Metro 2033 surpassed Crysis as graphical powerhouse 10 years ago. why it never got recognization?

Hello friends,

So everything graphical powerhouse for its time discuss, Crysis being mentioned. the meme "can it run Crysis?" become very popular among fanbase but it was surpassed 3 years later by Metro 2033 especially in indoor department where Crysis looks less impressive.

Heres the proof

This is original version of Metro 2033, no redux. look at lighting. Cant believe it was 10 years old game for its time it was unbelievable and here Crysis

The textures are not really that strong and draw distance suck here as i remember rock disappeared when you aim down the sights.

Here check its character model

and compare to Metro

Definitely character models also looks better. sure theres some areas where Crysis looks superior but overall Metro surpassed it.

But I never understood why did Metro not get recognizable as graphical powerhouse compare to Crysis? is it because it was little indie game for its time compare to mainstream game Crysis?

because its popular and mainstream games that always get recognization.

what do you think? lets discuss

As long as you exist my freind, it will be over-recognized.

Don't you get tired making same old threads about Metro or Doom or Stalker? 🤣😂😅

Metro Exodus is Crysis of this gen in bigger scale. it got overlooked because not mainstream enough.

lol. Metro is definitely the most overhyped series by Ghost. AA game at most.

Simple answer: It was recognized as the bar setter and clearly showed what the future will look like but it didn't surpass Crysis entirely.

While it had newer graphical features in the form of DX 11, tessellation and dynamic lighting. It lacked in many others like scope, scale, physics and overall no. of AI.

Metro is a boring series that no one cares about.

Metro was a linear corridor shooter with minimal exploration. Crysis was an open-world shooter with completely open exploration. Metro 2033 came out in 2010. Crysis came out in 2007. You specifically sought out clips of Crysis that looked worse than the rest of the game. You specifically sought out clips of Metro 2033 that looked better than the rest of the game.

Here's an 1080p screenshot of Metro 2033 running on a modern PC in 2019 with an RTX2080 card, taken directly from the video you posted:

Here's a 1200x675 screenshot taken from Crysis running on the f*ckingXbox 360 at 720p:

Are lobotomy's still legal where you live, Ghost? Because I sometimes worry that you've had one.

/thread

What? I remember praising it a bunch, and saw a lot of people doing the same. TW2 and Metro2033 were the shit back then.

Exodus had some huge issues, but it was my favourite game of 2019 (along with Jedi)

The shooting feels fantastic and I love how slow paced it all feels. Having the pump your flashlight before it gives out, having to wipe your gasmask when it gets dirty, ... It all makes for a very immersive experience. It's just a game where you start playing and everything it does is try to immerse you.

Because for a game that came out 3 years later it wasn’t such a benchmark. Especially since it was way smaller in scope than Crysis and nowhere near as revolutionary.

@IMAHAPYHIPPO said:

Metro was a linear corridor shooter with minimal exploration. Crysis was an open-world shooter with completely open exploration. Metro 2033 came out in 2010. Crysis came out in 2007. You specifically sought out clips of Crysis that looked worse than the rest of the game. You specifically sought out clips of Metro 2033 that looked better than the rest of the game.

Here's an 1080p screenshot of Metro 2033 running on a modern PC in 2019 with an RTX2080 card, taken directly from the video you posted:

Here's a 1200x675 screenshot taken from Crysis running on the f*ckingXbox 360 at 720p:

Are lobotomy's still legal where you live, Ghost? Because I sometimes worry that you've had one.

/thread

you pick screenshot of Metro when someone running in motion and having hit by enemy thus screen turn red.

further more Crysis after second half turn out linear corridor shooter.

AI is only thing where Crysis better than Metro. also destruction.

other than in every way Metro 2033 was better game. it was just like i said not mainstream title thats why it was overlooked.

see exodus, one of the best game of this gen got overlooked because it was not generic far cry, BF, COD or assasssins creed. its Crysis of this gen but even in bigger scale and more variety.

What I hate with GS is that the trolls always recycle the same bait and shitty threads.

What I don't care for with GS is that the same whiners fall for the same bait and shitty threads.

@SOedipus: I certainly didn’t fall for the weak bait.

Oh, I'm not saying that you did. Just adding to your post.

Simple minds do simple things.

why has ghost's english not improved throughout all the years of posting here. odd

It seems to get worse when he's having his daily outburst.

Crysis looked great at the time with a semi-open world. Metro looked decent, but was extremely linear.

It did get recognition, maybe you were just too young to remember?

Lol OP talking up Exodus. That game was underwhelming compared to 2033 and last light.

@ghosts4ever: Metro Exodus' graphics in 2020 are NOTHING compared Crysis in 2007. Metro Exodus isn't even

Crysis was the consensus overall graphics king 3 years in a row (maybe even 4 or 5) - Metro 2033 looked slightly better but Crysis had bigger environments. so if not Metro, then perhaps Battlefield 3 (2011) which was 4 years(!) after Crysis' launch

Metro Exodus on the other hand isn't even the #1 undisputed graphics king. Star Citizen is infinitely more impressive. Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020, is significantly more graphically advanced. Plague Tale Innocence has better models, lighting, textures, foliage, 3D objects, etc.

It's top 5 somewhere rivalling Red Dead Redemption II.

Crysis 1 : 3-5 years as graphics king

Crysis 3: 2 years as graphics king, until Witcher 3, Star Wars Battlefront came out

Played both games in their original versions recently and can safely say the idea of Metro 2033 looking better than Crysis is absolutely ridiculous.

The textures and density of the environments in Crysis alone laugh at Metro.

Metro 2033 is closer to STALKER in terms of visuals.

The environments in old Metro was drab and lacking variety and color variety so that's an instant downer out of the gate imo.

Crysis core is also better with power suits, taggings, more dynamic combat. Lot's of vestigial varieties like vehicles, water, environmental interactions. it's like the prototype of future games.

@ghosts4ever: It was a more demanding game because of the dx11 features, but crysis was still better looking. There's a reason why metro on the xbox 360 doesn't look too bad compared to the pc version, the crysis version on the pc vs the xbox was a whole different matter.

@commander: crysis is more demanding even today.

Recognization? Metro 2033 was released three years after Crysis 🙄

And it did get recognition. It was a benchmark reference for years for magazines.

I just tried playing this game again for the first time in quite a while, uninstalled pretty soon thereafter. I forgot how it dragged early on.

Or no one gives a shit. I don't know why you would. You're not a gamer, just a forum troll.

Lol metro was the benchmark game that replaced crysis completely. It got massive recognition.

Metro 2033 is good stuff...

Metro was overlooked for the same reason as Crysis 2 and 3: they're linear corridor shooters. What made OG Crysis special was the open world. It was pushing that kind of graphical quality in an open world. It was unrivalled in that regard until maybe Far Cry 3, which came 5 years later and ran on Dunia Engine, an off-spring of Cry Engine.

Same, tried repeatedly to get into Metro. Including it's supposed improved sequels.

The games themselves aren't long compared to many other shooters but still inevitably feel like a slog.

I know this is a bait thread but the answer is easily Crysis.

I wouldn't go that far. The levels are much, much smaller but still fairly sandbox in approach when it comes to enemy encounters, albeit severely dumbed down and artificial feeling.

Like, the alien enemies in 2 were legitimately fun to fight with mostly pretty dam good AI when it wasn't spazzing out, far more fun than the Koreans or Matrix squids from the original.

But that's damming praise, worlds tallest something something

Exactly. I wasn't even close to as impressed as I was by Crysis' graphics.

one reason. it was mainstream AAA game and use bigger budget than Metro.

Metro was little indie game by new developers and manage to looks as good as Crysis and even better in some place like indoor segments. have much better atmosphere too.

by the time in 2013 Metro last light arrive, Crysis feel dated.

You dont see this kind of rain in Crysis. rain in Crysis final mission was not even as good as this.

and as of recent

Metro Exodus did what Crysis did decade ago but in bigger scale

Far bigger world, more variety, obviously better graphics since its new, having customize weapons.

plus its far more challenging than crysis since it use medikit while Crysis was overpowered nanosuit and use regen health.

Metro series is underrated masterpiece and it not get recognization because its not made by giant AAA developers neither it is mainstream enough.

if Metro 2033 was mainstream game the meme would have happenend "can it run Metro"?

they're different kinds of games. one is an adventure / survival horror, the other is a much purer fps. regen health != less challenging by default. and let's not overlook that health does regen on all but the hardest difficulties in exodus. plus scavenging chemicals, crafting, drinking and sleeping besides bonfires wouldn't have made sense in crysis. any kind of health kit scavenge / management would have almost certainly made the game worse. and you know that really don't you ghosts.

same. only the most die hard metro fan would try and make such a claim. hence, this thread

Both of these games look like shit frankly. The graphics simply are objectively horrible and were never good no matter how much hype either game received. For that matter, they're both just bad games, objectively. Please observe here as I post a legitimate graphics king and GOAT, and I'll thank you to accept this as the fact that it is.