New Metro: Last Light DLC Crawls Rapidly Toward You

By John Walker on September 4th, 2013 at 9:00 am.

The Tower Pack for Metro: Last Light should have arrived in your Steam window by now. It’s a tower climb, a series of increasingly tough floors, setting the task of seeing how high you can climb.

It’s £4/€5 (and $5, which is £3.21 and €3.79 – gee, thanks), or is the second included piece in the season pass if you so optimistically purchased that. The tower challenge will record your stats and throw them into a shared leaderboard, letting the whole thing become a competitive climb.

Next up will be The Developer Pack, which will feature a “Shooting Gallery”, an AI Arena, and “Metro Museum”, along with a new mission called The Spider’s Nest. Then finally will be the Chronicles Pack with three new SP missions, where you’ll play as Pavel, Khan & Ulman, and Anna.

Here’s wot Jim thought of the game when it was released in May. Of course, this comes from publisher Deep Silver, who are still yet to get back to us about the release of Dead Island: Riptide’s torso.

__________________

« | »

, , , .

43 Comments »

  1. F3ck says:

    Wish they’d offer up some more laid-back content…the game’s so aesthetically pleasing, I often find myself just wanting to explore.

    Don’t much care for this tower idea.

    • analydilatedcorporatestyle says:

      Aye, the leader board will be a lottery of who managed to crouch under a spotlight while the enemy detection glitches out.

  2. RProxyOnly says:

    So this is a thing now? I can understand it for an rpg (I was never keen on it but it’s certainly a staple of the genre, particularly of the Japanese variety).. but it just seems so out of place for a shooter, not to mention that I’m positive there is different material they could be spending their time on creating for M:LL considering it was story and atmosphere that was the main draw for that game, and did it VERY well I may say.

    This idea seems dumb.. and a waste of money.

    • Koozer says:

      Well it’s easier than actual, proper game content, and they can make whatever the hell they want after people buy the Lucky Dip of DLC that is a season pass.

  3. slerbal says:

    Thanks for not forgetting the whole torso thing, I’ve not forgotten and I won’t be buying any games from Deep Silver until they do satisfactorily reply. A shame as I enjoyed the original Metro but given that there are so many amazing games from indie developers that I do want, it isn’t too much of a loss :)

    • RProxyOnly says:

      The whole “torso-gate” thing went completely over my head.. I simply don’t understand the scandal. Of all of the REALLY shitty things companies/people pull and the shit that goes on in the world on a daily basis, and THIS get the headlines???

      People get bent out of shape over the most unreasonable of things (no one look at my past posts. :P), especially when there is a bandwagon to jump on.

      • c-Row says:

        Can’t stop the bandwagon once it moves at full speed.

      • Bradamantium says:

        What have gaming companies done in the recent past that was really much worse than pushing a disembodied chest as part of a special edition?

      • Baines says:

        Torso-gate is pretty simple: An RPS writer got miffed that Deep Silver actions didn’t match what he had imagined that they had said, even though they never said what he had imagined. In this miffed-ness, he writes an article against Deep Silver and their “silence” over the issue, though Deep Silver’s “silence” is arguably what any sane organization would do in such a situation. (Whether or not you want to argue about the appropriateness of the torso statue, RPS’s complaint was based on someone reading something into a press release that wasn’t actually written there. When you are faced with that kind of situation, you become wary that anything else you say on the matter will also get twisted. Or, as some forums would advise, “Don’t feed the trolls.”) Torso-gate crops up again every now and again because it is part of a couple of campaigns on RPS.

    • N'Al says:

      I was going to say the exact opposite. Yes, torso-gate may be A THING, but I don’t see how it’s relevant here at all.

    • iniudan says:

      John I think your white knighting a bit too hard on this one, they made a stupid decision with that torso, but you are basically asking their marketing department to start pointing finger at itself, if they didn’t answer when it was still relevant, I am pretty sure they will not answer half a year later.

      Answering it, basically require to throw employee under the bus to take the blame, which usually end up with working place becoming a crappy environment has everyone start backstabbing each other, unless someone willingly step in to take the blame. Or at least that my view of normal human behavior, but been autistic, I am usually an idiot when it come to social perception and skewed my own perception of others to be pessimistic, has a protection mechanism.

      But feel free to say whatever you want, this is your home and podium to cry upon after all, if didn’t want to hear it I wouldn’t just come around, I just think that proclamation is futile at this point.

      EDIT: why did my post appear has a reply slerbal…

      • YogSo says:

        iniudan, I find tremendously ironic that you have summarized the situation so well and, at the same time, have missed the point so hard. And the irony reaches stratospheric levels when you throw away the “white-knight” term, because that’s exactly what you are doing, white-knighting in favour of Deep Silver.

        I’ll come around to that, but first, let me explain the situation to all of those in this comment thread that, again, have completely missed the point in their hurry to demonstrate how little they care about the so called Torso-gate and how “John’s preachings” bore them etc etc. Hey, people, if you don’t find anything wrong with that awful torso, it’s fine. Nobody cares. But the thing is… Deep Silver itself fucking acknowledged that it was a mistake!

        For the limited run of the Zombie Bait Edition for Europe and Australia, a decision was made to include a gruesome statue of a zombie torso, which was cut up like many of our fans had done to the undead enemies in the original Dead Island.

        We sincerely regret this choice. We are collecting feedback continuously from the Dead Island community, as well as the international gaming community at large, for ongoing internal meetings with Deep Silver’s entire international team today. For now, we want to reiterate to the community, fans and industry how deeply sorry we are, and that we are committed to making sure this will never happen again. (Emphasis mine)

        And THEN they went ahead and sold it nevertheless. THIS IS THE FUCKING POINT of John’s inquiries. Maybe you are ok with people lying to you in your faces, but I’m sure as hell I’m not ok with that, and much less, I’m not gonna start defending people/business doing it so openly and with such a total abandon.

        So, iniudan, back to you. Yes, of course, I expect, I demand people will have to accept the blame for their mistakes, because that’s exactly what happens to me when I make one. Because people/business that are incapable of owning to their mistakes aren’t worthy of any respect or trust. I still don’t understand what’s so weird about demanding them to act like proper grown-ups, iniudan. Will that take a toll in their business? Maybe, but you know what? That’s perfectly ok, because THEN AND ONLY THEN they’ll think twice before making another stupid decision.

        • wengart says:

          Deep Silver didn’t lie to anyone. They made a bloody torso which was targeted at a super niche community, and everyone got pissy about it. They then said it was a mistake and they wouldn’t do it again.

          The never said they weren’t going to sell the thing that they paid to have made, and customers paid to own.

          I don’t see the point in bringing it up anymore. Deep Silver has washed their hands of the situation and moved on, maybe players should too.

          • Agnol117 says:

            Ah, but you’ve hit the nail on the head. The biggest issue seems to be the perceived “lie” here — that they still sold it after they apologized and said they wouldn’t do it again. They intentionally phrased it in such a way that they didn’t say “we won’t sell it,” but some people insist that they did, and are all up in arms about that.

          • RProxyOnly says:

            @Agnol17… “and are all up in arms about that.”

            You having a laugh? :D

          • The Random One says:

            Yes, they intentionally phrased it in a way that didn’t specify they wouldn’t sell it, while also intentionally phrasing it in a way that implied they would, in fact, not sell it.

            That would be like Ubisoft or EA saying that their previously always-online game would now run offline, then doing nothing, then saying the game runs because it displays a message saying “This game doesn’t work offline” and that means the program is running.

          • wengart says:

            “Yes, they intentionally phrased it in a way that didn’t specify they wouldn’t sell it, while also intentionally phrasing it in a way that implied they would, in fact, not sell it.”

            They said they wouldn’t do it again. I don’t know how that implies that they would not sell it. It sounds to me like they’ve completed the action, but wouldn’t do it again.

          • Agnol117 says:

            @ RProxyOnly: that was actually unintentional, but I wish I could claim I’d done it on purpose.

            @ The Random One: But that’s the whole point. They phrased it in such a way that it looked like they said they weren’t going to sell it, but they never actually said that. What they did was, undoubtedly, in extremely poor taste, but they didn’t actually lie (as some people are trying to claim).

          • The Random One says:

            Agnol, if you actually believe that a statement written by PR people (as damage control surely was) means one thing while implying another unintentionally, I can only recommend you never sign anything without first having two trusted family members and an attorney look at it first.

          • Agnol117 says:

            The statement about being unintentional was with regards to the pun. Reading comp ftw.

        • iniudan says:

          Wtf are you talking about, my first sentence mention that the whole torso thing was stupid, then I proceeded to give an explanation has to why Deep Silver gave no reply and why it is futile to still ask one, I am in no way defending them. So stop been annoying and deform what I am saying, will you pretty please.

        • F3ck says:

          What a typically lighthearted take on yet another inconsequential issue…so hilariously on the nose for this site, however.

          Leave it to the Righteousness Protraction Squadron (and their keen eye for immaterial first-world “problems”) to keep such a non-issue alive and gasping for air.

          Some people really seem to just need an actual problem or two in their lives.

    • Vast_Girth says:

      To be honest the torso thing never bothered me at all in the first place and i still don’t understand why John got sand in his vagina about it. Sure it was tacky and had boobs, but come on, we are talking about games here, its not like that’s something not unheard of.

      However the Sim-city scandal was a shocker and i hope he keeps tries to keep that in the public conciousness as much as torsogate.

      • Vesuvius says:

        Of course man, you’re right. Why would someone think that selling a pair of breasts (perfectly intact) with all other pieces of the body torn away is a sexist thing? Baffling.

        Also: really undermines your attempt at credibility when you use expressions like “sand in your vagina”, you progressive man, you.

        • Don Reba says:

          What credibility are you talking about? Are you saying that he is being misleading about his own opinions?

        • Vast_Girth says:

          No one is saying it wasn’t sexist. But soooooo many games are sexist in exactly the same way is it really something to have a constant crusade about.

    • analydilatedcorporatestyle says:

      You are excluding all Deep Silver games because John Walker didn’t get a reply, hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha *breath* ahahahahahahahahahahaahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahah………….

      Get your tounge out of his hoop man!!

      As for the DLC, well it wasn’t very good in the shooting department so a bit of a strange call!

      • The Random One says:

        So instead of saying people who decry sexism only do that to have sex with girls, you’re saying they only do it to have sex with John Walker? Because I must say, that would be a pretty tough choice.

    • Roz says:

      Well, they DID give a reply, saying that they wouldn’t do it again. People need to grow up and realise just because they may be offended by something, doesn’t mean everyone else is.

      As for the DLC, doesn’t seem something I’ll be interested in as it just seems odd to do this sort of thing in an FPS game. Seems like the weakest of the four DLC, defiantly looking forward to exploring with the dev pack.

  4. STiger says:

    I remember reading something recently where Deep Silver said they wanted to attract a broader audience with the Metro IP. All this makes me realize is that Metro is now dead as a series, and I am soul-crushingly disappointed. The first sign was Ranger Mode as day one DLC.

  5. Eclipse says:

    instead of talking about Deep Silver, that’s only the publisher that got lucky and spent enough to scavenge Last Light from THQ’s corpse, I’d shine a light on the developer 4A Games, Jason Rubin talked longly about them here: http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2013-05-15-jason-rubin-metro-last-light-is-the-triumph-of-an-underdog

    • Don Reba says:

      Jason Rubin did exaggerate a whole lot there, though. And this was covered on RPS. Don’t remember if it was a separate article or the Sunday papers, though.

      • welverin says:

        To me it didn’t come across as Rubin exaggerating, so much as the developers themselves not thinking it was such a big deal. A) Because they were used to the conditions, and B) because they were still better off than other people around them.

  6. LTK says:

    The game is also on sale on Steam right now, which means this is the perfect opportunity to not buy it and wait for the edition that includes all DLC.

Comment on this story

XHTML: Allowed code: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>