Support NeoGAF

[Tigel]

Have any reviews talked about the PC version and how the port is?

It will be good, it's done by Nixxes.

 

[nbthedude]

I fail to see how Absolution is any of those things, besides challenges that reward the player with loose upgrades, I don't see how that applies to Absolution at all.

I sure do remember the stealth sequences in CoD, or that one time I dressed as a store clerk and hit a mob of civilians in the head with a brick.

More over, with Absolution the "upgrade system" is just a mechanic to encourage more diverse play. I never even used any of those upgrades but I was constantly trying to score better and use original kills/find more creative ways around the environments just because it was there whereas previously I probably would have just been fine with whatever way I managed to find to get through a level and take down my mark. I replayed Absolution levels continiously to discover the different context kills and various approaches. The only thing it seems to me that they did was make it less obtuse and give you a few more hints to consider when trying to discover the various methods.

Anyway, I'm not trying to derail the conversation to one about DMC or Hitman. I'm just pointing out that I find myself personally at a loss to understand the bile that is spewed at a lot of these games by "fans" who apparently get to define what it means to be a "fan."

And I'm no reviews cheerleader either, as I said. I find myself equally perplexed by the hyperbolic praise many games get even by supposedly good, smart reviewers. Arthur Gies Diablo 3 review baffles me as much as the bile that got spewed at the new DMC around these parts. I just can't relate to either side.

 

[ViewtifulJC]

I don't know if that is the case or not with TR. I know for a fact it was not the case with DmC. There are lots of new ideas in that game. It did cool things with level design and the graple mechanics. But just because it is easier to SSS combo and has less frame reversals or whatever, it's anathematized. I liked the new focus on level design and the re-imagination of the universe because even though I liked the previous DMC games, I was getting pretty bored with the endless focus on hyper-extreme combo nonsense. It still has that, but it downplayed it's importance and shifted the focus elsewhere.

If you're not fighting in DmC, you're doing really straight-forward, really easy, really repetitive platforming. There's actually less variety in DmC than in the other games, since the keys to progress and puzzles have been pretty much removed.

DmC's problem is that it failed to prove it's worth as a reboot. What it does best, is what the other ones did best. There's nothing of particularly worth that was new. The narrative is a rehash of past ideas and really obvious social commentary, that doesn't go in any interesting direction. The boss fights are largely mediocre spectacle. The Red/Blue enemies hampers the creativity of the combat(which is one of the key points of the DMC franchise). It added nothing of any real value to the franchise.

 

[Dead]

Just FYI: The 360 version is getting exclusive DLC.

single, multi or both?

 

[SlasherJPC]

How does it compare to the other Crystal Dynamic games in terms of platforming and puzzles?

I sort of played but not much some of the originals years ago but did not like them because of their controls and did not finish them but I finished and really liked Anniversary and liked and also finished Underworld. I will get this eventually, Legend too.

Well this one def feels different. Dark and gritty. There is a minor puzzle near the start but so far nothing else I've seen but I'm still really early and have not found this hidden tombs yet. I'll update more as I play this week. Platforming has felt very uncharted-ish. Still waiting to see if that changes but my impressions lead me to believe not.

 

[Lime]

See, it's like we are speaking a different language. I played Absolution. It is nowhere in hell like Call of Duty. It's like you guys only know how to speak in hyperbole because you are trying to counter the game media's hyperbole on the other side.

Absolution had some levels that were shorter and more straight forward, yes. I enjoyed those levels because I thought they gave you some mini-sandbox areas to try all sorts of original stuff w/o having to wade through long sections to play around with variations. Like the Chinatown level. I loved the idea that I could plant a car bomb in the drug dealers apartment, take the drug dealers clothes, lead teh guy back to the drug dealers apartment, and non-nonchalantly walk out of the apartment and set off the bomb as he snorted coke in the room.

As for the other levels that were more "go from point a to point b," the escape levels, again they were a nice change of pace between the longer levels. I didn't see it as dumbing down as much as adding variety.

I fail to see how Absolution is any of those things, besides challenges that reward the player with loose upgrades, I don't see how that applies to Absolution at all.

I sure do remember the stealth sequences in CoD, or that one time I dressed as a store clerk and hit a mob of civilians in the head with a brick.

Sorry I didn't explain what I meant properly. I wasn't pointing out specific parts of Hitman: Absolution, but attempting to show how the general change of direction for the game. The listed qualities of e.g. ludonarrative dissonance and COD XP only applied to Tomb Raider.

I should just have left out the mention of Hitman: Absolution to explain my point, which I hope nbtthedude understands properly in terms of not misinterpreting the criticisms people have with this change of direction.

 

[keltickennedy]

It will be good, it's done by Nixxes.

Oh shit...I forgot about that. It is Square Enix. I will definitely pre-purchase then.

 

[tiny raptor]

Given how annoyed I get when fire fights burst out in Uncharted I might actually be celebrating this. Maybe we'll get lucky with games like Walking Dead making a big splash and someone wants to do something like this.

Well then he wasn't talking to you. He's talking to the people who love the third-person shooting that Uncharted offers, not the people who actively want it changed.

Puzzles were just as piss easy as the combat was.Maybe even easier.

I wasn't even talking about the puzzle difficulty per se.

 

[GillianSeed79]

While I think it's a shame that Tomb Raider fans feel like this isn't a Tomb Raider game at all and feel betrayed or something, I really have to ask which Tomb Raider games you are fans of?

Wasn't Guardian of Light critically well-received, especially on GAF, even though it's arguably just as much of a departure gameplay-wise compared to the original Tomb Raider? I do have fond memories of playing Tomb Raider 1 and Tomb Raider 2 on the PS1 with their unique gameplay and platforming at the time. I have no reservations saying that those games probably haven't age gracefully at all. The only thing I remember about Tomb Raider III is Lara running around Venice and it having a much bigger focus on gunplay. Oh and a T-rex. After that, the franchise fell into a pit of mediocrity until the reboot of sorts at the start of this gen. I believe I played either Underworld or Legends, but the one I did play seemed much more action-adventure oriented with middling gunplay and some light puzzle mechanics.

I guess what I'm saying is when people say they are Tomb Raider fans, at what point in the franchise are we talking about? The original three games that came out well over a decade ago? The subsequent crap games that nearly killed the franchise? Or the current gen attempts at rebooting the franchise that, at best, were good to slightly above average?

For the record I'm interested in this seemingly Uncharted-esque Tomb Raider game, but for me, the thing that is scaring me away is the apparent me-too checkbox of current gen game mechanics like shallow RPG mechanics and collect-a-thon stuff.

 

[plagiarize]

Huh? I don't know what part of my post motivated your reply.



I think you're misunderstanding the issue. Change is good. Diversity is good. Evolution is good. People welcomed the idea of for example the reboot turning the franchise into a metroid-vania survival horror when the concept art leaked 4 years ago.

Unfortunately in the cases you listed, like Hitman Absolution or this game, the change of direction is not going towards innovation or creative evolutions of game design principles. Instead, they are carbon-copies of already existing lowest common denominator AAA game design with arbitrary Call of Duty XP, ludonarrative dissonance, more violence, etc. This is the problem people are having with the change in direction, among other things.

I guess part of my disconnect between what you are saying and what my brain says makes sense is that I remember when Tomb Raider kind of was Call of Duty. I mean, wasn't this a franchise that was a mainstream as it got, once upon a time? Even my sister who doesn't like video games played it. Everyone knows who Lara Croft is. We had five games in five years. There were two big budget action movies.

Tomb Raider lost touch with the mainstream. It was never just trying to appeal to a niche. It became marginalized to the point that it became niche. It wasn't shooting for a smaller more sophisticated audience at any point. If Call of Duty sales slide for a few years, will we slam it for aping whatever has taken it's place as if it's somehow selling out and trying to be lowest common denominator as if that's something surprising or new?

Tomb Raider was a great mainstream game, and judging from these reviews, Tomb Raider is a great mainstream game. I think I can deal.

 

[MormaPope]

So far Machinima has had the most fair and balanced review I've seen. He goes over the positives and negatives:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fWQMMlCCEuU&list=PLZLTS4u9M_2rPFsdbdY7xL8oAApgU0Zar&index=1

Awesome and realistic review, loved how he was honest.

But looking at the ratings makes me really fucking pissed off, more thumbs down than thumbs up and people are just calling him a hater. Fuck that, people just can't handle the truth, and that's extremely petty.

 

[daninthemix]

Awesome and realistic review, loved how he was honest.

But looking at the ratings makes me really fucking pissed off, more thumbs down than thumbs up and people are just calling him a hater. Fuck that, people just can't handle the truth, and that's extremely petty.

That's just Machinima's core audience behaving as usual - angry teens struggling with puberty. Lucky for Machinima they just keep watching and paying the bills.

 

[toddhunter]

While I think it's a shame that Tomb Raider fans feel like this isn't a Tomb Raider game at all and feel betrayed or something, I really have to ask which Tomb Raider games you are fans of?

The originals.

It isn't betrayal so much as frustration. The life of a tomb raider fan for the last decade has been screaming "don't make stupid games with no puzzles and QTE take downs. Just give us big fuck off tombs to explore" and having the various devs ignore that in search for big sales or whatever they are doing and messing it up completely every time.

Queue a new reboot and another opportunity to give fans what they want. Queue another disappointment for those fans.

My problem is the idea that a really great exploration game with puzzles and survival elements will not sell. I don't think that is the case at all, it just has to be actually good (the decline being the problem with the tomb raider games following on from the first) and games like Dark Souls are showing the way forward.

 

[sublimit]

Awesome and realistic review, loved how he was honest.

But looking at the ratings makes me really fucking pissed off, more thumbs down than thumbs up and people are just calling him a hater. Fuck that, people just can't handle the truth, and that's extremely petty.

Well he called Lara Laura therefore he is obviously a hater and can't be taken seriously.That's fanboy logic for you.

That's just Machinima's core audience behaving as usual - angry teens struggling with puberty. Lucky for Machinima they just keep watching and paying the bills.

I'm not sure it's Machinima's core audience in this case.It's more probably angry TRforums butthurt fanboys trying to find an excuse to bash the reviewer for being negative.

 

[plagiarize]

The originals.

It isn't betrayal so much as frustration. The life of a tomb raider fan for the last decade has been screaming "don't make stupid games with no puzzles and QTE take downs. Just give us big fuck off tombs to explore" and having the various devs ignore that in search for big sales or whatever they are doing and messing it up completely every time.

Queue a new reboot and another opportunity to give fans what they want. Queue another disappointment for those fans.

My problem is the idea that a really great exploration game with puzzles and survival elements will not sell. I don't think that is the case at all.

What do you expect from a franchise where the first game sold seven million copies?

 

[RyL]

Yeah I have unfortunately seen some when I was younger and curious about that kind of shit. And I know games are not even close to an accurate representation of what it's like and that's certainly not what I'm asking for. I just like it as a visceral aesthetic. It's like when I watch a Scorcese flick...I know someone is getting shot in the fucking head and there's gonna be a ton of blood everywhere.

Yea, I forgot to add this bit. It all depends on the genre, but the new Tomb Raider aimed for semi-realism (i think) and thus the blood splatter seems a bit out of place.

 

[MormaPope]

Sorry I didn't explain what I meant properly. I wasn't pointing out specific parts of Hitman: Absolution, but attempting to show how the general change of direction for the game. The listed qualities of e.g. ludonarrative dissonance and COD XP only applied to Tomb Raider.

I should just have left out the mention of Hitman: Absolution to explain my point, which I hope nbtthedude understands properly in terms of not misinterpreting the criticisms people have with this change of direction.

Aight, I get you. Absolution is very different as far as Hitman design goes and I love the game for what it ended up being but that's a completely different conversation.

Seeing the ratings and comments for this review is making me pissed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fWQMMlCCEuU&list=PLZLTS4u9M_2rPFsdbdY7xL8oAApgU0Zar&index=1

Why are people this dense? Why is there this sort of attachment to this game? Are teenage boys fantasizing about fucking Lara? Are full grown adults?

That's just Machinima's core audience behaving as usual - angry teens struggling with puberty. Lucky for Machinima they just keep watching and paying the bills.

Well he called Lara Laura therefore he is obviously a hater and can't be taken seriously.That's fanboy logic for you.

It's hilarious that specific review is warning them of what they're about to get into, yet they deny it's relevance due to fear of the game not being what they thought it was.

 

[nbthedude]

Sorry I didn't explain what I meant properly. I wasn't pointing out specific parts of Hitman: Absolution, but attempting to show how the general change of direction for the game. The listed qualities of e.g. ludonarrative dissonance and COD XP only applied to Tomb Raider.

I should just have left out the mention of Hitman: Absolution to explain my point, which I hope nbtthedude understands properly in terms of not misinterpreting the criticisms people have with this change of direction.

Well like I said, the only reason I brought up those two games is because I felt the "fan" reaction and criticism of them being more shallow or dumbed down was unwarranted.

I am a little dismayed at the idea of this TR game becoming an Uncharted clone because frankly I just liked the previous TR games much more than I liked Uncharted. But I don't know if it is just a bunch of noise because I've heard this line before on message boards and I'm sure glad I didn't pass on Hitman Absolution or DmC because I had a great time with those games. I love the old TR games, but I get the feeling these "fans" of TR are pretty much like those Hitman and DmC people, whom to me mostly just come off as ridiculous hyperbolic people screaming about the sky falling in gamedom. It's like they think dumb blockbuster games that they played when they were 15 are masterpieces that should be championed but modern dumb blockbuster games represent the fall of human culture.

 

[plagiarize]

Aight, I get you. Absolution is very different as far as Hitman design goes and I love the game for what it ended up being but that's a completely different conversation.

Seeing the ratings and comments for this review is making me pissed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fWQMMlCCEuU&list=PLZLTS4u9M_2rPFsdbdY7xL8oAApgU0Zar&index=1

Why are people this dense? Why is there this sort of attachment to this game? Are teenage boys fantasizing about fucking Lara? Are full grown adults?

don't judge 'people' on youtube comments. it will make you incredibly pessimistic about the human race, for one, and for two they don't really represent your average person at all.

 

[Revven]

But looking at the ratings makes me really fucking pissed off, more thumbs down than thumbs up and people are just calling him a hater. Fuck that, people just can't handle the truth, and that's extremely petty.

Ugh, yeah, you're right. It's horrible in there. What the hell? Well, it is youtube comments so... I can't be too surprised I guess. I hope Machinima doesn't take whatever those people are saying to heart. That review was very well done.

 

[tiny raptor]

You know, I'm too lazy to dig back through pages and find that bit where GamesRadar praises the pacing, but after watching their review, I agree that it's encouraging. So encouraging that it has sold me on the game, I'll be buying it on Amazon.

While I think it's a shame that Tomb Raider fans feel like this isn't a Tomb Raider game at all and feel betrayed or something, I really have to ask which Tomb Raider games you are fans of?

Wasn't Guardian of Light critically well-received, especially on GAF, even though it's arguably just as much of a departure gameplay-wise compared to the original Tomb Raider? I do have fond memories of playing Tomb Raider 1 and Tomb Raider 2 on the PS1 with their unique gameplay and platforming at the time. I have no reservations saying that those games probably haven't age gracefully at all. The only thing I remember about Tomb Raider III is Lara running around Venice and it having a much bigger focus on gunplay. Oh and a T-rex. After that, the franchise fell into a pit of mediocrity until the reboot of sorts at the start of this gen. I believe I played either Underworld or Legends, but the one I did play seemed much more action-adventure oriented with middling gunplay and some light puzzle mechanics.

I guess what I'm saying is when people say they are Tomb Raider fans, at what point in the franchise are we talking about? The original three games that came out well over a decade ago? The subsequent crap games that nearly killed the franchise? Or the current gen attempts at rebooting the franchise that, at best, were good to slightly above average?

For the record I'm interested in this seemingly Uncharted-esque Tomb Raider game, but for me, the thing that is scaring me away is the apparent me-too checkbox of current gen game mechanics like shallow RPG mechanics and collect-a-thon stuff.

Guardian of Light is an arcade spinoff title, not a full-fledged Raider game. Mario has spinoffs too, but fans don't complain because the core Mario games always focus on platforming.

And also as an aside, I really enjoyed Legend. It had great pacing, I've replayed it twice now.

I'm also a little worried about the checklist game design (not to mention all the other issues I've been mentioning), but if the pacing is truly that fantastic, I can forgive little flaws in the name of a good whole.

 

[Lime]

I guess part of my disconnect between what you are saying and what my brain says makes sense is that I remember when Tomb Raider kind of was Call of Duty. I mean, wasn't this a franchise that was a mainstream as it got, once upon a time? Even my sister who doesn't like video games played it. Everyone knows who Lara Croft is. We had five games in five years. There were two big budget action movies.

Tomb Raider lost touch with the mainstream. It was never just trying to appeal to a niche. It became marginalized to the point that it became niche. It wasn't shooting for a smaller more sophisticated audience at any point. If Call of Duty sales slide for a few years, will we slam it for aping whatever has taken it's place as if it's somehow selling out and trying to be lowest common denominator as if that's something surprising or new?

Tomb Raider was a great mainstream game, and judging from these reviews, Tomb Raider is a great mainstream game. I think I can deal.

You have to separate mainstream perception and popularity from the actual (ontological) properties of the game design in question. Sure, the franchise is huge in terms of brand value, but the actual characteristics of those games weren't straight-up copies of the same contemporary blockbuster games at the time - it still retained its own identity in visuals, audio, story and most important of all; gameplay. Thus, my initial post was an explanation why some people are not against change in itself, as it can lead to interesting new takes on the same core idea of an established series. But when you straight up copy other features from other mainstream games, you lose the creativity and innovation in your change of direction and the series loses any unique identity it once had, as its characteristics become AAA blur.

 

[MormaPope]

Ugh, yeah, you're right. It's horrible in there. What the hell? Well, it is youtube comments so... I can't be too surprised I guess. I hope Machinima doesn't take whatever those people are saying to heart. That review was very well done.

I only get angry because the review is very honest and in depth, yet the people commenting are not taking anything the reviewer said into consideration. They just want to be told what they want to hear.

 

[dreamfall]

I'll be completely honest in saying that while it doesn't have the incredible presentational values of Uncharted, I've been more excited for this game simply because of the ability to openly explore / navigate in Yamatai. That being said, the linearity of story set pieces is something that has been shown in developer diaries so I'm cautiously optimistic. It also probably won't have the tight shooting mechanics / polish of UC, but it'll have it's own strengths.

Every review points to it being a good action game. And that's different from feeling like a Tomb Raider game. The puzzles and platforming are probably what I desire most, so even glimpses of these gameplay features would be nice.

Waiting for the Preload on Steam. Waiting to give better impressions after playing it.

 

[sublimit]

Why are people this dense? Why is there this sort of attachment to this game? Are teenage boys fantasizing about fucking Lara? Are full grown adults?

It's quite sad but if you look at the official TRforums and the Eidos forum the majority of the threads and posts there are about Lara,Lara,Lara,Lara,Lara,Lara,Lara,Lara,Gameplay,Lara and Lara.
These "fans" wouldn't give a shit if Crystal made TR an on rails shooter but if they were to give Lara a different haircut...oh boy that would mean WWIII for them.

 

[Revven]

I only get angry because the review is very honest and in depth, yet the people commenting are not taking anything the reviewer said into consideration. The just want to be told what they want to hear.

Yup, it's really frustrating.

It's almost like the news media, people watch the channels their opinions are aligned with. If their opinions aren't aligned, they shun the other channels or don't pay attention to the other side of the coin. They just want their opinion justified and supported by "professional" people.

 

[abrack08]

I only get angry because the review is very honest and in depth, yet the people commenting are not taking anything the reviewer said into consideration. The just want to be told what they want to hear.

Yup, it's really frustrating.

It's almost like the news media, people watch the channels their opinions are aligned with. If their opinions aren't aligned, they shun the other channels or don't pay attention to the other side of the coin. They just want their opinion justified and supported by "professional" people.

I haven't seen the video, and I'm sure the comments are atrocious, as most YouTube comments are, but aren't you SORT OF doing the same thing? Assuming you're some of the people who were already convinced this game wasn't going to be very good, it seems you and a few others have found the lowest score/harshest review and are championing that as the best/most honest one (probably because it agrees with the things you already decided were problems). Again, I haven't seen it, and I would normally like to watch it before commenting but I can't, I'm in a school computer lab with no headphones. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[plagiarize]

You have to separate mainstream perception and popularity from the actual (ontological) properties of the game design in question. Sure, the franchise is huge in terms of brand value, but the actual characteristics of those games weren't straight-up copies of the same contemporary blockbuster games at the time - it still retained its own identity in visuals, audio, story and most important of all; gameplay. Thus, my initial post was an explanation why some people are not against change in itself, as it can lead to interesting new takes on the same core idea of an established series. But when you straight up copy other features from other mainstream games, you lose the creativity and innovation in your change of direction and the series loses any unique identity it once had, as its characteristics become AAA blur.

fair enough. i don't see it being a worrying trend though, or something new for the Tomb Raider series, which was criticised for adding too much action to it's very first sequel back in 1997.

the story was praised in its debut for being cinematic. trying to be more cinematic may make the game seem more like others here in 2013, but again, it's nothing new for the franchise.

the franchise hasn't been innovative since 1996, but that hasn't stopped a lot of those sequels from being good. when it aped Sands of Time platforming with Legend, for example... that made it a better game.

if I saw this as a worrying trend, as you may do, then I might be concerned by it, but gaming is only creatively stifled if you look at games which have budgets in multi millions... and those are always going to have to go after sales.

 

[CorrisD]

While I think it's a shame that Tomb Raider fans feel like this isn't a Tomb Raider game at all and feel betrayed or something, I really have to ask which Tomb Raider games you are fans of?

Wasn't Guardian of Light critically well-received, especially on GAF, even though it's arguably just as much of a departure gameplay-wise compared to the original Tomb Raider? I do have fond memories of playing Tomb Raider 1 and Tomb Raider 2 on the PS1 with their unique gameplay and platforming at the time. I have no reservations saying that those games probably haven't age gracefully at all. The only thing I remember about Tomb Raider III is Lara running around Venice and it having a much bigger focus on gunplay. Oh and a T-rex. After that, the franchise fell into a pit of mediocrity until the reboot of sorts at the start of this gen. I believe I played either Underworld or Legends, but the one I did play seemed much more action-adventure oriented with middling gunplay and some light puzzle mechanics.

I guess what I'm saying is when people say they are Tomb Raider fans, at what point in the franchise are we talking about? The original three games that came out well over a decade ago? The subsequent crap games that nearly killed the franchise? Or the current gen attempts at rebooting the franchise that, at best, were good to slightly above average?

For the record I'm interested in this seemingly Uncharted-esque Tomb Raider game, but for me, the thing that is scaring me away is the apparent me-too checkbox of current gen game mechanics like shallow RPG mechanics and collect-a-thon stuff.

To me guardian of light was great because it was never billed as a "Tomb Raider" game that fans knew, it didn't even use the name because evidentially the developers knew it was different too.

It was an adventure of Lara Croft but it wasn't "Tomb Raider", which is where to me my disinterest of this game started; if this was Lara Croft and the Uncharted island or whatever then Inwouldnt have a problem what they did, but IMO this isn't "Tomb Raider"

 

[The Mango Sentinel]

I didn't know fans didn't like Legend. That was the game that brought me back into Tomb Raider. Well I don't know if I should say brought me back since I had played them all up until that point....but Legend certainly made Tomb Raider fun again.

 

[SlasherJPC]

Yup, it's really frustrating.

It's almost like the news media, people watch the channels their opinions are aligned with. If their opinions aren't aligned, they shun the other channels or don't pay attention to the other side of the coin. They just want their opinion justified and supported by "professional" people.

Yeah this is sadly the case. I really don't care about what others think about a game per say, all that matters is ultimately my view/fun with a game. Granted I like hearing and knowing who has similar opinions and more so If they mention something one day I can take notice and try it out. I don't always agree with how critical some people around here can be (sometimes the hate/statments get really out of hand) but it's good to see the other side of things especially when people go in depth about what they don't like and why. I'm a more forgiving person when it comes to games and flaws, seeing both the good and the bad is ultimately why I like doing my reviews without scores, and always try to say what I found was negative or postive. When someone blantly just goes out of their way to say a game sucks because it doesn't fit their criteria of a masterpeice, that's when I get annoyed.

 

[Voice of Reason]

It's reviews like this that reaffirm that when this industry takes one step forward it only ends up taking two steps back.

 

[nbthedude]

You have to separate mainstream perception and popularity from the actual (ontological) properties of the game design in question. Sure, the franchise is huge in terms of brand value, but the actual characteristics of those games weren't straight-up copies of the same contemporary blockbuster games at the time - it still retained its own identity in visuals, audio, story and most important of all; gameplay. Thus, my initial post was an explanation why some people are not against change in itself, as it can lead to interesting new takes on the same core idea of an established series. But when you straight up copy other features from other mainstream games, you lose the creativity and innovation in your change of direction and the series loses any unique identity it once had, as its characteristics become AAA blur.

By TR 4, the series was basically an action game with hordes of enemies in industrial landscapes. Crystal Dynamics dialed the series back but they modernized other aspects, like the tedious jump backs from the edge of ledges. I don't recall of people called that the "dumbing down" of Tomb Raider at the time, but I wouldn't be surprised if they did. Then again, Core had trampled the series into the ground so much by that point that maybe they were just happy to see someone else take the reigns. I know I was.

My only point is that I really really get suspicious when any game becomes "evidence" in the crusade against the "dumbing down" of games. It's like everything that happened to the series previously gets crammed into this procrustean narrative of the trajectory of modern game design. It rings false to me and it is my first sign that people aren't even talking about the game itself but abstracting to some meta-narative they have developed about the industry as a whole. Hey, the original Tomb Raider series became more and more "action oriented." was that also proof of the dumbing down of games back in 1999? Lobbying some meta-narrative of the direction of the game industry on any one particular game is not a fair thing to do and it often results in a highly skewed picture of reality.

The original TR games undoubted borrowed a lot from games that came before them too. It borrowed heavily from Prince of Persia. It stole lock on mechanics from other games and made us all wish it would have stolen cameras from Legend of Zelda. Borrowing aspects of other games is not something new to the series. Nor is it automatically proof in favor of some meta-narrative about the homogenization of videogames. It is how it incorporates the elements it borrows that matters.

As for the narrative disconnect, I don't mind having that discussion and I think it is an interesting one. But I also think it is a criticism that can be lobbied at virtually 80% of the games on the market if not more. It seems highly disingenuous to me to cherry pick this as the game that deserves to be beaten up on that principle. I also don't see how this wasn't also a problem with every previous TR game. Lara was always a mass murderer from game one. Does it really matter in terms of narrative disonance whether we are talking about hundreds of people or a thousand?

 

[MormaPope]

I haven't seen the video, and I'm sure the comments are atrocious, as most YouTube comments are, but aren't you SORT OF doing the same thing? Assuming you're some of the people who were already convinced this game wasn't going to be very good, it seems you and a few others have found the lowest score/harshest review and are championing that as the best/most honest one (probably because it agrees with the things you already decided were problems). Again, I haven't seen it, and I would normally like to watch it before commenting but I can't, I'm in a school computer lab with no headphones. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

The reviewer explains his criticisms fluently, and articulately. He isn't hyperbolic at all and gives credit where it's due.

 

[plagiarize]

Yeah this is sadly the case. I really don't care about what others think about a game per say, all that matters is ultimately my view/fun with a game. Granted I like hearing and knowing who has similar opinions and more so If they mention something one day I can take notice and try it out. I don't always agree with how critical some people around here can be (sometimes the hate/statments get really out of hand) but it's good to see the other side of things especially when people go in depth about what they don't like and why. I'm a more forgiving person when it comes to games and flaws, seeing both the good and the bad is ultimately why I like doing my reviews without scores, and always try to say what I found was negative or postive.

scores breed debate. a lot of people here wouldn't be arguing about a lot of these reviews if they didn't have scores. a large part of the debate has become 'that review didn't sound like an 8.5'. it's all meaningless really, apart from for the dev teams whose bonuses have become leashed to metacritic I suppose.

I found it equally distasteful when people do that too. We have people accusing reviewers in this very thread of being bribed to slap high scores on their reviews. Based on what? Their own pre conceived notions. It's all depressing.

 

[M.W.]

It's reviews like this that reaffirm that when this industry takes one step forward it only ends up taking two steps back.

Good reviews?

 

[Revven]

I haven't seen the video, and I'm sure the comments are atrocious, as most YouTube comments are, but aren't you SORT OF doing the same thing? Assuming you're some of the people who were already convinced this game wasn't going to be very good, it seems you and a few others have found the lowest score/harshest review and are championing that as the best/most honest one (probably because it agrees with the things you already decided were problems). Again, I haven't seen it, and I would normally like to watch it before commenting but I can't, I'm in a school computer lab with no headphones. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

I'm not really doing the same thing. I read the other reviews/watched their video reviews. They weren't as thorough about the game and just made very blanket statements I could apply to any other game released last year. And any negative points they do bring to TR, which are aligned with some other reviewers, for some reason the score at the end doesn't reflect those negative comments; instead it reflects the positive comments made in the reviews. They use "fluff" words to avoid actually going in-depth about the game itself. Look at the beginning of the Gamespot video review to see what I mean (when you can).

Machinima's review has a few positive comments to make along with the negative and the score reflects those thoughts much better. It's not as disjointed. I'm not saying this just because I don't find great interest in this TR. I would be saying it even if the scores were the opposite, where it somehow would get a 2 or something but the review's content was littered with positive comments and a few negatives. And of course they explain in explicit detail how TR executed poorly here, there, and here. The reviewer didn't just make a blanket statement or two about the story and moved on; he went out of his way to explain how he felt about it and what was wrong with it.

So to reiterate, the scores in some of these reviews just seems disjointed while Machinima's is an example of a review that isn't disjointed. The reviewer remarked on some things he enjoyed, but still knocked those segments; he was able to see that the game has some enjoyment but some of the gameplay hampers things. And went into detail about WHY/HOW those things were good or how/why they were bad. It didn't feel fake to me like some of the reviews come off as.

Look at GT's review as an example of a poor review. (And they tend to do pretty poor reviews to begin with, IMO). Anyway, I've gotta dip out of this thread and study now.

 

[FlyinJ]

it's all meaningless really, apart from for the dev teams whose bonuses have become leashed to metacritic I suppose.

More like the entire industry is ruled by Metacritic. If a AAA game gets less than 80 on Metacritic, you most likely will never see a sequel.

 

[nbthedude]

I didn't know fans didn't like Legend. That was the game that brought me back into Tomb Raider. Well I don't know if I should say brought me back since I had played them all up until that point....but Legend certainly made Tomb Raider fun again.

I loved Legend and I consider myself a fan of this series.

It's those people who liked Angel of Darkness who are the real weirdos.

 

[Can Crusher]

I'm glad Tomb Raider is getting good reviews, it looks great.

 

[nbthedude]

The reviewer explains his criticisms fluently, and articulately. He isn't hyperbolic at all and gives credit where it's due.

Except most of the criticism he lobbies were also true of the original TR games. Lara was always a mass murder that was apparently the "good guy" for example. That is nothing new and it certainly is nothing that this game deserves to be so unfairly singled out for given that it is also true of 80% or more of videogames in general.

 

[Voice of Reason]

Good reviews?

With bad reasoning.

 

[angelfly]

I'm willing to give the game a try. I didn't like the Tomb Raider games until I played Legend so I'm willing to give CD a chance with taking it in a new direction since their previous reboot attempt made me like the series.

 

[plagiarize]

The reviewer explains his criticisms fluently, and articulately. He isn't hyperbolic at all and gives credit where it's due.

saying the main character's name wrong, is to people looking to discredit a bad review a lot like handing a gun to someone who wants to shoot you, and then turning your back to them. it doesn't invalidate anything you say, but it makes it incredibly easy not to take you seriously.

how do you fuck up something like that?

 

[Mango Positive]

I preordered it on Steam. I'm seldom disappointed in games that get across the board positive reviews. I'm actually glad it's not like the other Tomb Raider games. They've been upfront about the whole "reboot" thing. Gameplay changes are a part of that. I'd much rather play Uncharted Raider than Tomb Raider anyway.

 

[SlasherJPC]

It's all depressing.

I absolutly agree. Not to get off topic but honestly I play games to have fun and I even do my review stuff for fun as well. Yes I have to look at what I find doesn't work, etc because I can't just gloat about a game, no game is perfect and never will be. I just know gaming for me is a huge stress relief and I love it. Truly love playing games. Can't say it any other way. So to see how it sometimes brings the worst out of people with the bribing talk, my opinion is better then yours talk, etc BS...it really is sad. I hope people that are truly interested in this new Tomb Raider. Just play the damn thing. Then come back and offer your thoughts without slamming other people down, regardless if it's postive or negative.

 

[XANDER CAGE]

Looking forward to seeing how the final game is. Really hope all the nastiness was poorly handled PR/marketing/telling-your-producer-to-shut-up moments. I would love for this to secretly be just a great action game with a great female protagonist.

 

[Andrew.]

saying the main character's name wrong, is to people looking to discredit a bad review a lot like handing a gun to someone who wants to shoot you, and then turning your back to them. it doesn't invalidate anything you say, but it makes it incredibly easy not to take you seriously.

how do you fuck up something like that?

I havent seen the review yet, but maybe the guy is just a fucking idiot?

 

[plagiarize]

I havent seen the review yet, but maybe the guy is just a fucking idiot?

I don't think so. He makes valid points, but he undermines his credibility every time he says Laura.

 

[MormaPope]

saying the main character's name wrong, is to people looking to discredit a bad review a lot like handing a gun to someone who wants to shoot you, and then turning your back to them. it doesn't invalidate anything you say, but it makes it incredibly easy not to take you seriously.

how do you fuck up something like that?

That's the smallest thing that could ever be used against someone's criticisms. If someone honestly gives that much a fuck about character name pronunciation that they don't take someone seriously, that's borderline cult mentality.