izigame.me

I only approach the Metro series because of its fame in the single-player first-person shooter genre, a genre nowadays is surely fading away from the mainstream compared to what it was ten years ago. From the perspective of someone who does not familiar with the series, the Metro series looks generic in every aspect: a post-apocalyptic world where people fight monsters and other people for scraps. My friend lost interest in this series because it's mostly "on rails" and it's boring. The metro series does not look appealing to a lot of players, including me. Therefore, I had very low expectations going into this series, despite Metro having a good reception among some fan bases.

story under the ground

The world and background of the Metro quickly captured me after a few hours of build-up. All three Metro games spent a lot of their time on character development and world-building. In the journey under the ground, the protagonist went through different post-nuclear war underground subway stations and most of these locations are decorated with detailed background: the filth-stanched live quarters, the trading area where people spent military-grade bullets for food, water, wine and everything that helps them survive in the tunnels. Each train station is filled with people talking, walking, labouring with mostly, suffering. Such an environment is carefully crafted by 4A games to present a window for us to peek into the war-torn world of Moscow and its people. Going out of the station, the protagonist finds there are still wars fighting among the few thousands who survived when the bomb fell. The tunnels that connect every station are filled with dead bodies belonging to station soldiers. The protagonist will learn the cruel situation within and between the stations as the player also experience this unbelievably detailed, multilayered world of the Metro.

story above the surface

Despite a few sections where the protagonist ventures above the surface in the first two games, Exodus is the game that put its core experience on the surface. It deviates from the original story but presents the players with a much more colourful world outside of Moscow's surface. Exodus has more than five chapters and half of them happened in a relatively small-scale open world while the other half recall the traditional metro-style linear design of the original two games. The open-world under the sun is where the variety of exodus worlds shines. From the lunatic overran frozen Volga river to dried out desert that was formerly known as the Caspian Sea. Each location is presented to the player with distinct visual variety and somewhat unique gameplay elements. The story focus and the relationship between the exodus crew are changing between each chapter as they face different problems each time. The bond with the crew breaks or changes depending on the player's choice, or how they play the game. So in every open-worlded chapter, the ending is different and the consquence stays till the end of the game.

The way the player play impacts the story, not the player's choice

In every open-worlded chapter, the ending will change depending on how the player plays the game. And there is an invisible moral meter that increases when the player did something generally positive and decreases if the player chose to be cruel, brute or fails to complete some action. This moral meter is present in previous Metro games too. The problem with this simple good/bad moral meter is painfully obvious: it prevents the player from having fun. The latest entry in the Metro series introduces the gunsmith mechanic that allows player to alter the weapon to their liking, whether it's a short-range pistol or long-range snipe rifle. This is one of the most complete weapon changing system in recent years and it is also integrated into its economic system. However, the game has no non-lethal weapon, which means if the player wants to go stealth approach or pacifism playstyle for a good ending then they will have little to no chance to use the weapon they design and crafted.
Furthermore, this moral meter is not clearly defined, at least doesn't answer the moral question that the game asks: the moral meter goes low if the player kills the enemy, no matter whether they are the slavers, bandits, survivors or simply someone who stands against the protagonist. This swallow judgement of one's action is not a moral meter, it's a kill count meter. It is simply not fun to demand a non-kill playthrough from the player simply for the sick of the ending. This problem isn't unique to the Metro. Dishonored main game also suffers from this and its acutely self-undermined play experience. Sadly at the end of the Dishonored series, this problem is not solved, the developers of the Dishonored simply circumvent the issue by not letting the kill counter affect the world and ending.

my personal feeling about the Metro

The Metro series ended up my favourite fps game series despite the aforementioned flaws. I entered the Metro a few months ago, just wanna try out how the gun feels like, I left the Metro completed three games, spent more than 50 hours on the series and started to read the original inspiration. The books are even better than the games in my personal opinion. People at the 4A game dedicate a decade to showing us a world that was devoured by the nuclear weapon, and the abysmal surviving situation of the few who remain. The Metro series, in my interpretation, is a portrait of a much-least likely, but always possible, future for our generation. I live in the real world for more than twenty years and I was lucky that I experienced war only in video games and films. But that was only a short sight in human history. My grandfather went to war and my father served, and make no mistake the peace I was able to enjoy probably will not last long. At the end of the Metro series, I constantly think about messages that I received from the games and books and it is not pleasant. I only wish the Metro is my favourite game, not my future tho.