213
rate

Metro 2033 and Fallout 3: Contrasting Apocalypses - How they compare

March 26, 2010 in Blog comments 7

Some have been saying that Metro 2033 is a close take on Fallout 3, so we set our writer on the task of seeing just how they really compared.

Come check out his results and what he has to say on the matter. Personally I can see similarities, but that's about all, for me, they are poles apart.

A society being rebuilt after the fallout of a nuclear war? Sounds familiar…

Metro 2033, developed by 4A Games and published by THQ is the newest first person shooter on the Xbox 360.

Adapted from a novel by Russian author Dmitry Glukhovsky, Metro 2033 throws you in to a world where a nuclear fallout has left Russia contaminated, and the survivors have been pushed underground into the Moscow subway.

Now they are in a desperate struggle to rebuild society fighting against 3 other rebelious groups, and to fight off not only mutants but also Paranormal forces known as Dark ones.
XboxOZ360 via oxcgn.com »
Favourite this article Add source
| More
Report!
News story attached to:
Images about this story:

Comments

Register as a member to subscribe comments.
  • 0
    Daweii Mar 26, 10
    Metro 2033 looks interesting..
  • 0
    Province Mar 26, 10
    It's pretty good, I was a bit pissed its Xbox only (THQ cutting costs atm)
    • 0
      Gamesta100 Mar 26, 10
      Yeah I would like to play it but I have 0 plans on getting a 360.
  • 0
    XboxOZ360 Mar 26, 10
    Having spent a great deal of time following the game since 2008, and having had 2 lots of hands on time with it before release, I can attest to the fact that th egame in huge in the true sense of the word.

    The underground Metro System is almost 100 stations and sections, all of which make up a level of two.. Now given that we once had a 4hr hands-on, and only progressed say 2-4 levels, imagaine the time spance if you wanted to flesh this game out, and, get scare to your wits in the process.

    I was in a room with editors from IGN-Au, GameSopt-Au, several other major game sites, and at one time or another, we all let out girly screams of fright, followed by bouts of obsenities, then more screams.

    SO yes, the game is great, just get it, you will NOT be disappointed.
  • 0
    XboxOZ360 Mar 26, 10
    NO, the developers decided that the PC and 360 were the best choice for them, not THQ,4AGames started on the game years ago, and only release pre-alpha code and vids in 2008, so even then they had made their mind up on just PC and 360, so they could imply devote time on working in the game, rather than trying to make it fit different platforms.

    Their team isn't huge, and just not big enough to handle working on a PS3 version as well as the other two . . as PS3 teams require more ppl on-board, and plus their funds were only on level with AA titles, not AAA titles.

    Hey, just borrow a mates 360, rent the game, you'll love it.
    • 0
      Gamesta100 Mar 26, 10
      Only one of my friends owns a 360 and he lives 4 hours away.

      But honestly I don't give a shit what games I miss out on.I would love to play the Gears and the L4D's (my PC couldn't run the L4D's) but honestly not being able to play them doesn't bother me in the slightest.


      I replied to you because I just posted a comment saying I would like to play the game but don't own a 360.
  • 0
    Province Mar 26, 10
    Exactly, like frontlines: Fuels of war. They started with the scope of multi-platform then came to the conclusion they wouldn't be able to fund that so narrowed it to PC & Xbox as both follow similiar code and focusing on that they could make a better game for it.

This news story is archived and is closed to comments now.