Instale o Steam
iniciar sessão
|
idioma
简体中文 (Chinês simplificado)
繁體中文 (Chinês tradicional)
日本語 (Japonês)
한국어 (Coreano)
ไทย (Tailandês)
Български (Búlgaro)
Čeština (Tcheco)
Dansk (Dinamarquês)
Deutsch (Alemão)
English (Inglês)
Español-España (Espanhol — Espanha)
Español-Latinoamérica (Espanhol — América Latina)
Ελληνικά (Grego)
Français (Francês)
Italiano (Italiano)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonésio)
Magyar (Húngaro)
Nederlands (Holandês)
Norsk (Norueguês)
Polski (Polonês)
Português (Portugal)
Română (Romeno)
Русский (Russo)
Suomi (Finlandês)
Svenska (Sueco)
Türkçe (Turco)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamita)
Українська (Ucraniano)
Relatar um problema com a tradução
1. Its split into 3 map areas. Each is perhaps a mile or 2 in dimensions but with fairly varied landmarks and quests in them with an option to go between them. To be honest it still has a feel of open world play.
2. Dont know its not the most optimised game, a mid range setup nowerdays should run it fine, but your better off googleing that with your specific specs. Id recommend being able to run the higher lighting settings as it complements the games atmosphere.
3. The previous ones are patched (mostly) now and are a lot of fun but this is the most polished of the 3 (ive not had a single CTD). You will probably want to go for some of the mods for the first and possibly the second game to bring it more in line with this one.
3.5 The other games have more smaller connected maps and I imagine if you can run this game the others wont be much different with regards to systems requirements.
Id recommend this game and then perhaps getting the previous titles if you enjoy its 'flavour'.
1. The maps are divided but it does have a pretty open feel as mjcsniper stated. It gets pretty creepy at night, that's also when the majority of the mutants come out. Don't go in expecting a map like Fallout or Elder Scrolls, you'll be disappointed. There's loot to be had too, similar to Fallout or ES in that it's static and not haphazardly dropped like in Diablo or Borderlands.
2. Yeah, you're system should be able to run it, it was released back in 2008 so if you've got a video card from around 2008 you should be fine. Aside from that, it's not a very resource demanding game so I'm sure you're system can handle it. Just look at the requirements and compare those to your machines to get a better idea.
3. If you want the full STALKER experience then go ahead and get the previous games. It's not necessary they aren't very connected if at all. The previous STALKERs will help give you an idea what the other areas of The Zone are like, but I think the inner most area (which is featured in CoP) is the most interesting and fun to play in.
2. To max out the game there might be minor lag, if you get mods you WILL get lag, since the graphics usually get overhauled.
3. Stalker: Shadow of Chernobyl and Call of Pripyat are good starters. Clear sky was kind of average.
Overall i am considering of getting it, i just want to know which one is the best in your opinions.
And is your character customizable? (Clothing/armor)
On a quick personal note: atmosphere is everything in this game, and I think why it has gathered such a following. The inventory system is different to NV, and there is less 'stuff' - it's like hardcore mode in that survival is part of the game.
Better gear means the differince between life and death sometimes, especially later in the game. And the night vision is a must once you have it.
Odds are you will like the game, it's a good one if you don't care about visuals or mind slightly older game mechanics. And the dialogue is mostly text, some is spoken but not like Fallout. But if you don't care about any of that, than give it a go. It's a great middle-ware game not too indy and not AAA. Just right in the middle, I found few games in its genre can offer a similar experience.
2. Shadow of Chernobyl (first one in series) will work well on medium PCs but CoP and especially the graphic jewel that is Clear Sky will need high end PC to be run at their full potential. On a laptop? i doubt it, unless its an expensive one with a good videocard.
3.5 All games in Stalker series are hard and unforgiving for new players. If you get into them, you will love them forever, but if you dont get into them, you will probably hate them forever, so i cannot tell you should buy or not buy them.
They are superb games, a milestone in videogame design, but they are not for everyone.
2. Yes, and I think maybe at even high settings.
3. I REALLY recommend getting the previous ones, however if you wouldn't like this one, I'd say buy Shadow of Chernobyl, try it, and if you still don't like it, sorry, this might not be for you.
4.Yes and yes. SoC and CS (Clear Sky) are longer, but have their bugs. I'd say if you like the idea of the game, get all of them, really worth it.
2. My Laptop cant even run JC2 and I'm running this game on medium with the "complete mod" (which increses the hardware demand. Also, get this mod. It adds alot of polish). The minimum requirement for this game is hardware from 2003.
3. If you like like this one, yes. They both are a little bit less open world (they have smaller areas, but more of them) and are more story-driven.
3.5 Requirements for all 3 games are pretty much the same.
I played most of Shadow of Chernobyl (lost my save and too chicken to get it back) and all of Call of Pripyat multiple times.
As a game, Call of Pripyat does a better job. Because your character progression in this pseudo RPG is based entirely on your loot (as in no character traits, perks, or whathaveyou in Fallout) it is imperative that there is a feeling of progression from start to finish.
For me in Shadow of Chernobyl, which by far had the creepier atmosphere, I reached a point halfway through the game where I basically had everything I needed and that character progression broke down.
In Call of Pripyat that never happened, for reasons I detail in my review.
So while Call of Pripyat isn't as creepy or scary as Shadow of Chernobyl, it is the better game all around. That's not even factoring in the lack of bugs and such.