|
|
 |
| [Jul 31, 2012, 10:48 am ET] - Share - Viewing Comments |
This tweet from Sergey Galyonkin, marketing director at 1C Multimedia and this blog post have sparked rumors that S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 is in development at Bethesda Softworks after development of the first-person shooter sequel was frozen following trouble at developer GSC Game World. The Steam Forums (thanks PlayStation Universe) has a translation: The following info is from a reliable source but isn't official, keep that in mind.
Sergey Grigorovich didn't sell the brand name "STALKER".
Bethesda is going to publish a STALKER game and has all the rights to it.
The game is multiplatform(consoles+PC) and is based on Bethesda technology.
It's being made by a studio familiar with that technology(possibly Obisidian or the Fallout 3 team from Bethesda, but no facts as of yet). It is almost 100% guaranteed that it's not a Ukrainian studio.
Bethesda will be able to buy the brand name from Grigorovich later, but for now all the misc. merchandise is his responsibility.
Release date, engine, detailes - TBA.
Post Comment
Enter the details of the comment
you'd like to post in the boxes below and click the button at
the bottom of the form.
 |
| 35. |
Re: Bethesda S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 Rumor |
Jul 31, 2012, 14:54 |
ItBurn |
|
|
theyarecomingforyou wrote on Jul 31, 2012, 14:44:
ItBurn wrote on Jul 31, 2012, 13:57: The interface is also a hellish nightmare, from hell. Just like STALKER and The Witcher, which were both PC exclusive games. A bad interface is a bad interface and going multi-platform isn't the reason for that, it's just used as an excuse. That said, I found Skyrim's UI to be an improvement over Oblivion and most of the issues - like the levelling system - were obviously just bad design and not console related. It didn't get in the way of me enjoying the game.
ItBurn wrote on Jul 31, 2012, 13:57: The PC version was better because of mods and the editor, no doubt, but the port was less than stellar. The graphics were better, the performance was excellent (especially after a few patches), it was much more customisable and it played well on mouse and keyboard. I honestly don't know what people are expecting but going multi-platform allows developers to increase the scale of the game. Without that we wouldn't have seen games like Skyrim and Deus Ex: Human Revolution, as their smaller budgets would have greatly limited what they could do (if they could even justify such a game as a PC exclusive).
But again, the STALKER franchise - as interesting and atmosphere as it is - was pretty shitty from an interface and performance perspective and it was a PC exclusive. People need to just accept that sometimes a game is a mess because it's a mess and not try to paint consoles as the enemy at every opportunity. I don't like consoles but I don't feel the need to blame them for every mistake or perceived issue with a game. Well, we somewhat disagree. I think that STALKER's interface and controls were much better than Skyrim's. You must use the default controls for Skyrim. Try to change anything and you'll get a MAJOR headache. There are still things that I can't do properly today with my mapping. Also, switching powers/weapons is so painful that it taught me to keep the same things instead of switching.
Almost 100% of the time, going multiplatform dumbs down the game and robs it of some of it's most precious assets. Don't know about you, but as a long time PC gamer, the massive dumbing down of my games hasn't made me appreciate multi-platform. I can only imagine the games we'd have today if we wouldn't have had the console dark ages. I'll take bugs and low performance over dumbed down and simple ANY DAY. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
.. ..
Copyright © 1996-2013 Stephen Heaslip. All rights reserved.
All trademarks are properties of their respective owners.