Where do you see the Tomb Raider franchise going?

[Gengisgame]

...personally hoping for a return of actual Lara Croft.

Y'mean the one you subjectively like the most? Gotcha.

The one that if people hadn't supported wouldn't have led to the existence of this one.

When it comes to sequels/reboots there is often a degree of justified entitlement from fans, the purpose of most sequels capitalizes on the support of old fans now you have there attention and the money they gave them for the original.

 

[Johnny Thunder]

What I would want to see is for the franchise to immediately reboot, or rather, de-boot, right back to the old Lara but with the current gameplay mechanics. But of course the question is what do you think is gonna happen...

Well, they're gonna make a third game in this reboot series, and when that is done they're gonna republish all three games again in a trilogy pack. What happens after that though, I have no idea. They obviously are having a hard time financing the making of these games. If they can't do it anymore without having to rely on deals with big publishers then the series is going into a financial insecure future.
Everything is possible: is the franchise gonna be sold to Microsoft? Are they gonna reboot it again after this trilogy? Are they gonna downsize and make smaller, safer games?

 

[go-10]

I see it going downhill like any series after the 4th installment. Hopefully by then the series will move forward Lara will marry Sam and settle down to enjoy life as a college professor.

being realistic the series will go dormant for a couple of years and make a resurgence with a reboot in 2030

 

[EyeReaper]

Well, if it wants me to buy in, It'd better be dinosaurs.

I mean, seriously. When has literally any piece of fiction become better with the removal of dinosaurs?

Speaking of which, where's my Dino-crisis reboot?

 

[Estarc]

Considering the shit sales due to the botched launch I think we'll have to wait an see how it does after its PC and PS4 releases. Microsoft might have been content to bankroll this one to try and sell some Xbox Ones, but I doubt they'll do it again unless the franchise goes full exclusive.

 

[Something Amyss]

Given it's a Squenix franchise? Episodic content.

Also, depending on how heavily you are into gameplay-story segregation, every time Lara visits one of the optional Tombs, that's supposedly Lara recovering artifacts.

Well, that is kind of a problem. There's no real Tomb Raiding in the story, and the existence of optional tombs doesn't really help that. And honestly, I don't like the idea of Lara stopping in the middle of this frantic bid for survival to explore ancient ruins anyway. At least, not in this context with current Lara.

That's my other problem with TR:TNG, though. Lara's development was incredibly uneven, sometimes even without actual combat sequences breaking things up. But the combat sequences do basically give the impression of Lara going from timid to stone cold badass to timid again. I would have liked to see her develop more over the story. Maybe even learn to kill more casually, or possibly even just break under the pressure and that's why she's suddenly so cool with blowing away two dozen guys. But one moment, she's struggling with a gun, the next she's murdering people in ways that would make Ash from Evil Dead say "too far!" and then she's back to...whatever default Lara is in this game.

And yeah, I'm actually cool with little or no Tomb Raiding in this game. Though if I were introducing this, I probably would have started with one and had things go south from there. I also would have held off on combat, though, so probably ten people would play my Tomb Raider reboot. But I really did want to see her become Lara Croft, Tomb Raider, and I just didn't get that. Not really. Not consistently.

Probably because Nu-Lara doesn't really do much. She upgrades her 80-500 year old equipment with 80-500 year old junk and lets pretty much everyone but Sam die because she can't be bothered to be proactive about anything(and that's solely because Sam was important to the people on the island) without someone else doing the majority of the heavy lifting.

90s buzzword marketing jargon aside, the story is inherently a reactive one. In fact, a lot of Lara's adventures in the past have been reactive.

Some people don't really like when a beloved franchise suddenly changes tone as drastically as TR2013 did.

As though Tomb Raider was particularly tonally consistent prior to this.

 

[happyninja42]

Given it's a Squenix franchise? Episodic content.

Also, depending on how heavily you are into gameplay-story segregation, every time Lara visits one of the optional Tombs, that's supposedly Lara recovering artifacts.

Well, that is kind of a problem. There's no real Tomb Raiding in the story, and the existence of optional tombs doesn't really help that. And honestly, I don't like the idea of Lara stopping in the middle of this frantic bid for survival to explore ancient ruins anyway. At least, not in this context with current Lara.

That's my other problem with TR:TNG, though. Lara's development was incredibly uneven, sometimes even without actual combat sequences breaking things up. But the combat sequences do basically give the impression of Lara going from timid to stone cold badass to timid again. I would have liked to see her develop more over the story. Maybe even learn to kill more casually, or possibly even just break under the pressure and that's why she's suddenly so cool with blowing away two dozen guys. But one moment, she's struggling with a gun, the next she's murdering people in ways that would make Ash from Evil Dead say "too far!" and then she's back to...whatever default Lara is in this game.

And yeah, I'm actually cool with little or no Tomb Raiding in this game. Though if I were introducing this, I probably would have started with one and had things go south from there. I also would have held off on combat, though, so probably ten people would play my Tomb Raider reboot. But I really did want to see her become Lara Croft, Tomb Raider, and I just didn't get that. Not really. Not consistently.Pretty much my thoughts on the subject too. The way she would stop during her bid for survival to wonder at these ruins, and spend time (while Sam is potentially dying), to explore some artifact, was very...eh, whatever that phrase was Jim Fucking Sterling Son used once. Lubdonerotically Disambiguation, or whatever (yes I know that's not the phrase, I'm just being silly, and I can't recall the actual term at the moment). It would've been better if they had actually incorporated the tomb raiding into the main quest. Like having Sam being trapped behind some big door to their main complex, and the only way to unlock it, is to go into various tombs and find keys/switches/whatever, to open the way in. Then, she's forced to actually get her Archeologist freak on in a way that's supportive to the narrative. But nope, they just stuck them on the side. And given my personal dislike of jumping/platform puzzles, made me avoid them like the fucking plague. If they're optional, I don't want shit to do with them. If you make them core to the game (like Prince of Persia, or Portal for example), then I'm fine with it. I'm going in, fully aware this is a puzzle/platformer game. But if you just stick them on the side? Pssh, my Lara playthrough left that island without hardly any relics, and that was fine with me.

 

[Snotnarok]

An open world reboot, with RPG elements, online co-op and whatever else is popular regardless if it clashes with the series.

As much of a joke as the above is, I really hope they don't do that. Really sick of open world games and RPG mechanics being shoved where they shouldn't be.

 

[Evonisia]

Much as I liked Rise of the Tomb Raider, I can only see the series as treading water from here on out. It's either going to keep staying the same, or it will homogenise itself to different, newer trends. The first reboot game was basically Uncharted but not shit, so I imagine desperately chasing trends is the only path of logic the publisher has.

 

[Zenja]

I haven't played ROTR yet but the first one was merely OK to me. The originals hold nostalgia for me but going back to play them shows their age. It feels like they are trying to mimic Uncharted due to a heavier focus on narrative, but I really need to play ROTR before I can say how well they did this. The original games had somewhat of a story to them but I wouldn't call them story driven. More like they faked a story for the sake of level design, which according to Rhianna Prachett that is exactly what they had her do on the first one - which is why Lara is all "I am scared and alone" in cutscenes and them homicidal in the gameplay.

I think it would be smarter for them to focus more on puzzles, level design/plaforming, stealth and maybe throw in very hard to defeat enemies like mini bosses more often than minion style enemies. Then put the QTE's on the mini bosses as finishers or something and get rid of environmental QTE's which are extremely annoying to me. (That is if you insist on having QTE's - at least make them for fun, not story progression in a supposedly story driven game)

Honestly, Uncharted came out and made a better, more story driven Tomb Raider style franchise. (I say that as a Tomb Raider fan) Then Tomb Raider rebooted to compete and so far is just doing the same thing it did before all over again with a facelift/less confident Lara and a better marketing campaign. Granted, this is without me having played ROTR yet.

I find it very underwhelming myself. As for where it is going, if I had to guess, not even the developers know. Hopefully back in the direction of confident Lara. Hopefully in the direction of us finally finding out why her father was so important and how he died and who her mother even was besides the lady in the cutscenes(s) with her as a girl. Hopefully, giving us some knowledge as to how she grew up and letting us play around in her mansion again. Hopefully, we see some actual character development and not just remakes of TR2013 where Lara acts a little braver in each game. I would also like to see some competitor archaeologist, or some kind of recurring nemesis. If this reboot was to make the series story driven and give Lara character, I would like to see them do exactly that and not assume that changing the character archetype is 'giving her character'.

 

[felbot]

well new lara is a complete dumb ass with no fun and the reboot was more interested in shooting and shit platforming instead of actually raiding tombs.

I fucking hope they scrap it all and bring back old lara.

 

[Something Amyss]

Pretty much my thoughts on the subject too. The way she would stop during her bid for survival to wonder at these ruins, and spend time (while Sam is potentially dying), to explore some artifact, was very...eh, whatever that phrase was Jim Fucking Sterling Son used once. Lubdonerotically Disambiguation, or whatever (yes I know that's not the phrase, I'm just being silly, and I can't recall the actual term at the moment). It would've been better if they had actually incorporated the tomb raiding into the main quest. Like having Sam being trapped behind some big door to their main complex, and the only way to unlock it, is to go into various tombs and find keys/switches/whatever, to open the way in. Then, she's forced to actually get her Archeologist freak on in a way that's supportive to the narrative. But nope, they just stuck them on the side. And given my personal dislike of jumping/platform puzzles, made me avoid them like the fucking plague. If they're optional, I don't want shit to do with them. If you make them core to the game (like Prince of Persia, or Portal for example), then I'm fine with it. I'm going in, fully aware this is a puzzle/platformer game. But if you just stick them on the side? Pssh, my Lara playthrough left that island without hardly any relics, and that was fine with me.

Ludonarrative dissonance, which is basically what Gethsemani was already describing with the disparity between story and game, yeah.

Your example would have fit in perfectly fine, and made things make "sense." Not so much real-world sense, but "I can suspect my disbelief because I'm playing a video game with lightning spirits and women who can be impaled with minimal ill effects" sense.

That was sort of the weirdest element for me. There wasn't much in the way of platforming, and I think of that more than the shooting when I think Tomb Raider. I bet a lot of people do. And they could have actually included more of that and had it more in-line with rookie Lara's personality. Instead, we get a competent shooter with a story that seems to fight it.

 

[cikame]

...personally hoping for a return of actual Lara Croft.

Y'mean the one you subjectively like the most? Gotcha.
OT: I adored the reboot

You mean the one you subjectively like the most? Gotcha... wait what are we doing here?

OT: I was put off by a lot of things in the reboot, the voice actress, the decision to make her breathe into your ears constantly, the other characters, the awkward animations, the torture porn of Lara through the entire game, the gameplay is good but everything around it annoyed me.
I simply miss the confident aggressive Lara from the old days, i've been playing through all the original games recently and while i certainly don't miss the level design the games have a sense of style and panache, i like the old Lara and how weighty the movement controls were, i'd like to see a return to some of that but i think the new fans probably outweigh the old.

 

[Darth Rosenberg]

You mean the one you subjectively like the most? Gotcha... wait what are we doing here?

'Cept I wasn't trying to assert any Lara as The Actual Lara - which, to me, is a ridiculous thing to do with an icon. Have preferences, sure, but surely trying to frame one iteration as the 'actual' is rather meaningless.

You didn't elaborate, so I've no idea what you'd like - but often 'actual' seemingly translates as nothing but 'the first version', ergo many seem to just be whining about things changing. I'm sure other versions will iterate back to the rather lifeless, busty, Bond-esque sociopath of the classic era, so I suppose people just need to be patient...

I did enjoy previous TR's and Lara's, but I never really gave a toss about her as a character or representation of a human being before the reboot.

(I only saw your extensive edit after I replied, btw)

 

[happyninja42]

Ludonarrative dissonance, which is basically what Gethsemani was already describing with the disparity between story and game, yeah.

Your example would have fit in perfectly fine, and made things make "sense." Not so much real-world sense, but "I can suspect my disbelief because I'm playing a video game with lightning spirits and women who can be impaled with minimal ill effects" sense.

Yeah pretty much. It would at least make the exploring and tomb raiding be part of the actual game. Maybe ROTR does this better, since she's actively going out to explore these ruins, not washing ashore on one of them by accident, and being forced to deal with a survival issue instead of her archeological expedition.

That was sort of the weirdest element for me. There wasn't much in the way of platforming, and I think of that more than the shooting when I think Tomb Raider. I bet a lot of people do. And they could have actually included more of that and had it more in-line with rookie Lara's personality. Instead, we get a competent shooter with a story that seems to fight it.

I remember almost nothing of that game, except the terrible writing, and sacrificial lambness of the supporting cast. The only part I enjoyed out of that whole game, well 2 parts, was when that old, crochety guy from the ship, got tired of dealing with the hostage situation across that gap, and just bumrushed the thug over the edge. He was like "Fuck this noise, I'm going out how I chooose to, and I'm taking this asshole with me! He's not using me as a bargaining chip!" *Jumps off cliff like a boss*

The other being where the other female character, ( I forget her name, the black woman with the curly hair who stayed on the shore the whole time), gave Lara some lip, commenting "People sure do have a tendency to die around you." I remember shouting at the screen. "Thank you! Finally someone else fucking noticed this terrible writing!!"

 

[cikame]

You mean the one you subjectively like the most? Gotcha... wait what are we doing here?

'Cept I wasn't trying to assert any Lara as The Actual Lara - which, to me, is a ridiculous thing to do with an icon. Have preferences, sure, but surely trying to frame one iteration as the 'actual' is rather meaningless.

You didn't elaborate, so I've no idea what you'd like - but often 'actual' seemingly translates as nothing but 'the first version', ergo many seem to just be whining about things changing. I'm sure other versions will iterate back to the rather lifeless, busty, Bond-esque sociopath of the classic era, so I suppose people just need to be patient...

I did enjoy previous TR's and Lara's, but I never really gave a toss about her as a character or representation of a human being before the reboot.

(I only saw your extensive edit after I replied, btw)

Yeah i replied before considering expanding the conversation, i apologize.
By actual Lara i refer to the character as she was depicted for 17 years before the reboot, the new Lara is pretty radical as far as reboot's go, in most reboot's large parts of a characters appeal are kept, Dante is still a wise-ass joke cracking overpowered half demon, the upcoming reboot Agent 47 is identical, it's hard to say who Rad Spencer was as he was on the NES, as for Lara she loses her confidence and lust for adventure and gains... a voice actress with a slight American inflection? She loses her dual guns, her epic never not cool swan dive, she's constantly falling off of things, screaming nervously, being scared but for some reason still being capable of mass murder, only this time in much more horrific ways.
We all know the original Lara Croft, as you say she was and is an icon, i just don't see the new one as a deserving replacement.

 

[The Purple Grape]

I see it going further away from the over confident (some would call arrogant, but hey negative characteristics on female characters, can't have that) anti-hero who doesn't care who he kills and doesn't spend the time whining like she is some crappy YA story and her expressions that make her look like a child who has just found out they can't have that ice cream they wanted. But he as long as she is covered up, that's what is important. That means its not sexist at all. And why is there still no dual pistols and acrobatics? Not generic enough for the new series?

 

[happyninja42]

You mean the one you subjectively like the most? Gotcha... wait what are we doing here?

'Cept I wasn't trying to assert any Lara as The Actual Lara - which, to me, is a ridiculous thing to do with an icon. Have preferences, sure, but surely trying to frame one iteration as the 'actual' is rather meaningless.

You didn't elaborate, so I've no idea what you'd like - but often 'actual' seemingly translates as nothing but 'the first version', ergo many seem to just be whining about things changing. I'm sure other versions will iterate back to the rather lifeless, busty, Bond-esque sociopath of the classic era, so I suppose people just need to be patient...

I did enjoy previous TR's and Lara's, but I never really gave a toss about her as a character or representation of a human being before the reboot.

(I only saw your extensive edit after I replied, btw)

Yeah i replied before considering expanding the conversation, i apologize.
By actual Lara i refer to the character as she was depicted for 17 years before the reboot, the new Lara is pretty radical as far as reboot's go, in most reboot's large parts of a characters appeal are kept, Dante is still a wise-ass joke cracking overpowered half demon, the upcoming reboot Agent 47 is identical, it's hard to say who Rad Spencer was as he was on the NES, as for Lara she loses her confidence and lust for adventure and gains... a voice actress with a slight American inflection? She loses her dual guns, her epic never not cool swan dive, she's constantly falling off of things, screaming nervously, being scared but for some reason still being capable of mass murder, only this time in much more horrific ways.
We all know the original Lara Croft, as you say she was and is an icon, i just don't see the new one as a deserving replacement.

To be fair, she's got a lot of the traits of the original Lara.

1. Significant bust (And let's be honest, that was probably her most defining trait for YEARS of that franchise)
2. A desire to explore ancient ruins. (You say she lost her lust for advanture, but remember, the whole reason they were out there was Lara was trying to discover some lost ruins or whatever. You don't fund and lead an expedition like that without a "lust for adventure"
3. Same hairstyle
4. British-esque accent.
5. Tendency to run into things she needs to kill to continue her adventure.

As far as the character herself goes, that's a pretty decent translation, while still allowing her to be different. And yes, she's not as campy and jokey as the original Lara was, but that's because Lara was designed in the 90's. We've changed in our desire for what we look for in a protagonist. The original Lara was pretty damn shallow, there wasn't a ton of material there to work with. She was basically just a big tittied Indiana Jones with a gun fetish, running around ruins. So yeah, new Lara is very different from her, because they actually gave her some character. They gave her flaws, she's not a perfect avatar without issues. And frankly I'm glad for the change.

I don't think they did a great job with the story itself, but I have no issue with them trying to make Lara a more relatable, realistic hero, who has problems that she has to overcome, instead of just being perfect and fully formed right out the gate.

They need to do a LOT of work with her though, as she's got her own problems as a character, but as far as comparing her to the original, she's a much more fleshed out, and realized person.