Stalker Clear Sky DX10 Screens And Video

why is it called 'clear sky'? How about:

S.T.A.L.K.E.R: Overcast with a chance of rain
 
Man, I need to upgrade my graphics card. (Good thing 8800GTXs should be dropping in price soon, what with the arrival of the new cards and all.)

This game is gorgeous.
 
Can a single 8800GTX run STALKER on high + dynamic lighting at 1920x1200 res smoothly? I must get about 15fps with my 8800GTS 640MB. Of course, with dynamic lighting off it runs great but doesn't look nearly as appealing.

Clear Sky is looking fantastic.
 
I'll be all over this game! It's looking better and better each day...
 
cannondale06 said:
you can already get a better card for cheaper than the 8800gtx.
Click to expand...

Not really. Even when the 9800 comes out there is doubt it is going to shift much of anything. Its more of a small upgrade almost like it should have been the 8900 but with the release from ATI they had to catch up.

I do not think 8800 prices are going to drop significantly. Much like how it played out in the 7 series.
 
dj_2004 said:
Can a single 8800GTX run STALKER on high + dynamic lighting at 1920x1200 res smoothly? I must get about 15fps with my 8800GTS 640MB. Of course, with dynamic lighting off it runs great but doesn't look nearly as appealing.

Clear Sky is looking fantastic.
Click to expand...


I was able to run it at 1680 x 1050 max settings very smoothly....only after the 1.04 patch.
 
:eek: That video looked absolutely stunning!. Im gonna prolly make a war here but , IMHO it looks way better than Crysis in the graphics department, some of those shots actually looked like a photograph. Man I cant wait for this one, playing through the first one again right now.
 
@DJ_2004:

I run STALKER modded with float (floating point ) on this!:
C2D E2160@ 3.0 Ghz
2G ram
nvidia 9600GT 512.
runs all at max of allmost max @ 1920*1200
AA not used, AF at 1/4 ingame settings

runs great :)
( btw, you want more fps? decrease foliage first, then lightening distance and shadows, then the other details )
 
infect0 said:
Not really. Even when the 9800 comes out there is doubt it is going to shift much of anything. Its more of a small upgrade almost like it should have been the 8900 but with the release from ATI they had to catch up.

I do not think 8800 prices are going to drop significantly. Much like how it played out in the 7 series.
Click to expand...
the prices dont always drop and thats my point too. hell the 7900 cards are still expensive at most etailers. the 7900gtx never got cheaper before newegg stopped carrying it and the 7950gt is still $250. ;)
 
Ah, I have to finish STALKER.. Is this running on the same engine? If so, is it considered an expansion or stand alone?
 
Lone_Bullet.be said:
@DJ_2004:

I run STALKER modded with float (floating point ) on this!:
C2D E2160@ 3.0 Ghz
2G ram
nvidia 9600GT 512.
runs all at max of allmost max @ 1920*1200
AA not used, AF at 1/4 ingame settings

runs great :)
( btw, you want more fps? decrease foliage first, then lightening distance and shadows, then the other details )
Click to expand...

With dynamic lighting? Like I stated in my post, I have no trouble at all running the game at highest with 2xAA/16xAF without dynamic lighting.
 
I agree I think it looks better then crysis, hell we already know it will run better. :p
Can't wait for this, I really enjoyed the first STALKER.
 
STALKER is my favorite FPS to date. Better than Half Life 2, better than Bioshock, better than Crysis.

The atmosphere alone in STALKER was head and shoulders better than any other game I have ever played.
 
The screens and the movie were taken using a NV 9800. The video is 6 months old.

Ah, I have to finish STALKER.. Is this running running on the same engine? If so, is it considered an expansion or stand alone?
Click to expand...

STALKER- Xray 1.0
Clear Sky- Xray 1.5 will be stand alone
 
dj_2004 said:
With dynamic lighting? Like I stated in my post, I have no trouble at all running the game at highest with 2xAA/16xAF without dynamic lighting.
Click to expand...

Indeed :)
I have to say though ( forgotten about it ) I suffer some minor framedrops at the Bar.
perhaps because of the large numbers of people around there.
Also, My CPU is at 2.3Ghz, not 3.0 and my ram is only single chanel.
So those factors might be huge bottlenecks, and not my GPU.
I suggest you find some reviews :)
 
whats the deal with stalker, somethings just didn't work for me...

eh, ill play it again tomorrow and see if i cant get any further. I beat the game but some parts of it were just off.
 
Lone_Bullet.be said:
Indeed :)
I have to say though ( forgotten about it ) I suffer some minor framedrops at the Bar.
perhaps because of the large numbers of people around there.
Also, My CPU is at 2.3Ghz, not 3.0 and my ram is only single chanel.
So those factors might be huge bottlenecks, and not my GPU.
I suggest you find some reviews :)
Click to expand...

Something must be wrong with my system as the benchies I found show the 9600gt slower than my card with this game. Oh well, glad to hear it runs great for you.

MrWizard6600 said:
whats the deal with stalker, somethings just didn't work for me...

eh, ill play it again tomorrow and see if i cant get any further. I beat the game but some parts of it were just off.
Click to expand...

Like what? I beat the game recently and didn't notice any major bugs with the newest patch.
 
dj_2004 said:
Like what? I beat the game recently and didn't notice any major bugs with the newest patch.
Click to expand...

And I reached one of the endings, without any patch and without any serious bug, crashes, nothing...
 
I think Crysis now has some hardcore competition in the visuals department. :p

WANT!
 
I agree this game looks great, I don't see how its beating crysis in the overall graphical quality department, crysis still has alot more visual elements (foliage) than I believe stalker : CS will have, but the lighting looks fucking amazing, this game, and not crysis will force me to upgrade (don't feel like buying crysis for medium-low settings).

This game is going to be epic I think.
 
Oh my lord! This may just beat Crysis in graphics. I mean look at this shot, those rain effects are un-effing-believable!

Stalker_Clear_Sky_2023.JPG
 
It's too shiny. (I don't mean that in a good way -- look at the sandbags, say. They should not have a shine to them like that.)
 
depends how wet they are. :)

That said, quit going it looks better than crysis it will be great. The game looks GREAT in that it doesn't hurt the immersion, as long as it runs well (which crysis does), it wins.

Why? Crysis = No story/atmosphere, rather mediocre FPS gameplay. Gaymazing graphics/environment.

Stalker = Great Story, Great atmosphere, GREAT gameplay... good, non-hindering graphics/environment.

Stalker wins. Hands down.
 
silent-circuit said:
It's too shiny. (I don't mean that in a good way -- look at the sandbags, say. They should not have a shine to them like that.)
Click to expand...

That and the sky is just way, way overkill with brightness at some points, otherwise it looks great. Will this be the first DX10 game that doesn't run like crap?
 
blake_mooney said:
Oh my lord! This may just beat Crysis in graphics. I mean look at this shot, those rain effects are un-effing-believable!
Click to expand...

That's taking it too far. Very impressive yes, but no where near the near photo-realistic graphics of Crysis. Crysis is photo-realistic near and far from a certain object or place. STALKER managed awesome graphics, but only when at a certain distance. At close range, it would be much less realistic.
 
Silus said:
That's taking it too far. Very impressive yes, but no where near the near photo-realistic graphics of Crysis. Crysis is photo-realistic near and far from a certain object or place. STALKER managed awesome graphics, but only when at a certain distance. At close range, it would be much less realistic.
Click to expand...

I can play Crysis at 1920x1200 with everything on Very High in DX10 on my rig. (Yes, like one of 20 people in existence). I rarely do because the game itself is so lackluster after you get over the pretty pictures, but this is beyond the point. If you walk up to a tree, or look down at the ground, even with 16x AF at 1920x1200, it still looks like shit. Period. Crysis is anything but photorealistic.
 
silent-circuit said:
I can play Crysis at 1920x1200 with everything on Very High in DX10 on my rig. (Yes, like one of 20 people in existence). I rarely do because the game itself is so lackluster after you get over the pretty pictures, but this is beyond the point. If you walk up to a tree, or look down at the ground, even with 16x AF at 1920x1200, it still looks like shit. Period. Crysis is anything but photorealistic.
Click to expand...

QFT. Grass, brush, tree textures, etc., are pretty crappy. Other stuff is almost photorealistic but the nature side is quite underwhelming.
 
silent-circuit said:
I can play Crysis at 1920x1200 with everything on Very High in DX10 on my rig. (Yes, like one of 20 people in existence). I rarely do because the game itself is so lackluster after you get over the pretty pictures, but this is beyond the point. If you walk up to a tree, or look down at the ground, even with 16x AF at 1920x1200, it still looks like shit. Period. Crysis is anything but photorealistic.
Click to expand...

If it's shit, then it's the most near photo-realistic shit ever seen, better than everything else in other game.

I have a hard time calling it "shit", because even on my lowly system, which is no match for your "1920x1200 very-high" system, the trees, water and even the grass/rock textures are absolutely beautiful. Do point me to a better looking game and I'll settle.
 
General Crespin said:
QFT. Grass, brush, tree textures, etc., are pretty crappy. Other stuff is almost photorealistic but the nature side is quite underwhelming.
Click to expand...

Yet, they are not as crappy as any other game in existence. Your standards are pretty high I guess...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top