• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.

What do you think Metro Exodus's Metacritic Score will be?

  • 93-100

    Votes: 69 3.6%
  • 89-92

    Votes: 423 22.2%
  • 85-88

    Votes: 827 43.4%
  • 81-84

    Votes: 454 23.8%
  • <80

    Votes: 131 6.9%

  • Total voters
    1,904
  • Poll closed .

Serious Sam

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
4,354
Comparing youtube screengrab jpgs of a single moment to make the case that a visibly inferior version of a game is genuinely more pleasing to the eye.
Brings me back to the early days of PS4 and Xbox One back on NeoGAF. Those were the days...
What are you going on about? These screen grabs are from a video that YOU CAN WATCH YOURSELF, but I guess you didn't bother with that, because if you did, you would know that they had 3D artist with deep raytracing knowledge explain each scene in detail, and recurring theme was that RTX on looks more realistic in some scenes, doesn't look better in other scenes, and there are a few oddities and bugs with RTX in some other scenes. They also criticized extreme performance hit for minimal visual gains.
 

Timu

Member
Oct 25, 2017
15,540
Ok, raw footage time. Both are from the first level, so not too spoilery. RTSS shows fps and gpu usage in upper left corner.

Link #1

Res: 1080p
Quality: Ultra
Vsync: Full
Motion Blur: Normal
DirectX 12
Hair Works Off
Advanced Physx: On
Tessellation: On
Texture FIltering: AF 16X
Shading Rate: 1.0x

Link #2

Res: 1080p
Quality: Ultra
Vsync: Full
Motion Blur: Normal
DirectX 11
Hair Works Off
Advanced Physx: On
Tessellation: Off
Texture FIltering: AF 16X
Shading Rate: 1.0x



If I could run the game at ultra at 3440x1440 with a 1080 Ti, you should be fine with the 2080 Ti.
Link 2 isn't working.
 

Marble

Banned
Nov 27, 2017
3,819
Is it me or is this RTX stuff way overhyped? Watched numerous videos on YouTube and I don't find the differences that noticeable. Totally not worth it if you see what hit the framerate takes.

I'd go that far and say that an RTX user probably won't immediately notice it if the feature got turned off by accident without him/her knowing.
 

Sinder

Banned
Jul 24, 2018
7,576
Is it me or is this RTX stuff way overhyped? Watched numerous videos on YouTube and I don't find the differences that noticeable. Totally not worth it if you see what hit the framerate takes.

I'd go that far and say that an RTX user probably won't immediately notice it if the feature got turned off by accident without him/her knowing.

Really depends on your own eye I think. I'm a cinematographer for a living and always hyper aware of light, and to me it's absolutely stunning. I don't care how big of a performance hit it takes, I'm playing all of it at 4k/dxr.
 

Oracle

Banned
Nov 7, 2017
1,932
Ok, raw footage time. Both are from the first level, so not too spoilery. RTSS shows fps and gpu usage in upper left corner.

Link #1

Res: 1080p
Quality: Ultra
Vsync: Full
Motion Blur: Normal
DirectX 12
Hair Works Off
Advanced Physx: On
Tessellation: On
Texture FIltering: AF 16X
Shading Rate: 1.0x

Link #2

Res: 1080p
Quality: Ultra
Vsync: Full
Motion Blur: Normal
DirectX 11
Hair Works Off
Advanced Physx: On
Tessellation: Off
Texture FIltering: AF 16X
Shading Rate: 1.0x



If I could run the game at ultra at 3440x1440 with a 1080 Ti, you should be fine with the 2080 Ti.


What type of frames ? I have a 1080ti and same res monitor
 

NuMiQ

Member
Oct 25, 2017
599
The Netherlands
Do you agree with VG247 that the game took away your control a little too often?
This is one thing I absolutely hate in modern AAA games. Why can't all games be like RE2 remake...just let us play the damn game and leave the story to cutscenes.
I sort of agree, but I havent yet read their review. Most of the time I was free to move around during for instance the train sections. Which also gives you the ability to just skip most of the conversations that happen there. The times that the game takes control from you are usually story moments, or important conversations for the main plot. I get why they do that and won't really hold it against the game.
 
Oct 27, 2017
6,960
By definition it cannot look "more natural". You can argue the artistic merits of the scene, but the lights are placed in such a way as to approximate what RTX is doing by default. RTX is expensive, and you might prefer the look of faked lighting more, but that does not make it more realistic. However RTX/Raytracing will definitely be used more in the future, as it can drastically cut the workload of studios and gives better results on average.

Even if Rays are bouncing, the soft and translucent surfaces are not accurate with the RTX. There is something bad with how the fur/foliage occludes with the RTX on.

RTX is not unbiased, it is gimped and tweaked by the lighting/technical artists. It is also affected by the tricks which developers use for the fur, transparency, and SSS. In this case, the light on the plants does not look right, and the rabbit looks like it is made from the completely different material. Perhaps the simple lighting allows for the better SSS/transparency on the leaves, where RTX skims on the rays passing through the object.
 

SaiyanRaoh

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
267
New York
In the days of battle royale this and co-op that. The fact that is SINGLE player, OFFline game can exist today can make me overlook the platform (Epic) it's on and any minor issues the game has. Every time I think of "retiring" from modern gaming to focus on backlogs and emulation, something like this comes out.
 
Oct 27, 2017
822
We need to understand this gen reviewers are not complacent with games anymore. Scores are more accurate this gen.

But I was expecting a little bit more from this one. Maybe in 1 year when arrives at Steam with 66% off.

Can't really see the relevance of your reply when the parallel I drew in my post was to a sequel and its predecessor, Wolfenstein, released in this generation and how its scores shifted within this very generation in which there are these, or so you claim, less complacent reviewers.

You're also kidding yourself if you think pre-release anticipation/buzz/hype fueled by more mainstream coverage doesn't inform subsequent scores which are sometimes disconnected from the wider reception from players themselves i.e. Red Dead 2 and some of its backlash, and again, Wolfenstein: TNC which was scored higher than the first game yet, for some, there wasn't a clear leap in quality between the two or that it was inferior to the first game.
 

Firefly

Member
Jul 10, 2018
8,621
I am just going to off-quote the developers and say every single outdoor scene of this game looks better as a result of Ray Tracing: it is more physically accurate by far than the other solution they have. That red glow there? Yeah, that is not supposed to be there - a common problem the game's standard GI has with making objects in shadow facing side overly glow.
I will cross post here, but notice how objects glow here? Yeah that is what you are seeing, a physical innacuracy -
Back when games were implementing some sort of GI model the comparisons in favor of it always showed how the "glow" is a result of indirect lighting. With RTX, it seems to be the opposite? (though more phsyically accurate as you said) So comparisons like these are incorrect implementations of simulating GI?

https://images.nvidia.com/geforce-c...ion-interactive-comparison-001-on-vs-off.html

The bottom picture in your quoted post does indeed look much better to me.

Edit: I think I'm misinterpreting what you mean by glow.
 
Last edited:

plagiarize

Eating crackers
Moderator
Oct 25, 2017
27,511
Cape Cod, MA
Even if Rays are bouncing, the soft and translucent surfaces are not accurate with the RTX. There is something bad with how the fur/foliage occludes with the RTX on.

RTX is not unbiased, it is gimped and tweaked by the lighting/technical artists. It is also affected by the tricks which developers use for the fur, transparency, and SSS. In this case, the light on the plants does not look right, and the rabbit looks like it is made from the completely different material. Perhaps the simple lighting allows for the better SSS/transparency on the leaves, where RTX skims on the rays passing through the object.
If the developers are saying that the RTX on version is closer to their vision, that's good enough for me. I didn't try to reduce the dark blue 'blacks' of RE2 when I played it in HDR, because whether I preferred the aesthetic or not, it was how the game was meant to look.

I'd rather go with what the devs prefer and judge it on it's own failings or merits vs how I'd prefer it looked. Each to their own though.

That said, the specific comparison you highlight, if I'm looking at it right (and I might not be, I haven't watched the video it's from) it appears to be late in the day given the length of the shadows. That kind of low light would lend itself to darker shadows. Even if I'm wrong about the time of day the shadows should be greenish, not reddish, because the light passing through the leaves should be picking up the color of those leaves.

Both scenes seem to have an issue handling solid things the same as transparent things though. The shadows of the foliage and the shadows of the tree or rabbit in both images seem equally dark. Transmissive items like leaves currently pose a bit of a problem for ray tracing, mainly due to them increasing your ray counts unless you simplify them and treat them as opaque. In time they'll be handled better... but I'm not seeing them handled *worse* here.
 

MHWilliams

Member
Oct 25, 2017
10,473
Over at USG, we gave it a 3.5 out of 5.

The combat might be a difficult pleasure, but it isn't nearly enough to make me want to trudge through multiple repetitive objectives out in the open world of Metro Exodus.

4A's Metro series rose to cult glory in the dark, deranged environments of the Moscow underground, so it's no major surprise that the strengths of Metro Exodus lie in what 4A Games has typically excelled at. There's one linear chapter that arrives in the first half of Metro Exodus... It's a brilliant, haunting section in which you move through makeshift hospital wings and prison cells, and nothing else in Metro Exodus comes close to topping this grisly hour-long sequence.

As the conclusion to the Metro trilogy, Metro Exodus gives closure to key characters that we've spent time with for multiple games now.
 

rashbeep

Member
Oct 27, 2017
9,458
Is it me or is this RTX stuff way overhyped? Watched numerous videos on YouTube and I don't find the differences that noticeable. Totally not worth it if you see what hit the framerate takes.

I'd go that far and say that an RTX user probably won't immediately notice it if the feature got turned off by accident without him/her knowing.

maybe in the case of bfv where if you're not looking at a reflective surface you can't really see the benefit, and also ssr seems to do a decent enough job for most people. i can count on one hand the games i think do ambient lighting well, and this is in a league of its own in that area
 

Sinder

Banned
Jul 24, 2018
7,576
I don't agree about looking better part. It's certain hit or miss. For example, in this scene, RTS off looks much better, more natural and more pleasing to the eye. And that FPS difference is just mind boggling.

cpPrdXd.jpg


fPDKfLe.jpg

Pleasing to the eye is subjective imo, but I don't see how you can argue dxr lighting doesn't have a more naturalistic quality to it in every example, even this one.
 

chrominance

Sky Van Gogh
Member
Oct 25, 2017
13,581
That's the thing though, I don't think they're weird. I think it means video games are at the point where the worst AAA game is probably going to be competent at worst. It'll probably have good graphics and decent gameplay, and if some random person picks it up they'll probably have an okay time with it. It's a game that is deserving of a 70 (or w/e it theoretically gets scored). A publisher like Ubisoft is most likely not going to put out a game that is bad. It might be mediocre, but it doesn't deserve a score of a 20 just because the average game is good now. It deserves the 70 that an average game like it would have always received.

For me it's kinda comparable to exams in classes. If the average student in a class is passing a test because they studied, that doesn't mean you should adjust the scale to where half of them now fail. It just means that the average student in that class has a good enough understanding of the material to pass. The best of those students will still score higher and differentiate themselves, same way that games like God of War differentiate themselves from some average action game that does a lot of things competently but doesn't stand out. The average video game is going to have enough time and money put into it that it'll do most things well enough to at least be average. Scores are for consumers, so I don't think adjusting the scale to where that 70 game is now graded as a 20 would benefit anyone, it would just make them think the game is worse than it is.

I'm getting pretty off topic though.

Heh, at the risk of taking things even further off-topic:

I kind of agree with everything you say, but I think I draw a different conclusion. I wouldn't necessarily score that 70 game a 20 now. I also don't think we actually get that many 70-and-below games anymore; they're all within a fairly narrow band of 75-85. But if all these games are essentially good enough for most people to play, then what's the point of saying one's a 78 and one's an 82? What does that four-point difference even represent anymore, and why do hundreds of forum warriors continue to throw themselves into the fray overy a few measly review points that really don't matter in the grand scheme of things?

I think the reason to start scoring games on a harsher curve is just to better tease out those differences, so that two games with a four-point difference are actually more of an eight or nine-point difference, making the score feel more meaningful and less like statistical noise. But I'm also totally in favour of just dropping scores altogether or using intentionally vague scores to force people to read reviews to get a better sense of the game.

Anyways. I recall both 2033 and Last Light getting middling reviews, and I enjoyed both games immensely, so I see nothing here to contradict my initial thoughts on the game except for the runtime. 10-15 hours of Metro might feel very different to me than 25+ hours of Metro, so we'll have to see if this significantly dents my enjoyment of the game.
 

Marble

Banned
Nov 27, 2017
3,819
NuMiQ Thanks for the info. Can you tell us more about the HDR in the game. It's it good and is there a luminance slider?
 

Blade Wolf

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
9,512
Taiwan
I sort of agree, but I havent yet read their review. Most of the time I was free to move around during for instance the train sections. Which also gives you the ability to just skip most of the conversations that happen there. The times that the game takes control from you are usually story moments, or important conversations for the main plot. I get why they do that and won't really hold it against the game.

Thanks, that's a lot better than I thought, still I wish AAA games would cut down on the unskippable non-gameplay stuff.
 

NuMiQ

Member
Oct 25, 2017
599
The Netherlands
Can you tell us more about the HDR in the game. It's it good and is there a luminance slider?
Hm, haven't had the chance to try out HDR yet. My setup is not really powerful or calibrated or anything, but I do have an HDR capable tv hooked up.
I'll see if I can give you a rough impression.
I'll leave the incredibly technical stuff to the people who really know what they're talking about, like Dictator and DarkX.
 

butman

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt account
Banned
Oct 30, 2017
3,024
Is it me or is this RTX stuff way overhyped? Watched numerous videos on YouTube and I don't find the differences that noticeable. Totally not worth it if you see what hit the framerate takes.

I'd go that far and say that an RTX user probably won't immediately notice it if the feature got turned off by accident without him/her knowing.

Same here. Sticking with my 1060.
 

Trice

Banned
Nov 3, 2018
2,653
Croatia
Is it me or is this RTX stuff way overhyped? Watched numerous videos on YouTube and I don't find the differences that noticeable. Totally not worth it if you see what hit the framerate takes.

I'd go that far and say that an RTX user probably won't immediately notice it if the feature got turned off by accident without him/her knowing.
RTX is in it's conception. It's great tech but it'll take half a decade until all the quirks are solved and it's readily available and affordable to everyone and becomes the industry standard. It's not worth investing in it at the moment.
 

Blade Wolf

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
9,512
Taiwan
Then you really dont want narrative driven AAA games , do you?

Narrative doesn't mean no gameplay
Plenty of games tell their narrative through engaging dialogue choices and playable levels.
and I'm not against cutscenes since they are entirely skippable on replay.

I'm only against unskippable non-gameplay storytelling that's all.
You know, those forced slow walking and fancy in-game animation set pieces.
 

leng jai

Member
Nov 2, 2017
15,117
There goes the hope of being the "TW3" of the franchise. Will still likely enjoy the hell out of the game but I'm not expecting them to have fixed the issues of the first 2 games after these reviews.
 

Scott Lufkin

Member
Dec 7, 2017
1,457
Requoting so you guys don't think I just upped and forgot about you ;)
Just as an upfront: I think an 8.1 is an excellent grade, the word next to the score is 'Geweldig', which roughly translates to excellent or awesome.
Which is an apt description of how I feel about the game.
However, there are still issues. As you asked me for them, I'll post some here, but don't mistake this for me being very down on the game. Again, I gave it an 81, which in my book is still an excellent score.
Most of my gripes are with the pacing and some of the gameplay elements. The crafting is too simplistic and because there are only 2 crafting elements, you are not encouraged (except on higher difficulties) to check out all the world has to offer.
General gunplay is somewhat decent, but not nearly where I would like to see it. I'm not expecting some instant point and shoot gibbage, but right now some of the guns feel a little off to me. I'm a big fan of the new crossbow however.
The general story I thought was excellent and I found the cast charming. Standing around for 20 minutes while they tell you stories is not my idea of fun however. At some point I would've rather just read it, so I can set my own pace and not have to wait for someone to finish talking. I literally just lit up a cigarette on the train sections and settled in with a drink until they were done. The content itself isnt bad as such, but it's the presentation that bugs me.
The vehicle sections (boats and car) feel kind of off and dont really add anything, except give you a way to get around quicker, while skipping exploration, which I think would be more interesting, especially with how full and vibrant the world is. It feels as though they had intended to do more with the car, but the map in which they wanted to do it got cut or smth. For instance, you bring the car with you on the train, and it's there in the end, but only for a small linear section.
The AI is rather shit on lower difficulties, and tbh it's still nothing to write home about on the higher ones. I did really enjoy the way they convey what they are doing and how aware they are of your presence through speech.
Overall, I did really enjoy my time with the game, but I can imagine someone who does not enjoy story as much, will come away with a very different impression. It very much feels like a Metro game, warts and all. I hope they make another one soon.

Oh, this is perfect, thanks for the info! That sums up most if not all of the negatives I've seen so far. I can see some of that being frustrating without having to experience it (such as the cut-scenes, ouch) and some of it I can see would be a negative for some but probably won't bother me too much (simplified crafting, for instance). I'll find out in a few days for sure, certainly.
 

Marble

Banned
Nov 27, 2017
3,819
RTX is in it's conception. It's great tech but it'll take half a decade until all the quirks are solved and it's readily available and affordable to everyone and becomes the industry standard. It's not worth investing in it at the moment.

Do you perhaps know a good video really showing the benefits?
 

Sinder

Banned
Jul 24, 2018
7,576
RTX is in it's conception. It's great tech but it'll take half a decade until all the quirks are solved and it's readily available and affordable to everyone and becomes the industry standard. It's not worth investing in it at the moment.

Not worth it to you. People have to make up their own minds by looking at the comparison shots themselves. To me it's huge, to others it's whatever.
 

Scott Lufkin

Member
Dec 7, 2017
1,457
Is it me or is this RTX stuff way overhyped? Watched numerous videos on YouTube and I don't find the differences that noticeable. Totally not worth it if you see what hit the framerate takes.

I'd go that far and say that an RTX user probably won't immediately notice it if the feature got turned off by accident without him/her knowing.

It's not just you, and I'm a video guy. Certainly when viewed side by side there are differences, but one doesn't really look worse than the other to me. However, it's hard to parse looking at compressed YouTube videos vs. sitting in front of it as well, so it's tough to get a good sense of things. Since I have yet to encounter someone that has sat in front of the RTX enabled games and complain, it's probably well worth the price of admission, even now when it's still relatively new tech.

That said, I just bought a 1080 Ti last summer and don't feel the need to jump onto the RTX band wagon just yet. Maybe in a few years, I'll want to upgrade my video card and when that happens, I'll gladly go back and replay old favorites, like I assume Metro Exodus will become.
 

hydro94530

Chicken Chaser
Member
Oct 27, 2017
6,851
Bay Area
I certainly recommend it if you've played the previous games.

Can you answers a couple things if you have a chance? If you play on ranger hardcore, do you still get prompts or at least some sort of highlight for pickups in the environments? Also can you see your current ammo counts and general status of supplies?

One thing I didn't like about Metro 2033's ranger hardcore was because of this. I don't mind the harder everything on this setting, but if I literally have to guess how much ammo I have and physically scour the environment for pickups that usually tend to blend in, then I might have to skip that and just go with just hardcore mode. I think Last Light's hardest difficulty was much better simply because of small things like these. Thanks in advance.
 

Owl

Member
Oct 25, 2017
10,094
California
Does Ranger Hardcore have more difficult enemies or less supplies compared to regular hardcore, or is it just harder by more weapon jamming, less repair stations, and less on the HUD?
 
Jan 15, 2018
840
Up to an 84 for the PC version, the game is reviewing better than I thought. I'm a massive fan of these games and the universe, but I'll be the first to admit that your mileage may vary.
 

Edgar

User requested ban
Banned
Oct 29, 2017
7,180
Narrative doesn't mean no gameplay
Plenty of games tell their narrative through engaging dialogue choices and playable levels.
and I'm not against cutscenes since they are entirely skippable on replay.

I'm only against unskippable non-gameplay storytelling that's all.
You know, those forced slow walking and fancy in-game animation set pieces.
I'm not opposed to them, as long as it's Making a point in a narrative or makes sense for a character. And I'm certainly one of those people that like elaborate animations/set pieces as long as it's fitting the game and executed well
There goes the hope of being the "TW3" of the franchise. Will still likely enjoy the hell out of the game but I'm not expecting them to have fixed the issues of the first 2 games after these reviews.
I don't know if we gonna see TW3 moment of particular franchise, similarly we never had another AC2, UC2 moment in particular series either
 

Blade Wolf

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
9,512
Taiwan
I agree with the VideoGamerTV that the gunplay needs to be tighter.
The gunplay in metro games always feels like they are clunky and slow, like the recoil just feels delayed and weird.

The gameplay loop itself is of course extremely good which is why I love Metro games but good god was the shooting dated.
 
Oct 27, 2017
3,893
ATL
Question for those who already have the game, does this game punish you narratively for killing enemies? I hated the fact that I was forced to use stealth in many sections of the first two games if I wanted the better ending.
 

Marble

Banned
Nov 27, 2017
3,819
I agree with the VideoGamerTV that the gunplay needs to be tighter.
The gunplay in metro games always feels like they are clunky and slow, like the recoil just feels delayed and weird.

The gameplay loop itself is of course extremely good which is why I love Metro games but good god was the shooting dated.

No idea what you're talking about. Finished both Redux versions last week and the gunplay is awesome and punchy. It's probably not for you then.
 

floridaguy954

Member
Oct 29, 2017
3,631
I don't agree about looking better part. It's certain hit or miss. For example, in this scene, RTS off looks much better, more natural and more pleasing to the eye. And that FPS difference is just mind boggling.

cpPrdXd.jpg


fPDKfLe.jpg
I don't agree. The RTX on picture simulates realistic lighting vs the 'stylistic' lighting of the first picture. Shadows aren't that dark in real life.
 

shadowhaxor

EIC of Theouterhaven
Verified
Oct 27, 2017
1,728
Claymont, Delaware
Question for those who already have the game, does this game punish you narratively for killing enemies? I hated the fact that I was forced to use stealth in many sections of the first two games if I wanted the better ending.
Yes, it does. Dialogue changes, asking why you had to kill X. Or why did you do it a different way? It does also tie into what ending you get.
 

DodgeAnon

Member
Oct 25, 2017
805
Watching TwoAngryGamers stream this currently on Twitch and the RTX looks phenomenal, even on stream.

Can't wait to play it!
 

ArnoldJRimmer

Banned
Aug 22, 2018
1,322
I don't agree about looking better part. It's certain hit or miss. For example, in this scene, RTS off looks much better, more natural and more pleasing to the eye. And that FPS difference is just mind boggling.
Is it me or is this RTX stuff way overhyped? Watched numerous videos on YouTube and I don't find the differences that noticeable. Totally not worth it if you see what hit the framerate takes.

I'd go that far and say that an RTX user probably won't immediately notice it if the feature got turned off by accident without him/her knowing.


On some screenshots, the difference is not just obvious, but IMHO near a generational leap: You can see how fake/video gamey the non RTX shots look.

rtbounce3off07jc3.png


rtbounce3onopjj9.png

rtxoff8jkiv.png


rtxonk5krf.png