Tomb Raider 10th Anniversary Edition officially announced
- Thread starter Viewtiful Darkness
- Start date
Funky Papa
FUNK-Y-PPA-4
*does a little dance*
Funky Papa
FUNK-Y-PPA-4
Eff that, here's the PR
Nice to see it's gone multiplatform, smart move on Eidos' part... if Live Arcade ever raises that retarded 64MB limit, they should port it there too.
DS could handle a nice port of TR1 actually too. Hell, they could just port the NGage release and double the frame rate/draw distance.
DS could handle a nice port of TR1 actually too. Hell, they could just port the NGage release and double the frame rate/draw distance.
SolidSnakex
Member
Toby is leading this remake!
Funky Papa
FUNK-Y-PPA-4
I am damn ****ing sure MS will up the 64 limit, there's an important market for bigger games.
Viewtiful Darkness
Member
Funky Papa said:
They most likely will when they release the 256MB memory card this year. The limit would then be 256MB. Microsoft sets that limit because of the people who have Core systems.
Hitler Stole My Potato
Banned
No 360? Damnit. I would've picked this up too. A spruced up TR1 using the legends 360 engine would've been freakin' great.
SolidSnakex
Member
Y2Kevbug11 said:
It's real, TRC confirmed it just now. They must be far into development because its got to release this year.
SolidSnakex said:
Goddamn this is confusing.
Video leaks: CORE version that was recently confirmed cancelled
SCi says: Nice try Core, back to making shitty PSP puzzle games for you.
Core: We have exciting product to announce!
Everyone: Ooooh! CORE is gonna announce their awesome new tomb raider!
Core: Kidding! It's cancelled!
Eidos: Look over here, kiddies!
SolidSnakex
Member
quetz67 said:
That game looked better than Legend on the PS2, although the animation was behind it. So I doubt it'll look as good as Core's game.
Lord Error
Insane For Sony
Haha, nice! Can't wait. If they keep the PSP engine used in that video, that would be great!
Xdrive05
Member
Okay, some questions to clarify:
1. This is NOT the Core version (video here) that looked extremely awesome despite it being made by Core?
2. Is this going to be a remake along the same lines? IE: new moves and redone locations/models, but still based directly on the levels form TR?
3. This is NOT the leaked video version we've been going over, right? But something even newer?
1. This is NOT the Core version (video here) that looked extremely awesome despite it being made by Core?
2. Is this going to be a remake along the same lines? IE: new moves and redone locations/models, but still based directly on the levels form TR?
3. This is NOT the leaked video version we've been going over, right? But something even newer?
Dr Zhivago
Member
Bit strange they're just throwing away the Core version.
Expect Rebellion to announce Larry Craft : Mausoleum Explorer any day now.
Expect Rebellion to announce Larry Craft : Mausoleum Explorer any day now.
Correct. This is a different one made by Crystal Dynamics.Xdrive05 said:
I would assume so but until we get actual screens and video, we won't know.
Yes. It would appear that Eidos had both Crystal Dynamics and Core working on two separate remakes and then chose between the two.
Funky Papa
FUNK-Y-PPA-4
That doesn't look intelligent at all. Too many resources wasted. Maybe Core was working on the game, SCI/EIDOS was not happy with it and transferred the project to CD.Gribbix said:
Yes. It would appear that Eidos had both Crystal Dynamics and Core working on two separate remakes and then chose between the two.[/QUOTE]
Hope they made that choice based on quality.
Not that the TR:L PSP engine is bad, not at all, but it shows the typical PSP aliasing. But we cant know if the Core engine had the same problem and they just antialiased it for the video.
Hope they made that choice based on quality.
Not that the TR:L PSP engine is bad, not at all, but it shows the typical PSP aliasing. But we cant know if the Core engine had the same problem and they just antialiased it for the video.
Hope they made that choice based on quality.quetz67 said:
Not that the TR:L PSP engine is bad, not at all, but it shows the typical PSP aliasing. But we cant know if the Core engine had the same problem and they just antialiased it for the video.[/QUOTE]
I really doubt Core's engine was THAT spectacular. I don't think it looked like that in reality...many games look better than what they actually do. You know, typical.
SolidSnakex
Member
Y2Kevbug11 said:
Well atleast according to them it looked better and one reason they were angry about that video leaking was because the quality was so low it'd give people a bad impression of what it did look like.
Lord Error
Insane For Sony
Well, I don't know, that video had some image quality artifacting that looked very "PSP" to me, and the PSP games usualy look better on actual device than they do in the video.Y2Kevbug11 said:
That video did look better than TR:L PSP, but TR:L is a lot more complex game with physics and environments far beyond original TR.
You have got to be kidding. AoD was pretty damn great looking, and at 60FPS at that.Y2Kevbug11 said:I just don't buy that. Other than maybe MGSO, they'd officially have the best PSP graphics ever. And it's Core, when their last TR PS2 effort was pretty hideous.
I just replayed that level on my saturn version.
It looks hideous. Like unbelievable. But boy is that opening section with the pillars incredibly fun.
Maybe for the time, but I just played it and it is not good looking. The NPCs are very poorly modeled and the textures are extremely blurry. The environmental complexity is nice, but I really don't get the graphical raving over that game and I'm a HUGE TR fan.
It looks hideous. Like unbelievable. But boy is that opening section with the pillars incredibly fun.
Maybe for the time, but I just played it and it is not good looking. The NPCs are very poorly modeled and the textures are extremely blurry. The environmental complexity is nice, but I really don't get the graphical raving over that game and I'm a HUGE TR fan.
Funky Papa said:
I don't know. It's just that transferring one developer's incomplete work to another developer usually doesn't turn out well due to a lack of familiarity and having to work on a shaky foundation.
Also, it seems like CD likes to use all their own tools and engines. They were given the AOD engine but they decided against using it. They also wrote their own physics engine from scratch instead of just using a middleware engine like Havok.
Funky Papa
FUNK-Y-PPA-4
The saturn version hurt my eyes. Ugh.
I will get it because:
a) I am a Lara nut
b) I need more tombs. Legend was good, but I wanted more ruins and that calm feeling from the first two games.
I will get it because:
a) I am a Lara nut
b) I need more tombs. Legend was good, but I wanted more ruins and that calm feeling from the first two games.
SolidSnakex
Member
Y2Kevbug11 said:I just don't buy that. Other than maybe MGS
TR AoD was beautiful. The game itself had alot of problems, but the graphics engine wasn't one of those.
Guns N' Poops
Banned
Xdrive05 said:Yeah, that one was fantastic!
It kind of reminds you how the level design started degenerating after TR2, or even the first game.
Omg, I remember playing this *bows* By the way, where can I see that trailer of the cancelled Core Design version?
Xdrive05
Member
Funky Papa said:
1000000% agreed.
I just recently rented it on the xbox. But I have to say,
that King Arthur amusement park segment, following by finding the real tomb of King Arthur, was pretty great. That was really the only part of the whole game that made it feel like an actual (good) tomb raider game to me. The forklift thing was a little hokey but I still enjoyed it.
One of things I'm REALLY wanting from the remake is for the original soundtrack to return, even if it is remastered or orchestrated.
