GSC/S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 Statement Monday

GSC Game World tweets about their plans to respond to the rumors that the Ukrainian developer is shutting down. Here's the short and sweet tweet:
An official statement will be made on Monday.
View : : :
50 Replies. 3 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  2  3  ] Older
50.
 
Re: GSC/S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 Statement Monday
Dec 12, 2011, 19:53
50.
Re: GSC/S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 Statement Monday Dec 12, 2011, 19:53
Dec 12, 2011, 19:53
 
No, haven't seen one yet. Blue would have it up if they did I'm sure.
49.
 
Re: GSC/S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 Statement Monday
Dec 12, 2011, 12:38
49.
Re: GSC/S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 Statement Monday Dec 12, 2011, 12:38
Dec 12, 2011, 12:38
 
To save me looking elsewhere, has an official statement been made yet?
48.
 
Re: GSC/S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 Statement Monday
Dec 12, 2011, 07:38
48.
Re: GSC/S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 Statement Monday Dec 12, 2011, 07:38
Dec 12, 2011, 07:38
 
Badboyquake wrote on Dec 11, 2011, 20:14:
sure, fov is important in a (competitive) multiplayer game. its unimportant in a singleplayer game.

It's important in singleplayer too, one FOV doesn't fit all.
Avatar 54452
47.
 
Re: GSC/S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 Statement Monday
Dec 11, 2011, 21:38
47.
Re: GSC/S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 Statement Monday Dec 11, 2011, 21:38
Dec 11, 2011, 21:38
 
Badboyquake wrote on Dec 11, 2011, 20:14:
sure, fov is important in a (competitive) multiplayer game. its unimportant in a singleplayer game.

wha!?

You like the zoomed in feel? eeesh. Feels like looking through a papertowel roll.
46.
 
Re: GSC/S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 Statement Monday
Dec 11, 2011, 20:14
46.
Re: GSC/S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 Statement Monday Dec 11, 2011, 20:14
Dec 11, 2011, 20:14
 
sure, fov is important in a (competitive) multiplayer game. its unimportant in a singleplayer game.
45.
 
Re: GSC/S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 Statement Monday
Dec 11, 2011, 17:51
45.
Re: GSC/S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 Statement Monday Dec 11, 2011, 17:51
Dec 11, 2011, 17:51
 
I like a high FOV in UT. I usually would run 90-100* there. Otherwise I tend to go for lower. I run Skyrim at 80-85 on my 16:9 monitor.

FOV sensitivity also depends on what monitor you're using though. I know there are some people still using 4:3 CRTs and games frequently look a hell of a lot different on those than a 16:9/10 screen for various reasons. Not all developers adjust FOV in the same way at different resolutions, etc. Some games are curiously designed in that you see considerably less on a big widescreen display than a 4:3/5:4 monitor.
Avatar 49717
44.
 
Re: GSC/S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 Statement Monday
Dec 11, 2011, 17:19
44.
Re: GSC/S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 Statement Monday Dec 11, 2011, 17:19
Dec 11, 2011, 17:19
 
If you people would have played Natural Selection or Tremulous on a regular basis you'd actually be quite comfortable with FOVs between 90 and 120.
For me a FOV of at least 90 to 100 is a must in multiplayer games.
43.
 
Re: GSC/S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 Statement Monday
Dec 11, 2011, 16:15
43.
Re: GSC/S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 Statement Monday Dec 11, 2011, 16:15
Dec 11, 2011, 16:15
 
StingingVelvet wrote on Dec 11, 2011, 16:11:
I've been PC only for 20+ years and have never got the FOV thing either. And most of the time when I up the FOV in a game it makes it look really zoomed out and fish-eyed.

In Skyrim for example, I see people suggesting 90 and even higher... insanity, it looks like you're looking at the world through a coke bottle. I did up it to 75 to match Morrowind and Oblivion, but I could easily live with the default.
Indeed. I played around with the FOV in Skyrim but settled on 75, as I didn't think it looked right when I went higher. I know people argue there's mathematics / science behind it but it seems incredibly subjective to me. And as I pointed out before, many people objected to the FOV in HL2 and that clearly wasn't influenced by console as it was PC only (it was only ported to the X360 2yrs after release) and Valve carefully considered the FOV of the game.
"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance."
Avatar 22891
42.
 
Re: GSC/S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 Statement Monday
Dec 11, 2011, 16:11
42.
Re: GSC/S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 Statement Monday Dec 11, 2011, 16:11
Dec 11, 2011, 16:11
 
I've been PC only for 20+ years and have never got the FOV thing either. And most of the time when I up the FOV in a game it makes it look really zoomed out and fish-eyed.

In Skyrim for example, I see people suggesting 90 and even higher... insanity, it looks like you're looking at the world through a coke bottle. I did up it to 75 to match Morrowind and Oblivion, but I could easily live with the default.
Avatar 54622
41.
 
Re: GSC/S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 Statement Monday
Dec 11, 2011, 15:44
41.
Re: GSC/S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 Statement Monday Dec 11, 2011, 15:44
Dec 11, 2011, 15:44
 
theyarecomingforyou wrote on Dec 11, 2011, 14:28:
xXBatmanXx wrote on Dec 11, 2011, 13:47:
FOV is important because majority of people now use WS monitors. It wasn't AS important when we used 4:3 square huge things
You say that as if all games aren't developed with widescreen in mind, which they are - the FOV they use is deliberate. Anyway, I don't see why we're even arguing about this. I have already stated I'd like to see all developers include an option for FOV - even if it's buried away in advanced settings - and include some sensible restrictions for competitive multiplayer games. And that means all games should support EyeFinity properly (does nVidia have a name for their version of the technology?).

I have a hard time believing that they do that on purpose. The reason it is there is because the majorty of them are developing for a console - which also doesn't make sense (as most people have a WS main tv also). Most console games really feel like you are using 1 eye (best way for me to describe it). It just makes no sense.

If it feels like a tunnel and everything is "zoomed" in, I instantly go to google and look for a FOV fix.
40.
 
Re: GSC/S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 Statement Monday
Dec 11, 2011, 14:28
40.
Re: GSC/S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 Statement Monday Dec 11, 2011, 14:28
Dec 11, 2011, 14:28
 
xXBatmanXx wrote on Dec 11, 2011, 13:47:
FOV is important because majority of people now use WS monitors. It wasn't AS important when we used 4:3 square huge things
You say that as if all games aren't developed with widescreen in mind, which they are - the FOV they use is deliberate. Anyway, I don't see why we're even arguing about this. I have already stated I'd like to see all developers include an option for FOV - even if it's buried away in advanced settings - and include some sensible restrictions for competitive multiplayer games. And that means all games should support EyeFinity properly (does nVidia have a name for their version of the technology?).
"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance."
Avatar 22891
39.
 
Re: GSC/S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 Statement Monday
Dec 11, 2011, 13:47
39.
Re: GSC/S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 Statement Monday Dec 11, 2011, 13:47
Dec 11, 2011, 13:47
 
theyarecomingforyou wrote on Dec 11, 2011, 13:36:
xXBatmanXx wrote on Dec 11, 2011, 10:57:
We are here....just not responding to the trolls who say FOV isn't important.
Whoa, back up a bit. Not everybody that disagrees with you is a "troll". I've just never found FOV to be essential to my gaming experience and, in case you didn't know, I have never been a console gamer - I'm PC through and through. If it were just purists arguing the technical merits it would be one thing but it annoys me that many people that want to change it simply want to do so to get a competitive advantage or simply enjoy incredibly high FOVs, like 120+.

But this is all getting way off topic. The point is that someone attacked Metro 2033 for a low FOV, while neglecting that they used a different measurement - people don't give a shit about the technicalities, they just look for a number and moan if it isn't the number they were expecting. Metro 2033 plays fine and was a very good game; very different to STALKER but in my opinion a better overall game.

FOV is important because majority of people now use WS monitors. It wasn't AS important when we used 4:3 square huge things - but now, a 90 FOV looks almost perfect on a WS monitor. (I use a 22 inch LCD). I don't use it for the "advantage", I use it because it looks and feels better.

The advantage thing? meh, doesn't bother me that people use it. What about the people that multiple monitors? Majority of MP kills in the small arena games are now head on anyway - not side kills or back kills.

I will usually push FOV until it shows the fisheye even a little, and most games I can use 85-90 to get that sweet spot just before fisheye.
38.
 
Re: GSC/S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 Statement Monday
Dec 11, 2011, 13:36
38.
Re: GSC/S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 Statement Monday Dec 11, 2011, 13:36
Dec 11, 2011, 13:36
 
xXBatmanXx wrote on Dec 11, 2011, 10:57:
We are here....just not responding to the trolls who say FOV isn't important.
Whoa, back up a bit. Not everybody that disagrees with you is a "troll". I've just never found FOV to be essential to my gaming experience and, in case you didn't know, I have never been a console gamer - I'm PC through and through. If it were just purists arguing the technical merits it would be one thing but it annoys me that many people that want to change it simply want to do so to get a competitive advantage or simply enjoy incredibly high FOVs, like 120+.

But this is all getting way off topic. The point is that someone attacked Metro 2033 for a low FOV, while neglecting that they used a different measurement - people don't give a shit about the technicalities, they just look for a number and moan if it isn't the number they were expecting. Metro 2033 plays fine and was a very good game; very different to STALKER but in my opinion a better overall game.
"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance."
Avatar 22891
37.
 
Re: GSC/S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 Statement Monday
Dec 11, 2011, 10:57
37.
Re: GSC/S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 Statement Monday Dec 11, 2011, 10:57
Dec 11, 2011, 10:57
 
Mad Max RW wrote on Dec 10, 2011, 21:30:
bhcompy wrote on Dec 10, 2011, 21:24:
Mad Max RW wrote on Dec 10, 2011, 19:46:
Narrow FOV as a gameplay feature is a total fabrication. For most PC gamers it's as essential as vertical sync, turning on/off mouse acceleration/smoothing, and screen resolution.

It's a single player game. Single player games are about controlling the environment and mood of the game. Stop crying.

/also, vsync is essential?

I can't believe people are making an argument out of this. And vsync is absolutely essential if you're getting tearing across the screen.

Are there any sane people left on this site to back me up?

We are here....just not responding to the trolls who say FOV isn't important. For a few reasons:

1. They are most likely console fanbois
2. They are wrong
3. Most of the time they have no idea what they are talking about

Those of us "in the know" are very aware of how important FOV is. There are games I don't play because the FOV is not changeable or acceptable.

This comment was edited on Dec 11, 2011, 11:33.
36.
 
Re: GSC/S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 Statement Monday
Dec 11, 2011, 10:54
36.
Re: GSC/S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 Statement Monday Dec 11, 2011, 10:54
Dec 11, 2011, 10:54
 
bhcompy wrote on Dec 10, 2011, 21:33:
Mad Max RW wrote on Dec 10, 2011, 21:30:
bhcompy wrote on Dec 10, 2011, 21:24:
Mad Max RW wrote on Dec 10, 2011, 19:46:
Narrow FOV as a gameplay feature is a total fabrication. For most PC gamers it's as essential as vertical sync, turning on/off mouse acceleration/smoothing, and screen resolution.

It's a single player game. Single player games are about controlling the environment and mood of the game. Stop crying.

/also, vsync is essential?

I can't believe people are making an argument out of this. And vsync is absolutely essential if you're getting tearing across the screen.

Are there any sane people left on this site to back me up?

People still have tearing problems? What is this? 2001? Last game I had any tearing problems with was Farcry 1

A lot of games suffer from tearing issues.....
35.
 
Re: GSC/S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 Statement Monday
Dec 11, 2011, 10:06
35.
Re: GSC/S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 Statement Monday Dec 11, 2011, 10:06
Dec 11, 2011, 10:06
 
well, this sucks a bag of dicks. Even if they get someone else to fund it it's doubtful they'll be allowed the amount of artistic freedom that made the original games so immersive.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Both the “left” and the “right” pretend they have the answer, but they are mere flippers on the same thalidomide baby, and the truth is that neither side has a clue."

- Jim Goad
Avatar 10137
34.
 
Re: GSC/S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 Statement Monday
Dec 11, 2011, 09:24
34.
Re: GSC/S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 Statement Monday Dec 11, 2011, 09:24
Dec 11, 2011, 09:24
 
Marvin T. Martian wrote on Dec 11, 2011, 08:46:
Metro isn't near as great as you make it out to be.
And ... Metro uses savepoints to cheaply expand gameplay time.
33.
 
Re: GSC/S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 Statement Monday
Dec 11, 2011, 08:46
33.
Re: GSC/S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 Statement Monday Dec 11, 2011, 08:46
Dec 11, 2011, 08:46
 
Silicon Avatar wrote on Dec 10, 2011, 13:33:
But as I've pointed out before, Metro 2033 was a spin-off from GSC-GW and it was a lot more focused and polished, with a strong narrative.


Metro isn't near as great as you make it out to be.
Various reviews agree with statements like
"The weapons—while compulsively upgradeable—are crafted in such a way as to be realistic, which in this case means “boring.” That would be fine and dandy if the other two pillars of first-person-shooter fun—level design and enemy AI—did enough heavy lifting to make up for it. Sadly, they don’t."

"Levels, of course, are visually spectacular, but at their core are linear corridor crawls"

and many reviews concur and point out many other flaws.

[This comment was edited on Dec 11, 2011, 08:52.

This comment was edited on Dec 11, 2011, 08:54.
Avatar 1746
32.
 
Re: GSC/S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 Statement Monday
Dec 11, 2011, 05:15
Dev
 
32.
Re: GSC/S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 Statement Monday Dec 11, 2011, 05:15
Dec 11, 2011, 05:15
 Dev
 
Silicon Avatar wrote on Dec 10, 2011, 13:33:
Sounds like a "Yes we're shutting down" to me. Otherwise they'd be denying it left and right.
Or, if you are optimistic, it could be something along the lines of serious downsizing and canceling projects, but maybe they will keep a a few to work on the game.
31.
 
Re: GSC/S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 Statement Monday
Dec 10, 2011, 23:51
31.
Re: GSC/S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 Statement Monday Dec 10, 2011, 23:51
Dec 10, 2011, 23:51
 
Yes a narrow FOV can cause motion sickness, particularly on desktop PC setups and if view bob is also present. View bob is perhaps the biggest cause of that though I think. STALKER has a pretty extreme view bob (might as well call it a swagger) in fact in its stock form.
Avatar 49717
50 Replies. 3 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  2  3  ] Older