Metro 2033

1. DrNakedSpaceMan

   Jul 20, 2011

   10

   I was actually really surprised with this one. It's pretty rare to see a shooter rely on story to keep the player going instead of theI was actually really surprised with this one. It's pretty rare to see a shooter rely on story to keep the player going instead of the mindless action we see in the Call of Duty series. There are some but very few parts that are annoying, but they aren't very big things. Numerous times I forgot to take off my gas mask because the breathing audio is barely audible. I'm not sure why they put the air powered weapons in the game since finding them is next to impossible except for the rare one or two times. The scoped weapons scopes don't work very well in darker environments even with night vision goggles on. I like the stealth elements of the game as well. It's not like other games with stealth in them where you only have to keep track of a few things. You have to keep track of the light exposure, how much noise your making, and how far you are from others that you might wanna kill. While this may sound unnecessarily complicated, it's actually all very simple.
   
   I did find it annoying that there's no obvious way to get the "good" ending of the game. I actually had to find a guide only to find that you would have to pretty much talk to everybody and interact with pretty much everything to get to it. I'm also disappointed that they didn't use the "good" ending for the sequel but instead went with the "bad/normal" ending. But then again it's understandable since, the book, Metro 2034 doesn't have much fighting in it like Metro 2033 has.
   
   The guns are also extremely fun to use. I was really surprised that using the AK-47, or the Kalash as the in game residence call it, didn't feel like just firing yet another AK-47. Using the silenced weapons to get rid of enemies quietly and destroying lights are also fun to do.
   
   Overall, the game is extremely good. It may not be for the one who is looking for nothing but action but it's still good. I recommend setting your own challenges in the game since it makes it even more fun. For example, playing the entire game using only pistols or rifles.… Expand

   • 9 of 9 users found this helpful
2. n0mad30

   Nov 20, 2013

   10

   Game is awesome for those who love this genre. Atmosphere is impressive, ambient is amazing. The game is not without a lacks, quite shortGame is awesome for those who love this genre. Atmosphere is impressive, ambient is amazing. The game is not without a lacks, quite short besides, however the one who likes this world will stay here forever.… Expand

   • 0 of 0 users found this helpful
4. BiasedCRTC

   Sep 1, 2011

   9

   This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Metro, for all its faults, is quite underrated. To be honest, yes combat is kind of bad, but the game isn't meant to be a shooter, as many people treat it. It is mostly focused on the Story, which can be quite gripping if you are willing to go any try everything a second time. Combat isn't very good because it doesn't require you to fight EVERY baddie that crosses your path. On the Communist vs. Nazi mission, you can get an achievement for both killing them all AND for sneaking past them. In Fact, its recommended not to do it without the STEALTH suit. The nosalises are constantly just going past you or standing up mid-combat because they are stupid. They were more than likely created out of moles that mutated into them, if you take a look at their faces. As for people complaining about graphics, you're missing a very noticeable point: This is irradiated Moscow, which probably didn't look so happy in the first place. However, I will agree that the Gas Mask doesn't seem to make much sense. After all, if Gas Masks cancelled out radiation, we wouldn't have Haz mat suits.… Expand

   • 1 of 1 users found this helpful
5. DanielJ

   Mar 17, 2010

   8

   Say whatever you want about the post-apocalyptic setting, and how it's been beaten to death. I don't think in terms of video games Say whatever you want about the post-apocalyptic setting, and how it's been beaten to death. I don't think in terms of video games this setting has been overdone just yet. Metro 2033, while it is an apocalypse game, is not in the traditional sense. You'll not find the desolate, satirical wastes of Fallout in this game. Most of Metro 2033 takes place in the metro tunnels of Moscow. The air on the surface is still very much poisonous, and this game is the polar opposite of fallout in terms of mood. While in Fallout you'll be laughing at the jokes that Black Isle/Bethesda put in these games, but also feel very much alone in the wastes, traveling by yourself. In Metro 2033, you get a sense that humans are barely holding on to survival, and the appearance of a new step in evolution, the "Dark Ones". You are Artym, and you are for some reason immune to the psychic power of these beings, and thus go to seek help for your village, community, whatever you want to call it. You'll come across many other communities on your journey, all of which have this sense of life about then that Fallout doesn't seem to be able to quite capture. It is an odd pairing, this hopelessness you feel through the game, and these happy communities you come across, though in reality if we all didn't die from a nuclear fallout, this may be exactly what it would be like. Out in the metro tunnels though, you will feel very much alone. The game does a really good job at immersing you into your environment, combining realistic audio, current gen graphics, that may not exceed very many games of this generation, it's not to say that they are bad. They are very much good. The gunplay has gotten a lot of flak from most reviews, and it isn't exactly unjustified. There are times when enemies are performing a scripted action, and your bullets do no damage to them, which is especially bad since ammo is the currency of this post-nuclear world. The enemies don't seem to react realistically to being shot. If I had to give a comparison in terms of gunplay, I would have to say Bioshock, and that is very much what i was reminded of when i was gunning down bandits and the like. Like Bioshock however, the shooting is average, and the story and feeling of the game more than support this game. Metro 2033 is a relatively short game, clocking in at around 8 to 10 hours (longer than your standard FPS's 6 hour story), and you will not have much incentive to go back and play again if all you like was the story and atmosphere. Either get it if you don't mind spending the 60 dollars, or wait for the inevitable price drop(s) in the coming months.… Expand

   • 0 of 0 users found this helpful
6. arxos231

   Mar 22, 2014

   8

   This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Critic's can't seem to see a good thing if it's right in front of them.
   Metro 2033 is a " What if" scenario, where the United States dropped a nuclear missile on Moscow in Russia causing World War III. In the aftermath, your play as a character named Artyom who lived the underground safe havens of a Metro. After your Metro was under attacked by mutated leftovers who rome the darker sides of the Metro, Artyom is sent to reach the other side of the Metro so that he could get some help for his home Metro.
   Metro 2033 was a game that kept interested thought out it, the action is intense, the story is interesting, and it gives off the real atmosphere of an apocalypse.
   The combat is so much fun after you get use to it, however you could use a more stealthy approach but its broken as hell, also the rounds for gun are in really short demand and what ever clip you find could only give a total of three-thirty round so ammo management is a need to and make every shot count. The story is outstanding to go through, it's not like the Call of Duty s**t you go through. The story is one that if something good or bad happens you react to it majorly felling happy, mad, or sad. Finally the setting of the apocalyptic world. Well it's down right beautiful, the Metro's lighting sets the area where its dark and damp, while the ruins of the world you go through outside is gorgeous. However so parts fell lazy and liner paths to fallow.
   There's no way to describe the way this game was, the rating was an 8.5 but its generous to give a 9 so an 8 is going to have to do… Expand

   • 0 of 0 users found this helpful
7. Melychath

   Feb 22, 2013

   7

   I am changing my score from eight to seven. The atmosphere is still great, and the potential for a mind blowing game is still there, but as II am changing my score from eight to seven. The atmosphere is still great, and the potential for a mind blowing game is still there, but as I have played more I have seen more issues with poor hit detection and silly AI. Being that combat is a big part of the game (stealth is much fun in this game) I felt that a score of eight was too high and adjusted down to a seven. This game is still a lot of fun, and worth picking up. Hopefully, Metro: Last Light will have these issues resolved (if it gets released).… Expand

   • 0 of 0 users found this helpful
8. MatthewE

   Mar 19, 2010

   0

   They should have stayed with GSC and learned how to develop this franchise. 1) Quick time events suck. Especially in FPS. 2) Linear campaign They should have stayed with GSC and learned how to develop this franchise. 1) Quick time events suck. Especially in FPS. 2) Linear campaign is BORING. 3) Cut-scenes are too frequent. 4) The more you play the game, the more it will suck as it is not a Survival Horror at all. It cannot decide between a stealth/FPS/movie? 5) Plot is less than worthless. It actually would be less annoying if the narrator just never spoke at all, and let the player use their imagination. Buy COD4 if you want failbox-360 shooters. Buy "Call of Pripyat" if you want to see a REAL survival horror FPS for the PC...… Expand

   • 1 of 12 users found this helpful

See all 77 User Reviews