Metro Exodus is really disappointing

[stroopwafel]

Exodus isn't a labour of love, it's a love of tedium. You feel slow, the vehicle of your agency feels lethargic, and it padded the game in the worst possible way. Making you slow and unresponsive, or making the environment feel cluttered in a way videogames yet will never handle well.

I wouldn't consider poor mechanics 'padding'. Like I said the janky animations and sub-par gunplay has always been part of the Metro series(they are not a big budget studio anyway) but it compensated with immersion and atmosphere, which is what fans of the previous games enjoyed about it. Nobody makes story-driven single-player FPS games anymore so Metro was always somewhat unique in that regard. It's obvious Metro Exodus lost focus and is a way poorer game b/c of it but not b/c of poor developer intentions.

As for Monster Hunter, that is a series you either love or hate and I definitely fall in the latter category. You need a PhD to understand any of it's intricacies and just fighting the same lizards with no health bars over and over isn't my idea of fun anyway.

 

[B-Cell_v1legacy]

Nobody makes story-driven single-player FPS games anymore so Metro was always somewhat unique in that regard. It's obvious Metro Exodus lost focus and is a way poorer game b/c of it but not b/c of poor developer intentions.

i agree and for that i respect 4A games. I was hoping they would improve gunplay but they didnot. neither AI. I liked Metro games for immersion, atmosphere and story.

first hour was incredibly scripted but until i went to volga. we get open maps and game become better. I just hate they put long and lenghty unskipabble cutscene this time like far cry 3.

however there is Rage 2 coming out which is story driven open world FPS. and not sure if I call Doom Eternal story driven but its another SP FPS coming out.

 

[Here Comes Tomorrow]

Nobody makes story-driven single-player FPS games anymore so Metro was always somewhat unique in that regard. It's obvious Metro Exodus lost focus and is a way poorer game b/c of it but not b/c of poor developer intentions.

i agree and for that i respect 4A games. I was hoping they would improve gunplay but they didnot. neither AI. I liked Metro games for immersion, atmosphere and story.

first hour was incredibly scripted but until i went to volga. we get open maps and game become better. I just hate they put long and lenghty unskipabble cutscene this time like far cry 3.

however there is Rage 2 coming out which is story driven open world FPS. and not sure if I call Doom Eternal story driven but its another SP FPS coming out.

If you like Metro for the story then why are you talking like story cut scenes are a negative.

I'm not sure you know why you like it honestly because you're contradicting yourself.

 

[B-Cell_v1legacy]

Nobody makes story-driven single-player FPS games anymore so Metro was always somewhat unique in that regard. It's obvious Metro Exodus lost focus and is a way poorer game b/c of it but not b/c of poor developer intentions.

i agree and for that i respect 4A games. I was hoping they would improve gunplay but they didnot. neither AI. I liked Metro games for immersion, atmosphere and story.

first hour was incredibly scripted but until i went to volga. we get open maps and game become better. I just hate they put long and lenghty unskipabble cutscene this time like far cry 3.

however there is Rage 2 coming out which is story driven open world FPS. and not sure if I call Doom Eternal story driven but its another SP FPS coming out.

If you like Metro for the story then why are you talking like story cut scenes are a negative.

I'm not sure you know why you like it honestly because you're contradicting yourself.

because story in 2033 and last light were excellent. story here is just pretty forgattable so far.

I like story but not long cutscenes, Half life told one of the best story without cutscene. cutscenes should be only start and end of mission and thats it. not to interrupt here and there.

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

Im currently playing it.

I bet you are.

So why did you wait so long? Why not make a topic about it sooner?

because game is not running smooth and struggling on my PC. getting FPS drop.

Good lord you're so obvious. Just fuckin' support the devs that you claim to like ffs.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

In this case, I want to play the game because I think it will be better than Last Light. But I also don't want to gamble fifty bucks on it. I also don't necessarily want to download the Epic launcher either to play it. I usually only pay full price if I want to play the game right now and that's rarely the case for most releases.

The problem I have with PC gaming is that gamers have given up their right to own games and everything is digital so PC gaming is far more of a money risk since you can't sell the game if you don't like it or you're just played and are done with it.

Ehhh... there is always the worry of money dumping and simply lying to yourself you like something. Ala Kingdom Death: Monster... whether people like it or not, whether due to a limitation of resources, or simply feeling ripped off, price matters.

I mean, in the end, you should feel like you're getting something at a pricepoint where pleasure to cost is worthwhile. Anything less is kind of madness.

I mean take your argument and compare it to fastfood. Just because you might like a burrito from a store does not mean the burrito experience should be no less enjoyable if it cost $100 rather than $12. Quite clearly the burrito experience, and part of its enjoyability, is reflective in the fact that you can then go from that burrito to still have $88 worth of other pleasures

Entertainment and food are 2 different things plus games have pretty static prices as the most a game costs is $60. Also you can sell a game when you're done or don't like it, which you can't do with food obviously. Video gaming is like one of the cheapest hobbies one can have, thus playing a game for me is all about if it's worth my time. Most games are 30-50+ hour commitments and time is a much more limited resource than money even for someone like me and I doubt I'm even in the middle-class bracket either.

I usually won't buy a game(if I do) until the price tag matches what I think it's worth. If it's a $60 AAA Game with stellar reviews from everyone, I'll consider that worth the $60. If it's 5 hour indie game, I'll be more likely to pay $30-20. Or if it's a AAA I have some interest in but it's also getting raked over the coals for it's various flaws, that might be a $30 or less purchase right there. I would have been pissed if I'd paid $60 for MGSV but getting it far cheaper made me feel only somewhat disappointed(mostly for wasting my time in addition to my money).

The nice thing is, games drop in price fast enough that it's only a matter of waiting until the price drops low enough to consider it to be worth it. Waiting a year to play something can be the difference between feeling ripped off at $60 and getting it for a song at $20 and feeling "Well, that was worth the price".

Not to mention I don't think most of us can afford to pay $60 left and right. Cash is finite and pretty much everyone has bills to pay(unless you're lucky enough to be living off someone else generosity).

You can sell games though. If you really want to try out a game at release, you can with very little money risk (like $10 tops, which is like the cost of a movie ticket). Of course, there's no need to buy a game before you actually wanna play it. Time is much more of a finite resource and gaming is like the cheapest hobby really, less than seeing movies a couple times a month really. I feel time is far more limited and important resource especially when considering how cheap a form of entertainment gaming is when you consider $/hr. Movies or just going to a bar are more expensive forms of entertainment.

 

[Mcgeezaks]

Nobody makes story-driven single-player FPS games anymore so Metro was always somewhat unique in that regard. It's obvious Metro Exodus lost focus and is a way poorer game b/c of it but not b/c of poor developer intentions.

i agree and for that i respect 4A games. I was hoping they would improve gunplay but they didnot. neither AI. I liked Metro games for immersion, atmosphere and story.

first hour was incredibly scripted but until i went to volga. we get open maps and game become better. I just hate they put long and lenghty unskipabble cutscene this time like far cry 3.

however there is Rage 2 coming out which is story driven open world FPS. and not sure if I call Doom Eternal story driven but its another SP FPS coming out.

If you like Metro for the story then why are you talking like story cut scenes are a negative.

I'm not sure you know why you like it honestly because you're contradicting yourself.

Bcell? Contradicting himself? No way! He claims that every game with iron sights is a COD clone but when it comes to Metro/Stalker/Doom it doesn't matter. He also hates romance in video games yet I haven't seen him complain about the romance taking a pretty big part of Last Light and an even bigger part of Exodus.

 

[Gordon_4_v1legacy]

In this case, I want to play the game because I think it will be better than Last Light. But I also don't want to gamble fifty bucks on it. I also don't necessarily want to download the Epic launcher either to play it. I usually only pay full price if I want to play the game right now and that's rarely the case for most releases.

The problem I have with PC gaming is that gamers have given up their right to own games and everything is digital so PC gaming is far more of a money risk since you can't sell the game if you don't like it or you're just played and are done with it.

Ehhh... there is always the worry of money dumping and simply lying to yourself you like something. Ala Kingdom Death: Monster... whether people like it or not, whether due to a limitation of resources, or simply feeling ripped off, price matters.

I mean, in the end, you should feel like you're getting something at a pricepoint where pleasure to cost is worthwhile. Anything less is kind of madness.

I mean take your argument and compare it to fastfood. Just because you might like a burrito from a store does not mean the burrito experience should be no less enjoyable if it cost $100 rather than $12. Quite clearly the burrito experience, and part of its enjoyability, is reflective in the fact that you can then go from that burrito to still have $88 worth of other pleasures

Entertainment and food are 2 different things plus games have pretty static prices as the most a game costs is $60. Also you can sell a game when you're done or don't like it, which you can't do with food obviously. Video gaming is like one of the cheapest hobbies one can have, thus playing a game for me is all about if it's worth my time. Most games are 30-50+ hour commitments and time is a much more limited resource than money even for someone like me and I doubt I'm even in the middle-class bracket either.

I usually won't buy a game(if I do) until the price tag matches what I think it's worth. If it's a $60 AAA Game with stellar reviews from everyone, I'll consider that worth the $60. If it's 5 hour indie game, I'll be more likely to pay $30-20. Or if it's a AAA I have some interest in but it's also getting raked over the coals for it's various flaws, that might be a $30 or less purchase right there. I would have been pissed if I'd paid $60 for MGSV but getting it far cheaper made me feel only somewhat disappointed(mostly for wasting my time in addition to my money).

The nice thing is, games drop in price fast enough that it's only a matter of waiting until the price drops low enough to consider it to be worth it. Waiting a year to play something can be the difference between feeling ripped off at $60 and getting it for a song at $20 and feeling "Well, that was worth the price".

Not to mention I don't think most of us can afford to pay $60 left and right. Cash is finite and pretty much everyone has bills to pay(unless you're lucky enough to be living off someone else generosity).

You can sell games though. If you really want to try out a game at release, you can with very little money risk (like $10 tops, which is like the cost of a movie ticket). Of course, there's no need to buy a game before you actually wanna play it. Time is much more of a finite resource and gaming is like the cheapest hobby really, less than seeing movies a couple times a month really. I feel time is far more limited and important resource especially when considering how cheap a form of entertainment gaming is when you consider $/hr. Movies or just going to a bar are more expensive forms of entertainment.

In this case, I want to play the game because I think it will be better than Last Light. But I also don't want to gamble fifty bucks on it. I also don't necessarily want to download the Epic launcher either to play it. I usually only pay full price if I want to play the game right now and that's rarely the case for most releases.

The problem I have with PC gaming is that gamers have given up their right to own games and everything is digital so PC gaming is far more of a money risk since you can't sell the game if you don't like it or you're just played and are done with it.

Ehhh... there is always the worry of money dumping and simply lying to yourself you like something. Ala Kingdom Death: Monster... whether people like it or not, whether due to a limitation of resources, or simply feeling ripped off, price matters.

I mean, in the end, you should feel like you're getting something at a pricepoint where pleasure to cost is worthwhile. Anything less is kind of madness.

I mean take your argument and compare it to fastfood. Just because you might like a burrito from a store does not mean the burrito experience should be no less enjoyable if it cost $100 rather than $12. Quite clearly the burrito experience, and part of its enjoyability, is reflective in the fact that you can then go from that burrito to still have $88 worth of other pleasures

Entertainment and food are 2 different things plus games have pretty static prices as the most a game costs is $60. Also you can sell a game when you're done or don't like it, which you can't do with food obviously. Video gaming is like one of the cheapest hobbies one can have, thus playing a game for me is all about if it's worth my time. Most games are 30-50+ hour commitments and time is a much more limited resource than money even for someone like me and I doubt I'm even in the middle-class bracket either.

I usually won't buy a game(if I do) until the price tag matches what I think it's worth. If it's a $60 AAA Game with stellar reviews from everyone, I'll consider that worth the $60. If it's 5 hour indie game, I'll be more likely to pay $30-20. Or if it's a AAA I have some interest in but it's also getting raked over the coals for it's various flaws, that might be a $30 or less purchase right there. I would have been pissed if I'd paid $60 for MGSV but getting it far cheaper made me feel only somewhat disappointed(mostly for wasting my time in addition to my money).

The nice thing is, games drop in price fast enough that it's only a matter of waiting until the price drops low enough to consider it to be worth it. Waiting a year to play something can be the difference between feeling ripped off at $60 and getting it for a song at $20 and feeling "Well, that was worth the price".

Not to mention I don't think most of us can afford to pay $60 left and right. Cash is finite and pretty much everyone has bills to pay(unless you're lucky enough to be living off someone else generosity).

You can sell games though. If you really want to try out a game at release, you can with very little money risk (like $10 tops, which is like the cost of a movie ticket). Of course, there's no need to buy a game before you actually wanna play it. Time is much more of a finite resource and gaming is like the cheapest hobby really, less than seeing movies a couple times a month really. I feel time is far more limited and important resource especially when considering how cheap a form of entertainment gaming is when you consider $/hr. Movies or just going to a bar are more expensive forms of entertainment.

Even in the days of physical PC games it was often one and done because of CD keys and later, online actvation. PC gaming never had the same thriving secnd-hand market consoles did even prior to the Internet so its loss wasn?t really mourned but consoles should maintain a deathgrip on theirs at all reasonable cost.

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

Entertainment and food are 2 different things plus games have pretty static prices as the most a game costs is $60. Also you can sell a game when you're done or don't like it, which you can't do with food obviously. Video gaming is like one of the cheapest hobbies one can have, thus playing a game for me is all about if it's worth my time. Most games are 30-50+ hour commitments and time is a much more limited resource than money even for someone like me and I doubt I'm even in the middle-class bracket either.

Okay, a couple of problems here:

1: Wait two years and a videogame will more than quarter in price. Videogames have a higher depreciation rate than cars. So much so you occasionally get them for free as loss leader marketing is a thing in a world of 7 billion possible consumers and living in ostensibly a free distribution method being that pure information is almost entirely intangible.

2: Videogaming is totally not the cheapest hobby you can have. Assuming following your rhetoric. And given there are so many cheap games out there you can legitimately argue comparative experiences without the same paycheque.

So videogaming doesn't even have aspirational branding in its favour. It's not even comparable to old muscle cars and classic motorbikes you can buy and fix up. I mean as an avid motorcyclist other motorcyclists will give me a knowing upnod if I turn up somewhere with a classic (not old) Guzzi from the early 90s-late 80s that I picked up for a few thousand but take really good care of it even if the latest hotness will set one back much more.

I mean clueless idiots will oooh and ahhh at the latest hotness, but non-idiots will be like; "I recognize your diligence. Keeping classics still riding is a way of life."

I'm sure classic firearm owners might be the same way, IDK... point is gaming is not even that cheap. For a really good rig without games, I could buy certain classic motorcycles with some problems (and lacking rego). With some decent contacts with wreckers and other people in the hobby, for the price of a suite of new games I could pick up decent replacement fuel tank and some fairing, get insured.

So it ranks pretty bourgeois all things considered. And maybe people aren't so bourgeoisie? That and most people have a suite of games they've barely touched, and I for one get guilty buying stuff without even enjoying them.

Only 35% of people apparently got past the Taurus demon in the Prepare to Die PC version of Dark Souls. So why flesh out $60 for something people might not feel they'll be able to play completely? And if Fallout 76 has taught us anything, even the most hyped games sometimes get a 50+% discount a week in. So reasonably speaking, how much is a week worth to you?

The whole point of capitalism is the rational exercise of purchasing power, and we have an industry telling us; "Buy this one game, now, for $60... or wait two years, pick it up for $10." In this sense, videogames are trying to both emulate high fashion and low fashion, all without any distinguishment of the product or questions of its genuine-ness.

 

[DeliveryGodNoah_v1legacy]

More like STALKER 1.5 till STALKER 2 comes around.

STALKER never interrupt gameplay to show cutscene everytime. this is far from STALKER.

althought Metro is different breed. but its not fair to compare either two.

You're the last person I want to see telling people what two games they can compare.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

More like STALKER 1.5 till STALKER 2 comes around.

STALKER never interrupt gameplay to show cutscene everytime. this is far from STALKER.

althought Metro is different breed. but its not fair to compare either two.

You compare everything to STALKER and Metro.

 

[B-Cell_v1legacy]

Nobody makes story-driven single-player FPS games anymore so Metro was always somewhat unique in that regard. It's obvious Metro Exodus lost focus and is a way poorer game b/c of it but not b/c of poor developer intentions.

i agree and for that i respect 4A games. I was hoping they would improve gunplay but they didnot. neither AI. I liked Metro games for immersion, atmosphere and story.

first hour was incredibly scripted but until i went to volga. we get open maps and game become better. I just hate they put long and lenghty unskipabble cutscene this time like far cry 3.

however there is Rage 2 coming out which is story driven open world FPS. and not sure if I call Doom Eternal story driven but its another SP FPS coming out.

If you like Metro for the story then why are you talking like story cut scenes are a negative.

I'm not sure you know why you like it honestly because you're contradicting yourself.

Bcell? Contradicting himself? No way! He claims that every game with iron sights is a COD clone but when it comes to Metro/Stalker/Doom it doesn't matter. He also hates romance in video games yet I haven't seen him complain about the romance taking a pretty big part of Last Light and an even bigger part of Exodus.

read again. its been only thing i have been complaining about Metro. otherwise game is excellent unlike COD/BF type of FPS.

metro exodus has longer cutscene than 2033 and last light which it should not have.

 

[Mcgeezaks]

Nobody makes story-driven single-player FPS games anymore so Metro was always somewhat unique in that regard. It's obvious Metro Exodus lost focus and is a way poorer game b/c of it but not b/c of poor developer intentions.

i agree and for that i respect 4A games. I was hoping they would improve gunplay but they didnot. neither AI. I liked Metro games for immersion, atmosphere and story.

first hour was incredibly scripted but until i went to volga. we get open maps and game become better. I just hate they put long and lenghty unskipabble cutscene this time like far cry 3.

however there is Rage 2 coming out which is story driven open world FPS. and not sure if I call Doom Eternal story driven but its another SP FPS coming out.

If you like Metro for the story then why are you talking like story cut scenes are a negative.

I'm not sure you know why you like it honestly because you're contradicting yourself.

Bcell? Contradicting himself? No way! He claims that every game with iron sights is a COD clone but when it comes to Metro/Stalker/Doom it doesn't matter. He also hates romance in video games yet I haven't seen him complain about the romance taking a pretty big part of Last Light and an even bigger part of Exodus.

read again. its been only thing i have been complaining about Metro. otherwise game is excellent unlike COD/BF type of FPS.

metro exodus has longer cutscene than 2033 and last light which it should not have.

You usually say games are bad and shit all over them because of these things but you're giving it a pass for Metro and the two other games you like, you're not making any sense.

 

[B-Cell_v1legacy]

Nobody makes story-driven single-player FPS games anymore so Metro was always somewhat unique in that regard. It's obvious Metro Exodus lost focus and is a way poorer game b/c of it but not b/c of poor developer intentions.

i agree and for that i respect 4A games. I was hoping they would improve gunplay but they didnot. neither AI. I liked Metro games for immersion, atmosphere and story.

first hour was incredibly scripted but until i went to volga. we get open maps and game become better. I just hate they put long and lenghty unskipabble cutscene this time like far cry 3.

however there is Rage 2 coming out which is story driven open world FPS. and not sure if I call Doom Eternal story driven but its another SP FPS coming out.

If you like Metro for the story then why are you talking like story cut scenes are a negative.

I'm not sure you know why you like it honestly because you're contradicting yourself.

Bcell? Contradicting himself? No way! He claims that every game with iron sights is a COD clone but when it comes to Metro/Stalker/Doom it doesn't matter. He also hates romance in video games yet I haven't seen him complain about the romance taking a pretty big part of Last Light and an even bigger part of Exodus.

read again. its been only thing i have been complaining about Metro. otherwise game is excellent unlike COD/BF type of FPS.

metro exodus has longer cutscene than 2033 and last light which it should not have.

You usually say games are bad and shit all over them because of these things but you're giving it a pass for Metro and the two other games you like, you're not making any sense.

but i criticize metro cinematic approach. always. and romance too.

i gave it credit for being one of the most immersive and atmospheric game.

 

[Trunkage]

So I've heard this is Metro Fallout edition. Is this a good comparison?

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

So I've heard this is Metro Fallout edition. Is this a good comparison?

Kind of. Only one won't require modders by necessity.

 

[stroopwafel]

So I've heard this is Metro Fallout edition. Is this a good comparison?

Not really. There are no fetch quests and the world is a thousand times more grim. It also looks a million times better despite being made on a fraction of the budget. Metro Last Light to me was more like Fallout but condensed to only the good parts. I guess with Exodus it's easy to make the comparison with Fallout but the small hub worlds are nothing alike. The open ended gameplay in FO4 is actually way better than anything you find in Metro Exodus despite the tedious quest design.

 

[Mcgeezaks]

Nobody makes story-driven single-player FPS games anymore so Metro was always somewhat unique in that regard. It's obvious Metro Exodus lost focus and is a way poorer game b/c of it but not b/c of poor developer intentions.

i agree and for that i respect 4A games. I was hoping they would improve gunplay but they didnot. neither AI. I liked Metro games for immersion, atmosphere and story.

first hour was incredibly scripted but until i went to volga. we get open maps and game become better. I just hate they put long and lenghty unskipabble cutscene this time like far cry 3.

however there is Rage 2 coming out which is story driven open world FPS. and not sure if I call Doom Eternal story driven but its another SP FPS coming out.

If you like Metro for the story then why are you talking like story cut scenes are a negative.

I'm not sure you know why you like it honestly because you're contradicting yourself.

Bcell? Contradicting himself? No way! He claims that every game with iron sights is a COD clone but when it comes to Metro/Stalker/Doom it doesn't matter. He also hates romance in video games yet I haven't seen him complain about the romance taking a pretty big part of Last Light and an even bigger part of Exodus.

read again. its been only thing i have been complaining about Metro. otherwise game is excellent unlike COD/BF type of FPS.

metro exodus has longer cutscene than 2033 and last light which it should not have.

You usually say games are bad and shit all over them because of these things but you're giving it a pass for Metro and the two other games you like, you're not making any sense.

but i criticize metro cinematic approach. always. and romance too.

i gave it credit for being one of the most immersive and atmospheric game.

My point is that you're dismissing games for having certain things like romance and iron sights when games that you like also have these things.

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

My point is that you're dismissing games for having certain things like romance and iron sights when games that you like also have these things.

Why are you trying to explain something to B-Cell? First of all, he should start buying the games if he wants to be a part of discussion. It's really fuckin' obvious what he's doing since he keeps "buying" the games that he hates and the timing of his playthroughs always coincides with the timing of the crack. Which also supports my assertion that he's a child without a paycheck, not a 20+ year old guy. So stop arguing with a child.

 

[Trunkage]

So I've heard this is Metro Fallout edition. Is this a good comparison?

Not really. There are no fetch quests and the world is a thousand times more grim. It also looks a million times better despite being made on a fraction of the budget. Metro Last Light to me was more like Fallout but condensed to only the good parts. I guess with Exodus it's easy to make the comparison with Fallout but the small hub worlds are nothing alike. The open ended gameplay in FO4 is actually way better than anything you find in Metro Exodus despite the tedious quest design.

Just to be clear, I see Witcher 3 as a fuckton of fetch or kill quests. Adding a detective part doesn't make them less of a fetch/kill. A friend stated that the first side quest he met in Exodus was 'fetch a teddy bear' and that was enough to call it Fallout.