I really try to temper my excitement for most things lately, but the last sequel I was this excited for was Max Payne 3. I can not wait for this game.
I'm pretty excited about this game! S.T.A.L.K.E.R has always been an interesting game series, mixing a post apocalyptic with strange phenomenon. They recently did a shadow drop of a remastered edition of all the PC games on Xbox; those can tide me over until S.T.A.L.K.E.R 2 comes out.
I hope it's somewhat like the metro games, those are some of my all time favorites and absolutely would love more of something with that atmosphere and immersion.
S.T.A.L.K.E.R. is an open world game whereas Metro is linear. As such, there are many differences between the two:
-
Open, outside maps vs literal underground metro tubes.
-
Almost no stealth (bonked) vs split into stealth/combat gameplay.
-
Regular, duplicates and misc and survival inventory management with wide variety vs limited choice and specialized upgrades.
-
Wonky but unrestrictive vs fine-tuned but channeled.
-
Simple but great story (rather small scale and non-heroic, like the inspiring book "Roadside Picnic") where you wake up and try to find an #1NPC called Strelok to kill him vs journey of a hero through the gutters in a post-apocalyptic world.
-
Anomalies crancked up to 11 and are a core part of the gameplay vs anomalies are rather world-building elements.
-
Extensive modding (Oblivion-era game still keeping its modding community alive and theiving with tens of complete overhauls and completely new games, few-click-install modpacks and complete modding frameworks) vs out-of-the-box and as-is experience.
The similarities are:
-
Great storytelling. Both do good storytelling that hooks the player, although with different types of stories.
-
Good character writing. Metro has memorable characters with names and actions attached, while S.T.A.L.K.E.R. has no name loners and misers that will leave you with great campfire/guitar memories and novel-like stories.
-
Excellent environment design. S.T.A.L.K.E.R. are older games so graphics are rather worn out compared to Metro, but the environment design is so good that places hook you up anyway.
I have simply glossed over the Metro parts because you already know about them. So don't think I'm thinking less of them. On the contrary, as someone who played all Metro games on their authentic experience difficulty first, played Exodus when it was released, then later a couple years ago struggled to start playing S.T.A.L.K.E.R. due to how old and what a slog it was unmodded. Even though I am still fond of the games from my childhood and can play them despite (actually sometimes thanks to) their old graphics and rough mechanics, S.T.A.L.K.E.R. took me 3 attempts and finding OGSE/OGSR (Old Good Stalker Evolution/Remastered) overhaul to enjoy them in 2021. And boy, what an enjoyment that was, taking up about 300-400 across all 3 games.
Thank you for such a detailed comparison!
It seems that they are largely different in many aspects, but probably similar in the ways I most enjoy of a game. I actually tried to play STALKER once a long time ago and never really clicked for me, in part because of the same reason you mention, it was very wonky and didn't run well at all, but I am willing to give this one a chance given that the same happened to me with the Metro series. One of my favorite parts of metro was the Caspian desert in exodus, which I would say is kind of an open world map, so maybe I can hope that this one captures me in the same way.
Thanks for the response, and let's hope this will be a great one!
-
