The Metro games have moral actions and deeds you can do, but short of maybe 2-3 instances they never present you with an outright moral choice to your face.
Still, after Exodus I'm not too optimistic about the future of the franchise as-is.
The issue with Exodus can be summarised simply by saying that it took too many steps out of its niche and into the broad, generic, open-world games we've seen done a hundred times before.
It's not outright bad but it fails miserably at being a good Metro game. The world is much less interesting than the Moscow Metro (which had the chance to be fleshed out significantly in the books), and the story is so dumb that they (spoilers for Metro 2035) ran with a story and reason which Artyom pokes holes in in the book and which turns out to be a quickly-thought-up cover story for what's really going on. Not that it really matters as after the first half hour it just drops you into an "open" world, lets you waste more time walking around with nothing to do than actually doing anything interesting, then a few hours later just rinses and repeats.
If you really need your Metro fix then there are worse sequels in the world of games, but I consider Exodus to be the Fallout 4 to 2033 and LL's Fallout 3 and New Vegas - a lot of the magic is gone.
I have Exodus on my wishlist, what made you dislike it? First two games were pretty great. I actually liked the corridor-shooter aspect of it, so whilst I am not too thrilled about it being more open world that alone didn't deter me.
The issue with Exodus can be summarised simply by saying that it took too many steps out of its niche and into the broad, generic, open-world games we've seen done a hundred times before.
It's not outright bad but it fails miserably at being a good Metro game. The world is much less interesting than the Moscow Metro (which had the chance to be fleshed out significantly in the books), and the story is so dumb that they (spoilers for Metro 2035) ran with a story and reason which Artyom pokes holes in in the book and which turns out to be a quickly-thought-up cover story for what's really going on. Not that it really matters as after the first half hour it just drops you into an "open" world, lets you waste more time walking around with nothing to do than actually doing anything interesting, then a few hours later just rinses and repeats.
If you really need your Metro fix then there are worse sequels in the world of games, but I consider Exodus to be the Fallout 4 to 2033 and LL's Fallout 3 and New Vegas - a lot of the magic is gone.
The Metro games have moral actions and deeds you can do, but short of maybe 2-3 instances they never present you with an outright moral choice to your face.
Still, after Exodus I'm not too optimistic about the future of the franchise as-is.
Was Exodus bad? I've got it in my backlog.
The issue with Exodus can be summarised simply by saying that it took too many steps out of its niche and into the broad, generic, open-world games we've seen done a hundred times before.
It's not outright bad but it fails miserably at being a good Metro game. The world is much less interesting than the Moscow Metro (which had the chance to be fleshed out significantly in the books), and the story is so dumb that they (spoilers for Metro 2035) ran with a story and reason which Artyom pokes holes in in the book and which turns out to be a quickly-thought-up cover story for what's really going on. Not that it really matters as after the first half hour it just drops you into an "open" world, lets you waste more time walking around with nothing to do than actually doing anything interesting, then a few hours later just rinses and repeats.
If you really need your Metro fix then there are worse sequels in the world of games, but I consider Exodus to be the Fallout 4 to 2033 and LL's Fallout 3 and New Vegas - a lot of the magic is gone.
I have Exodus on my wishlist, what made you dislike it? First two games were pretty great. I actually liked the corridor-shooter aspect of it, so whilst I am not too thrilled about it being more open world that alone didn't deter me.
The issue with Exodus can be summarised simply by saying that it took too many steps out of its niche and into the broad, generic, open-world games we've seen done a hundred times before.
It's not outright bad but it fails miserably at being a good Metro game. The world is much less interesting than the Moscow Metro (which had the chance to be fleshed out significantly in the books), and the story is so dumb that they (spoilers for Metro 2035) ran with a story and reason which Artyom pokes holes in in the book and which turns out to be a quickly-thought-up cover story for what's really going on. Not that it really matters as after the first half hour it just drops you into an "open" world, lets you waste more time walking around with nothing to do than actually doing anything interesting, then a few hours later just rinses and repeats.
If you really need your Metro fix then there are worse sequels in the world of games, but I consider Exodus to be the Fallout 4 to 2033 and LL's Fallout 3 and New Vegas - a lot of the magic is gone.