Metro: Last Light, Metro 2033, choice and consequence

[Azrael the cat]

I never had much interest in the two Metro games, until over in the Zahaira thread the developer cited Metro: Last Light (the sequel to the better known Metro 2033) as an example of a game with what sounded like Deus Ex 'unmarked C+C'. One specific example he gave was from Metro: Last Light, where he described an event where you're not told that you can let an enemy surrender instead of killing him, but what you do acts as an 'unmarked' choice that has significant consequences down the track.

The obvious comparison point he seemed to be going for would be the decision whether to kill the NSF leader, let Navarre do it, or kill Agent Navarre to prevent her murdering an unarmed prisoner in Deus Ex.

I'm aware that the Metro games don't have the hybrid crpg gameplay of Deus Ex, but are either of them any good in terms of this kind of unmarked C+C? Is it just a feature of the sequel, or is it in Metro 2033 - is one better than the other in this regard?

 

[J_C]

I never had much interest in the two Metro games, until over in the Zahaira thread the developer cited Metro: Last Light (the sequel to the better known Metro 2033) as an example of a game with what sounded like Deus Ex 'unmarked C+C'. One specific example he gave was from Metro: Last Light, where he described an event where you're not told that you can let an enemy surrender instead of killing him, but what you do acts as an 'unmarked' choice that has significant consequences down the track.

The obvious comparison point he seemed to be going for would be the decision whether to kill the NSF leader, let Navarre do it, or kill Agent Navarre to prevent her murdering an unarmed prisoner in Deus Ex.

I'm aware that the Metro games don't have the hybrid crpg gameplay of Deus Ex, but are either of them any good in terms of this kind of unmarked C+C? Is it just a feature of the sequel, or is it in Metro 2033 - is one better than the other in this regard?

Both games have different endings, but apart from that, i don't think that the games are full of C&C.

 

[Azrael the cat]

By different endings, are we talking SH2 style, where combinations of decisions throughout the game lead to one of 5 or so endings (not FO-style 'this happened in this town', more 'you acted like this so this is your ending')? Or a 'choose A, B or C' at the end?

Either can be fine in the right circumstances - but 'choose A, B or C at the end' games need to have a lot more meat elsewhere, whereas I'd still view a game like SH2 as being a good implementation of C+C even though your various choices (from memory, the main ones were how meticulous you were at keeping your health high, playing in a consistently suicidal manner with low health, how you treat one of the main female characters, a few context-specific reactions, and whether you rush through the last corridor or slow down so you can hear the dialogue all the way through) only come into effect at the end.

Doesn't have to be that complex - in fact most Japanese games tend to overdo that kind of C+C. SH2 is one of the few where the various ending conditions are obscure enough that there's no way you can play it with a 'choose your own adventure' mindset, but they all make sense and fit the character arc (whether it becomes a story of redemption, self-destruction, repeating the past, etc).

 

[Peter]

combinations of decisions throughout the game lead to one of 5 2 or so endings

This was the case in Metro 2033. You don't really make many obvious binary choices in the game, and those that you do are relatively inconsequential (ie using services of a prostitute or not was one of them iirc), as much as the game tries to track your general playstyle and tailor the ending to how you act throughout the game. This mostly comes down to how violent or stealthy you are, but also tracks whether you make some environmental interactions or not and some other things.

It's a pretty neat system. Nicely subtle. Most people get the bad ending first time around, or don't even realize the game has "moral choices" without looking it up.

Don't know how it is in Last Light, but I assume the system carried over.

 

[sexbad?]

The endings in the Metro games are binary good or bad scenes. However, they pretty much run exclusively on non-explicit choices. No matter what you do to the guy who surrenders in Last Light, the narrative doesn't change at all anywhere else, but letting him live instead of being trigger happy counts as a point toward the good ending. Actions like getting through a level without killing anyone in it, saving prisoners of war who don't have anything to do with you, or just exploring thoroughly will count toward the good ending. I think it's a neat idea to think about, but its effect on gameplay is really negligible.

 

[Spaceman Spiff]

I believe you're talking about the hidden morality system in both games.
I've never thought of it as "C&C" in an RPG sense.
Yes, there are small choices (or just actions like listening to a character to the end) you can make in this game that are not explicitly marked by the game beforehand, but none of your actions/choices have immediate or significant impact on the gameplay or story besides which ending cutscene (there are two) you get.
However I liked the system in Metro 2033 quite a bit, it resembles Deus Ex "C&C" in the sense that it doesn't feel like a binary "gamey" choice, but feels like the natural learning process of the character you're playing, which then gets reflected in the good/bad conclusion of the story.

 

[Lemming42]

I don't recall there being that many choices. The games keeps track of how you act throughout the story and then give you the corresponding ending. I could never get the good ending to 2033 though.

 

[sexbad?]

Don't know how it is in Last Light, but I assume the system carried over.

Yup. It's basically the same.

Actually in addendum to saying its effect on gameplay is negligible, I actually think that it shows that the developers trust players not to fuck up. There's never a modern-game-style big quest marker in the Front Line level in 2033 that tells you you can avoid a lot of combat by making your way down the abyss under the track bridge where everyone is fighting, for example. But that's an option you can find, and if you do it right the game rewards you with a gold star.

 

[Sodafish]

Yeah no actual C&C to speak of in the game.

If there were any my prime choice would be throwing that fucking awful kid to the lurkers as a distracting meal whilst I made a stealthy exit, rather than enduring carrying him on your back and putting up with his godawful blather and the enforced retardo aiming. God I hated that part.

 

[DeepOcean]

You did random acts of goodness, you get good ending. You do random acts of evil, you get evil ending. I wouldn't call that C&C as the end result has nothing to do with the decisions you took.

 

[J_C]

You did random acts of goodness, you get good ending. You do random acts of evil, you get evil ending. I wouldn't call that C&C as the end result has nothing to do with the decisions you took.

Doing evil stuff or not is not a decision?

 

[Invictus]

I rather liked the C&C from the Metro series, instead of the goody goody or asshole response from the Mass Decline games or the "oops turns out I helped the bad guys" C&C of the Witcher games this system actualy was very under the works where your overall attitude and actions throughout the game decided the ending you got rather than an arbitrary "red, blue or green" popamole choice.
It is similar to the feel of the Stalker games, where both series are not RPGs but they do give your actions weight and consequence; for example on Call of Pripyat if you side with the Stalkers they will drive out the bandits but make finding artifacts harder or doing certain quests in Shadow of Chernobyl will unlock different options for endings
I don't play many FPS nowadays but the overall mood, gorgeous graphics and great setting for both the Stalker and Metro series really stand head and shoulders over the Battlefields and other popamoles

 

[Multiple Sarcasm]

Thing is, Metro 2033 game is a popamolefied, trigger-happy, imbecile cousin of the novel, and if you've read the book, you'll be permanently facepalming throughout the game.
I liked the subtlety of the 'choices' and how they added to the mood, but as far as 'consequences' are concerned, they were ultimately pointless, because

Spoiler

the "good" ending is Disney-dumb and makes you want to take all the good deeds back just to unsee this sugar-coated hugbox.

Thankfully, Last Light is based on the book ending, so if you want to run around shooting things in a post-apo setting, my suggestion is to avoid Metro 2033 game, read the Metro 2033 novel, and only then, if you still want to spoil the impression, play Last Light.

 

[sexbad?]

The writing in both games is so bad. I would never want to read a whole novel by that same author.

 

[Multiple Sarcasm]

So don't? Glukhovsky didn't write for the game, and 4A Games butchered the story beyond belief.

 

[sexbad?]

He is credited in both games.

 

[Multiple Sarcasm]

He's the author of the novel, upon which the game is loosely based. Why would you expect him not to be credited?

 

[sexbad?]

Because if I was competent enough to be aware of how bad the stories of the games are, I would want to distance myself from that garbage writing as much as possible.

 

[sexbad?]

I got the e-book from pre-ordering Last Light, though. I may try it out, but it looks like City of Thieves shit with a side dish of chosen-one nonsense.

 

[Average Manatee]

You did random acts of goodness, you get good ending. You do random acts of evil, you get evil ending. I wouldn't call that C&C as the end result has nothing to do with the decisions you took.

Doing evil stuff or not is not a decision?

It's not really evil stuff in most instances, and it feels like a hamfisted way to add "replay value!" "choices!" as a selling point. Like, because you refused a monetary reward from one of your quests (bearing in mind that this is money you are using to buy ammo and selflessly save the world) you are now a "good guy" and won't commit genocide, whereas if you are the kind of person who would accept a reward that was freely offered to you in exchange for something you've done good, you are now a "bad guy" who will happily nuke a race into oblivion.

Though to be fair, I don't think it's ever specifically referred to as "good vs. evil". It's really more of a "have I seen and experienced enough to recognize the dark ones as sentient beings rather than mindless terrorizers". It's just that this fact is diluted by a lot of extraneous good vs. evil points for random stuff.

 

[set]

C&C is an abbreviation for "Choice and Consequences"

Metro Last Light, nor the previous game, have any oncsequences, even though they do track your choices -- at least in the second one, I dunno about the first.

Getting a different ending cinematic is the cheapest of all "consequences" - it doesn't impact how you play.

If that's the developer of Zaharia's idea of C&C then I think I know what we can expect from that game...

 

[J_C]

C&C is an abbreviation for "Choice and Consequences"

Metro Last Light, nor the previous game, have any oncsequences, even though they do track your choices -- at least in the second one, I dunno about the first.

Getting a different ending cinematic is the cheapest of all "consequences" - it doesn't impact how you play.

If that's the developer of Zaharia's idea of C&C then I think I know what we can expect from that game...

Different endings are cheap consequences, but still consequences. The ending slides of the Fallout games are similar (different endings for the factions), altough there are much more of them.

 

[set]

There are more C&C than that. FO has a few quests at least where doing X pissess off Y but gets you in the good graces of Z or gets you an item/money W. Or, in FO2, you have staggering divergences in how you beat the game - what actions are required to "win". There's no option to skip huge amounts of Metro Last Light from my understanding.

 

[chestburster]

The writing in both games is so bad. I would never want to read a whole novel by that same author.

World building is top-notch in both games and the novel. In fact, world building is on par with the best post-apocalyptic literature (A Canticle for Leibowitz, The Road, Fallout 1, etc.), with fully functional ecosystems, believable social structures and technologies.

And since you don't speak Russian, you're not qualified to comment on the quality of the game/novel's language (bad English translation has nothing to do with the author).

 

[sexbad?]

The writing in both games is so bad. I would never want to read a whole novel by that same author.

World building is top-notch in both games and the novel. In fact, world building is on par with the best post-apocalyptic literature (A Canticle for Leibowitz, The Road, Fallout 1, etc.), with fully functional ecosystems, believable social structures and technologies.

And since you don't speak Russian, you're not qualified to comment on the quality of the game/novel's language (bad English translation has nothing to do with the author).

I didn't talk about the world building. It's great. However, the writing and narrative are absolute garbage in ways that aren't likely due to translation problems.