Tomb Raider

[flarty]

Survival is a much more prominent them than in most other action games. There's a difference between avoiding getting killed in a very immediate sense (CoD, Gear of War) and enduring - surviving, one might even say - a repeated onslaught: the island is trying to kill Lara, the cultists are trying to kill Lara, Lara is in danger of freezing, starving, falling, etc. to death.

Also, Forbes isn't a gaming magazine and Kotaku is a rag. Read reviews by people who actually know what they're doing (Gather Your Party, Rev3Games - I also remember Gamesradar being pretty good, but that was a while ago), and research who actually does know what they're doing in the journalism scene.

Story wise yes. But game play wise it isn't.

As I've said three times, yes.

After reading the write up stating "Armed only with raw instincts and the ability to push beyond the limits of human endurance". It turns out it meant you press Q every once in a while to highlight points of interest with "survival instinct".

Fuck's sake, seriously? Yes, okay. We fucking get it. The hundred-character blurb on the back of the box is not a good barometer of what is in the game based on your extremely narrow, stubborn and limited interpretation of said blurb. You have stated this "point" several times by now and it hasn't gotten any less childish. Either think up another reason for disliking the game or stop vomiting up this one. Fuck.

As for reviews i usually stay clear of them because of above reason. I usually read the write up and check the over all average on meta-critic.

The fact that you only look at rags and places that don't have a focus on games?

Jesus anyone would think we was discussing how to achieve world peace with how irritable your getting over this. Relax, take a deep breath and stop crying. Try to realise I'm just spouting an opinion about a game and how it was presented.

I cant believe your going on at me like I'm the one with the problem

Edit: Your the person questioning why i thought it would be a survival game. So expect an answer.

 

[schtingah]

Not another 'People like stuff I don't so they must be wrong' thread.

I thoroughly enjoyed Tomb Raider. What it did best for me is present me with a world I wanted to explore. I also liked the combat and cover system. The story was enjoyable, I liked the new direction they're going for with the character.

The whole survival thing I didn't miss any mechanics like that (probably because I'm not a fan of them, but that's something else entirely) and I also didn't get that kinda feel about the game before I launched it, but then I tend to buy my games pretty blind.

 

[Busard]

I played it recently, didn't really enjoy it thoroughly.

Like you, I was underwhelmed. It was a triple A experience that was too afraid to drift away from the usual AAA conventions. It just felt too much like Uncharted. It didn't try to achieve it's own identity, gameplay wise.

There were some good intentions but the various mechanics weren't deep enough. The exploration is fairly straightforward and doesn't let many room for freedom, multiple paths or personal discoveries. Added to that the extremely cop-out ability of the "survival instinct" vision which is basically assasin's creed eagle vision, just to strip away any kind of mental gymnastic from the player. The tombs themselves are pretty straightforward as well. It's just a matter of using your predator vision and then it's all about timing (which can be easily mastered).

The rest is pretty much what you can expect from a standard but well polished TPS. Although the violence of the action kinda strips away all the serious work put into Lara's characterisation. While I do appreciate they tried to rewrite her the way they did, the illusion shattered the moment you entered combat and she becomes some kind of bloodthirsty maniac with some Gears of War style execution that were so ridiculously over the top, it makes you wonder if she wasn't already in several wars before that.

For me, it just goes down to "yet another story experience" where basically the game doesn't feel the need to challenge you all that much. It just throws stuff at you, one time after the other while you can basically chug through content without really thinking about anything else except the scenario.

It's not a bad game per se. It's extremely well polished, the survival theme is a good touch and it definitively offers an interesting perspective on the character. But it just doesn't go far enough. It's too lazy with itself and content itself with basic overly seen mechanics from this past generation.

 

[King of Asgaard]

Agreed.
I'm currently watching a playthrough of it, and I'm so bored of it.
It looks like Uncharted with a female protagonist, and I am absolutely sick of hearing her moan and scream.
Plus, it's rather unbelievable at times, usually when we're supposed to believe that Lara, wielding naught but a bow, is able to murder what seems like thousands of goons.
Not to mention, the characters are pretty shit. I mean, you're going in knowing that this is an origin story, so surely that should make it known that no characters outside of Lara are going to make it to the end credits. Because of this, it makes their constant dropping like flies almost comical, as Lara mourns the tragic loss of a character who's had maybe 10 minutes of screen time.
Also, if you're trying to portray weakness, and overcoming the odds, could you not wisecrack, Lara? It makes your character even less believable.
Overall, it's the kind of mediocrity you wouldn't expect from a Tomb Raider game.

 

[LetalisK]

I thought it was okay. It drifted somewhere around that space between "Yeah, alright" and "I'd recommend it."

Not sure why people thought it was going to have survival mechanics. That was never shown in the marketing, at least not so far as I'm aware.

Zhukov likes Tomb Raider?

Definitely going to have to try it out now. I say this with zero sarcasm: That is a ringing endorsement for me.

 

[teqrevisited]

I got the chance to play someone else's and just wondered what game I was playing. The reboot idea already lost some of my interest and the idea that the puzzles are optional just put me right off. That is the main focus of a Tomb Raider game. You shoot endangered animals and goons, solve puzzles and jump a lot.

It just felt to me that they took it and tried to make it something that it wasn't.

 

[flarty]

I played it recently, didn't really enjoy it thoroughly.

Like you, I was underwhelmed. It was a triple A experience that was too afraid to drift away from the usual AAA conventions. It just felt too much like Uncharted. It didn't try to achieve it's own identity, gameplay wise.

There were some good intentions but the various mechanics weren't deep enough. The exploration is fairly straightforward and doesn't let many room for freedom, multiple paths or personal discoveries. Added to that the extremely cop-out ability of the "survival instinct" vision which is basically assasin's creed eagle vision, just to strip away any kind of mental gymnastic from the player. The tombs themselves are pretty straightforward as well. It's just a matter of using your predator vision and then it's all about timing (which can be easily mastered).

The rest is pretty much what you can expect from a standard but well polished TPS. Although the violence of the action kinda strips away all the serious work put into Lara's characterisation. While I do appreciate they tried to rewrite her the way they did, the illusion shattered the moment you entered combat and she becomes some kind of bloodthirsty maniac with some Gears of War style execution that were so ridiculously over the top, it makes you wonder if she wasn't already in several wars before that.

For me, it just goes down to "yet another story experience" where basically the game doesn't feel the need to challenge you all that much. It just throws stuff at you, one time after the other while you can basically chug through content without really thinking about anything else except the scenario.

It's not a bad game per se. It's extremely well polished, the survival theme is a good touch and it definitively offers an interesting perspective on the character. But it just doesn't go far enough. It's too lazy with itself and content itself with basic overly seen mechanics from this past generation.

I think that's the fairest thing I've read about it. It is extremely well polished and it is a very pretty looking game. But if they really ran with the survival them and made it more open world it could of been a pretty unique game. But all it ended up being was another TPS really.

Not another 'People like stuff I don't so they must be wrong' thread.

That's not very fair now is it, especially since i did end my post asking for other peoples thoughts =/

Captcha: well now.............indeed captcha

 

[Thuggych]

Nope i didn't really pay much attention to the press. I shouldn't have to either. If you going to use the words survival and survivor so prominently in your advertising, I'm going to expect a survival game.

Imho, you should ALWAYS do research when buying a product, and not rely exclusively on advertising. TR has been out long enough, where it's not that hard to figure out what type of game it is, and what mechanics it has. It is your responsibility as a consumer to do at least a minimal amount of due diligence. Ads are designed to sell a product, and often straddle the line of deceptive with very liberal use of "buzz" words to grab your attention.

 

[flarty]

Nope i didn't really pay much attention to the press. I shouldn't have to either. If you going to use the words survival and survivor so prominently in your advertising, I'm going to expect a survival game.

Imho, you should ALWAYS do research when buying a product, and not rely exclusively on advertising. TR has been out long enough, where it's not that hard to figure out what type of game it is, and what mechanics it has. It is your responsibility as a consumer to do at least a minimal amount of due diligence. Ads are designed to sell a product, and often straddle the line of deceptive with very liberal use of "buzz" words to grab your attention.

This discussions been had pal. But I'll reassert myself here again. The lack of survival elements are not the main reason im upset with the game, i feel it was a huge missed opportunity. My main gripe is that if the game play put the focus on survival and exploration it would be worthy of the high scores it received. Other than that i feel its just a mediocre game.

 

[Krantos]

I thought it was great.

For the first time they actually developed Lara as a person, rather than just a pair of breasts that talks. Yes, I think the story got a little stupid by the end, and QTEs could fuck right off. Other than that, however, I had a great time playing it, and hope they do another in that vein.

 

[Thuggych]

This discussions been had pal. But I'll reassert myself here again. The lack of survival elements are not the main reason im upset with the game, i feel it was a huge missed opportunity. My main gripe is that if the game play put the focus on survival and exploration it would be worthy of the high scores it received. Other than that i feel its just a mediocre game.

Then maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're trying to say, because it reads to me like: "I don't mind that it doesn't have heavy emphasis on survival...I'm just upset that it doesn't have heavy emphasis on survival."

TR got high scores largely due to its storytelling coupled with competently handled action adventure TPS gameplay. That's what the devs set out to accomplish, and they executed it exceptionally well. I agree that the gameplay does not seamlessly mesh thematically with the story/setting...but neither does Bioshock: Infinite; they're still both amazing games.

 

[flarty]

This discussions been had pal. But I'll reassert myself here again. The lack of survival elements are not the main reason im upset with the game, i feel it was a huge missed opportunity. My main gripe is that if the game play put the focus on survival and exploration it would be worthy of the high scores it received. Other than that i feel its just a mediocre game.

Then maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're trying to say, because it reads to me like: "I don't mind that it doesn't have heavy emphasis on survival...I'm just upset that it doesn't have heavy emphasis on survival."

TR got high scores largely due to its storytelling coupled with competently handled action adventure TPS gameplay. That's what the devs set out to accomplish, and they executed it exceptionally well. I agree that the gameplay does not seamlessly mesh thematically with the story/setting...but neither does Bioshock: Infinite; they're still both amazing games.

Ok ill put it simple terms, as the game stands i do not feel it deserves such praise. It had a poor story, with poorly written characters, as for game play its just another cover shooter. Now Bioshock was mediocre shooter in my opinion, but its story, its characters, and its setting are probably the most unique and best we have seen since Bioshock 1

My problem about the survival element is, they had the concept and didn't capitalize on it. It would of been more suited to a Tomb Raider game than turning it into a cover shooter. It would of been something different, and possibly may have been worthy of the high score. In other words that's how i think they could of improved it.

 

[Maximum Bert]

I enjoyed it a lot even more than Bioshock Infinite (which I also liked a lot) then again I had low expectations for the game as I have despised Tomb Raider games for almost their entire existence I just decided to give the 2013 reboot a go to see if it had changed and it had for the better imo.

Lara was actually likeable in this one and everything just felt nice and satisfying unlike most of you it seems I was actually worried it would get bogged down with things like having to sleep or find food and all that crap which I almost always find a major chore and usually you just end up gaming that system anyway so it ends up as just a nuisance.

The multiplayer sucked but I was expecting that and I just ignored it after a few gos. I was hoping for an Uncharted 2/3 esq action game only with its own distinct flavour and thankfully thats what I got. I just found it very easy and enjoyable to play through it never dragged for me which is unusual in a game the gameplay remained fun throughout (loved using the bow) and the narrative kept me wanting to push forward while the art direction was great and the graphics were also not half bad.

I never thought I would say I like Tomb Raider or Lara Croft but this game won me over I still dont like the old games or the old Lara though.

 

[CriticalMiss]

I thought the game way okay and hope that a sequel will come out and improve on it's predecessor, if Squeenix don't cancel the 'failing' franchise that is. My main gripe is that there wasn't enough tomb raiding and too much gears of war. Considering the name of the game I was annoyed that most, if not all, of the tombs were optional side areas and gave you nothing but some experience and salvage. They weren't even that difficult to get through and didn't really seem like much effort had gone in to them. Plus they tacked on multiplayer, which would have removed resources which could have gone in to fixing the tomb issue.

 

[everythingbeeps]

I liked it a lot more than Bioshock Infinite, and in fact it's probably my favorite game of 2013 so far, though the only other games of 2013 I played that weren't complete pieces of shit (Dead Space 3, Crysis 3) were Ni No Kuni and Sly 4, and I haven't played nearly enough of either.

 

[Jachwe]

It was a fun game. For me more than some average joe because I actually study japan's history and have a fair understanding about the scientific method so I realy laugh realy hard whenever Lara tries to be an "archeologist". Lara sees a Kamakura period building and assumes it belongs to Yamatai despite the kingdom of Yamatai being placed at the beginning of the Kofun period roughly at 250 BC and Kamakura being placed at 1185 AD. Very scientific to assume that some building build after more than 1400 years of what we know from the sources the kingdom existed is still somehow part of the kingdom thus implying the kingdom existed for more than 1400 years because not reason is given except Lara might have caught the flu and is going mad.
I mean they build a lift to lift a ship into the mountains or out of the mountains... but for no appearent reason, so it made me laugh. Action was entertaining and I have a lot of disposable income, so it wasn't like I regretted playing it.

 

[jackinmydaniels]

Yeah, I could tell the moment I saw some gameplay that all it was really trying to be was Uncharted, with more blood and 'Lara Croft' instead of Nathan Drake. I agree that they should have done SOMETHING with survival mechanics, give us some big areas to explore where you can scavange for food and items to keep yourself equipped and healed for the next big gunfight. But, unfortunately, it was a huge missed opportunity. Also, I understand why you might think there'd be some survival mechanics considering there was nothing but 'Survivor' this or 'Survival' that all over the marketing for the game.

All in all, it just doesn't seem to do anything unique aside from having a female lead. Even the premise seemed like it was lifted straight from Far Cry 3, stranded on an island filled with pirates and crazy folks. I also hear the story is pretty lackluster too, with Lara's characterization pretty much going nowhere, but I'd have to actually play it to figure that out I'd suppose.