![]() ![]() The game i loved most in the series was the legend, since not only was the first game ive played of the series, it was also a really good one and it had so many good components that made it a great game (like lot and different puzzle solving, great storyline, great motocycling levels and variety of maps). It's ok, i respect your opinion, even though i think the underworld was still lot better than the new tomb raider. You didn't like that much tomb raider:underworld. The new tomb raider game it's more like a survival game than anything else, there's almost no puzzle solving in that new and different game. Tomb raider is the best in YOUR opinion, defenly not mine or lot of the other ppl's opinion, and it's not even sequel to any game of the series, since it's a totally new story, which in my opinion is really sad and stupid. Lol, the new tomb raider it's a totally different game, and therefore shouldn't be even compared. Anniversary was a long and great as well, but Underworld. Legend had that great storyline and different places to explore, different countries. (Best Tomb Raider is the newest one.) But Underworld should be the Legend and Anniversary sequel and it wasnt that good. Actaully the game was a little fail in my opinion. I just put some time in getting the blocks to roll onto the pressure plate. Hopefully they'll give Crystal Dynamics the freedom and time to implement deep changes to the gameplay, rather than telling them to simply reduce Lara's bust size so they can churn out a new Tomb Raider for next Christmas.Originally posted by BlackVeined:Had the same problem! Read some things about physX driver issues and v-sync settings (v-sync was already turned on). Still, Eidos has been with Tomb Raider since the beginning and should know by now that small superficial changes aren't what is needed to revive this series. It's possible Crystal Dynamics has a lot of ideas for revamping the gameplay for the next Tomb Raider game. It's worth noting that the BBC article that spurred this rant didn't interview anyone from Crystal Dynamics and the person who first brought up The Dark Knight was actually the Chief Financial Officer of Eidos. This is the kind of crap that players have gotten tired of - not Lara's unreasonable measurements or the formulaic storylines. I've jumped to my death too many times because I couldn't swing the stubborn camera around to show the five feet in front of my character's face. Also, it'd be swell to play a Tomb Raider game where the camera wasn't balls terrible. Isn't it time to finally make the combat mechanics not suck? Since 1996, all you've had to do is hold down the "target" button, hold down the "fire" button, and then hop around in circles until every bat/spider/wolf in the room is dead. I'm not suggesting that the series change from its traditional emphasis on traversing through forgotten tombs and caverns through a mixture of puzzles, platforming, and combat - I'm just suggesting Crystal Dynamics find a better way to execute this gameplay. While yes, the original Tomb Raider was a success because of that gameplay, you can't skate by on the same tricks for that long without people getting bored. Why'd Legend manage to do well, then? Gameplay. Legend's relative success really had little to do with its story, though in fact, some might argue that Darkness had a stronger plot. Crystal Dynamics' first outing, Tomb Raider: Legend, was a reboot of the series' story and fared better than Darkness but still didn't reach the level of acclaim that the first two games in the series did. Core Design attempted to make the series grittier and darker with Tomb Raider: Angel of Darkness and the game tanked so badly that Eidos took the series away from them and gave it to Crystal Dynamics. They've already tried that twice with Tomb Raider by my count. It's baffling Eidos would even consider a reboot, though. The simple, escapist premise is fine and doesn't need to be rethought. Granted, all the storylines follow more or less the same formula - Lara going off to find some forgotten relic - but there's not many other reasons why someone would go off and raid tombs. ![]() Likewise, I don't think revising up the series' plot or tone would suddenly renew gamers' interest in the series. ![]() Still, I have trouble believing that women would suddenly be taken with the series if Croft were a self-made women with a more realistic figure. Some might also take exception to the fact that she's an heiress rather than someone who supports herself financially. Everything about her look is designed for the enjoyment of a male audience - she has a body that would make Barbie jealous and she does most of her treasure-hunting in short-shorts and a tank top. Though she's an ass-kicking treasure hunter who relies on her own wits and strength to survive, it's true that she's not the most "female-friendly" character ever devised. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |