Tomb Raider Review - An Icon Reborn

[Falseprophet]

Rant over. Susan, you Cadillac of reviewers you, how would you want them to handle the combat/character problem? A stellar review as always...

You know, I don't have a good answer to that. If her gameplay development mirrored her character development, the game would have to play much differently, and while it might still be quite fun, it wouldn't be the adventure romp that we want it to be. And don't get me wrong, the combat is a lot of fun. I loooooooved pulling off headshots with my bow, and setting guys ablaze with napalm arrows. (Shooting guys off zip lines? The best.) So I'm not sure what the best solution would be. I love both halves of the game, and it's easy enough to mentally put aside the fact that there's really no reason for Lara to be such a good shot. As much as we want games to deliver good characterization and strong stories, we can't ignore the fact that they also have roles to play as games.

What comes to my mind at the moment is doing something like James Bond in Casino Royale (book or Daniel Craig film): capable and confident at the beginning, but gets thrown in over his head against people who are much more dangerous than he bargained for, and barely escapes with his life, then becoming the cold, ruthless agent we know.

So maybe something similar could have been done with Lara: starting as a medium-rare badass, and through the travails of the story becoming a well-done badass by the end. But maybe that would have diminished the dramatic impact of the story?

 

[Susan Arendt]

Rant over. Susan, you Cadillac of reviewers you, how would you want them to handle the combat/character problem? A stellar review as always...

You know, I don't have a good answer to that. If her gameplay development mirrored her character development, the game would have to play much differently, and while it might still be quite fun, it wouldn't be the adventure romp that we want it to be. And don't get me wrong, the combat is a lot of fun. I loooooooved pulling off headshots with my bow, and setting guys ablaze with napalm arrows. (Shooting guys off zip lines? The best.) So I'm not sure what the best solution would be. I love both halves of the game, and it's easy enough to mentally put aside the fact that there's really no reason for Lara to be such a good shot. As much as we want games to deliver good characterization and strong stories, we can't ignore the fact that they also have roles to play as games.

What comes to my mind at the moment is doing something like James Bond in Casino Royale (book or Daniel Craig film): capable and confident at the beginning, but gets thrown in over his head against people who are much more dangerous than he bargained for, and barely escapes with his life, then becoming the cold, ruthless agent we know.

So maybe something similar could have been done with Lara: starting as a medium-rare badass, and through the travails of the story becoming a well-done badass by the end. But maybe that would have diminished the dramatic impact of the story?

In this specific case,I think it would have. What makes her journey so meaningful is that she starts off ordinary. She reacts and behaves much like you or I would, and then finds the strength within to do what she believes must be done. Now, in future games, perhaps, we could have the kind of arc you're describing, but I think for this origin story, it was very important for us to see Lara as ordinary so that we could then find her even more extraordinary by the end.

 

[Saxnot]

So, i like the review, and it certainly looks promising, but i need to nitpick.


Susan said on her review that it has become difficult to take Lara Croft seriously in recent games. I understand she feels strongly about lara, but this is a game series that has never really had stellar stories or character development. even before the legends/underworld era, you went from room to room murdering dozens of tigers and wolves,using perfectly function 2000-year-old mechanics, to get to entirely undisturbed treasure. not exactly a realistic or meaningful series.

That said, i am not against them trying a new direction, and trying to make the series 'grow up' , as it were. though i have to say, even if it was schlocky, legends and underworld were at least good schlok. even at its (arguably) worst, Tomb Raider was better than most action games

 

[m19]

So maybe something similar could have been done with Lara: starting as a medium-rare badass, and through the travails of the story becoming a well-done badass by the end. But maybe that would have diminished the dramatic impact of the story?

But even a medium-rare badass, or a complete badass for that matter, can't possibly defeat that many people at once.

 

[sageoftruth]

The fact that Laura gets used to killing people so quickly proves what we already knew. She's a psychopath.

I couldn't help but remember one of Yahtzee's old reviews where he said that Lara's perfect mate would be Jason Vorhees because she was basically...EVIL!

He put it something like: "In the last game she would occasionally look down at her hands after killing someone as if to say "What kind of monster have I become?" but really, we all know she's off her rocker."

OT: I tried playing one Tomb Raider game in the 90's and couldn't get far in (even with a walk through) because I couldn't ever latch on to a 'hidden' ledge in some canopy or something. That left 99% of the game unfinished.

Looks like things have gotten better.

As for people whining about the reboot it should be clear that the need was unavoidable: After silliness like the giant octopus how could they "Up" things next? Lara unearthing fire breathing dragons?

...

Lemme guess: They did that somewhere, didn't they?

Well, she does kill one in Tomb Raider 2, along with giant spiders, T-Rexes, and rocket-powered stone guardians.

 

[Sehnsucht Engel]

I've been looking forward to this game for a while now, and I'm glad it's getting positive reviews. I thought it came out today, and freaked out a bit. >_> I haven't been able to finish Hitman Absolution yet, and want to do that first. Also noticed how Square Enix was involved with both games. Though they made final fantasy too, so my impression has only been increased a little...

 

[Susan Arendt]

So, i like the review, and it certainly looks promising, but i need to nitpick.


Susan said on her review that it has become difficult to take Lara Croft seriously in recent games. I understand she feels strongly about lara, but this is a game series that has never really had stellar stories or character development. even before the legends/underworld era, you went from room to room murdering dozens of tigers and wolves,using perfectly function 2000-year-old mechanics, to get to entirely undisturbed treasure. not exactly a realistic or meaningful series.

That said, i am not against them trying a new direction, and trying to make the series 'grow up' , as it were. though i have to say, even if it was schlocky, legends and underworld were at least good schlok. even at its (arguably) worst, Tomb Raider was better than most action games

Oh, I agree, it was always meant to be very B-movie, but it also got rather ridiculous and lost its creativity. I quite enjoyed Legend, Underworld less so, but it was fun enough. But that Lara had really run her course.

Also, no, Angel of Darkness was not better than most action games. No, no, no, no. *shudder*

 

[kannibus]

Not sure if this was mentioned before, but did anyone else unconsciously dub Far Cry 3 over this?

Seems to be the same plot mechanic...

 

[gamernerdtg2]

What annoys the hell out of me is that "cartoony" and "unrelatable" matter. It's a friggin game! Why do people even care about the alleged "disparity" between her frailty and her assasin like qualities? Here we go with story driven b.s. and art in games - why can't we leave the game part alone?

Well, it must be that we're now phasing out backwards compatability and used games so nevermind. Ok yah, the old games are all cartoony and unrelatable.

 

[Zhukov]

What annoys the hell out of me is that "cartoony" and "unrelatable" matter. It's a friggin game! Why do people even care about the alleged "disparity" between her frailty and her assasin like qualities? Here we go with story driven b.s. and art in games - why can't we leave the game part alone?

Well, it must be that we're now phasing out backwards compatability and used games so nevermind. Ok yah, the old games are all cartoony and unrelatable.

Well, pardon us for having different tastes than you. How dare we?!

Personally, I like playing something every now and again that doesn't feel like it was made for a child.

Not sure if this particular game qualifies, not having played it and all, but we shall see.

 

[CaptOfSerenity]

Why even call her Lara Croft? If they wanted to tell a new story in the Tomb Raider setting with a brand new character, then why didn't they just do it? She isn't anything like her except in her name: She doesn't act like her or sound like her and she barely resembles her.

While the new Lara might be good (some might like her better, which is fine), this seems like a slap in the face for everyone who liked Lara Croft and the Tomb Raider franchise before.

I'll pass on this one.

Why do fans have to take every change on their favorite well-trodden, overdone series as personal attacks? Do you really think the world revolves around you?

Seems like they wanted to add some depth. Seems like you could keep an open mind.

First of all, I wouldn't say I'm a fan, I like the franchise but not all that much, so imagine what an actual fan might think.
For the sake of the argument, let's say that Tomb Raider is well-trodden and overdone, isn't it much more of a reason to start a new IP or at least make a new protagonist?
Didn't really get that last part. I don't recall making any selfish demands.

I'm very open to new things and changes as long as they make sense. Making a new and completely different character and acting as if she's one of the most well-known characters gaming doesn't make sense. Imagine if they make a new Mario game where Mario is a teenager who doesn't have a mustache and talks with an American accent.

The part where you say "it's a slap in the face." As if trying to inject a franchise with some life and creativity is a "slap in the face" to fans is ridiculous. You know what the alternative is? Let the franchise die. Then, everybody would be like "make me a classic-style Tomb Raider game." Then it comes out and no one gives a fuck.

 

[Daystar Clarion]

For people asking is it a good PC port. While I don't know that because the game isn't out yet, Square Enix has been very good to PC community with their previous games.

But that's not why I'm here. I am here to give you some good hair news. Finally, something is being done about the hair in video games. AMD has some new fancy tech that makes Lara's hair look just fabulous. Very next-gen stuff. And as a PC gamer, I can't completely ignore shiny things and new technologies, so this makes me excited about the future of hair in gaming. It's a pretty big leap from how hair's been rendered in the past. It's also a huge plus for this game, but I already decided to get it anyway.

LOOK!
http://kotaku.com/5986952/thank-amd-for-the-best-video-game-hair-ever/gallery/1

The tech behind it: http://blogs.amd.com/play/tressfx/

Aww shit son, dem hair physics!

Glad I got it on PC then

 

[xPixelatedx]

I haven't played a Tomb raider since 3, so forgive me if everyone knows something I don't, but Wow, that video... It looks like typical next gen copypasta.

I don't care that they changed Lara, that's fine because I didn't care about her from the start. I honestly don't care if the main protagonist is a pink bunny with a bow tie. I played the original Tomb Raider games because it was fun to dive through tombs, explore labyrinths and solve puzzles. Everything I've seen of this new game look like Uncharted, just with a different protagonist and story. Not interested in the least.

Interesting review though. The game doesn't seem bad, it just simply is not my cup of tea at all.

 

[KingsGambit_v1legacy]

Wow, did they forget to use any colours when designing this game? o.o It's the most dreary, bland looking colourless game I've seen!

 

[Gordon_4_v1legacy]

The only thing that really bugs me is the whole leveling of skills; its a mechanic that tends to irritate me outside of RPGs and when it's tied to stat-stacking in the multi-player it just leaves a bad taste in my mouth.


Other than that, I'd give this game great consideration as a purchase, because even if she starts as a soft spoken and terrified normal person it still makes her potential journey more interesting than watching Nathan Drake start as a smug twat, be a smug twat, and end as a smug twat.

 

[Doom972]

Why even call her Lara Croft? If they wanted to tell a new story in the Tomb Raider setting with a brand new character, then why didn't they just do it? She isn't anything like her except in her name: She doesn't act like her or sound like her and she barely resembles her.

While the new Lara might be good (some might like her better, which is fine), this seems like a slap in the face for everyone who liked Lara Croft and the Tomb Raider franchise before.

Simple.

If they had made this game without the Tomb Raider title, people would be calling it a Tomb Raider rip-off, and it'd be constantly compared to those games. The differences are enough to be noticeable to those who enjoyed the games, but they are also similar enough to have a lot of comparisons.

We're going to have to agree to disagree on that point I guess. I don't see how someone would've though that this is a Tomb Raider game if they had named the game and its protagonist differently.

 

[Doom972]

Why even call her Lara Croft? If they wanted to tell a new story in the Tomb Raider setting with a brand new character, then why didn't they just do it? She isn't anything like her except in her name: She doesn't act like her or sound like her and she barely resembles her.

While the new Lara might be good (some might like her better, which is fine), this seems like a slap in the face for everyone who liked Lara Croft and the Tomb Raider franchise before.

I'll pass on this one.

Why do fans have to take every change on their favorite well-trodden, overdone series as personal attacks? Do you really think the world revolves around you?

Seems like they wanted to add some depth. Seems like you could keep an open mind.

First of all, I wouldn't say I'm a fan, I like the franchise but not all that much, so imagine what an actual fan might think.
For the sake of the argument, let's say that Tomb Raider is well-trodden and overdone, isn't it much more of a reason to start a new IP or at least make a new protagonist?
Didn't really get that last part. I don't recall making any selfish demands.

I'm very open to new things and changes as long as they make sense. Making a new and completely different character and acting as if she's one of the most well-known characters gaming doesn't make sense. Imagine if they make a new Mario game where Mario is a teenager who doesn't have a mustache and talks with an American accent.

The part where you say "it's a slap in the face." As if trying to inject a franchise with some life and creativity is a "slap in the face" to fans is ridiculous. You know what the alternative is? Let the franchise die. Then, everybody would be like "make me a classic-style Tomb Raider game." Then it comes out and no one gives a fuck.

I don't mind changes - I actually liked the changes made by Crystal Dynamics in Legend, Anniversary and Underworld - They kept the spirit of the game and it's iconic features, while improving game mechanics.

In this game, it seems like they just made something that's completely unrelated and then called it Tomb Raider. If you had played any of the other games, you would know what I mean. A game that has nothing to do with what the franchise was about isn't "injecting a franchise with some life and creativity", because such fundamental changes don't leave room for improving anything about it because none of it is there anymore.

Letting a franchise die is also a good option. Maybe this franchise was already milked to death and doesn't need any more installments? I'd prefer that it would die, rather than have it become something completely different.

 

[Legion]

Why even call her Lara Croft? If they wanted to tell a new story in the Tomb Raider setting with a brand new character, then why didn't they just do it? She isn't anything like her except in her name: She doesn't act like her or sound like her and she barely resembles her.

While the new Lara might be good (some might like her better, which is fine), this seems like a slap in the face for everyone who liked Lara Croft and the Tomb Raider franchise before.

Simple.

If they had made this game without the Tomb Raider title, people would be calling it a Tomb Raider rip-off, and it'd be constantly compared to those games. The differences are enough to be noticeable to those who enjoyed the games, but they are also similar enough to have a lot of comparisons.

We're going to have to agree to disagree on that point I guess. I don't see how someone would've though that this is a Tomb Raider game if they had named the game and its protagonist differently.

I didn't say they'd think it's a Tomb Raider game, I said it'd be similar enough to be called a rip-off. Like how people are complaining about how Bungie's new game Destiny is just like Halo, purely because of some aesthetic similarities.

 

[Weresquirrel]

I get kind of a Farcry 3 vibe from some of the things I've heard about this new Tomb Raider. A young and frail traveller forced by their surroundings to harden themselves in order to fight back against the wilderness and save their friends. I gotta say though, it's peaked my interest.

I never actually played any of the original Tomb Raiders as I didn't have a Playstation, so the first one I played was Underworld, and it was quite silly. Too silly for me to really get into it.

Might pick it up. There's not been much else that's making me take notice.

 

[LordDPS]

I suggest waiting for more reviews to come in, particularly user reviews, before making your decision.

User reviews. Urgh.

I laugh at the notion of basing actual purchasing decisions on those manic, poorly written displays of blatant agendas.

Like every review ever?