• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Metro 2033

Smash88

Banned
The optimum specs are bullshit.

Either it is unoptimized or the specs they are saying is for marketing.

Core i7 vs. Q9550 would garner not a lot of gains in gaming.

The 8GB...come on, only kids would believe this.

Graphics card I can believe. Although a 5870 could do the job. The 5890 should be coming out in June (the refresh of the 5870).
 
Az987 said:
lol, i came here to post that!

Im tempted to pre-order but I think I should wait til I get my 20$ credit for Bad Company 2

If I pre-ordered at a higher price I'll get the lowest pre-order price according to their guarantee, right? What if it goes back up to $55 or something?
 

vocab

Member
BigNastyCurve said:
If I pre-ordered at a higher price I'll get the lowest pre-order price according to their guarantee, right? What if it goes back up to $55 or something?

Whatever price is there at the time of release is the price you pay. Prices rarely go up, they usually go down on Amazon. I would just buy it from Newegg if you are going for the PC version.
 

HK-47

Oh, bitch bitch bitch.
I hope all those people in the trailers in underground settlement actually walk around like that. Oh man, this could be great.
 

Zenith

Banned
Darklord said:
I fucking knew it. 8gb ram? WTF Only thing I pass is the CPU and my PC is only 8 months old!

the "optimum" specs are tongue-in-cheek. How do you think it goes from 1 gig to 2 gigs to 8+ gigs when making the leap from minimum -> recommended ->optimum.
 

adelante

Member
Bi50N said:
Dmitry and I sat down with GameSpot UK last week, resulting in this huge two-part video interview, with new Xbox 360 direct feed.

Part I:

http://uk.gamespot.com/xbox360/action/metro2033thelastrefuge/video/6252495/metro-2033-interview-2

Part II:

http://uk.gamespot.com/xbox360/action/metro2033thelastrefuge/video/6252494/metro-2033-interview-1

Hot damn...even though much of the game takes place in confined spaces, the graphics looks worlds apart from similar titles like Bioshock2; the detail and richness of the visuals is amazing:
- shadows and specular effects are cast by anything that emits light (like the animated ones on grounds and walls cast by campfires and those on your gun as you fire it)
- nice depth of field applied to close up objects (like your hands and gasmask as you put it on)
- glowing embers flying around in the outdoor setting on top of all that snow and fog particle effects


The sound design is pretty awesome too. Random laughters of distant metro inhabitants travelling through the tunnels, sounds muted and replaced with a ringing effect when your friend fires a shotgun near your freakin face...
 

Bi50N

Member
adelante said:
Hot damn...even though much of the game takes place in confined spaces, the graphics looks worlds apart from similar titles like Bioshock2; the detail and richness of the visuals is amazing:

:D

adelante said:
The sound design is pretty awesome too. Random laughters of distant metro inhabitants travelling through the tunnels, sounds muted and replaced with a ringing effect when your friend fires a shotgun near your freakin face...

Yeah, this is often tough to get across on web trailers. If you have a 5.1 set-up, you're in for a real treat with Metro...

Seriously, we can't wait to see the public's reaction to not only the game but the 4A Engine too. We think you're going to be more than pleasantly surprised with how this game looks (and sounds), regardless of which version you pick up...
 

FLEABttn

Banned
Bi50N said:
Seriously, we can't wait to see the public's reaction to not only the game but the 4A Engine too. We think you're going to be more than pleasantly surprised with how this game looks (and sounds), regardless of which version you pick up...

Looking forward to it. PC version for me now.

Doubt you can comment on it, but I'm hoping for a PS3 version down the line, maybe if this does well enough.
 

WrikaWrek

Banned
FLEABttn said:
Looking forward to it. PC version for me now.

Doubt you can comment on it, but I'm hoping for a PS3 version down the line, maybe if this does well enough.

Your PC isn't good enough?
 

WrikaWrek

Banned
FLEABttn said:
It is. I'm just weird in that I like mouse and keyboard, but don't like PC gaming. It's hard to explain because it comes out sort of irrational.

That's sorta weird. Try a 360 controller, maybe it will feel more like a console.
 

FLEABttn

Banned
WrikaWrek said:
That's sorta weird. Try a 360 controller, maybe it will feel more like a console.

It's not the controller, cause I prefer the precision and customization of mouse and keyboard by far for a lot of genres. I just don't like the DRM (even Steam), the various hardware issues (why does this game cause artifacting when every single other game doesn't), various software issues (the engine doesn't work right with this very specific hardware combination, which happens to be my own), the driver issues (this game isn't properly supported by my current videocard drivers so it runs like ass, but the beta drivers cause Warcraft to have jittery animation), the terrible PC ports (too many to list), other things I'm sure I'm forgetting.

Even when it all works out in the end with one game, the dicking around I have to do with others has worn me out of the platform. I just want to pop my game in and have it work.
 

K.Jack

Knowledge is power, guard it well
FLEABttn said:
It is. I'm just weird in that I like mouse and keyboard, but don't like PC gaming. It's hard to explain because it comes out sort of irrational.
You can share. We're here for you.

edit: oic keke
 

~Kinggi~

Banned
The logical thing for me to do would be buying the PC version since it would have a longer shelf life and my PC would be able to make it look better than consoles, but i just cant enjoy gaming on the PC besides the select few games like Diablo or something. PC gaming is too much of a chore to me these days.

Im pretty sure im gonna end up going with the 360 version, especially since they have gotten it to look as good as it has. Im still undecided though.
 

WrikaWrek

Banned
FLEABttn said:
It's not the controller, cause I prefer the precision and customization of mouse and keyboard by far for a lot of genres. I just don't like the DRM (even Steam), the various hardware issues (why does this game cause artifacting when every single other game doesn't), various software issues (the engine doesn't work right with this very specific hardware combination, which happens to be my own), the driver issues (this game isn't properly supported by my current videocard drivers so it runs like ass, but the beta drivers cause Warcraft to have jittery animation), the terrible PC ports (too many to list), other things I'm sure I'm forgetting.

Even when it all works out in the end with one game, the dicking around I have to do with others has worn me out of the platform. I just want to pop my game in and have it work.


You just described hell, my pc only gives me heaven. Bad apple son.
 
Okay GaF, I'm in Moscow for 3 more weeks.

What about a IRL/in game 4D comparaison of the subway stations ?

You provide in game picture of the stations, I try to recreate the angle, in the real life station. Anyone interested ?
 

Totobeni

An blind dancing ho
uh , surprisely my PC is actually way above the recommended requirements for the game :/

will the Xbox 360 version graphically match the minimal or the recommended set of the PC version ? because I pre ordred the 360 version ( look fucking good ) , but if the 360 version look worse than the PC version at the recommended setting , i will jump to PC with this game.
 

Bi50N

Member
Outtrigger888 said:
Have the developers given an estimate on the length of the game? That's my only concern, otherwise day 1.

We reckon a first-time play through on normal will take you 10 hours minimum. The studio speed-run record is 7.5 hours...

Then there's Hardcore, and other reasons why you might want to replay!
 

burgerdog

Member
Bi50N said:
We reckon a first-time play through on normal will take you 10 hours minimum. The studio speed-run record is 7.5 hours...

Then there's Hardcore, and other reasons why you might want to replay!

Perfect length, don't get me wrong, I do enjoy some long games from time to time. However, with Bad Company 2, Final Fantasy XIII, and God of War III/Metro 2033 hitting the week after 13, I do not mind some short games at all.
 
Bi50N said:
We reckon a first-time play through on normal will take you 10 hours minimum. The studio speed-run record is 7.5 hours...

Then there's Hardcore, and other reasons why you might want to replay!

Im glad to hear that, and knowing me I will explore everything. I thought I was done spending money on games this month, but some how I didnt know anything about this game untill 3 days ago and now this is my most anticipated game this month. I pretty much already know what GoW3 and FF13 are gonna offer, but I have a good feeling about this game.
 
Bi50N said:
We reckon a first-time play through on normal will take you 10 hours minimum. The studio speed-run record is 7.5 hours...

Then there's Hardcore, and other reasons why you might want to replay!
Thanks for the info, for me that means that I can finish the game in 15 hours.
(I'm ALWAYS slower than the dev team time gives), and I do not mind at all.
 

faridmon

Member
can you get Core i7 CPU for cheap these days? the cheapest i have found is +300$.

and do you need anything else to maximise its effect?
 
FLEABttn said:
It's not the controller, cause I prefer the precision and customization of mouse and keyboard by far for a lot of genres. I just don't like the DRM (even Steam), the various hardware issues (why does this game cause artifacting when every single other game doesn't), various software issues (the engine doesn't work right with this very specific hardware combination, which happens to be my own), the driver issues (this game isn't properly supported by my current videocard drivers so it runs like ass, but the beta drivers cause Warcraft to have jittery animation), the terrible PC ports (too many to list), other things I'm sure I'm forgetting.

Even when it all works out in the end with one game, the dicking around I have to do with others has worn me out of the platform. I just want to pop my game in and have it work.

Pretty much the reason why I'm turning to consoles after almost 25 years of computer gaming. I'm getting too old for that shit.

My 9600GT says I should go with the 360 version anyway.


Totobeni said:
will the Xbox 360 version graphically match the minimal or the recommended set of the PC version ? because I pre ordred the 360 version ( look fucking good ) , but if the 360 version look worse than the PC version at the recommended setting , i will jump to PC with this game.

Bi50N should answer this, but I think I read in an interview that the 360 version looks better than the PC version on medium settings, but worse than the PC version on high settings.
 

Rur0ni

Member
faridmon said:
can you get Core i7 CPU for cheap these days? the cheapest i have found is +300$.

and do you need anything else to maximise its effect?
You see them on forums (like hardforum) going for 200-250. Nothing wrong with second hand. :p

Of if you live by a microcenter, you can get it for 200 new I think.
 

faridmon

Member
Rur0ni said:
You see them on forums (like hardforum) going for 200-250. Nothing wrong with second hand. :p

Of if you live by a microcenter, you can get it for 200 new I think.
if i am correct, this the next step of CPU after the quad core isn't? is it worth the investment now or wait few months?
 

Rur0ni

Member
faridmon said:
if i am correct, this the next step of CPU after the quad core isn't? is it worth the investment now or wait few months?
An i7 is a hyper threaded quad core. Depending on the application, performance improvement can be dramatic. Or no improvement at all. If you already have a quad core chip, I wouldn't spend the money on an i7. If you have a dual core on the other hand, maybe so. ;)
 

Fredescu

Member
Darklord said:
I fucking knew it. 8gb ram? WTF Only thing I pass is the CPU and my PC is only 8 months old!
You pass the recommended specs, what are you worried about? Forget the Optimum specs.
 

adelante

Member
Bi50N said:
We reckon a first-time play through on normal will take you 10 hours minimum. The studio speed-run record is 7.5 hours...

Then there's Hardcore, and other reasons why you might want to replay!
Sounds pretty good, since I always like to start a shooter on the next difficulty setting available...

Game's as good as bought for me. Just hoping the story doesn't disappoint :p
 

Bi50N

Member
Zenith said:
is it true the human enemies are Nazis still fighting the Russians after WW2 caused an apocalypse?

Heh, not quite!

It's never explained what caused the apocalypse (which happens around 2013), nor is it really important... The Moscow Metro becomes a sealed microcosm of human civilization, and individual stations become miniature states, each with their own form of ideology, government etc.

Some stations remain independent, others form alliances - in the game there are four main power groups, 'Hanse' who control the ring line, 'Polis' who control the central cluster, the last true 'city' in the Metro, and the then 'Red Line' and 'Reich' - old school communists and neo-Nazis respectively who are locked in a war.

So they are Russian Nazis, fighting for 'Russian Purity' - rather than Germans!

The book goes into far ore detail of course, and is Dmitry's critique of contemporary Russian politics in which extremest groups of all colours are on the rise...
 
Totobeni said:
uh , surprisely my PC is actually way above the recommended requirements for the game :/

will the Xbox 360 version graphically match the minimal or the recommended set of the PC version ? because I pre ordred the 360 version ( look fucking good ) , but if the 360 version look worse than the PC version at the recommended setting , i will jump to PC with this game.

Probably neither, its never matched the GPU performance of an 8800 series GPU in any mutliplatform game before. I'll 100% guarantee you that it'll be no where near matching a PC rig with the recommended requirements, at best it'll match minimum, but to hope for anything more than that is just wishful thinking, it'd be totally unprecedented.


REMEMBER CITADEL said:
My 9600GT says I should go with the 360 version anyway.

No, it really doesn't. A 9600GT has never performed worse than Xenos in multiplatform titles (at worst they may have come out equal), I don't know why you'd assume that's about to change. Remember the 360 version is 720p with zero msaa (though it has analytical AA which the PC version will as well) and zero AF, at 30fps, that's really not such a high standard to hit with modern PC hardware, no matter the game. Heck, a 9600gt isn't a million miles away from pulling that off with Crysis very high settings, and I've certainly not seen any console manage that.

The 360 version looks amazing for what it is, don't get me wrong, but modern PC GPUs are 5-10x faster, and optimisation can only go so far.


Darklord said:
I fucking knew it. 8gb ram? WTF Only thing I pass is the CPU and my PC is only 8 months old!

Man, some people really need to learn to take a joke. Here's a hint, the GPU in those "optimal" settings isn't even for sale yet.

Honestly, people really need to stop reading so much into minimum and recommended specs, they've meant precisely fuck all for far too long a time. They don't even begin to hint at what framerate/IQ/resolution/graphics settings that you'll achieve with the quoted hardware and as such they're pretty damn worthless. Wait for some respected sites to benchmark it or for some trusted members of PC-GAF to give performance analysis if you're worried.
 

kitch9

Banned
Acosta said:
Nice, I have almost covered the Optimum specs (just miss the 4GB and I don't have a SSD, but my HDD is fast).

We may have a new Prince, fellow masters! Love to see games with high specs target.




Hope they enable global illumination!

That depends on the performance hit. If its too high forums will be full of retards complaining they can't max the game out, calling it another Crysis etc etc.
 

Dennis

Banned
kitch9 said:
That depends on the performance hit. If its too high forums will be full of retards complaining they can't max the game out, calling it another Crysis etc etc.
I don't care if they officially enable Global illumination in the ingame settings, just let it be known how to enable it in the .ini file or something.

I want to make my PC bleed tears of molten thermal paste!
 
DennisK4 said:
I don't care if they officially enable Global illumination in the ingame settings, just let it be known how to enable it in the .ini file or something.

I want to make my PC bleed tears of molten thermal paste!

This is probably the best way to do it, making it an ingame option will probably lead to loads of hate from luddites that believe graphics settings that artificially restrain what the engine can render is good "optimisation". The very high settings in Crysis were never meant for the hardware available at release and high settings were already far and away more impressive than any game that came before it, but nope because you couldn't "max out!11!" Crysis on an 8800GTX is was a poorly optimised piece of crap. Fucking idiots, they spoil all the fun for those that like to see the medium advance at more than a snails pace.

Just because its possible to make the game look better, doesn't mean the graphics that your hardware can produce are any worse. I mean, the 360 version is going to be stunning and probably the best looking game on the system and yet it probably won't be rendering even 1/10th of what the PC version will be at max settings, still doesn't change the fact its an insane looking game for hardware of that level. Just be happy that the game will be producing some of the best graphics your GPU has ever pumped out, don't act like a retard just because its possible to make it look even better, that's an extra pressie waiting for your next upgrade. :D
 
brain_stew said:
Remember the 360 version is 720p with zero msaa (though it has analytical AA which the PC version will as well) and zero AF, at 30fps, that's really not such a high standard to hit with modern PC hardware, no matter the game. Heck, a 9600gt isn't a million miles away from pulling that off with Crysis very high settings, and I've certainly not seen any console manage that.

Right, maybe you should define "million miles away". Crysis demo wasn't perfectly playable on my configuration (Core 2 Quad Q8400, 2 gigs of RAM, WinXP) on high settings, let alone very high (and I thought it looked worse on medium than maxed out Far Cry, which is what I played just before that). Not sure which resolution I played it on, though, possibly 1680x1050.

Even if it wasn't for the fact that my PC doesn't meet the recommended specs, there's a myriad of other reasons why I'm slowly backing away from PC gaming in general. I'm not a huge graphics whore as I regularly play a lot of older games so cutting edge visuals don't mean much to me.
 

Truant

Member
Are you guys only seeing the optimum specs? The recommended settings are going to make the game look and run better than on the 360, so you really don't need a super powerful computer.
 
Top Bottom