What is your opinion on the Core Design Tomb Raider games?

[Chaosut]

With my copy of Tomb Raider 9 still coming through the mail I've been replaying parts of the older Tomb Raider games by Core Design, I am curious to see what fellow escapists think about them from a modern perspective (and of course, to share my own opinion). I frequent the official Tomb Raider forums as well but I feel that speaking my mind there would be very likely to incite rage, which is not my intention. So how do people feel they can stand up against modern action-adventure games, and how do you think Core Design's Tomb Raider games compare to Crystal Dynamics ones?

The atmosphere of Core Design's Tomb Raider games have definitely stood the test of time. But when it comes to the gameplay Crystal Dynamics borrowed liberally from the design of Sands of time, and that gave their game a level of precision and speed that I haven't experienced in any of the older games. Stringing toggether jumps, quickly changing direction etc. feels so much more natural, not to mention the lack of a jump delay. I understand and appreciate the innovation of Tomb Raider 1 in the world of early 3D games, but to keep the same tank-like controls intact for five games just doesn't make sense to me. The Crystal Dynamics TR games have their fair share of camera issues (especially in Underworld), but I can't really see how anyone without the nostalgia goggles could prefer the movement controls and mechanics of Core Designs TR games.

There are a lot of areas where I would put the effort of both company's on a fairly even level. I have nothing against the aged visuals of old TR, because even though there was little improvement in the visual fidelity over the course of the first five games, the original was impressive for it's time. And of course the cutscenes of the Crystal Dynamics TR games aren't going to be as static and awkward due to vast technological improvements. And some of the mediocre voice acting is forgivable too given that the standards of video game voice acting have (at least when it comes to mainstream games) largely increased over time. And to me Tomb Raider has always been about atmosphere over quality of storytelling, so I'm not sure if I could place any of the individual storylines ahead of the others. But I do think that the writing for the dialogue is sharper in Legends/Anniversary/Underworld (I'm purposely excluding the somewhat self-aware silliness of Guardian of Light).


Playing Tomb Raider: Anniversary and the original back to back just feels like a world of difference. Of course without the original a remake wouldn't exist, but the only thing I would put in favor of the original game is the boss battles. Many fans had a problem with Legend's easy difficulty and sidekicks who won't shut up, but Anniversary put you on your own again and upped the difficulty whilst still maintaining the (at least comparatively) higher level of polish. And it seems to me that the original games wouldn't have nearly the same level of challenge if it weren't for the awkward controls and the save system (at least on consoles that is). Listening to the developer's commentary for TR: Anniversary is fascinating because you really get a sense of how much they improved aspects of the level design. And just on an unrelated but nonetheless interesting note (at least for me), they even mention how the waterfall section had to be increased in size over the original because people's memories of it were disproportionate. But anyway, a lot of hardcore Tomb Raider fans still feel that Anniversary is vastly inferior to the original. Which makes me wonder if a remake that provided little more than a visual upgrade is the only thing they would've accepted. In all honestly I'd love to see a a remake akin to Anniversary for Tomb Raider 2 and The Last Revelation.

In my mind Core Design ran the franchise into the ground by the time Angel of Darkness came out, and it was obvious that they couldn't keep up with the times. So what do you guys think? (I'm sorry if I have offended anyone btw).

 

[The Madman]

I love em... mostly. Sometimes. The original Tomb Raider and and Tomb Raider: The Last Revelation are brilliant and Tomb Raider 2 was pretty good as well. 3 was alright, though definitely not the strongest.

Unfortunately Angel of Darkness really really did suck and as time went on aside from Last Revelation the Tomb Raider games kept getting progressively more actiony, which I never liked and why I also have no interest in the new Tomb Raider game. I don't play these games for action, I play them for adventure if that makes any sense. I play them for the sense of exploration you get as the game reveals these vast complex locations to you and you're free to roam in them.

There's just a sense of exploration to the Tomb Raider (Good ones anyway) that few other games can match and none that I've ever played get that combination of puzzle solving, platforming, exploration, and action quite as well as the best of the Tomb Raider games. It's like the Reeses of the gaming world: Sure other people have combined chocolate and peanut butter, but never quite the same way as Reeses does it.

So yeah I'm kinda disappointed with the new game. I just don't care about it. At all. And I know that if it's successful chances are good I'll never see another Tomb Raider with that unique blend that I loved ever again.

Incidentally Tomb Raider Anniversary is also really really good. I genuinely don't understand how it sold so poorly, it's much better than Legend which was mediocre at best and just on its own is a brilliant little game with some of the best level design in the entire franchise and even gaming in general.

 

[Zhukov]

(I'm sorry if I have offended anynone btw).

What?

How on Earth could anything you've written there be offensive?

...

Y'know what? Your apologetic attitude offends me!

 

[WoW Killer]

Saw this topic this morning but had to go out for stuff, so sorry for digging it up.

I know what you mean. The original was from an era that got away with certain design flaws, particularly controls and camera angles, that wouldn't be accepted today. As it happens, I think the whole 3D platformer genre is bunk. As much as a game like Mario 64 is praised by some, just see how Nintendo have gone back to doing 2D Mario games. It just works better in 2D.

But I think the original Tomb Raider stood out, because it wasn't really a platformer. See a platformer is generally a skill based game; you have to use the controls to get from platform A to platform B. Tomb Raider was blockier, more digital than the other 3D games. You would walk up to a ledge and think "that's a three block gap, I'll take two steps back, then hold run, forwards and jump to get across". It turned the whole platforming bit into more of a routine. So it wasn't a skill based thing.

Tomb Raider was basically a puzzle game. It's that sense of "I see where I want to go; how do I get up there? Maybe I can try climbing up here. Oh, that's not the way, but from here I can see another significant place; let's try there next.". That's basically the gist of it.

The trouble is, you can't really do a modern replica of that. Back then, the blocky terrain wasn't seen as lacking. These days, your rocks have got to look like rocks. If I'm counting the edges of scenery in terms of game logic then you've failed in portraying that illusion.

So my conclusion is, the more modern styling of the main gameplay is most probably correct, and it is in fact a superior game style from a technical point of view. I haven't played the new one yet, and I hope they've at least caught a little bit of the old puzzle spirit. Either way, if I was to make a new Tomb Raider, I'd probably be using a similar style.