S.T.A.L.K.E.R. in 2006?

Oblivion-Lost.com has a story up speculating that the release of S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Shadow of Chernobyl has slipped until 2006, offering the following quote from THQ responding to questions about the game's absence from their recent financial reports covering releases through the middle of next year: "We have no definitive release date yet for S.T.A.L.K.E.R. We do expect to have some announcements, including a public demonstration this summer. More news to follow." In an amusing side note, the THQ's S.T.A.L.K.E.R. Website (thanks Rhialto) actually lists the game as "now available," much to the amusement of those who frequent the GSC Game World Forums.
View : : :
38.
 
Re: No subject
May 6, 2005, 17:42
38.
Re: No subject May 6, 2005, 17:42
May 6, 2005, 17:42
 
Your not alone. Why cant developers get it we want these type of games? I would love to see a SS3 or DE3, but if its a different IP and has the same game mechanics I'm all for it.

Some of us understand. Like i said, keep an eye out after E3.

And about them not selling well, that's not entirely true. System Shock 2 would have made a decent amount of money if it wasn't for the situation over at Looking Glass. Deus Ex likewise had a slow start but eventually made its fair share. It's not that these games weren't getting bought, it's that they weren't marketed in the way that, say, STALKER was. Can't really say is because now STALKER is becoming quite the industry joke. However you'd be hard pressed to find a PC gamer that has never heard of STALKER, so joke or not, that's good marketing. So the issue here is that someone needs to make a great game along those lines, with deep gameplay, a great story and memorable characters, and make sure that it is marketed correctly. Perhaps gamers will get lucky and someone will.

---------
Pandora Studios programmer
http://www.pandora-studios.com
Date
Subject
Author
1.
May 6, 2005May 6 2005
2.
May 6, 2005May 6 2005
3.
May 6, 2005May 6 2005
4.
May 6, 2005May 6 2005
5.
May 6, 2005May 6 2005
7.
May 6, 2005May 6 2005
6.
May 6, 2005May 6 2005
8.
May 6, 2005May 6 2005
9.
May 6, 2005May 6 2005
17.
May 6, 2005May 6 2005
30.
May 6, 2005May 6 2005
32.
May 6, 2005May 6 2005
33.
May 6, 2005May 6 2005
 38.
May 6, 2005May 6 2005
    Re: No subject
31.
May 6, 2005May 6 2005
10.
May 6, 2005May 6 2005
28.
May 6, 2005May 6 2005
11.
May 6, 2005May 6 2005
12.
May 6, 2005May 6 2005
16.
May 6, 2005May 6 2005
13.
May 6, 2005May 6 2005
14.
May 6, 2005May 6 2005
15.
May 6, 2005May 6 2005
19.
May 6, 2005May 6 2005
18.
May 6, 2005May 6 2005
20.
May 6, 2005May 6 2005
21.
May 6, 2005May 6 2005
23.
May 6, 2005May 6 2005
24.
May 6, 2005May 6 2005
   oops..
25.
May 6, 2005May 6 2005
    Re: oops..
22.
May 6, 2005May 6 2005
27.
May 6, 2005May 6 2005
29.
May 6, 2005May 6 2005
34.
May 6, 2005May 6 2005
35.
May 6, 2005May 6 2005
36.
May 6, 2005May 6 2005
39.
May 6, 2005May 6 2005
41.
May 6, 2005May 6 2005
42.
May 6, 2005May 6 2005
43.
May 6, 2005May 6 2005
44.
May 6, 2005May 6 2005
45.
May 6, 2005May 6 2005
     Re: No subject
47.
May 6, 2005May 6 2005
37.
May 6, 2005May 6 2005
49.
May 7, 2005May 7 2005
50.
May 7, 2005May 7 2005
40.
May 6, 2005May 6 2005
46.
May 6, 2005May 6 2005
54.
May 9, 2005May 9 2005
48.
May 7, 2005May 7 2005
51.
May 7, 2005May 7 2005
52.
May 7, 2005May 7 2005