The differences between the Metro 2033 books and the games

"Metro 2033" is a real phenomenon (okay, wait, it already was)...
Dmitry Glukhovsky created a real outlet for the Russian reader, and the games (no, it's more like a conclusion)...
Karoch, if about the prevailing value and integrity of the game world over the book in the case of The Witcher majority has long ago decided everything for himself, the debate about a more successful incarnation of the post-Soviet post-apocalyptic world of "Metro" is not that not subside, but to a general consensus few have come. Proof of this for me were the comments under the recent (f*ck, it's been almost half a year) History of the Series. So, why don't I (a person with very superficial knowledge of both the world and the details of the books and the world and the details of the games) tell a superficial and extremely subjective truth that no one needs, by way of a slightly more detailed comparison than I had in that very same History of the Series, but also very superficially.

Let's start with the most similar thing: the plot, because in the game it was transferred quite... canonically. But the book, expectedly, gives more context. It devotes a lot more time to Artyom's life on the station, his relationship with his stepfather, his friends, his dreams, his experiences, talks about his mother, who was eaten alive by rats when he was very young. The game can't encompass all of this in its timeline, making it feel like Exodus is a train on the rails of the book's plot. In the book, Artyom will have to hang on a Nazi necktie, and sold into slavery to rake up slop at the central station, and the cultists to argue and philosophical speeches from ghosts, and a prisoner of cannibals to visit.

In general, the book looks at times more intense. Moreover, the events in it are sequential, and you watch them not in fast-forward, but quite measured... so measured... that I once abandoned it for two and a half years, as I think Fen did, and all the others who say that the book is hopelessly boring and the game has no such factor. And I wholeheartedly agree with them. Well, not entirely (and not entirely), but the moments where the book sags quite a bit are visible to the untrained eye, and I could even pick them out for myself. Moments where nothing important happens for the plot, for character development, and the lore is revealed in a very strained way - station descriptions. That is, the thing the game did best: to show the atmosphere of the life of common people in the subway, when you hear that some kid is asking for a rat on a stick, another kid's mother lost her, some guy quarrels with his wife, and someone shouts at the whole neighborhood about the sale of some junk - it's awesome! Alas, it's the most boring moment possible in the book.

But when it comes to some unknown fucking game, Glukhovsky can really get the creepy stuff going. Despite the fact that, again, such scenes don't carry any important information, and to restore a coherent idea of the lore from such scenes you can except to make some abstract theories, in a proper state, which I was in during the second reading, the book can put you in a normal such a trance, and you really start to penetrate into this world. For example, the moment when Artem is already walking in the tunnel in front of Polis (the place he was going halfway through the book) he gets lost, hears something in his head, gasps, stumbles, turns around three times, eventually chooses a random direction, and just runs through it as fast as he can until his heart stops. The film opens with a brief glimpse into the history of the Terrorist Fighting Network and a later episode in which Artyom encounters the Librarians, who are becoming more and more involved with the Librarians' work. In the end, Artyom meets ONE Librarian picking at this moment in the guts of Artyom's still-alive comrade, and then this thing starts repeating human words, as if understanding their meaning is strong. Unfortunately, in the game these moments are extremely sterile, and directly atmosfernuyu scene I remember only at the very first exit into the subway tunnel, and not even in the original "Metro 2033", and in "Redux", where it is made more competent to build suspense.

The real divergence begins in the development of the Metro concept in the sequels.
"Metro 2034" is much more local than its predecessor. Moreover, it reveals nothing new about the world of the universe, and those very trance moments are either absent or so few that I forgot about them. Anyway, this book isn't about monsters, it isn't about the underground, it isn't about atmosphere, you could say it's about people, but with a big stretch, because it's about LOVE, about humanity and about the miracle that could come if you really wanted it. I'm not messing around, the "last romantic story of a lost world" is written on the back cover of the book, and we'll talk about that later. What's important is that there's nothing here that the first book was loved for, and therefore no development of the original's concept. Gone are almost all the jokes and irony on the part of the main character, with which the entire second half of the first book was replete. It's funny how it all sounds like some fan's rant, although I, firstly, am not a fan at all, and secondly, I'm not on fire at all; right now I'm typing this with the kind of pokerface I couldn't have dreamed of in 6th grade, but we (I) have digressed. There's exactly one entertaining thing about this whole book for me: it features the character Homer, who as the narrative progresses, writes a book about all the things he experiences on his journey through the subway, a book that everyone should remember. The fact that this character is in Metro 2035, and in the course of the narration and reaches the reader that all of Metro 2034 "and is his book. This explains the locality and shifted emphasis on the love story, and Deus Ex Machin'u, who stumped me in the finale, and that puts the final cross on the need to read this book.

In Metro 2035, Glukhovsky decided to develop the idea of a world beyond Moscow. It all begins with the fact that Artyom, at the end of the first book, at the moment of launching missiles from the tower on the Blacks with the lateral vision of the seventh sense noticed some otherworldly signal, and now he is obsessed with catching it again and discovering life outside of Moscow.
The direction of the story has changed again, replacing the romantic tale with a cinematic conspiracy scenario. Things constantly revolve around some mystery: the mystery of the Nazis, the mystery of the Reds, the mystery of the Order, the mystery of the Jew-Masons, which poured into stunning scenes that would have looked a hundred times more appropriate on the big screen. And I don't call it "screenplay" for nothing, because the description of the world finally took the back seat to the description of the concrete scenes, and the local dialogues are more like a handout to the actors on the set than the dialogues in the book. Sometimes it comes to some absurd stream of consciousness on the type:
-It's like this.





-A horse in the coat!
And it could go on for two pages, and it's just impossible to read (thankfully it occurs only three or four times per book).
This time the author really got into the politics (at certain moments the cultural imagery became so prominent and so foreheaded that I was starting to worry about his physical health).
It's funny how one can reconstruct the evolution of his attitude towards the world from Glukhovsky's books:
"2033" - the first discovery of the world with its wars, diseases, disappointments and hopelessness

"2034" - falling in love, the discovery of life's values and finding one's purpose in life.
"2035" - fighting windmills and sending everyone away.

To me, the "Metro" series is the best possible games and screen adaptation, because there's nothing better than to make the beginning on the canonical rails, and then, following DND'ologists example, break those rails to hell and start developing the concept in the opposite direction. That way you don't just get "Things are bad," as they have been in all the books, but "Things are bad, but sometimes springtime comes." That's why Metro isn't The Witcher, because The Witcher 3 (yeah, yeah, imba, I know) is better than ALL the Heralt books (I haven't read Ciri). CD Project had an opportunity to cram into the game for 300 hours everything that was in the four books, and they crammed it, they had an opportunity to work it all in at the highest level, and they did it: there's political intrigue with plots, and Senior Blood prophecies from the last two books as a main plot, and small self-contained stories from the first two as numerous quests. The games and the Metro 2033 books simply tell different stories and can work for different audiences. For some, the nerdiness, foreheaded thinking and depressive attitude puts a crimp on the books, and for others, the games are put a crimp on not outstanding shooter content, the curvature of certain gameplay moments and voice acting. That's why I won't dare to say what's better, the books or the games. games, books, metro 2033, blogs Write a comment Total comments: 4