kunonabi
Member
It's possible to create games without having to shoot dudes all the time. They could have developed a game with Lara fighting for survival and discovering herself without having to murder a hundred people.
Tomb Raider VGA 'Survivor' Trailer
- Thread starter Larson Conway
- Start date
It's possible to create games without having to shoot dudes all the time. They could have developed a game with Lara fighting for survival and discovering herself without having to murder a hundred people.
what kinda thinking do you hate?
because uncharted established itself as a game where you shoot/kill a bunch from the start. whereas tomb raider proved a long time ago you dont need a vast number of human enemies to fight. the "something else" people are trying to picture this as that it may not be is "tomb raider."
You and me are on the same page, RagnarokX. I think there's a general sense among many developers that if they're not constantly shoving some new shiny thing at gamers, they will get bored and trade-it in after a day. So this leads to developers frequently getting in the way of their own games...
SURVIVORMAN: THE GAME - Featuring Lara Croft
game starts with you getting stuck in a cave after a cave-in, and you having to survive into an intricate open world underworld with puzzles and traps everywhere. All combining into one ultra puzzle that you gradually complete over the course of the game to unlock the final way out... through the secret of all tombs! ho ho ho. pay me later, SquareEnix.
To be fair, the old games had a lot of human killing, too; but that was a problem even with them. It was just tedious and boring and broke the pace of the exploration and puzzle solving. They need to dial it back, not ratchet it forward.
I'll have to disagree, not entirely, with you there. The main skill needed to master jumps in some of the older TR games is getting past the awful controls and movement. Also I didn't find most of the level designs that good either, as they're built around empty areas with a jumping section, and a puzzle that usually involved gears or pushing blocks. I've played TR 2, 3 and Chronicles (and just a tiny bit of the underwater section of Underworld), so I'm glad they're trying to mix things up.
The thinking that the enemies you face in the game contrast with the character you're playing ("oh, drake is such a nice guy, why he killed thousands during his journey?"). I think this kind of things should be relegated to movies, as implementing them in games will mostly affect the gameplay.
It depends on which old game. Tomb Raider 1 and 2 I think could hardly be defined as having a "lot" of anything killing... you were in combat for at best 5~10% of the game.
Shepard said:
I am not mad they are trying to mix things up. Lara Croft: Guardian of Light changed so much with the overall concept but was a stunning, AAA game that most Tomb Raider fans adore. It is HOW they are mixing it up. We had just one franchise that played anything like Tomb Raider; now we have zero.
Whatever else you feel about the TR series, this is the problem many fans have. They just turned this game into so many others on the market... and now we have no games like Tomb Raider on the market.
that's not the thinking im exhibiting. i never said lara shouldn't kill people because i think she's a delicate flower. i don't think she should kill so much cause it goes against what the series is primarily about.
kunonabi
Member
I agree.I never really cared for it in the original games either and it just got worse and worse as it went on.
sublimit
Banned
From the classics only TR2 had lots of human enemies and i still think it was perfectly balanced.It never became the main focus.
TR4 also had quite a few human enemies but it was nothing compared to the platforming,puzzles and exploration it had.
Tomb Raider 1 is ok. I think TR2 could have dialed it back a bit in Venice and the sunken ship sections. Maybe it had more to do with the fact that combat in the old games usually amounted to standing in place or back/sideflipping and firing the pistols until whatever you were shooting at died. Whenever a human enemy came up it was more of a "Oh fuck, this again?" moment. The divers were really annoying. Rats, tiny spiders, and any bird enemy were kinda pushing it. TR2 had the best video game spider moment until Xenoblade came out
Tomb Raider 1 is ok. I think TR2 could have dialed it back a bit in Venice and the sunken ship sections. Maybe it had more to do with the fact that combat in the old games usually amounted to standing in place or back/sideflipping and firing the pistols until whatever you were shooting at died. Whenever a human enemy came up it was more of a "Oh fuck, this again?" moment. The divers were really annoying. Rats, tiny spiders, and any bird enemy were kinda pushing it. TR2 had the best video game spider moment until Xenoblade came out
oh yeah, fucking Venice. gah
Let me tell you that back/sideflipping pistol shit led to some truly horrifying moments when some ancient beast was attacking me and the camera was out of view because I had freakflipped all over the place and was just wildly aiming into the darkness lol
But in Tomb Raider 1, I broke my ankle. Walking down a dark corridor, hearing footsteps and shit. Nothing...nothing... then a raptor jumps out at me! I jumped so far out of my seat that when I landed I fucked my ankle up. Good times, good times.
I wish someone made a new thread for that stream as I missed about half of it.
But anyways, watching that renewed my faith in the game somewhat. The hub system could be interesting if there's lots of branching paths and things to do in each one. They mentioned that the hubs get larger and more complex as you go through the game, which sounds like what I want out of the experience.
Hell no, those were the best parts of the game. If anything they should have dialed it back on the oil rig and opera levels.
But anyways, watching that renewed my faith in the game somewhat. The hub system could be interesting if there's lots of branching paths and things to do in each one. They mentioned that the hubs get larger and more complex as you go through the game, which sounds like what I want out of the experience.
Tomb Raider 1 is ok. I think TR2 could have dialed it back a bit in Venice and the sunken ship sections. Maybe it had more to do with the fact that combat in the old games usually amounted to standing in place or back/sideflipping and firing the pistols until whatever you were shooting at died. Whenever a human enemy came up it was more of a "Oh fuck, this again?" moment. The divers were really annoying. Rats, tiny spiders, and any bird enemy were kinda pushing it. TR2 had the best video game spider moment until Xenoblade came out
Hell no, those were the best parts of the game. If anything they should have dialed it back on the oil rig and opera levels.
I didn't even mention the offshore rig, which I think if I were remaking TR2 I would cut completely. Those levels aren't interesting at all.
I get it, but when you say "plays like tomb raider", the only thing that comes to my mind are the earlier ones, as I think none of the most recent ones was able to achieve this. And taking the old games in mind, this should be a "platformer/puzzle" game, genre that has some notable examples, like the Pop series. I'm not defending that they do a game solely based on gunfights, but they already said they are working on the puzzles, so I think that this will make the gameplay more interesting (again, I tried to play both 3 and chronicles recently, and couldn't get into them). And I forgot about Guardian of Light, which I think, from a gameplay standpoint, is the best in the series.
Now I get it. Was under the impression that your thoughts were directed to her character, not the game itself (mostly due to the first comment that brought this topic here, earlier in this page), sorry for that.
Hey I was pretty impressed with what they showed in the IGN demo. I have been a bit weary about the lack of platforming and exploration and after seeing them meess around in the hub, I feel much better. There seems to be lots of stuff to find from resources to relics (I honestly wasn't even sure there were treasures in this game as stupid as that sounds) and that hub was mostly just jumping around and searching the environment. I did skip around a bit, so that may not be totally accurate, but it seemed that way. I don't like to watch too much as to not spoil stuff for myself. And the gear-gating seems cool as it will give you access to places you couldn't get before.
This was probably the best thing I have seen on the game so far since I read those early preview articles. I'm not sure it will win over the most pessimistic of people here (and I totally get why people aren't happy with what has been shown), but as someone who was somewhere in the middle of hating this game and being super excited, I feel a bit better now.
This was probably the best thing I have seen on the game so far since I read those early preview articles. I'm not sure it will win over the most pessimistic of people here (and I totally get why people aren't happy with what has been shown), but as someone who was somewhere in the middle of hating this game and being super excited, I feel a bit better now.
timetokill
Banned
This and more in "Iwata Asks: Silent Hill developers through time"
I've never agreed with this complaint about Nathan Drake or other similar characters when a non violent solution is non existant in the games. Clown car bad guys crawl out of the woodwork and shoot. Your option is to shoot back or die. I don't think the designers are concerned with the disconnect it creates with the narrative and context of the story.
But thats also the issue with this TR game. It doesn't bother me so much that Lara will have to engage these guys in combat. Its the quantity and the manor in which its portrayed.
Make it impossible for Lara to win a shootout with more than 2 bad guys. Make it to where she has to use trickery or her surroundings to win. They're so keen on the Hunger Games relation, yet that Katniss chick hid like coward and didn't take unnecessary risks unless she had to.
I think it will be a fun game, I'm hoping the exploration segments are enjoyable and are a significant part of the game. All that said, the game isn't what it maybe should have been. I'm not too cynical to enjoy it though.
Yeah, I'd say the real problem isn't that she's killing dudes, it's how much the game appears to focus on it. Why do the dudes even need to be in the scenario? Couldn't she just be shipwrecked on a mysterious island covered with ancient tombs and objects displaced from time and deal with animal life, supernatural threats, and occasional human enemies?
Like the scenario is kinda like a Bermuda Triangle type thing. They could have sections of the game where Lara stumbles onto a small group of displaced WW2 era axis soldiers and she has to fight or sneak passed them.
Really with this whole scenario it should have been like Tomb Raider Land. Like a Tomb Raider Amusement Park. A mysterious island covered in ruins from civilizations across time and space. It would give them free reign to cover the island in tombs and other ruins that could be accessed from an open world without having to worry about geography and mix cultural architectural styles and legends in interesting ways.
I do think most people in this thread, whether they're excited for this game or ready to shit on it the day it drops long for the day where certain games don't have certain bullet points shoehorned in because the publisher needs something easy to market.
Didn't some Capcom bigwig say that they felt Resident Evil needed to compete with the CODs of the world? Why? Why would they ever think that? Honestly I think "TEH CAZZUELS" would rather play something similar to the original series. They already have COD and Gears and others for all the shootbang they could ever want.
Didn't some Capcom bigwig say that they felt Resident Evil needed to compete with the CODs of the world? Why? Why would they ever think that? Honestly I think "TEH CAZZUELS" would rather play something similar to the original series. They already have COD and Gears and others for all the shootbang they could ever want.
We wont be able to see this until the game ships, but the gameplays I've seen so far, show her using lots of the environment elements to win the fights (specially pronounceable in the E3 demo).
Net_Wrecker
Member
I don't see this tanking, it'll do decently at the very least. It's a crowd pleaser, for better or for worse. With the right marketing push, it will find an audience.
And after it's all said and done, I'll still pick it up, as long as it isn't jank. I'll be bitter the whole time, but I have a soft spot for action/adventure titles.
Most of the combat in that stream was bow + arrow and firearms.
chickdigger802
Banned
Man... after playing through binary domain, and a bunch of spec ops... I think i'm tired of games trying to tell me some cool story or something, but make me shoot shit all the time.
Meh. I'd buy this game day one if someone can confirm that there are a total of 20 bad dudes in this game (killing them is optional).
Why do games that try to make cinematic immersive experience, never get the 'cinematic' part right? In movies, the action is at most... what 30% of the film?
Meh. I'd buy this game day one if someone can confirm that there are a total of 20 bad dudes in this game (killing them is optional).
Why do games that try to make cinematic immersive experience, never get the 'cinematic' part right? In movies, the action is at most... what 30% of the film?
The Temple of Xian was terrifing for any arachnophobe... those big ass spiders n the dark, oh manTR2 had the best video game spider moment until Xenoblade came out
I didn't see the stream, I was talking about the E3 demo with her shooting the barrels, the lamps, rolling barrels over enemies... seemed pretty varied.
The Temple of Xian was terrifing for any arachnophobe... those big ass spiders n the dark, oh man
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ou2ZAxxu2JM
Lara has to deal with breast cancer.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3JUrhh9VC8
Oh shit! I just realized! This game is basically Crystal Dynamics taking George Wood's advice from this review, except they made her an attempted rape victim instead of giving her breast cancer.
well I have to admit I am SHOCKED, just like George Wood said I would be lol
NotTheGuyYouKill
Member
I hope there's a really good balance of combat, traversal, and exploration.
Rhianna Pratchett's writing this game, right? Terry Pratchett's daughter. Anyone read any work by her? Is she good?
I only know that she wrote Heavenly Sword and Mirror's Edge and other stuff I don't know.
Did she write any books?
says she wrote Mirror's Edge, Dungeon Hero, the Overlord games, Heavenly Sword and Prince of Persia. Not exactly a stellar track record. Not even close
I did read somewhere that her dad expects her to sort of take over the Discworld series when he goes? Also, she looks like a bizarro Morgan Webb.
It has about a 0% chance of having the same quality of writing/story and like-able characters. And just overall production qualities since it's not an exclusive game.
NotTheGuyYouKill
Member
Hahahaha, oh my God, I didn't notice that till you mentioned it.
Yeah, I read an article saying the same about the Discworld series.
I heard Heavenly Sword's story was pretty good, Mirror's Edge less so. I'm not familiar with Overlord, and for Prince of Persia, she didn't do the whole thing.
I hope the story ends up being more "Amy Hennig" than "Richard fucking Morgan".
I think the production values are pretty good for this game, but I am leaning closer to your stance on the quality of writing and characters. Amy Hennig and the cast of Uncharted feels like lightning in a bottle, everything came together perfectly. Amy writes a great, fun story (even if it's well-trodden) and the cast has insanely good chemistry with each other (heck, just watch the latest episode of Emily Rose's show Haven which guest-starred Nolan North and you can see they have great chemistry right off the bat).
The premise and potential for this type of story gets me excited, but I really hope they don't drop the ball, especially after all this talk about "emotion".
Tomb Raider came first.
Uncharted got its ideas from previous games (Tomb Raider being a big influence).
Get it straight.
They're talking presentation, not premise and on that note, this game does borrow a lot from Uncharted.
Assuming they're talking about this tomb raider game, it's pretty obvious they're copying uncharted here. Uncharted 1 may have been more of a TR game but moved away with 2 and 3 to a more setpiece and action driven focus and that's exactly what this is copying instead of previous TR games.
I guess it's because I don't play many shooters that shooter conventions don't bug me. I understand the previews that complain about it and the people complaining about it here, but I only play games like Gears and Uncharted like twice a year. I should say, the idea doesn't bug me; poor implementation does. Think about the hand to hand combat in Uncharted and that is what I despise.
As for the people complaining about franchise genocide, I don't really see what the radical difference is between this and a game like TR Legend. Lara is an action hero in both games. She does action-hero things. The same goes for the platforming.
I think I'm going to love this game when it comes out. It seems like a game made just for me. Character action games are my thing.
As for the people complaining about franchise genocide, I don't really see what the radical difference is between this and a game like TR Legend. Lara is an action hero in both games. She does action-hero things. The same goes for the platforming.
I think I'm going to love this game when it comes out. It seems like a game made just for me. Character action games are my thing.
Are the Uncharted games really some gold standard of game storytelling? C-grade sub Solomon's Temple fare with the occasionally witty one liner and the same bog standard one dimensional characterization we come to expect in the industry. I do sometimes enjoy Sully and Drake's back and forths in the levels they share together, but other than that the stories have been really forgettable.
Not that I think Tomb Raider will surpass even this modest bar though
Ninjimbo said:
Legend is probably closest to this one, but even then the comparison is only skin deep. These are games where puzzle and platforming is still more central to the foundation than any of the action is. Where death is actually available to the player if they fuck up, you don't just auto catch ledges like they say you do in this one.
But take Legend out of the equation, and it just gets further and further away. This game is just Uncharted with ultra gore and a upgrade system; Tomb Raider was a puzzle/platforming game more in the Prince of Persia vein than anything else. Combat was like the EIGHTH priority in these games.
That means absolutely nothing. It is perfectly possible for the new TR to take cues from Uncharted even if Uncharted took cues from the old TR.
Uncharted doesn't play like old Tomb Raider. This new Tomb Raider appears to be more influence by Uncharted than old Tomb Raider. A copy of a copy.
Gunpei_Yokoi
Neo Member
They are searching for a new and big audience.
Tomb Raider saga was burn-out.
Tomb Raider saga was burn-out.
Are the Uncharted games really some gold standard of game storytelling? C-grade sub Solomon's Temple fare with the occasionally witty one liner and the same bog standard one dimensional characterization we come to expect in the industry. I do sometimes enjoy Sully and Drake's back and forths in the levels they share together, but other than that the stories have been really forgettable.
Not that I think Tomb Raider will surpass even this modest bar though
That was my point. For video game standards ND is held up there near the top, even if most of those same people probably refuse to give Obsidian the time of day and consider them lesser than Bioware and Bethesda.
NotTheGuyYouKill
Member
Are the Uncharted games really some gold standard of game storytelling? C-grade sub Solomon's Temple fare with the occasionally witty one liner and the same bog standard one dimensional characterization we come to expect in the industry. I do sometimes enjoy Sully and Drake's back and forths in the levels they share together, but other than that the stories have been really forgettable.
Not that I think Tomb Raider will surpass even this modest bar though
But there's nothing wrong with that. It's basically the video game equivalent of a blockbuster film. I mean, Star Trek '09 doesn't tell a great story "Oh raggedy bunch of misfit recruits on their first mission must band together to stop a homicidal psycho". But it's fun and the cast has great chemistry. Uncharted's basically like that. It's not trying to tell some grand sweeping narrative about the nature of humanity (though occasionally we might see things like that in the traits and nature of some characters), but that's not really the goal, is it? Something like The Last of Us would be more geared for that type of tale.
Which I don't mind. I'll be honest, I never really played the old TR games. I just played some of TR2 when I was younger. It was alright. I preferred Syphon Filter. But Uncharted is one my favourite franchises, period. If it plays similar to that, if it's fun, and if it tells an interesting (not necessarily good, but fun/interesting/engaging story), it's generally enough for me.
Third person character action games are pretty much my favourite, and this sort of game fits right into the genre I'm interested in. Adventure-horror type thing, you know.
Man who cares what many gamers hold near the top for video game standards. Many of these silly fools think Final Fantasy VIII has a good story or some shit
Sure, I mean, there's nothing wrong if you love it. I would disagree that it's the videogame equivalent of a blockbuster (more like the videogame equivalent of one of those made-for-DVD copycat movies that wish they were a blockbuster), but in the end if you find it fun, it's fun. I just don't think they're any type of standard Tomb Raider needs to be living up to, is all. Frankly I don't even think Tomb Raider NEEDs a story other than "crazy mystical artifact rumoured to be hidden in the world, DISCOVER IT"
Yeah, there is definitely another direction they could have went. That said, this still looks entertaining and fun for what it is and I have no qualms about playing it. Because like I said, I play games for fun and will play anything that looks fun. I love hard as nails hardcore games and I enjoy games I can just kick back and enjoy the ride with.
I'm just a gamer and have been since the Atari 2600. Thinking that you have to play certain types of games in order to be considered a gamer is nonsense, in my book. Not implying you meant that either, I'm just saying. Being a gamer to me means you will play any and all kinds of games, just so long as they look like something you can have a good time with.
As far as this goes, I think it will be hit and miss and will probably get critically hammered, but I will still play it at some point. I just want to see Lara become Lara and think it will be a fun experience.
But there is something wrong with it. Video games shouldn't be progressing towards becoming like movies where player input has less and less importance. There are plenty of games where you can shoot, so special emphasis should be placed on what makes this game different. Turning the platforming and exploring into a bunch of scripted sequences is a step backwards. It can be fun and interesting, but I still think it's settling for less and reducing diversity, which is a major problem in the industry.
NotTheGuyYouKill
Member
Man who cares what many gamers hold near the top for video game standards. Many of these silly fools think Final Fantasy VIII has a good story or some shit
Sure, I mean, there's nothing wrong if you love it. I would disagree that it's the videogame equivalent of a blockbuster (more like the videogame equivalent of one of those made-for-DVD copycat movies that wish they were a blockbuster), but in the end if you find it fun, it's fun. I just don't think they're any type of standard Tomb Raider needs to be living up to, is all. Frankly I don't even think Tomb Raider NEEDs a story other than "crazy mystical artifact rumoured to be hidden in the world, DISCOVER IT"
Eh, I appreciate the attempt that CD is making (as hilariously bad as their PR gets sometimes trying to explain it) at trying to tell an interesting/"deeper" story. Maybe they succeed, maybe they fall, but at least they seem to genuinely wanna try. It's just something I like.
This is my problem with gaming in general now.
If they want to take my beloved franchises like Splinter Cell and turn it into a RPG with a stealth system and open world, alright I'm interested in seeing how it is.
But we don't get something like that (doesn't have to be a RPG, just an example). We never get something like that. We get linear areas in Hitman and auto headshots in Splinter Cell with reduced stealth, most of the RPG elements and some skills in Elder Scrolls yanked out with nothing better to replace it. And they're rewarded with GOTY by the gaming press that is supposedly comprised of dedicated gamers but I've been doubting that for 4 years now.