• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Tomb Raider Review Thread!

Spazznid

Member
I just don't get how Tomb Raider Underworld 2 wouldn't have also quite plainly been playing it safe.

Look, I understand the pain of people that hate this change. Whether RE6 is a good game or not, it isn't what I want from a Resident Evil game... but I wouldn't rather play Dead Aim, or whatever previous low point of the series you want to highlight over it.

This is something that I fully understand. If a franchise changes, people should think like this. I can take the anger, and the dissatisfaction, but the games aren't ruined by changing.
 

SapientWolf

Trucker Sexologist
I'm sure you'll get more value out of TR than Crysis 3. C3 is only 5 hours or so and is mostly your typical military shooter, it's not nearly as open or experimental as 1. If you're playing them on consoles then that's even more reason to avoid it.
I liked Cry 3's multi. Not sure how TR stacks up in that department. And no, CoD is not a suitable replacement for Cry3's MP. Good grief no.
 

kunonabi

Member
I dont care about that at all. If this adventure shooter is a damn good adventure shooter then i will buy it. Ill judge the game on what it is, not what its "supposed" to be.

If they made this exact same game with "insert random protagonist" then I would still get it, the fact that it stars Lara Croft doesnt make it any better or worse to me.

Dont get me wrong, i understand your stance completely, its just that i dont care about that as much as a lot of others do. Game sounds like Uncharted to me and i happen to like Uncharted.

The problem is I consider this kind of modern adventure shooter to be crap regardless of how polished it is. I just don't care for shitty platforming, regen health, qtes, excessive set pieces, etc. etc. regardless of what the name is on the box.
 
I just don't get how Tomb Raider Underworld 2 wouldn't have also quite plainly been playing it safe.

Look, I understand the pain of people that hate this change. Whether RE6 is a good game or not, it isn't what I want from a Resident Evil game... but I wouldn't rather play Dead Aim, or whatever previous low point of the series you want to highlight over it.

It was not. This is coming from a huge fan of the series. It wasn't awful because it was a shooter...it was awful because it was poorly executed.
 
The problem is I consider this kind of modern adventure shooter to be crap regardless of how polished it is. I just don't care for shitty platforming, regen health, qtes, excessive set pieces, etc. etc. regardless of what the name is on the box.

Every game isnt for everyone. Thats something i like to stress in game discussions. Just because a game isnt for you doesnt make it crap.
 
This game/thread trully feels like ground zero for industry/design, hardcore/casual arguments. I love it. Sorry Lara had to be caught in a crossfire.

If you get stuck for 5 hours in a game, you should probably work on some critical thinking skills.

But whatever, people like you have obviously won. You've even got a "I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE FUCK TO DO MODE" that even highlights obvious places to jump. As if the visual cue without wasn't enough.

Fuck thinking. I need to smash open more crates to get XP that does absolutely nothing but give me gratification that XP appeared on the screen.

I kept re-reading this post; had to comment how much I love it.

IGN on Tomb Raider - How To Tell If You'll Love Tomb Raider

WhatMakesTombRaider1.jpg

....thanks IGN, you've perfectly attracted and warned all the appropriate people.


"batshit insane"

"life and death quick time events"

"awesome freedom"

"massively epic highly scripted set pieces straight out of a Hollywood blockbuster film"

-Video games 2013.

It's funny how this is almost a great description of Metal Gear Rising in some ways, and I love it for it. Does things very differently, and we were warned ahead of time that it would do things differently. Not sure if the same applied for the TR reboot.


Because for most of us it is a negative.

The times where a game had me stuck for days are for when I was a child with the time and lack of options to do better things. As a person that has little time to invest on my hobby I do not appreciate obtuse design created to make people "think". Entertainment can be draw in many forms, complexity for complexity sake is not one of them for me.

This "dumbing" down of games mentality is very frustrating to hear. The rating and the audience for this game is not likely going to stand and "think" for 5 hours to get through a section of this game.

I take offense to this. The reason is that the fact that I can't accommodate a significant amount of time to playing games, has no bearing on my enjoyment of playing them.

This idea that complex = more enjoyment is not always true. A joke is not always more funny if it has 7 layers of reference. A song is not always better if it is complex musically. There's also appreciation to simplicity, streamlining and so forth.

Tons of games are being made every year. There are games that cater to that complexity. This is not one of them. Doesn't make it any less enjoyable to those that want to play it. Harping the lack of complexity will not make any those that enjoy it, "Oh well, those hours of fun didn't count".

C'mon man. You get optional, OPTIONAL tombs in Tomb Raider. You can't see the thinking in something you can skip that takes too long for you, but giving others the option who relish in challenging puzzles.

1. You can still replay them.

2. Make your peace and understand this is not the same kind of game.

3. This is not the game for you.

A property should only be tied to the owner of that property.

Not that you are, but some people feel too happy that this game isn't for Tomb Raider fans. TR is going to have a more split fanbase than RE at this point. RE might have more sections split against each other, but this feels bigger.

Did you feel the same about Dead Space or RE4 death animations? Come on now. lol

You really want to compare games designed as horror games to games designed to be action-adventure? Not saying that can't happen in action-adventure at all, but is it so hard to see someone having a problem with that?
 

Spazznid

Member
It was not. This is coming from a huge fan of the series. It wasn't awful because it was a shooter...it was awful because it was poorly executed.

As a fan of the series, your position on whether the drastically different game is executed well or not is clouded...

I loved the game. Story may be meh, but gameplay is superb. If this game emulates that even a bit, then I count it as a success.
 

Varna

Member
PC no hud mods will save you.

It would be a start for me. Can't fix the regenerating health and ammo drops though. :(

A lot of games this gen have cool gameplay elements that are not too insulting on their own. Coupled with the ridiculous huds, radars and hints it's just ridiculous though.
 

kunonabi

Member
Every game isnt for everyone. Thats something i like to stress in game discussions. Just because a game isnt for you doesnt make it crap.

agreed. There are plenty of genres and franchises that I don't care for but I can respect them as good games. I consider the very foundations of these kinds of adventure shooter or whatever to be built on awful pillars of modern game design.
 
how many of these adventure shooters are there? I'm drawing a bit of a blank after the Uncharted series. obviously this has been made more like other franchises out there, but I'm with Dark10X who pointed out way back when, that there is far from an abundance of Uncharted-esque games being released. what has there been since uncharted 3 came out over a year ago?

Are you serious? All these recent third person games so similar barring a few mechanical differences. Pick one. Uncharted, Far Cry 3, Assassin's Creed, Splinter Cell, Army of Two, Gears, Dead Space 2 + 3, Resident Evil 6, Ghost Recon Future Soldier, Max Payne 3, etc. etc. etc. They're all cut from the same cloth. The colors might be different but all the tricks are the same. There's not one real Tomb Raider experience among them, and now Tomb Raider is in their lane as well.

I dont care about that at all. If this adventure shooter is a damn good adventure shooter then i will buy it. Ill judge the game on what it is, not what its "supposed" to be.

If they made this exact same game with "insert random protagonist" then I would still get it, the fact that it stars Lara Croft doesnt make it any better or worse to me.

Dont get me wrong, i understand your stance completely, its just that i dont care about that as much as a lot of others do. Game sounds like Uncharted to me and i happen to like Uncharted.

I enjoy the Uncharted series too. Uncharted 2 is one of my favorite gams this gen. I, personally, don't need ANOTHER series being Uncharted. The name on the box is supposed to mean something.

I just don't get how Tomb Raider Underworld 2 wouldn't have also quite plainly been playing it safe.

Look, I understand the pain of people that hate this change. Whether RE6 is a good game or not, it isn't what I want from a Resident Evil game... but I wouldn't rather play Dead Aim, or whatever previous low point of the series you want to highlight over it.

At least Underworld was a solid base for an ACTUAL Tomb Raider game. Say what you will about the camera and janky animation, but the sprawling levels and traversal between the massive puzzles was exactly what this series should've been heading towards and taking advantage of.
 
Are you serious? All these recent third person games so similar barring a few mechanical differences. Pick one. Uncharted, Far Cry 3, Assassin's Creed, Splinter Cell, Army of Two, Gears, Dead Space 2 + 3, Resident Evil 6, Ghost Recon Future Soldier, Max Payne 3, etc. etc. etc. They're all cut from the same cloth. The colors might be different but all the tricks are the same. There's not one real Tomb Raider experience among them, and now Tomb Raider is in their lane as well.

I dont think anyone is confusing Assassins Creed, Tomb Raider, Far Cry 3, and Gears of War with each other. There more than just a few mechanical differences between those games.
 

Shosai

Banned
You really want to compare games designed as horror games to games designed to be action-adventure? Not saying that can't happen in action-adventure at all, but is it so hard to see someone having a problem with that?

If you think it's weird when a college student blows up a bunch of dudes skulls just 5 minutes after throwing up over the notion of killing someone, then you must be just as thrown off by seeing a hardened cop stomping a bunch of zombie heads.

My name is Shosai and I have no idea what context means.
 

Ninjimbo

Member
It was not. This is coming from a huge fan of the series. It wasn't awful because it was a shooter...it was awful because it was poorly executed.
RE6 was executed about as well as one could imagine considering it was going the length to please every single RE fan. Some segments of the campaign are busted, but when the game works, it is great. Easily one of the best TPSs out there.
 
I dont think anyone is confusing Assassins Creed, Tomb Raider, Far Cry 3, and Gears of War with each other. There more than just a few mechanical differences between those games.

I never said anyone is mistaking one game for another, but they're all clearly taking fruit from the same tree. The "set piece" laden gameplay, character archetypes, cutscene and narrative style, the violence, the kill animations, the pacing, the collectethon, the box checking, XP and bars increasing, etc. They all go in the same pile in terms of what they're trying to accomplish, and the tricks they use to get there. It's exactly why the last few E3's have been so underwhelming. All these action/adventure/shooter hybrids are playing in the same sandbox, and stealing sand from each other to build their sand castles.
 
As a fan of the series, your position on whether the drastically different game is executed well or not is clouded...

I loved the game. Story may be meh, but gameplay is superb. If this game emulates that even a bit, then I count it as a success.

Not really, because I judged it as a shooter. I had no problem with 4 and I had minimal problems with 5. And I would've had no problem with 6 being a shooter if it would've just done it right. But 6 just felt like shit. It failed at doing things that basic shooters have been doing competently for years. Taking cover was a hassle and it was pretty pointless anyway. The way the herb system worked was so pointless. The part that you say is meh, the story, I actually enjoyed, once it all came together. I certainly enjoyed Leon's campaign and I enjoyed parts of Ada's, but Jake and Chris had awful campaigns because of the shitty mechanics, not to mention some terrible level design at some parts. Jake's section in the snow was a fucking nightmare. And I could go on and on for a while. Of course this is all my opinion, but I, like someone said earlier, judge a game on what it's aiming to be, not what I want it to be. RE6 aimed to be a shooter and to me it failed terribly.

RE: ORC even did certain things better than it.
 

Old Lace

Member
Did people complain this much about Guardian of Light? It was really different from the old school Tomb Raider games too.

I kind of understand the complaints though. Before a lot of previews came out it looked like the game wasn't going to be so loaded with crazy kills and stuff.
 

kurahador

Member
It was not. This is coming from a huge fan of the series. It wasn't awful because it was a shooter...it was awful because it was poorly executed.

The execution was fine. The direction however was not.

Seems like they didn't have a solid plan on which direction to take, and decided to mesh together a couple of different ideas into 1 game instead.
 

kunonabi

Member
Did people complain this much about Guardian of Light? It was really different from the old school Tomb Raider games too.

I kind of understand the complaints though. Before a lot of previews came out it looked like the game wasn't going to be so loaded with crazy kills and stuff.

No, Guardian of Light was a good game and it wasn't a reboot or mainline sequel anyway.
 

RagnarokX

Member
Did people complain this much about Guardian of Light? It was really different from the old school Tomb Raider games too.

I kind of understand the complaints though. Before a lot of previews came out it looked like the game wasn't going to be so loaded with crazy kills and stuff.

Was Guardian of Light the new direction for the franchise?
 

Andrew.

Banned
Derricks only real issue of this game now is how he is going to be able to manage all of those Lauara screams that he deems orgasmic enough to consider pornographic. Godspeed man. I hope you do your best on the volume control while your parents aren't in your vicinity.

I'm sorry but he approached the trap, what, yesterday?
 

mujun

Member
It's not about having to 'figure out where to go', and you almost never had to do that in TR games either. It was always about figuring out HOW to go, not WHERE to go. Most of the time it's immediately obvious where you progress in these games, it's just not always readily apparent the how of it.

And that is partially the point of the game, that's correct. That you're EXPLORING a tomb and using skill sets you've learned throughout the course of the game and applying them meaningfully to overcoming a set of challenges, whether that be in puzzle form, combat form or exploration form. The whole point of these exercises is that they ARE challenging, because the best developers trust the gamers enough to understand that a genuine sense of accomplishment is probably the greatest feeling games can offer - and such a feeling is only possible when applied against real gameplay challenges. They don't think of it in terms of 'well the average QA tester finished this segment in 15 minutes, that's far too long for today's modern ADHD-addled audience to sit and think', they think of it in terms of 'the only players worth catering to are those who are going to put in the effort to actually apply themselves and overcome great gameplay design challenges.'

I see what you mean. I do however think that your "greatest feeling" comment is subjective, though.
 

MormaPope

Banned

I've seen most of the game through leaked footage on youtube, I'm not going to spoil it for you, but most of the entertaining parts of the game are the set pieces. Puzzle solving is brain dead, and the combat is always contained into small areas.

I'd bet you will gush about the game no matter what though, so I don't even know why I'm responding to a gif.
 
Top Bottom