No announcement yet.

Metro 2033

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Metro 2033

    “For there is nothing more serious than a lunatic when he comes to the central point of his lunacy.”

    Max Sterner

  • #2
    Well you can't say this is a copy of S.T.A.L.K.E.R. or Fallout because stalker and Last Refugee (or Metro 2033) are made after novels in '70...interesting
    It is always more difficult to fight against faith than against knowledge.

    Косово је Србија!
    Never go to war with a country whose national holiday celebrates a defeat in 1389.

    Armored Brigade

    Armored Brigade Facebook page


    • #3
      STALKER is also more of a sandbox game while Metro is strictly an on the rails shooter. Shame.
      Burke's Joystick: Because Edmund Burke would have been a gamer.


      • #4
        The problem with this game is that it has worse coding than GTAIV, so it will run like crap.

        From benchmarks I've seen, it looks worse than FarCry2 yet is more system intensive than Crysis.
        Surrender? NutZ!

        Regard your soldiers as your children, and they will follow you into the deepest valleys; look on them as your own beloved sons, and they will stand by you even unto death. -Sun Tzu


        • #5
          It got a surprisingly low 6.9 from IGN. All indications are that this is a game that is best left to find its way into the bargain bin. By then, it will be patched and cheaper.
          Burke's Joystick: Because Edmund Burke would have been a gamer.


          • #6
            Well i got this game yesterday and put in a couple of hours playing lastnight.
            To sum up my first impressions in one word - Awesome.

            In a few more words..
            The atmosphere is excellent, and while i can't really say it's "scary", it does do a great job of making you paranoid while you play. When running around on the surface, if you enter a building there is the thought that around any corner a creature could come jumping out at you, or you may trigger a booby trap and get a large spikey tree trunk to the face. Even though these don't occur constantly, you get to the stage where you'll want to move slowly while inside, and checking corners/dark areas becomes habit.
            Becuase the air is radiated/toxic/smelly, you'll be required to wear a gas mask while on the surface, this causes your player to breathe heavily and loudly which adds to the tension when searching dark areas with shotgun in hand.

            The weapons are interesting, being designed underground and made from whatever is lying around, you'll find shotguns that act like revolvers (6 shots), pistols with rifle handles, and sticky flare bombs that fire out nails. There are also above ground weapons which are obviously much more suited to the task of killing things, but they are harder to come by.
            Another interesting feature is all weapons (that i've seen so far) have a method of showing the player how many bullets are left, without the use of a HUD, for example, the 'smg' has a side mounted clip so you can watch as you slowly run out of rounds.

            Sound is also a strong feature in the game, when out on the surface you'll hear nasties moving around, gun fire from the occasional friendly, and other general ambience sounds. When you're in one of the stations filled with people, you'll feel as if you're actually there or at a marketplace somewhere. You can go up to most groups or individual people and engage/listen to conversations, the voice acting is decent and i found myself getting lost in the discussions of others.

            On to the graphics, they're simply brilliant - Deffinately up there with the likes of Crysis, and the use of light in this dark and gloomy game really helps to add to the atmosphere.

            I could go on for longer, but i really feel this is a game that should be experienced and not read about.

            Originally posted by Wargamer Scott View Post
            It got a surprisingly low 6.9 from IGN. All indications are that this is a game that is best left to find its way into the bargain bin. By then, it will be patched and cheaper.
            I'm not entirely sure that IGN should be relied on for their honesty when it comes to reviews. More often than not they seem to praise games that don't deserve it, and despise a game for being different and or not created by one of the bigger names.

            Take MW2 as an example, it scored a 9.5 despite many, many flaws, and the general public (ignoring the few voters who would of given it a 1 due to IW's slap in the face to PC gamers) would of given it an 8 or lower.
            CnC4 received a 7.4 from IGN, even though pretty much everyone who's played it states that it's the worst of the series, and a god awful way to end the franchise. But, it's got EA's name on it...

            I had a read of the review they produced for Metro 2033, and i disagree with alot that is said, and more importantly how it's said.
            They didn't like the stealth, so they rated the gameplay lower because of this...They didn't say "stealth doesn't work", they did say it's frustrating, but it sounds like they just aren't capable of using stealth in games. Their verdict is more "we didn't like the stealth part so we'll rate it lower".

            I've played through one of the stealth missions he's mentioned, and it worked fine for me - I wasn't spotted and i had a blast taking out the bandits silently in the dark. You can go up to lights and switch them off granting you more freedom to move in the shadows. A quick glance at your watch will let you know how well hidden you are, i notice the reviewer never mentions this...

            The other complaints about glitches, well i can't comment on them as i've not seen any but i don't doubt there may be a few.
            As for the comment about the currency system being unexplained, that's absolute nonsense. I had no idea what the game was even about before i started playing, i didn't follow the hype, or the previews or interviews, but i found out straight away when i got to my first "store". Clearly the reviewer wasn't paying attention.

            The other two 'official' reviews for metro gave it an 8 and a 9. The readers of IGN even gave it a 7.8.
            I'm not saying IGN are always untrustworthy, but i really don't think you should ignore a game entirely because of one obviously incapable reviewer who seems to simply not like this style of game.

            Originally posted by Intranetusa
            From benchmarks I've seen, it looks worse than FarCry2 yet is more system intensive than Crysis.
            Well i've got a decent rig so i'm not sure if it's harder to run on the older systems. Though considering most games these days are 'tweaked' so they run on consoles, we rarely ever get a chance to make use of a good system. I don't mind if every now and then a game comes out with high requirements.

            Just had a quick look around and it appears that the team worked closely with Nvidia (just as Crytek did) and Metro 2033 is actually the poster child/game for Nvidia's new 400 series which features DX11.

            EDIT - I think i may of been a bit harsh with regards to the stealth comments, i may have a better explanation as to why the reviewer didn't enjoy it/couldn't use it.

            I was talking with a mate of mine who's also playing through the game at the moment, we got onto talking about the 'stealth' missions and discovered something interesting. These parts of the game are only stealth if that's the approach you've taken with regards to your weapons/playing style.
            We'd both had only bought the one weapon by the time we had reached the first area when stealth was an option. He had upgraded his shotgun, and i had upgraded my revolver (with a silencer), i'd also kept a healthy supply of throwing knives while he had only one or two. This meant when he got to the same section i was able to move through relatively silently, he was unable to do so. After dying a couple of times he opted to just treat the part as a normal firefight and simply engaged the enemies as he would if it wasn't a stealth mission - Which turned out great and he still had a blast.
            Same thing happened later on in another 'stealth' section where i had now upgraded to a silenced/scoped rifle and my mate had upgraded to a revolver with a longer barrel and scope. But this time he decided not to bother trying stealth and wasn't punished for it, so clearly the stealth missions aren't actually stealth missions but rather missions that can be played through quietly..

            Also later on in the game i cam across another couple of vendors who offer to sell you a heavy duty armor which will make you more resistant to bullets, or a suit which enables you to hide easier. It's one or the other from what i can tell as they both cost alot.
            This gives the impression that a playing style is meant to be chosen early on. This would also enable people to re-play the game with a different style in mind.

            I still stand by my statement that IGN isn't the best source of ratings, but i can see how the reviewer would of considered the stealth to be "broken" if he hadn't gone down the stealth route earlier on.
            Last edited by Nokturnal; 23 Mar 10, 18:44.
            "My God, I wish we had the 9th Australian Division with us this morning."
            - Major General Freddie de Guingand, Chief of Staff, Allied Land-force Headquarters Europe, D-Day, 1944.


            • #7
              The more I hear about this game, the more I wish I had reserved it on Steam, I could have gotten a free copy of Red Faction with it!


              • #8
                I recently got the game, it's fun, but it won't last long. It's too linear compared to fallout and stalker.


                Latest Topics