Why the open-worlds of the S.T.A.L.K.E.R. series are superior to those in The Elder Scrolls series

[Brawndo]

I was reading this article on Euro Gamer about the S.T.A.L.K.E.R. series after the developer, GSC, recently shut its doors, and I felt the author made a very valid point:

GSC were absentee developers. In this sense, that's a good thing. Throughout playing any of the three Stalker games, it's difficult to feel like their attention is ever really on you. Instead it's on organising a hillside scuffle between the dog-things and those boar-things. Or orchestrating some skirmish between two gangs of Stalkers, or maybe some bandits. Or swirling up some horrendous, traveling anomaly, that will pull you into a whirlwind of radiation and wind, before flaying you alive. But it wasn't created for you - you just happened to be the dummy that walked into it. Idiot.

It's a world that exists despite you, rather than because of you. In an industry where a game like Skyrim has enough stuff for you to stumble across and trigger to distract you into thinking this is a living, breathing world, GSC actually managed to do it, for the most part. There are still scripted sequences, but those became less and less prevalent across the development of the three games, until Call of Prypiat just dropped you into the Zone with a vague mission to investigate some downed choppers and left you to it.

[...]

But that's part of the point; the Stalker games create an environment that is apathetic of you at the best. It doesn't make allowances, or pay any undue attention to what it is that you're doing, and that's liberating. It means the game has stepped back and allowed you the space to enjoy your own story, rather than the one that has been prepared for you. Even if that story is some minor, insignificant tragedy that is followed by a quickload and a second attempt, it's yours.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-12-18-retrospective-s-t-a-l-k-e-r-article

This put in words what I was feeling every time I played Oblivion or Skyrim, but couldn't quite put my finger on it. He's right, almost nothing happens in TES games unless the player character causes them to happen. Sure, there are random encounters in Skyrim, but they don't matter the second you walk out of the area. There's a civil war going on, really? You can't fault my skepticism with all that non-fighting going on between the Imperials and Stormcloaks. A demonic invasion in Cyrodill? Pfft, you never have to worry about those Oblivion gates, even that one that is 50 feet from a town. Nothing will ever happen unless you progress through the main campaign.

Compare that to the constant faction vs. faction warfare going on in Call of Prypiat. I've played CoP and Shadow of Chernobyl and the author is spot on - the player character is totally unimportant. You are just another Stalker and no one cares until you do enough shit to make a faction even take notice of your existence. I haven't played the prequel to the series, Clear Sky, but I've read that it was criticized by some S.T.A.L.K.E.R. fans for making the player character "the one and only savior of the world with magical powers" (a la Dragonborn).

Note: This criticism does not suggest Skyrim or the other TES games are bad games, nor does it suggest that the S.T.A.L.K.E.R. games are better overall; I just think this one feature is handled in a superior manner. There are many good reasons to play TES games, and plenty of reasons why the S.T.A.L.K.E.R. games could have been better. I myself have twice the number of hours played for Oblivion and Skyrim than the S.T.A.L.K.E.R. games, but I still think it is a valid criticism.

EDIT: If anyone likes the kind of open-world where you aren't the centerpiece, you should also check out the Mount and Blade series. You start that game with a horse and some money and then the developers say, "have a good time." You can expect cities and castles to change hands without your input on a regular basis.

 

[The Madman]

I haven't played Skyrim myself, but I do agree about the STALKER series. One of the best parts about that series is that despite not being a completely open-world ala Oblivion, it nevertheless manages to feel *alive* in a way few other games have ever really achieved. Some of my most amazing gaming moments in recent memory are of the STALKER games and just some of the incredible non-scripted events which can take place. Not only that, but the sheer ambiance as well. Just seems like the STALKER games present a world that can breath and feel.

There's just something incredible about getting stuck out in the wilderness during a night storm. Your vision reduced to near nothing thanks to the heavy rain and the impenetrable darkness illuminated only by the pathetic light of your flashlight and the occasional blinding flash of lightning across the sky. A moment made all the more intense by the sounds of howling and gunfire in the distance as some presumably horrible fate befalls some unlucky sods some distance away, their gunfire vague crackling barely heard over the constant rumbling of thunder and the pounding of rain.

Spoiler: A taste for those that have never played the series.

Honestly can't think of a single other game quite like it which is why I'm so torn over what's happened to the series developers. I want a STALKER 2, I really really do.

 

[JesterRaiin]

Is it true ? Yes, to some extent. Some things in STALKER games depend solely on character showing in some places or doing some things. For example lost Monolith's soldiers are waiting for player to meet them, and later to rescue them. They stay where they are, no matter how much time will pass, how many "storms of chaos" will emerge. They do nothing to change their "lives". So it is not "black-white" situation either.

Is it good, is it bad ? It's impossible to say. I'm ok with both ways.

 

[GiantRaven]

I definitely agree. It seems that other developers are almost fearful of something happening outside of the player's control. It's something I'd really like to see the end of in a bunch of different games.

The civil war in Skyrim is a brilliant example. If I was making Skyrim, I would've definitely implemented some form of faction wars-esque system with all the various holds (save the two important ones) switching between factions as they built up forces and waged battles.

 

[RuralGamer]

Mmmm that's actually a pretty good point about CoP's game world I overlook often; it is proof you don't need scripting to make a decent open-world game. Heck, it creates some interesting scenarios; I knew this one independent Stalker who always seemed to live; he ended up on his own after his whole team were wiped out, save him; I saved him from a bandit trying to execute him while he was down and after that he wandered around the zone, taking out tons of bandits on his own until he was finally overwhelmed by a pack of dogs.

 

[Moonlight Butterfly]

Well the first stalker never tricked me into thinking it was a living breathing world because all the enemies respawned when you walked back through an area. This wouldn't be a problem apart from the fact you have realistic carry weight for ammunition...

Real people aren't expected to kill 200 plus people on one outing. :|

I don't really understand their point all it sound like to me is 'We can't be bothered to put interesting things in relevant to the player so we just automated everything outside your control have fun'

It sounds pretentious.

 

[Clive Howlitzer]

While I consider it like comparing apples and oranges, I like both. The only downside is I've only ever had any luck playing the first STALKER game. Every one other one was wrought with crashes, long load times, and instability. I've had poor luck with them.

 

[Mr Somewhere]

Well the first stalker never tricked me into thinking it was a living breathing world because all the enemies respawned when you walked back through an area. This wouldn't be a problem apart from the fact you have realistic carry weight for ammunition...

Real people aren't expected to kill 200 plus people on one outing. :|

I don't really understand their point all it sound like to me is 'We can't be bothered to put interesting things in relevant to the player so we just automated everything outside your control have fun'

It sounds pretentious.

But there are also interesting things for the player to stumble upon too, usually.
Yeah, that respawning, that was a problem alright. The Stalker games were flawed, but there really wasn't anything else like them. It's sad.


Also, how is that pretentious?

 

[Moonlight Butterfly]

Well the first stalker never tricked me into thinking it was a living breathing world because all the enemies respawned when you walked back through an area. This wouldn't be a problem apart from the fact you have realistic carry weight for ammunition...

Real people aren't expected to kill 200 plus people on one outing. :|

I don't really understand their point all it sound like to me is 'We can't be bothered to put interesting things in relevant to the player so we just automated everything outside your control have fun'

It sounds pretentious.

But there are also interesting things for the player to stumble upon too, usually.
Yeah, that respawning, that was a problem alright. The Stalker games were flawed, but there really wasn't anything else like them. It's sad.


Also, how is that pretentious?

I meant in a way they are making excuses for themselves by dressing it up in flowery language. Like an art student submitting a blank canvas because he procrastinated and calling it 'The Emptiness of Life'

They are basically saying having no random encounters is better because the game world feels like it's not made for you. In reality that just translates as having less content.

I liked the Stalker games and my best mate loves them which made me sad when I heard they had gone out of business.

 

[teh_gunslinger]

Well the first stalker never tricked me into thinking it was a living breathing world because all the enemies respawned when you walked back through an area. This wouldn't be a problem apart from the fact you have realistic carry weight for ammunition...

Real people aren't expected to kill 200 plus people on one outing. :|

I don't really understand their point all it sound like to me is 'We can't be bothered to put interesting things in relevant to the player so we just automated everything outside your control have fun'

It sounds pretentious.

But there are also interesting things for the player to stumble upon too, usually.
Yeah, that respawning, that was a problem alright. The Stalker games were flawed, but there really wasn't anything else like them. It's sad.


Also, how is that pretentious?

I meant in a way they are making excuses for themselves by dressing it up in flowery language. Like an art student submitting a blank canvas because he procrastinated and calling it 'The Emptiness of Life'

They are basically saying having no random encounters is better because the game world feels like it's not made for you. In reality that just translates as having less content.

I liked the Stalker games and my best mate loves them which made me sad when I heard they had gone out of business.

But there are almost nothing BUT random encounters in STALKER. When I meet a fellow stalker and help him out against the dogs he's fighting that's random. Both me being there, him being there and the dogs being there. It's all random.

But it's not random as in having been determined by a die roll and looked up in a chart and inserted.

It's random because various systems converged at that point, including my player agency.

 

[Mr Somewhere]

Well the first stalker never tricked me into thinking it was a living breathing world because all the enemies respawned when you walked back through an area. This wouldn't be a problem apart from the fact you have realistic carry weight for ammunition...

Real people aren't expected to kill 200 plus people on one outing. :|

I don't really understand their point all it sound like to me is 'We can't be bothered to put interesting things in relevant to the player so we just automated everything outside your control have fun'

It sounds pretentious.

But there are also interesting things for the player to stumble upon too, usually.
Yeah, that respawning, that was a problem alright. The Stalker games were flawed, but there really wasn't anything else like them. It's sad.


Also, how is that pretentious?

I meant in a way they are making excuses for themselves by dressing it up in flowery language. Like an art student submitting a blank canvas because he procrastinated and calling it 'The Emptiness of Life'

They are basically saying having no random encounters is better because the game world feels like it's not made for you. In reality that just translates as having less content.

I liked the Stalker games and my best mate loves them which made me sad when I heard they had gone out of business.

Ah yes, I see where you're coming from now. But that's more at the fault of the writer. I imagine that the developers intended to give the illusion of a living world around the player.

But, yes, it's a real shame what happened.

 

[Thyunda]

Well the first stalker never tricked me into thinking it was a living breathing world because all the enemies respawned when you walked back through an area. This wouldn't be a problem apart from the fact you have realistic carry weight for ammunition...

Real people aren't expected to kill 200 plus people on one outing. :|

I don't really understand their point all it sound like to me is 'We can't be bothered to put interesting things in relevant to the player so we just automated everything outside your control have fun'

It sounds pretentious.

But there are also interesting things for the player to stumble upon too, usually.
Yeah, that respawning, that was a problem alright. The Stalker games were flawed, but there really wasn't anything else like them. It's sad.


Also, how is that pretentious?

They are basically saying having no random encounters is better because the game world feels like it's not made for you. In reality that just translates as having less content.

But it DOES make it feel like the other denizens of the world have stories of their own, and not everything centres around the player. I didn't really notice it until I was told STALKER did it differently (never played the game myself), but then I noticed...it IS true. My favourite parts of Bethesda games are finding the journals and corpses of events already gone by...but I've yet to actually see an event take place that didn't directly involve me. The man who breeds mutant skeevers? I'm sure he had a great story, but all I saw was a guy with skeevers who I killed.
So there we go again. His story ended via Dragonborn. In Fallout New Vegas (Obsidian, I know, but same style), the best story by far was that of the Father in the Cave. And that had no involvement from the player, but the story was long finished.

I'd like to feel as though I'm inhabiting a living world, rather than facing a blank canvas and splashing paint where I see fit.

 

[Moonlight Butterfly]

le snip

I kind of get what you mean but a game is meant to get you involved not be a movie that you're watching.

Perhaps a happy medium could be met.

Take Fallout 3 for example perhaps the player could encourage and help Gob to the point where he feels confident enough to off Moriarty himself and you come back into town and exchange smug smiles over a nuka cola.

 

[Thyunda]

le snip

I kind of get what you mean but a game is meant to get you involved not be a movie that you're watching.

Perhaps a happy medium could be met.

Take Fallout 3 for example perhaps the player could encourage and help Gob to the point where he feels confident enough to off Moriarty himself and you come back into town and exchange smug smiles over a nuka cola.

Oh, well, of course balance is needed. I wasn't saying Bethesda/Obsidian did it wrong, just that some stories happening without the player would be nice, rather than the whole "Thank you, you've saved me from the bandit kidnappers. Now I'm going to disappear and you'll never hear from me again. Or maybe I'll just hang around a nearby town and spout the same line of grateful dialogue a few times."

More...unscripted events as well as scripted would be nice. I think we've reached a satisfying agreement.

 

[Dandark]

I loved the unscripted events in STALKER. My favorite thing to do is play Clear sky with the TFW mod and wander around as a loner, joining a faction and getting involved is great but being a loner is best because the mod removes the actual storyline, meaning every single thing that happens is non-scripted.

One time while on my return from a raid into red forest(A very bad idea on my part, lost the whole squad I was with) I encountered some Duty guy's and mercs fighting over a building . I was going to take a detour around it as I didn't want to get caught in the crossfire but then from my vantage point high on a hill, I saw a military helicopter in the distance.

After cursing my terrible luck to emerge bleeding and low on supplies from the forest only to run into this I then ran towards the base. I had to run past the Mercs to get into a building, they followed me inside while shooting at Duty, I got hit once and had to stop to bandage it.

Once inside, the Mercs held the entrance so the Duty guy's couldn't get in. The helicopter then flew by and promptly slaughtered the Duty members. It tried to take a few shots at the mercs untill they retreated further inside, it then decided to fly off again.

I ran out to try and loot the bodies, I took a gun from one of the troopers that had been modified at some point, however then the mercs came out and threatened to shoot me if I didn't hand the stuff I just looted back to them.

Despite the fact I was armed with an AK and surely safe in my heavily armed leather coat, I decided I wouldn't last a second out in the open against 5 angry mercs and handed the stuff over. I then continued my journey back to what passes for the trade center so that I could resupply.


My point is that all of that was unscripted. The mod had added things like helicopter patrols in as well as given the AI the ability to demand stolen loot back but still, it was all completely unscripted.

If I wasn't there, then it would of happened the same way(minus the bit with my looting). Maybe it would of gone differently, maybe Duty would of made it inside the base first and let the mercs be murdered. STALKER still remains one of my favorite game series because of this kind of alive world it has.

I have already gotten bored with Skyrim but I find my self still playing this game again and again, I also have to play it on low settings since my computer isn't that good, I can hardly imagine how great it would be on maximum settings.

 

[Wolfram23]

Oh STALKER. What a great game. I mostly played CoP.

There's definitely scripted events in the game, of course. They don't leave it all up to chance. However, yeah, there's quite a bit of randomness. It's always cool to leave town and head off towards distant gunfire, only to find bandits vs mercenaries vs vampires (whatever the invisible guys are) and then loot the bodies... and fight off a random manticore.

I find it kind of... almost annoying, I suppose, how every time you go to a new city in Skyrim there's a scripted event that plays out. I get the purpose, but it would be kind of nice if maybe you could see that event only after doing a quest or two in the town, rather than having it happen by default. I find I just end up forgetting about it soon enough. I guess it would have more impact if you had to "unlock" it.

Anyway I think Skyrim does have a few good "random" elements, like random thieves or random imperial vs stormcloak fights. But then, there's many interesting places waiting for you to find them - just too bad it's the same on every character. There's little to no chance of finding the same "special" place twice with completely different circumstances (thinking of, for example, the necromancer at the necro stone).

 

[Hyper-space]

snip

The Stalker Series isn't completely open-world, unlike Elder Scrolls. The difference in design is what makes the Stalker Series and Elder Scrolls incompatible when comparing the game-world. For you to enjoy the complete freedom that the Elder Scrolls series brings, you have to accept that some things won't change dynamically (because then it would limit the things you could do, which goes against the core-concept of the series).

So yeah, both series and their design-philosophy has its flaws and strengths.

 

[latiasracer]

Ive not played Skyrim, But i have heard alot about it.(I Love Fps, all of my freinds are RPGers).

I Am however, very much inlove with Stalker. It does feel like you are just another guy, nobody important.

I haven't played the prequel to the series, Clear Sky, but I've read that it was criticized by some S.T.A.L.K.E.R. fans for making the player character "the one and only savior of the world with magical powers" (a la Dragonborn).

As a firm player of All 3 games (CS being my favourite) i have to dissagree with this. Clear sky, was infact the one i felt least important in. True there is the element of you being the bloke with magical powers, But that's ditched pretty early on and only comes up rarely when baldy comes up on the radio. Infact, the reason i sided with one of the factions - is because i was feeling a little left out with all the faction battles going around me, i wanted to take part.

Stalker is broken up into areas, and the events are mostly unscripted (Minus a couple) Skyrim is one big massive area ( I think...? ) and scripted events suit that, as random events could prevent your progression in the story. Stalker has that inaway aswell, for instance Freedom won't destroy Duty before you get to those areas, and vice versa.

At the end of the day, Stalker is an amazing series. The Elder Scrolls is an amazing series.
We should all be thankfull for them, and be sad at the fact S.t.a.l.k.e.r is now no longer with us.

 

[Brawndo]

I have already gotten bored with Skyrim but I find my self still playing this game again and again, I also have to play it on low settings since my computer isn't that good, I can hardly imagine how great it would be on maximum settings.

How bad are your load times? I can't use any mods or it takes over 10 minutes just to load a saved game, and it's already pretty long (3-4 minutes) with the standard games. I actually have a pretty decent computer too, so I don't know what the problem is.