Stalker: Call of Pripyat

[grayx]

I've never found that, no more than any other game and I'm really glad that they kepy stats & skills out of it. If the Stalker games need anything it's the survival elements that they cut and modders returned.

I don't quite understand why you think PC stats/skills wouldn't be a good addition to a gameplay?

The only reason that I could think of is bad an implementation or flawed design, but those are trivial solutions and could be applied to any part of a game or a project for that matter. If that's something genre related, I don't believe in genres any more. Only in a good or bad experience, and It's my opinion that stat/skill incorporation in this game would only enhance experience.

Just think for a minute: do you remember first scene in SOC? You had pistol (I think) and some light jacket as armor, right? Fast forward close to the end and PC haven't changed a bit, just He has vitorez or some top weapon and some top armor: there is no some additional "reward" for experience that you accumulate throughout the game. This is my personal opinion: game should always reward player for playing it and experience dependent PC stat/skills are great tool to accomplish that goal.

As I said before, artifacts are some substitute for stat/skill, but those are not primarily experience related events. They are mostly random encounters (except that one in Red forest in SC and low level ones from fetch/kill missions)

As for survival element, I couldn't agree more with you. I just hope they will not repeat same mistake again.

@ TheWesDude
Strange, I didn't have any problem downloading it. Using firefox 3.5.1 tho...

@ comscar
True

 

[dirtbag]

I never got S.T.A.L.K.E.R just because I saw these sometimes-insvisible tentacle guys in some gameplay videos. Stupid! They should change that.

I don't know why game developers keep throwing in this type of shit... It worked in Doom because they was kind of seethroughgrey. It didn't work in Jedi Knight. Well, you know what I mean...

 

[requiem_for_a_starfury]

I don't quite understand why you think PC stats/skills wouldn't be a good addition to a gameplay?

Because they don't fit in games which rely on player skills. We need stats and skills in Fallout because we don't directly control the character's actions. In shooters you have direct control so why do you need stats or skills? It's not a reward it's a chore, it's bad enough that most shooters still subscribe to the old trope of starting with no gun or a crap gun.

The only reason that I could think of is bad an implementation or flawed design

Inserting character skills when you already allow player skills is flawed design. Penalizing player skills makes the game artificially hard at the start, going the other way and boosting player skills as you progress (with some form of auto aiming) removes the challenge. Either way where's the fun in that?

Fast forward close to the end and PC haven't changed a bit, just He has vitorez or some top weapon and some top armor: there is no some additional "reward" for experience that you accumulate throughout the game.

The character doesn't change but the player does, we all have to follow the learning curve with any game. Thankfully there's no experience cap on my skills.

It didn't work in Jedi Knight. Well, you know what I mean...

Actually I don't, the stealth troopers (or whatever they were called) in Jedi Knight and the Bloodsuckers in Stalker are easy enough to spot when cloaked. And the Bloodsuckers are well sign posted with the sound effects. Besides they don't play a large part in the game, and the always visible snorks are way more deadly, if only because your character will die while you roll around on the floor laughing.

 

[grayx]

Because they don't fit in games which rely on player skills. We need stats and skills in Fallout because we don't directly control the character's actions. In shooters you have direct control so why do you need stats or skills? It's not a reward it's a chore, it's bad enough that most shooters still subscribe to the old trope of starting with no gun or a crap gun.

Eh, yes, PC vs. Player skills. Twitchy gameplay vs. role playing. Etc, etc... Yes, now I understand what you meant.

Problem is, I don't believe in that division any more. I have had a lot of discussions about that (no doubt you too, judging by the number of posts) but in short, as I can't make strict separation between mine and PC experience (as a human, even on a biological level, one part of my brain have a specific function to "re-live" experience of others we saw, heard or we thought about it; something connected to empathy, not to mention psychological attachment to a PC), and imo, that is a basic presumption in this argument [pc vs. player], I can't say that combining Player vs. PC skills are flawed designs any more that combining any other mutually accepted element. I don't believe that combining those two elements is inherently wrong.

Hm, once again I'm cursing my knowledge of this language as I'm not sure that I explained what I wanted.

In essence, although I know we are threading on a thin line, imo clever, well thought addition of stat/skill system into this game would enhance our experience tenfold.

The character doesn't change but the player does, we all have to follow the learning curve with any game. Thankfully there's no experience cap on my skills.

Ok, but that's not the point. You, as player, can be perfect and master any weapon and you may or may not enjoy it, but I'm talking about gratification in game by small "gifts" that allow game mechanic to reward [or punish] players action as he builds up his time/experience in game.

There is no practical difference for you as a player in acquiring new weapon that has better accuracy and enhancing PC stats by the same amount.

I'm now running in circles here. All I'm saying is: there IS similar system in place [artifacts, better weapons, armor] which have similar function as RPG stat/skill trees, but implementing experience based, additional RPG elements, wouldn't hurt the game at all.

Unless you are Bethersda....

 

[dirtbag]

It didn't work in Jedi Knight. Well, you know what I mean...

Actually I don't, the stealth troopers (or whatever they were called) in Jedi Knight and the Bloodsuckers in Stalker are easy enough to spot when cloaked. And the Bloodsuckers are well sign posted with the sound effects. Besides they don't play a large part in the game, and the always visible snorks are way more deadly, if only because your character will die while you roll around on the floor laughing.

As I said I have not played it yet I want to but I feel like I will get frustrated with those. Otherwise, I like the visual design of them. Really cool.

 

[requiem_for_a_starfury]

Problem is, I don't believe in that division any more.

It's not a matter of belief. Stats and skills are a mechanic, a means to an end, a system for playing certain types of games. Those games aren't first person shooters, forcing stats and skills into a first person shooter is adding a layer of unneeded redundancy.

I don't believe that combining those two elements is inherently wrong

I've never played a shooter with stats that's successfully combined the two. It's an inherently unfair combination, either you make the game artificially more difficult at the beginning or artificially easier at the end, either way penalizes the less competent player who must work harder to compensate for the skill system or rewards the better player who probably gets more kills and earns more experience anyway. In Deus Ex if you want to play as a sniper you can get the sniper rifle at the start of the game, and the better at fps games you are the less points you need to invest in the rifle skill allowing you to spend them elsewhere. That gives you a tremendous advantage at the beginning of the game allowing you to do much more than a player who needs to raise their rifle skill as high as possible just to be able to use the rifle.

All I'm saying is: there IS similar system in place [artifacts, better weapons, armor] which have similar function as RPG stat/skill trees, but implementing experience based, additional RPG elements, wouldn't hurt the game at all.

The thing is crap weapons can be discarded fairly early on, skill systems stay with you until you've earned enough points to be able to ignore them. Not that there really have to be crap guns, plenty of fps games have no crap guns just different guns for different purposes. For example Clear Sky gave more of a purpose to pistols with equipping the detector.

@dirtbag they are few and far between (at least in the vanilla game) and there are mods to turn off the cloaking or change it's visual effect.

 

[frosty_theaussie]

They always say "A-Life has been improved" and it never is. If you followed the development and release of GSC's STALKER games you'd be accustomed to their lies by now.

 

[grayx]

It's not a matter of belief. Stats and skills are a mechanic, a means to an end, a system for playing certain types of games. Those games aren't first person shooters, forcing stats and skills into a first person shooter is adding a layer of unneeded redundancy.

I really do understand what are you saying, but I'm talking about paradigm shift here. Actually I think everything you stated here could be turned around 180 degrees and still be true. It's the way how you look at things, even if we talking about game mechanic. Again, personal experience of a player is main deciding factor is some system suitable, applied on every single situation. Those things that you mention are principles and I could agree with that if a project is generic one, but if authors want something more then ordinary, then rules are not all that strict. Of course, chance of failure is multiplied. There are good numbers of games that incorporate FPS with RPG elements into pleasant experience.

I've never played a shooter with stats that's successfully combined the two. It's an inherently unfair combination, either you make the game artificially more difficult at the beginning or artificially easier at the end, either way penalizes the less competent player who must work harder to compensate for the skill system or rewards the better player who probably gets more kills and earns more experience anyway. In Deus Ex if you want to play as a sniper you can get the sniper rifle at the start of the game, and the better at fps games you are the less points you need to invest in the rifle skill allowing you to spend them elsewhere. That gives you a tremendous advantage at the beginning of the game allowing you to do much more than a player who needs to raise their rifle skill as high as possible just to be able to use the rifle.

Well, I'm. Among first there was System Shock 2. FPS with stat/skill tree. I liked it very much. All I'm saying, it's possible. It's all balancing and design issues, not god given laws not to be broken.
Even Bethesda's F3 have had a great chance to be something special. What it have become is a different story, result of idiotic decisions by the people who do not care about anything except how to sell stuff to immature [or mature] kids.

Same could be said and vice-versa. Man of War. RTS strategy. TPV RT/Turn Based. In critical moments I had to take direct command of some tank or artillery peace to turn battle in my favor. Great Experience. Using elements of player skills to overcome odds in game.

Can't remember name of that game [old] in which you literally draw sign in the air with mouse to produce magic rune. What's the name... Whole action is underground... Never mind, in that game you have whole those elements, both PC and player based. And once again great, great experience.

I see this is going offtopic so sorry, no more I have hopes for this game, that's all

 

[Eyenixon]

The reason the slight RPG elements existed in S.T.A.L.K.E.R. was to force the player to scrounge for better equipment, so that weapons weren't always perfect and the player couldn't rely on his current arsenal to last, it was all to emulate the feeling of survival.

That's all it ever was. Combat should rely on player skill and any other factors will be based on his equipment, not on personal stats, that's how it should be, it's what made the first game worth playing.

So saying that they should expand the RPG elements is garbage, if anything they should make it more behind-the-scenes and focus on streamlining it so that it isn't so finicky and unbalanced as it was in the first game.

 

[requiem_for_a_starfury]

There are good numbers of games that incorporate FPS with RPG elements into pleasant experience.

Skills and stats are an rpg mechanic not really an element, there are very few games that actually have RPG elements like choice and consequences.

Well, I'm. Among first there was System Shock 2. FPS with stat/skill tree. I liked it very much. All I'm saying, it's possible. It's all balancing and design issues, not god given laws not to be broken.

System Shock 2 is the best of a bad bunch, but it still has unnecessary restrictions.

Man of War. RTS strategy. TPV RT/Turn Based. In critical moments I had to take direct command of some tank or artillery peace to turn battle in my favor. Great Experience. Using elements of player skills to overcome odds in game.

That's not the same thing at all. It's nothing to do with skills but the limits of the game's ai.