyboard and a mouse vs a 16 button button controller with dual analogues).
It could be because the dev's think console exclusive gamers are stupid.
It could be that console exclusive gamers are stupid.

I don't care the exact reasons as to why. I care that it happens almost every time.

 

[Gorgon]

It's not that STALKER is complex, it's that its extreme level of hardcore gameplay is what makes it fun and interesting. Expanding their market to consoles is generally indicative of a loss of such hardcore elements.

-Bullets with trajectory and weapons having a (more) realistic (than most) sense of fiddlyness that would completely fall apart with console auto-aim

-Bleedouts and invisible anomoly fields

-Control scheme with leaning, prone, multiple ammo types, multiple fire modes, and an inventory that doesn't pause the game while in use. Not condusive to controller layout.

-Monsters and enemies that can kill you in three (or less) hits

-Being tailor made for an eastern european audience, giving it a unique "for us by us" perspective that games with global aspirations lack

-Not feeling the need to over-explain itself so that everybody can 'get it'. Very little in the way of tutorials-- trust in the player to figure things out on their own.

I still don't see any problem. I only see some points that may need adressing, like console autoaim, or maybe pausing to acess inventory due to the controler. Those are hardly gamebreakers and are also nothing that can't be tailored depending on version. Everything else you've mentioned is a mute point, in my opinion.

 

[Gorgon]

You're far too focused on the why and the PC fanboy strawman.

I don't care why ex-PC exclusive games get dumbed down when they are brought to consoles. However, when not merely ported to consoles but designed from the bottom up with the notion it will be on a console almost always necessitates a dumbing down of systems or technical things.

It could be technical issues.
It could be input issues (100+ button keyboard and a mouse vs a 16 button button controller with dual analogues).
It could be because the dev's think console exclusive gamers are stupid.
It could be that console exclusive gamers are stupid.

I don't care the exact reasons as to why. I care that it happens almost every time.

And that's fine by me. However not everyone in this thread is like you, as have been made perfectly clear.
It does displease me to see the constant exchange of crap between fanboys from both ends of the spectrum. My "problems" with the "PC fanboy strawman" are the same as the one with the "Console fanboy strawman", no more no less. For me, it's all stupidity.

But I'm not complaing about strawmans. I'm complaing about something that is perfectly clear in this thread and in others, which is that many PC-exclusive gamers are actually convinced that games that make it to consoles have to be dumbed down to compensate for the little brains of consolites. This is no strawman, it's a real generalized opinion. One that makes me think that the exponents of these views have little or none more real brain or taste than the idealized dumb stereotypical console gaming they so hate.

 

[FLEABttn]

This is no strawman, it's a real generalized opinion.

No, this would be a strawman. Back it up with some numbers from the greater PC population or something. Otherwise you're just building up an easy argument to knock down.

 

[bhlaab]

I still don't see any problem. I only see some points that may need adressing, like console autoaim, or maybe pausing to acess inventory due to the controler. Those are hardly gamebreakers and are also nothing that can't be tailored depending on version. Everything else you've mentioned is a mute point, in my opinion.

How are any of those 'mute' points when they are the backbone of the game?

 

[Technosteve]

how is console going to handle saves every 5 seconds due to being scared shitless about dying. And the god awful load times eh eh eh eh

 

[Prime crotch]

The real answer is leaning, two whole buttons for that.

 

[bhlaab]

If this game has a god damn cover system I will shit

 

[JoeMartin]

But I'm not complaing about strawmans. I'm complaing about aomething that is perfectly clear in this thread and in others, which is that many PC-exclusive gamers are actually convinced that games that make it to consoles have to be dumbed down to compensate for the little brains of consolites. This is no strawman, it's a real generalized opinion. One that makes me think that the exponents of these views have little or none more real brain or taste than the idealized dumb stereotypical console gaming they so hate.

I wouldn't put it so bluntly, but you're starting to get the gist of the idea here.

I get the feeling that very few people who see no cause for concern haven't actually played Stalker, or any serious PC franchise that moved to consoles for that matter. Let's be honest: The market for a game like Stalker doesn't exist within the console userbase - it's a radical game compared to the console norm and would almost certainly get lost in the sea of mediocre "AAAAAAAA" titles with better marketing budgets, more auto regenerating health, and a more friendly and fun atmosphere. GSC has to know this, so if they're going ahead with putting the next Stalker on consoles anyways this leads me to believe there will be a lot of "issues" that need "addressed" to make the change to consoles.

And I already don't like it.

 

[charlequin]

So thanks to this thread I found out about S.T.A.L.K.E.R. Complete, which I am installing as we speak. Thanks, thread!

Other than graphical fidelity and buttons instead of keys, what really is the reason for this huge divide between console games and PC games? Is it that console gamers somehow don't have the chops to handle more complicated inventories and gameplay mechanics?

A small part of it is the actual input systems, and a huge part of it is the audiences in play and the perception thereof.

Because console games are pricier, because they provide less money per sale to publishers (as a percentage of cover price), because they're sold in what today is a much more mass-market fashion, and because they've been the target of an ongoing effort (by the platform holders) to limit their audience to generic 18-35 males, it's both true that the "average" console gamer is interested in a more accessible and surface-level experience, and that publishers think that they want something even more simplified than they actually do.

For me, the right choice would be to try to bring up the average by releasing more interestingly complex console games, but publishers always seem to take the opposite tack. I think most of the really classic examples of console-ized PC games (Deus Ex, Thief, etc.) are actually missteps since the originals weren't too complex for console gamers and they became shittier games by being streamlined in that way, but it doesn't seem like any amount of failures of that sort will actually convince publishers to take a different approach.

Best case scenario. Worst case scenario is removing features because they don't want to have to develop two versions of the same game. See Dragon Age 2 for more info.

In fairness, do GSC have a track record of making mystifying and infuriating decisions about literally every one of their games in the last ten years like Bioware do?

 

[Neuromancer]

The real answer is leaning, two whole buttons for that.

Or one button, for example the left bumper and then left or right on an analog stick to lean.

You could also make that button the crouch modifier too.

 

[subversus]

If this game has a god damn cover system I will shit

oh my :lol

Go to 0:56
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_2PN5J31mlQ

RO2 is still PC exclusive btw

 

[Spire]

STALKER has a design sensibility unlike anything ever released on consoles, or PC's as well, for that matter. It was made in eastern europe and it's just...different. If there was one company that I would expect to not dumb down their game for consoles, it'd be GSC. They just don't follow the same rules that other developers do.

 

[Blizzard]

About leaning...I don't play many games that have it -- I didn't play STALKER much, and I seem to recall Enemy Territory: Return to Castle Wolfenstein had leaning too. I -think- in ET, you could not fire and lean at the same time. That's the big thing that always annoyed me about leaning. Are you supposed to just use it to peek around a corner (possibly getting shot in the process), and then actually expose most of your body to shoot at what you just saw?

STALKER may have let you lean and shoot though, I don't remember. Or maybe looking around a wall and shooting doesn't work in real life so they leave it out of the game?

 

[John]

About leaning...I don't play many games that have it -- I didn't play STALKER much, and I seem to recall Enemy Territory: Return to Castle Wolfenstein had leaning too. I -think- in ET, you could not fire and lean at the same time. That's the big thing that always annoyed me about leaning. Are you supposed to just use it to peek around a corner (possibly getting shot in the process), and then actually expose most of your body to shoot at what you just saw?

Well no, you're supposed to go around the corner then lean out of it. ??

 

[Inkwell]

About leaning...I don't play many games that have it -- I didn't play STALKER much, and I seem to recall Enemy Territory: Return to Castle Wolfenstein had leaning too. I -think- in ET, you could not fire and lean at the same time. That's the big thing that always annoyed me about leaning. Are you supposed to just use it to peek around a corner (possibly getting shot in the process), and then actually expose most of your body to shoot at what you just saw?

STALKER may have let you lean and shoot though, I don't remember. Or maybe looking around a wall and shooting doesn't work in real life so they leave it out of the game?

I find leaning quite important. It's pretty much a simple cover system, and it allows the game to feel a bit more strategic instead of run-and-gun. It's such a simple solution to using cover that I'm surprised more FPS games on any platform don't use it.

 

[EviLore]

oh my :lol

Go to 0:56
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_2PN5J31mlQ

RO2 is still PC exclusive btw

Complaints about cover-based shooters have to do with all of them playing exactly the same.

RO2's a significant step forward for first person shooter game mechanics.