Metro 2033 the reason of bad ending

I like your thoughts on it, but I think that the "bad ending" was supposed to follow the book, wich means that they (the Dark Ones) are dead.
As for the Nazis, you always got the reds who battle against them. Thereby the balance of the scale is equal, so they will not grow more than the reds, or there will be a Fourth Reich in the metro, no doubt. ^^

 

I agree with you that it would be stupid to continue on from the good ending, as the bad ending is better for continuity and throws even more unanswered questions at the player. However, I have to say that after completing the game for the second time and getting the good ending, it was nice to feel safer and warmer after crawling through those tunnels again. xD Btw, nice thread idea,

 

Well, in the game itself, the Nazis talks through some speakers, saying they've captured many Reds and gotten them on their side. I fear that the nazis will have a great advantage of number in the end. Hopefully, someone from the old reds will do sabotage within the nazis :3 The worst thing to happen would be that they joined up together, which is less likely, but think about it; Hitler and Stalin became allies in WW2 (If I remember correctly xD).

 

Well, yea but much of the fact that the nazis got was fake in the end. I also believe so here, just cuz the red alos got Cyanide capsuls to kill them selves with. And stalin with Hitler? lol that was meant to go down to hell! xD

 

Well, Mao was worse than Hitler or Stalin, since he killed over 70 million Chinese in peacetime. I get sick of hearing about how evil Hitler was when Mao is scarcely mentioned.

Anyway, yep, the bad ending is the original, and does introduce a few questions.

 

i agree nod2033. i lived in america for 9 years now, and being 1 of 6 russians in a school of 4000 is actually pretty wierd. my history teacher only talked about america and some actually made fun of or discriminated russians not paying attention that i was russian. really made me angry.

 

Well, in the cold war, the Russians kind of were the bad guys..

 

Well, the Communists were the bad guys, just like the Nazis were the bad guys. Not every Russian, or every German, had full knowledge or freedom to act. Most Germans were shocked when they heard about the concentration camps, and the Communists weren't exactly an easy government to stand up to.

Heck, this thread has become pretty serious!

 

Heh, yeah, I meant to put it that way ^.
Anyway, I'm so annoyed. On my first playthrough, I got the bad ending. Then, the second time, I thought "Hey, why not get the good one?". But of course I played it in load game, so my moral points didn't change at all. My third time, I started a new game and did even more to get the moral points. Heck, I even ran around searching for the poor people so I could give them bullets! BUT NOOOO

 

Ha ha, "searching for the poor people. I love it in English, the one old guy goes "Oh my GAWD!" Ha ha!

http://au.faqs.ign.com/articles/107/1078934p1.html

I printed this out, and had it next to me as I played. Just scan it when the level starts, and keep it in mind as you go through it. Some places are very out-of-the-way, and some require extensive searching. You know you've found/done one when the screen goes orange-y and there is a sound. Also, don't steal money from guitar dudes. Also, don't waste the final dark one, just shoot him till he collapses. He should ask "Why?" Hope this helps.

 

Saying that the Communists were the "bad people" is even more of a generalization than saying that all Russians were since it has international meaning. Stalin wasn't a Communist. Maybe he believed he was, but in reality, he was just another rotten tyrant. The Soviet Union overall was a perfect example of what happens when someone fails to create real Communism, twists the system and dominates the masses with their own tyrannical rules for their own, personal, Capitalistic gain. The only differences being that the working class got to do it then and they had an army of poor, brainwashed supporters who were thinking of achieving real Communism whilst their leaders slept on back notes. I would call myself a Communist from a political point of view, yet I'm completely against what the Soviet Union did in the Cold War and before that, even more so, I'm against Stalin's strategies. Does this still make me a "bad guy"? The world isn't divided into good & evil/black & white/red & blue etc. Just different shades of grey.

Anyway, going back on topic; I recommend just opening up the Steam overlay menu when pausing the game and selecting the browser. From there, you can look for walkthroughs made by gamers and websites alike, keeping them open whilst playing the game. However, if you're playing on the 360, then you're gonna have to print some sheets out.

 

I've studied Communism, both USSR and China, and have also had a Czech teacher who had experienced it first hand. Firstly, Communism has never worked as a fair government, for a number of reasons, including corruption, greed, and favoritism (the West also has this problem), but also because the whole idea can't work on a national scale. If everyone is equal, then no-one has authority, and therefore no-one has responsibility. This was clearly shown in China, with the famines they had. Traditionally, the farmers sold their crop, and worked hard to sell more. But then, with Communism, all of the crop was taken by the government, and everyone was given rations, which worked for a while. But the farmers thought "Well, no matter how much food we produce, or how little, everyone receives the same rations". So they just laid back, and eventually this caused a famine.

Going away from history, and looking at the theory of Communism, here are is one major point. Communism claims power and authority shouldn't exist, that everyone is equal. But this cannot work. People need leaders, even animals need a leader in their group (alpha wolf, lion who leads the pride), and there are always people who will rise to this, either by popularity or by force. It's natural. And, since they're working for the good of the whole, these people will gain power, wealth, and prestige. While some may become corrupt, there are numerous examples of honest, good, and fair rulers. Even Communists have some very good points, such as banning prostitution, stopping abortion, and trying to help poorer people. But, unfortunately, the honest workers often get attacked by the government they support (as in the book Wild Swans, by Jung Chang. Jung Chang's father was a model Communist, but in the end he became a political prisoner. Jung Chang herself was in the Red Guard, and wrote her experiences of Communist China in the book).

Don't take this personally, please! Serious topics will always seem aggressive, but it's just an exchange of opinions, nothing more. Good to see people thinking seriously!

 

thank you von! i know a lot of people and even TEACHERS who say false ideas about communism and blame it for everything on earht without fully understanding it. I personally am kinda toward the Socialism side / point of view but totally agree with your statement...

 

I agree with almost everything you said in your post, as you are speaking the truth. But I've heard the "natural leader" argument against Communism many times. Simply laying back and saying we have to have a leader will not help - why not try to change our nature? Let's evolve. We can do it. After all, it's natural for people to live off others for their own personal gain; yet people somehow managed to change that and there are people in the world who work together not because it's beneficial for them, but for the good of all (some charities for example). We managed to change that, why not change the leader crap. There should never be one leader, an alpha wolf. It's completely natural for the strongest (whether physically or intellectually) of the group to have complete control over everyone else... but it is our duty to change our nature, if we are to live in a better, more peaceful society that's good for all.

Btw, I'm not taking this personally. I understand people posses different views; when politics get personal, that's when things can get really bad. xD

 

By the way, I'm Polish so my parents experienced "Communism" first hand also and grew up in it. I know what it was like back then, in the former Soviet Union territories thanks to them and education. You will never learn anything new about Communism from someone who has lived in a country controlled by the tyrannical government of the USSR. They will always have a negative & biased view towards it and I'm not surprised, since the Soviet Union was almost absolute fail. I hope your teacher at least admitted that his view was biased, because my parents do and thanks to them, I can see it from multiple sides of the argument instead of just the American, Polish or Other Former Soviet Union Territorish point of view.

 

I thought carefully about the points in the post above, and I appreciate your clear answer. Of course people will feel strongly about things which have affected their lives so much, and I try to keep that in mind. I also realize that the "West" has many negative points, definitely. It's so corrupt and useless it's pretty sickening. But my main concern is the idea of Communism itself, which is unnatural and also impossible in practice. I don't think the government should be in absolute control of the population and the country's produce, and people should be given the freedom to manage their money and possibly improve their lot in life. In America and most "first world" countries, people who wish to improve their lifestyle often manage to do so, to greater or lesser degrees. Of course, absurdly rich people are a problem, especially with so much poverty and starvation in the world. But wiping out the "bourgeois" by revolution or violence has never struck me as a good way to solve the issue. How we should, I don't know. The French Revolution saw many innocent, and sometimes good, people die, including children. The same with America, Russia, China, and Vietnam, etc.

The rich are often supported by the lower classes, especially in Hollywood, sports, and elections. The country willingly gives them billions of dollars (euros? ) a year, when in reality they are doing nothing constructive, useful, or good. How we fix these things has always been a problem, and I think it always will be. But hierarchy and unequal distribution of power is normal, as I've posted above. Just look at the military. Agreed, often the bias is extreme, and this isn't right.

The idea of communism is good on a smaller scale, like in Catholic Monasteries: No one owns anything, everything is shared by the community. But there is still an abbot, who makes sure it runs smoothly, and who makes major decisions. These communities often work well, and there is no major power bias or struggle. Of course, every person there appreciates this and strives to keep it this way. Now, of course, this is just a parallel, the world can't turn into a monastery! But the point is this: the idea of common property/power works well on a small scale, but becomes more difficult on a larger scale, and becomes almost impossible on a national scale.

It's always good to have both sides of the story, in fact, it's necessary. I am always interested to learn more, and hear your views. That's how we learn.

Man, these posts are long! Ha ha!