Stalker is a buggy pos

God I love how they always seem to put the nvidia 5700 as the minimum spec for vid cards on many modern games. PLEASE - Someone show me screenshots of this game running on a 5700, I'd love to see it look like an ATARI.

I still have a 5700LE lying around, but no AGP slot............
 
Well I dont know wtf is going on with Stalker.

Yesterday I was getting all sorts of slowdowns and had to keep alt tabing, and today I try it after work and its running much better ..... and I didn't change a damn thing.
:confused:
 
I got the vibrating grass a few times, very weird

As for the pause, I experienced that as well, but I attributed it to loading scenery when entering a new area

What resolution and settings are you using? Even at 1280x800 it doesn't run very well on my box. Then again I've been having other issues with my box.

I'm about to reformat and reload Vista.
 
What resolution and settings are you using? Even at 1280x800 it doesn't run very well on my box. Then again I've been having other issues with my box.

I'm about to reformat and reload Vista.

my box is not as good as yours and it can run max settings at 1280x1024 (highest my present monitor can go). Maybe reload xp, but don't infect your nice expensive PC with vista.
 
my box is not as good as yours and it can run max settings at 1280x1024 (highest my present monitor can go). Maybe reload xp, but don't infect your nice expensive PC with vista.

Yeah but at what framerate? For me to enjoy a game truly, I don't wanna be hindered by framerate issues. 45-50 fps is a good starting point (edit: but in this game 40 average is fine, nice engine).

Also Dan, what resolution are you playing at? I'm pushing 1280/960 here, and my settings look bloody great (dropped grass shadows, no pseudo-AA, lighting/shadows sliders around half way). A good thing about this engine is that unlike alot of other games, when it drops down to 30fps its still quite smooth. It even has something Oblivion lacked, true sun shadowing on everything. Specular looks amazing too, parallax and plain old bumpmapping used to spectacular effect. With some better quality normal mapping it would be truly stunning though.
 
Anyone else having a problem using quickload? When I hit F7 to quickload, nothing happens despite having a quicksave!

Sorted this myself. Quickloading does not work on XP if your account username is more than 1 word long or contains _ characters. Created a new account under Control Panel - Users and tried again. Quickload and quicksave work perfectly. :)

This forum is not a place to come for troubleshooting advice on games, everyone hijacks the threads with performance issues!

The game is atmospheric and has a somewhat fiddly user interface. It's kind of like Fallout in 3D, without the style or great storyline. Decent game so far, pretty difficult. The quickload function is getting plenty of use!
 
I'm under Vista and this game doesn't work. Disappointed.

Running Vista and I've not had one major bug.

Some of the people complaining about the choppyness have pretty old gaming machines, 1Gb today does not cut it for new games, neither do budget cards which are several generations old.

Also low end X2 CPU's are fairly bad for games.

*edit*

Im running 1680x1050 with Max settings with AA slider 1 notch over and the AF slider in the middle, the only thing I've dropped is the texture resolution from max to 1 notch below which seems to kill my FPS down to about 15, Im getting an average between 60 and 80 most of the time.

Specs in Sig, running Vista Ultimate 32bit with 101.41 drivers
 
Game is still running with Godlike performance with the rig in my sig. No slowdowns or any graphical bugs at 1680x1050 and 16x AF.
 
my box is not as good as yours and it can run max settings at 1280x1024 (highest my present monitor can go). Maybe reload xp, but don't infect your nice expensive PC with vista.

Vista's performance is fine, and I actually like the OS. Two out of three of my machines run Windows Vista and I'm fine with that.

I'm running Stalker at 1280x800 (Secondary native monitor resolution) and it's generally smooth, but it stutters alot for some reason. My 74GB Raptors are nearly full, and that may be the reason. Tonight I'm going to finish backing up my data, and I'm going to reload Windows Vista and reorganize my RAID array.

The 74GB Raptors will become a RAID1 array for the minimal amount of data that I have that I'd like some redundancy in place to help safeguard. (Aside from DVD backups stored in a safe.)

The 150GB Raptors will become my operating system drive (RAID0) and where I load all my games.
 
After reading this thread yesterday I was pretty worried about the performance I would get in this game.

I played for only about 15 minutes last night, but was very happy w/ the performance the rig in my sig had w/ the game.

I ran at 1280x1024, EVERY SETTING MAXED OUT! I did not use FRAPS or anything to measure the framerate, but it had to be 30+ which was very acceptable to me. The game looks amazing at those settings. I even maxed out the view distance, grass shadows, used full dynamic lighting, etc.

Not sure why I would see such nice performance w/ 'a low end X2' and musty old hardware.:rolleyes:

Seriously though, I was quite surprised at how well the game ran.

I am running on XP w/ the newest XP driver from nvidia.
 
After reading this thread yesterday I was pretty worried about the performance I would get in this game.

I played for only about 15 minutes last night, but was very happy w/ the performance the rig in my sig had w/ the game.

I ran at 1280x1024, EVERY SETTING MAXED OUT! I did not use FRAPS or anything to measure the framerate, but it had to be 30+ which was very acceptable to me. The game looks amazing at those settings. I even maxed out the view distance, grass shadows, used full dynamic lighting, etc.

Not sure why I would see such nice performance w/ 'a low end X2' and musty old hardware.:rolleyes:

Seriously though, I was quite surprised at how well the game ran.

I am running on XP w/ the newest XP driver from nvidia.

STOP IT !!!!

Your are going to make me break and get a second 7900 GT for sli. :D
 
After reading this thread yesterday I was pretty worried about the performance I would get in this game.

I played for only about 15 minutes last night, but was very happy w/ the performance the rig in my sig had w/ the game.

I ran at 1280x1024, EVERY SETTING MAXED OUT! I did not use FRAPS or anything to measure the framerate, but it had to be 30+ which was very acceptable to me. The game looks amazing at those settings. I even maxed out the view distance, grass shadows, used full dynamic lighting, etc.

Not sure why I would see such nice performance w/ 'a low end X2' and musty old hardware.:rolleyes:

Seriously though, I was quite surprised at how well the game ran.

I am running on XP w/ the newest XP driver from nvidia.

I can't do that at even 1280x800.
 
What resolution and settings are you using? Even at 1280x800 it doesn't run very well on my box. Then again I've been having other issues with my box.

I'm about to reformat and reload Vista.

First I tried it on a 7900 GTX, I found that at 1280x1024 noaa/16xaf max in-game settings perf was in the upper teens/lower 20's.

Then I tried it on an 8800 GTX, very playable at 2560x1600 noaa/16xaf max in-game settings.
 
I also noticed that 30fps seems to be smooth to me, normally a game looks choppy to me unlues I'm above 40-45fps or so. It's kinda wierd actually, it made me wonder if the FPS counter was reading right.
 
I can almost confirm the suspicion of a memory leak. After I played for 20 or 30 minutes, the game started to get a little choppy. After quiting and reloading, it was back to normal. :confused:

Quicksave feature doesn't work on WinXP SP2 nor WinVista. Well, in XP it doesn't work period. In Vista, it'd work half the time.. the other half it'd CTD. :rolleyes:
 
I can almost confirm the suspicion of a memory leak. After play for 20 or 30 minutes, the game started to get a little choppy. After quiting and reloading, it was back to normal. :confused:

Quicksave feature doesn't work on WinXP SP2 nor WinVista. Well, in XP it doesn't work period. In Vista, it'd work half the time.. the other half it'd CTD. :rolleyes:

My experience was far greater, it didn't become unplayable until a good 7 hours into the game, I stopped and then restared and played for approx another 2 hours.

Bare in mind that I'm running quite a high FPS to begin with, maybe 60-80 depending on exactly where I am, so it was a significant drop to about 20-30 when I decided to load it up again/
 
Posted this in one of the other Stalker threads, but seems to fit better here.

I'm running Stalker on the PC in my sig w/ WinXP Pro. While my specs may not be great, they are above the recommended specs (my X1800XT is close).

I can only play for 15 minutes at most before my system locks up. Playing @ 1280x1024. Runs and looks great on High settings, but locks up. Tried medium and custom settings and same result. I'll be walking along, then, it just stops. No error messages or anything, just a frozen screen.

FEAR Combat, meanwhile, runs at the same resolution with high detail and no problems (I only mention this for comparison purposes since FEAR gave a lot of people trouble).
 
I can't do that at even 1280x800.

I wonder if it has something to do w/ the lack of maturity of the 8800 series or its driver, or possibly are you running Vista? Also, maybe the game hates OC'd rigs.

I'll have to install FRAPS and check myself. But without knowing my FPS, I could tell it ran pretty smoothly, IMO. Im a huge first person shooter guy, and can easily see the difference in other games between 30, 45 and 60 FPS.
 
Also, maybe the game hates OC'd rigs.

In my experience it does hate OC'd rigs. I have no problem with Company of Heros, or SupCom, with my overclock ... but with STALKER I had to push a little more voltage through the processor and drop the speed from 2.64 to 2.6.
 
I got a CTD from Stalker this morning on Vista when I went to save a game. This was in my clipboard after the crash:

Code:
Expression    : fatal error
Function      : _out_of_memory
File          : D:\xray-svn\xrCore\xrDebugNew.cpp
Line          : 339
Description   : <no expression>
Arguments     : Out of memory. Memory request: 3943 K

Interesting feature. I had successfully saved at least half a dozen times before that happened.
 
I can almost confirm the suspicion of a memory leak. After play for 20 or 30 minutes, the game started to get a little choppy. After quiting and reloading, it was back to normal. :confused:

Quicksave feature doesn't work on WinXP SP2 nor WinVista. Well, in XP it doesn't work period. In Vista, it'd work half the time.. the other half it'd CTD. :rolleyes:

Quick save has worked fine for me so far. I'm running WinXP SP2 with rig in my sig. I haven't played that much yet, but so far it has played smooth as butter. I'm running it at 1600x1200, no AA, Full AF (in game), Full Dynamic Lighting, Full Distance, Max texture and the other settings are either at max or somewhere in between half and max.

It seems Nvidia users have been having more trouble with this game than ATI users. Right now I'm running the game with an X1900XTX OCed by Overdrive to the max possible (since disabling ATI services and OCing the GPU past 700MHz caused too much instability in some games and video apps). I'll be receiving an 8800GTX soon. When I get it I'll compare it to the X1900XTX which has done an excellent job running STALKER so far. Theoretically, the 8800GTX should run the game much smoother, we'll see what happens.
 
With my 8800GTX+VistaI don't notice any choppyness or FPS dropping below 30fps at any time with everything maxed, except no AA of course.

The only chop I get is from loading new terrain.
 
it's hardlocking my machine (win xp) left and right so i'll pass on it for the time being. sort of lost interest in it anyways since it was delayed for so damn long. why they had to create a new gfx engine from scratch i have no idea... why not just use source ffs? like they're ever gonna make a fortune licensing the x-ray engine :rolleyes: bad move and a waste of time they put into that (imo)
 
it's hardlocking my machine (win xp) left and right so i'll pass on it for the time being. sort of lost interest in it anyways since it was delayed for so damn long. why they had to create a new gfx engine from scratch i have no idea... why not just use source ffs? like they're ever gonna make a fortune licensing the x-ray engine :rolleyes: bad move and a waste of time they put into that (imo)

When people say they lost interest in a game because of a long delay, that just sounds silly to me. What does that even mean? Why would you lose interest just because you had to wait a little longer? If it came out 2 years ago in the same shape, what would be the difference?
 
It appears that for some people the game installs with read only selected on the game folder, thus maybe causing the crashes while saving, sure enough I checked my folder and it was flagged read only, though I haven't have a chance to play it yet.
 
It appears that for some people the game installs with read only selected on the game folder, thus maybe causing the crashes while saving, sure enough I checked my folder and it was flagged read only, though I haven't have a chance to play it yet.

Thanks for the tip. I'll look into that!
 
I tried that, did not work here. Stalker rechecks it to read only and crashes same as before.
 
Damn, let me tell you, Ive been playing this game for a couple of 2 hour sessions and it runs as smooth as silk on my comp. I run 1920x1200 on maximum and I think this game looks as good or better than anything out here right now......5 years old or not.

I have not had any technical issues yet at all.
I just cant figure out the inventory and wearing things on the belt yet???? Where are the bolts I keep reading about????

My sons computer runs an e6600/650i/7900GTX in SLI at 1280x1084 (or what ever that is) and it looks good there too. No technical problems either.
 
Picked it up today and no go here for me. Vista 64bit + 8800GTX and the thing seems horribly buggy to me. Strange rapid animating grass, texture flicker issues, no AA, vsync not working, program not-responding errors every few minutes etc.

I'll stick it on the shelf until they release a patch that brings this thing up to 'retail' standard. If there is such a thing these days.
 
The option panel is forcing me to play in dx8 on my 9800xt, despite the fact that it's a dx9 card. The frame rate is terrific, but the graphics look like Call of Duty 1.

Not terribly impressive. This may be the first game I return.
 
The option panel is forcing me to play in dx8 on my 9800xt, despite the fact that it's a dx9 card. The frame rate is terrific, but the graphics look like Call of Duty 1.

Not terribly impressive. This may be the first game I return.
And it's gonna happen a lot more often unless you upgrade your video card. I'm surprised the game is actually design well enough to force your settings in a way you would get a "terrific frame rate" with such an old card.
 
I can almost confirm the suspicion of a memory leak. After I played for 20 or 30 minutes, the game started to get a little choppy. After quiting and reloading, it was back to normal. :confused:

Quicksave feature doesn't work on WinXP SP2 nor WinVista. Well, in XP it doesn't work period. In Vista, it'd work half the time.. the other half it'd CTD. :rolleyes:

I fixed the quickload/ quicksave problem by doing the following (see my former post)

Sorted this myself. Quickloading does not work on XP if your account username is more than 1 word long or contains _ characters. Created a new account under Control Panel - Users and tried again. Quickload and quicksave work perfectly.
 
When people say they lost interest in a game because of a long delay, that just sounds silly to me. What does that even mean? Why would you lose interest just because you had to wait a little longer? If it came out 2 years ago in the same shape, what would be the difference?

well pardon me then... if it is silly to you then it must be silly. silly me.
 
God I can't wait to play this on my 9800Pro. I reckon I'll be able to have a few medium settings, mostly low, at 8x6. Fear runs all most graphical stuff at medium, at 10x7, so I think I'm being reasonable.

Oh well, I've got a job now, if it runs like shit, I'll just buy a new rig. :D
 
Runs butter smooth 1600x1200, maxed settings, no AA while running anti-virus and Bitorrent in the background.;)
 
This game barely runs for shit on my 1gb of memory. Fuck this pile of shit. I really wanted to play it, not watch a slide show.
 
This game barely runs for shit on my 1gb of memory. Fuck this pile of shit. I really wanted to play it, not watch a slide show.

lol
I only have 1gb and it's not that bad.





I finally got to play for about 30min in windowed mode but when I was on my way back to take the guy his mempoy card or whatever it locked up again :(
 
Back
Top