Metro: Last Light to support “pretty modest” PCs

Monday, 1st August 2011 03:49 GMT By Brenna Hillier

Metro: Last Light will equal its precursor’s impressive visual performance, but cater to low-end PCs.

Showing off the game’s reportedly lovely graphics at E3, THQ’s Huw Beynon told Ausgamers the demo was running on a “pretty modest PC” and that developer 4A Games is performing wonders.

“I don’t mind telling you that it was a six gig of ram i7 and we had a single GTX-480, which was nVidia’s DX11 launch card last year,” he said.

“I think it’s fair to say that the guys at 4A are some kind of strange, technical wizards that can get that kind of performance out of it so we’re really excited.”

Metro: Last Light is the follow up to dystopian survival shooter Metro 2033, which turned heads for its impressive use of DirectX 11 tech. It’s due on PC, PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360 sometime next year, with a Wii U version on the cards.



  1. kangkang

    I tide fashion Good-looking, not expensive Free transport

    #1 3 years ago
  2. unacomn

    Wait, an i7 is modest? Am I really that behind the times with my Pentium D?

    #2 3 years ago
  3. Maximum Payne

    @2 Yea LOL also 480 gtx is far from modest :)
    I really hope they improved performance or this is going to be even more demanding game.

    #3 3 years ago
  4. Edo

    Pretty modest PC!?!??!?

    #4 3 years ago
  5. Christopher Jack

    @2, CPU isn’t as important as GPU when it comes to gaming, any decent Core 2 Duo or an decent i3 processor can run almost every game there is, with the right GPU, they could probably run everything on max, or at the very least medium.

    #5 3 years ago
  6. Erthazus

    “CPU isn’t as important ”

    your knowledge impress me as always.

    #6 3 years ago
  7. YoungZer0

    Weird, so it runs better than the first one? Because the first one was really poorly optimized.

    #7 3 years ago
  8. Christopher Jack

    @6, Stop being a dick all your life, their are more beneficial things to do than to take something out of context & insult them for it.

    My point is, a moderate CPU generally won’t bottleneck you as much as a moderate GPU when it comes to gaming.

    Try to add something to the conversation for once in your miserable life rather than being a cynical bastard.

    #8 3 years ago
  9. Noodlemanny

    I didn’t really notice the graphics at all in 2033. I even thought they weren’t very good. I could have the graphics on almost full the whole time. Then again I think the newest DirectX is hugely bigged up. The actual base DirectX is great but the difference between DirectX 11 and DirectX 10 is seriously next to nothing. I don’t know about the other stuff but to me seeing it all it does is make a few things a tiny little bit more bumpy. Thats really not something your going to notice when your shooting someone in the face.
    Stop going fucking crazy when a high end game doesn’t use the latest version (Crysis 2) because it really, really, really makes no noticeable visual difference.

    #9 3 years ago
  10. Erthazus

    “My point is, a moderate CPU generally won’t bottleneck you as much as a moderate GPU when it comes to gaming.”

    oh yeah. Good luck with that. As i said before, your knowledge impress me as always.

    #10 3 years ago
  11. Noodlemanny

    Getting two three letter sequences in the wrong order (by accident) has nothing to do with knowledge.
    Oh and hes right and you know it.

    (CJ Craig, WW FTW)

    #11 3 years ago
  12. Erthazus

    No he is not, because you don’t even know how to speed up your videocard or CPU.
    This gen is especially not so important to buy the latest videocard. There is no point in that.
    If you don’t know why CPU can’t be a big pain the ass, then you never used multicore features and etc. in videogames.

    I have 580 GTX and i won’t change it till the next generation and i have i7 Sandy bridge 2600K (one of the best CPU on the market today) and i will change next year for the Ivy Bridge series.
    So your knowledge here is absolutely Zero on what can be pain in the ass.

    #12 3 years ago
  13. Maximum Payne

    @10 But it is true.With moderate dual core at 3.0 ghz in full HD, graphic card is far more important in 90% game.Other 10% where quad is really necessary is Bad Company 2,RTS games and GTA4 :P
    Just depend of strength of your graphic card.

    #13 3 years ago
  14. Erthazus

    @13, it’s not important if you play on medium settings and etc and if your games does not support multicore features.

    Games like METRO, STALKER… Especially ARMA games require multicore support so badly, that without it you will have some… freakin awesome problems even if you have 580 GTX or 590.

    also, sometimes if optimization sucks ass… Memory leaks won’t be fixed with GPU, so if your PC have a decent CPU then it can save sometimes.
    I know that for sure. It sure saved me from bad GTA4 and STALKER optimization.

    #14 3 years ago
  15. Maximum Payne

    @14 No offence but for some like Stalker and Metro I don’t think they utilize quad core as GTA 4 for example.I didn’t try ARMA 2 so don’t know.But I watch lot of test on internet and its just important to have solid intel core 2 duo/i5 dual core for lot of game it would be fine with like 6870.For you graphic card maybe you need very strong CPU to support that beast of graphic card.Again for me its better to have good dual core rather then slower quad core….Now when you have good quad thats again different story :)

    #15 3 years ago
  16. Christopher Jack

    @14, I’ve got a Core 2 Quad (Q6600) processor which is pretty moderate by today’s standards(Quite proud with that considering I got it over 4 years ago), probably about as powerful as a high end 1st gen i3 processor & it’s still capable of playing any game on the market on high with a steady frame rate if I have a good graphics card shoved in it.

    #16 3 years ago

Comments are now closed on this article.