The video is a comparison of three post-apocalyptic games: S.T.A.L.K.E.R., Metro, and Fallout. The host discusses various aspects of the games, including their attention to detail, graphics, and gameplay mechanics. They praise the Metro series for its detailed world and realistic graphics, while also acknowledging the strengths of the other two games. However, in the end, the host concludes that Fallout is the winner in terms of overall quality and immersive experience.
Here are the key facts from the text:
1. The narrator was bored in a bunker and decided to watch the series "Chernobyl".
2. The narrator wanted to play a post-apocalyptic game but only knew of "S.T.A.L.K.E.R.", "Metro", and "Fallout".
3. The narrator spent three hours thinking about which game to play but couldn't decide.
4. The narrator decided to compare the three games and present their findings.
5. All three games are set in a post-apocalyptic world with a nuclear disaster.
6. In "S.T.A.L.K.E.R.", radiation can be lethal and players must change filters in their gas masks to avoid suffocation.
7. In "Metro", players must navigate through a radiation-filled world and avoid mutants.
8. "Fallout" has a complex combat system and a detailed game world.
9. The narrator visited the Chernobyl exclusion zone to research and take photos for the "S.T.A.L.K.E.R." game.
10. The developers of "S.T.A.L.K.E.R." participated in the creation of "Metro".
11. The narrator thinks that "Fallout" has the best graphics and attention to detail among the three games.
12. The graphics in "S.T.A.L.K.E.R." are considered photorealistic and comparable to those in "Call of Duty: Modern Warfare".