Metro vs. S.T.A.L.K.E.R.

I prefer Stalker for numerous reasons, but the biggest is the nostalgia.

Metro 2033 is a great game, but far too linear at times.

I've had metro in my library for too long and never played it, but always liked the look of Stalker, never played that too, but for what its worth, I vote Stalker :P

i just want to point out that having a great number of great mods to make game even more enjoyable and adding more content to it is not a bad thing by any streach of imaginations, so I would put mods into S.T.A.L.K.E.R. Pros :>

The mods are shite, but SoC is fantastic. The second was fucking awful, though :(

Read the first Metro book and play STALKER.

Stalker is too quiet for me, have played both Shadows of Chernobyl and Clear Sky. Metro 2033 was very buggy too. But Metro Last Light probably GOTY for me. Maybe I had so low hopes due to Metro 2033 average game play. But Last Light really surprised on all levels! Variation, graphics, optimization, story, nudity(!), A.I, stealth system and overall pace. But you have to play Metro 2033 first in my opinion to appreciate it just like any older game.

Depends which metro, 2033 is awful buggy, you can't sell stuff and so linear ... however metro last night is way better and even better than stalker.

defiantly s.t.a.l.k.e.r!

s.t.a.l.k.e.r has a great story, you probably connected more to the story of metro (which has also great story) because they showed it more intuitively with more talks and cut scenes and less text to read, you have to read a lot on s.t.l.a.k.e.r in order to really enjoy the story - like old time quests games.

Metro for me, since I never played S.T.A.L.K.E.R

ahh, the LAP Dance in Metro: Last Light, lol

Both are awesome.. But probably Stalker better coz its open world and have more things in it..

Linearity isn't necessarily a bad thing, it works in Metro's favour.

In my opinion you cannot really 'vs' them.

As you said yourself, Metro is very linear with a decent story, while STALKER is very much focused on the open world, random encounters and non linearity. And even with some RPG elements in it.

The only thing they really have in common is the setting I think which is that post apocalyptic Soviet industrial style.

I can't really say which one I like better, but I can say STALKER is more easy to spent more hours on, by roaming around, doing side quests and the like.

they both are great

stalker cause of free roam and entering bunkers and hidden places and getting the crap scared out of you. metro is fiiine just fine, fiiine just fine, fine

both are glitchy shit..

Definitely STALKER. Open world, more realistic combat. It's harder and more variable than Metro, where player is riding an invisible train through levels =)

Little offtop: 4A Games (Metro developers) new game will be "Open world FPS in space" if someone of you don't know it yet :)
Sorry for my english.

Stalker of course..a shame that GSG doesn't develop anymore a sequel. Metro is a good game , but to much linear and limited in terms of freedom and weapon\rpg elements

I played STALKER a good 2-3 years ago, pretty fun game. I liked the gameplay and setting, only played the original. I never got to play Metro, I have 2033 on Steam and just bought Last Light on the 360 about two months ago and never played any of them. Metro does look like a pretty good game as well, I need to play it sometime. But my vote will have to go to STALKER, wish they would come out with more of them.

STALKER, despite all the bugs.

They are both great games, If any gamer has the time, these two series/titles (I guess you can grab only 1 of the 2/3 games available) are a must play.

Metro: 2033 is too buggy to play. If I try using my custom resolution, the game becomes nothing but a black screen. Since I can't use my custom resolution, I can't see everything on the screen.

They are far too different to even consider comparing, both are fantastic in their own ways.