Question for “Metro” players & fans..

[GamerBlake]

For all of you who have played the “Metro” series:

 

I just picked up all 3 of the Metro games and I’m wondering if it’s one of those series that should be played in order or does it not matter?

 

I want to enjoy the story but is it all one continuous story or is it 3 seperate stories that can be played in any order?

 

The most recent one is Metro: Exodus but I don’t want to start with that if it’s a continuation on the stories from the previous games Metro and Metro: Last Light.
 

 

[Jurrunio]

Imo Exodus is the first one to offer a more "open" landscape to play in (let's say 50% closed 50% open), but earlier games spend much more time in dark cramped areas. Imo if you're not used to fighting up close (which can be seen as a type of jump scare-rich environment), play Exodus first. There's very little in the plot that you have to understand from previous games in order to enjoy this one, it spends the first few chapters rephrasing the worldview of Metro games in general.

[SpookyCitrus]

In order for sure, it's a continuous story from 2033 to exodus, so if you play them out of order it may be a little confusing. Exodus would be a little easier to get away with but still you wouldn't know exactly what is going on in the story if you didn't play the first two.

[mbntr]

I woud go from oldest to newest, the metro series has a great storyline, infact most of it comes from the books, sure it's a game but you wouldn't like to read a trilogy from latest to oldest

[jones177]

In order.

Also keep your frames below 120 since there is a physics bug that affects crawling through tight spaces.

[GamerBlake]

18 minutes ago, jones177 said:

In order.

Also keep your frames below 120 since there is a physics bug that affects crawling through tight spaces.

I think they have a cap at 60 FPS. At least the first one does. I never seem to get anymore than 60fps at 1440p with max settings and I’m running an 8700K OC’ed and a 2080 Ti which is pretty high end hardware.

[GamerBlake]

1 hour ago, mbntr said:

I woud go from oldest to newest, the metro series has a great storyline, infact most of it comes from the books, sure it's a game but you wouldn't like to read a trilogy from latest to oldest

Well I mean I wasn’t sure if it was a trilogy or if it was three different stories seperate from each other in the same series. Like if none of the characters or stories overlap then they can be played in any order but if stuff overlaps or the stories are all part of one whole then I’d definitely do Metro, then Metro Last Light, then Metro Exodus.

[GamerBlake]

1 hour ago, Cvet76 said:

Do it. You'll love it! The first two are different atmospherically and technically than the third one. Fantastic series. I Haven't played the third one yet, but I think there is a continuation of the story. But whether that story connects strongly to the previous parts, I can't say. Either way I always start a series at the beginning. That way none of the details or references in future parts can escape me.

Have fun playing!

You can get Metro Exodus at a great price right now during the Summer Sale on Steam if you don’t have it already. It’s $17.99 instead of the normal $39.99.

55% off! Unless you mean you have it but just haven’t gotten around to it?

[GamerBlake]

1 hour ago, Jurrunio said:

Imo Exodus is the first one to offer a more "open" landscape to play in (let's say 50% closed 50% open), but earlier games spend much more time in dark cramped areas. Imo if you're not used to fighting up close (which can be seen as a type of jump scare-rich environment), play Exodus first. There's very little in the plot that you have to understand from previous games in order to enjoy this one, it spends the first few chapters rephrasing the worldview of Metro games in general.

I can do both close quarters and open combat. I’m thinking more about the story though, not so much which one I’ll be more comfortable or have an easier time with. I’d hate to play the last one only to find out that none of it makes any sense without playing the first two and then end up ruining the ending to the first two by playing the last one first .

[jones177]

1 minute ago, GamerBlake said:

I think they have a cap at 60 FPS. At least the first one does. I never seem to get anymore than 60fps at 1440p with max settings and I’m running an 8700K OC’ed and a 2080 Ti which is pretty high end hardware.

I played it with a i7 8700k(only 4.9 all cores) with 2 GTX 1080  tis in SLI at 3440 X 1440.  

In the right games they can destroy a 2080 ti.

I retired them last month.  

 

[GamerBlake]

1 minute ago, jones177 said:

I played it with a i7 8700k(only 4.9 all cores) with 2 GTX 1080  tis in SLI at 3440 X 1440.  

In the right games they can destroy a 2080 ti.

I retired them last month.  

 

I think it might just be an issue with the game itself. Because I get like 150fps in Metro Exodus with max settings and only 58-60 FPS in Metro (first game) and I know for a fact that a Metro Exodus is way more demanding at max settings with RTX enabled than the very first Metro game is.

[jones177]

Just now, GamerBlake said:

I think it might just be an issue with the game itself. Because I get like 150fps in Metro Exodus with max settings and only 58-60 FPS in Metro (first game) and I know for a fact that a Metro Exodus is way more demanding at max settings with RTX enabled than the very first Metro game is.

I did this for fun. 

1080p low 2080 ti XC.

[Guest]

Continuous story. 

 

Metro 2033

last light

exodus. 

[Jurrunio]

39 minutes ago, GamerBlake said:

I’d hate to play the last one only to find out that none of it makes any sense without playing the first two and then end up ruining the ending to the first two by playing the last one first

I dont find this to affect me, but follow them in order of release date if you dont mind face to face fighting

[GamerBlake]

10 minutes ago, fpo said:

Continuous story. 

 

Metro 2033

last light

exodus. 

Oh ok I’ll start with 2033 then. I don’t want any spoilers or ruined plots like someone looking like they’re about to die only for me to know they survive because they’re in the next game.

[GamerBlake]

27 minutes ago, jones177 said:

I did this for fun. 

1080p low 2080 ti XC.

Yeah it might be something wrong with my game then. I’m using this card.

[Guest]

16 minutes ago, GamerBlake said:

Oh ok I’ll start with 2033 then. I don’t want any spoilers or ruined plots like someone looking like they’re about to die only for me to know they survive because they’re in the next game.

I don’t think it does anything that annoying in this game. 

The only thing is that the good ending in metro 2033 is the one that doesn’t happen & the bad ending in last light doesn’t happen or Idek. 

 

Don’t worry about good/bad endings. They’re very minor differences & extremely difficult to get the good ones unless you google it. 

I didn’t beat exodus yet, but that’s the case for 2033 & last light. 

The more you explore the better you’ll enjoy the games btw. 

[jones177]

30 minutes ago, GamerBlake said:

Yeah it might be something wrong with my game then. I’m using this card.

I just tested the game again and averaged 165 in game but could not get a screenshot.

Here is the bench at the highest setting at 1440p. This is with a FTW3 Ultra but it is not overclock.

 

[JZStudios]

1 hour ago, GamerBlake said:

Oh ok I’ll start with 2033 then. I don’t want any spoilers or ruined plots like someone looking like they’re about to die only for me to know they survive because they’re in the next game.

Yeah, it's a linear progression. The only shit thing is the first game gives you a choice of an ending, and then the second one makes a canon choice. The stories all follow Artyom as he makes his way through the Metro and looking for a better life.

[Andreas Lilja]

Last Light has the numerous annoying outdoor levels where you need to bunnyhop to your destination and stop for filters. Wish you could buy them somewhere like in the first game... Ain't nobody got time for the scenery. 

[GamerBlake]

7 hours ago, jones177 said:

I just tested the game again and averaged 165 in game but could not get a screenshot.

Here is the bench at the highest setting at 1440p. This is with a FTW3 Ultra but it is not overclock.

 

Here is mine. You can see in the top left corner it's only getting like ~72fps @ 1440p with maxed out settings.

I'm running an 8700K & 2080 Ti XC2 Ultra so I just don't understand what is going on.

It seems like having SSAA at x4 is what is causing the huge FPS drops.

[GamerBlake]

1 hour ago, Cvet76 said:

The price isn't the problem. The overwhelming number of still unplayed games in my steam library is

I feel ya on that one  

 

I got a ton of games during this current Steam Summer Sale cause they’re just so friggin’ cheap!

 

Hellblade: Senua’s Sacrifice, Doom Eternal, Metro 1-3, Dark Souls 3, Detroit Become Human, etc.,

 

Although I gotta say, I played DBH first of these and it’s an amazing game I would recommend to anyone. The graphics are incredible and the story is great.

[jones177]

9 hours ago, GamerBlake said:

Here is mine. You can see in the top left corner it's only getting like ~72fps @ 1440p with maxed out settings.

I'm running an 8700K & 2080 Ti XC2 Ultra so I just don't understand what is going on.

It seems like having SSAA at x4 is what is causing the huge FPS drops.

 

It may be because we are using different versions of the game. I don't play the Redux version but the original one. 

 

I did install the Redux version and it does play like you described.

SSAA at lower settings looks fine to me and x2 was around 105fps and 0.5 was 125fps and again I did not notice a difference. 

 

[Kawaii Koneko]

22 hours ago, Cvet76 said:

I Haven't played the third one yet, but I think there is a continuation of the story. But whether that story connects strongly to the previous parts, I can't say.

It definitely does but it is definitely the biggest deviation from the books. That is partially expected due to where the final book ended but they definitely took some big liberties. I'm fine with that though. It works well to move the game's story forward.

 

22 hours ago, Jurrunio said:

There's very little in the plot that you have to understand from previous games in order to enjoy this one, it spends the first few chapters rephrasing the worldview of Metro games in general.

I do agree that anyone can pick up Exodus and enjoy it because while the story is definitely connected to the previous games, they did a good job of telling a rather self contained story. So really it does a good job at offering new players something they can enjoy while still rewarding players who played previous games.

 

Personally though, I would recommend playing the first two games first. It makes the game much more rewarding. After playing through the dark and cramped Metro of the first two games, it feels like a real accomplishment to finally be out on the surface.

 

21 hours ago, GamerBlake said:

Well I mean I wasn’t sure if it was a trilogy or if it was three different stories seperate from each other in the same series. Like if none of the characters or stories overlap then they can be played in any order but if stuff overlaps or the stories are all part of one whole then I’d definitely do Metro, then Metro Last Light, then Metro Exodus.

There are definitely things that you understand right away if you have played the previous two games. The game makes most of what is going on clear but playing the first two gives you a lot more context.

 

And if you read/listened to all the books, you will definitely notice some inconsistencies right away. But like I said, I'm with that. It works for the game and even the author said he is totally fine with the games deviating from the source material.

 

Honestly, I would maybe consider reading the books first. I beat 2033 Redux and a couple levels of Last Light Redux before I stopped and listened to all three books. It actually made the games more enjoyable as I compared the story to the game. It didn't really spoil the games either since the games had their own versions of many events in the books.

[GamerBlake]

9 hours ago, jones177 said:

It may be because we are using different versions of the game. I don't play the Redux version but the original one. 

 

I did install the Redux version and it does play like you described.

SSAA at lower settings looks fine to me and x2 was around 105fps and 0.5 was 125fps and again I did not notice a difference. 

 

Apparently running SSAA at x4 like I was doing when I was getting ~70 FPS is the equivalent of playing at 8K in terms of processing power demand.

 

When I turned SSAA to OFF it jumped to like 215 FPS.