I wonder why they replaced Core Design with Crystal Dynamics.

[Lord Tony]

Tomb Raider Angel of Darkness was the last Core Design game. It was rushed due to a timed budget by the studio and it was bad enough to get Core Designed fired. Was it really that bad?

Crystal Dynamics took over, Legend was okay but it was too easy and sucked. Then there was anniversary which was a remake of the first game and doesn't hold a candle to the first game. Underworld had MORE BUGS THAN AOD! Then there is the guardian of light which I'm not even going to get to.

Then there is the Tomb Raider reboot which Crystal Dynamics felt Tomb Raider needed a reboot because they didn't like the direction of where Tomb Raider was heading after what they caused! Then they just turned it into an Uncharted clone.

R.I.P. Core Design, you made less mistakes than Crystal Dynamics.

[GoBucks76]

Well that's one opinion - here's another - graphically Legend was miles better than AOD (and one of the few Tomb Raiders I finished to completion). Anniversary was a graphical update to the original Tomb Raider (which didn't run on newer systems until DosBox came out). Underworld was designed for consoles and had DLC that was ONLY available on the PS3. And now we have the new Tomb Raider - which is the biggest selling game in the franchise history and pushes the envelope even further than any of the games prior.

Eidos kicked Core Design to the curb because they had fallen into a rut with Tomb Raider I - IV and then delivered the disasterous Angel of Darkness. Legend was an excellent revival to the series and brought Tomb Raider into the 21st century. Like any series that has run for a long time (like the James Bond movies) people can argue about the changes in direction or what worked and what didn't work - but overall I think Crystal Dynamics has done a good job and I really enjoyed the latest Tomb Raider.

[Lord Tony]

First off graphics don't mean anything when you have core gameplay values.

Secondly the new tomb raider was marketed as a survival game. The survival aspect is nothing more than a gimmick.The only reason it sold so well was because people thought it was the first Tomb Raider surivival game. Then people realized it is nothing more than just an action shooter with a subpar survival story.

Even Sqare Enix said the amount of units sold was low. If the new Tomb Raider had actual survival gameplay it would have done a lot better, trust me. IF they make a sequel it won't do as well as this game, the gamers who already bought this expecting a challenging survival game have already been deceived and no longer wish to go through this a second time.

[Lord Tony]

If you want a survival game you better stick with The Last of Us. You aren't going to get it from Tomb Raider.

[fenke]

Originally posted by Lord Tony:

If you want a survival game you better stick with The Last of Us. You aren't going to get it from Tomb Raider.

It's never been intended as a survival game, nor was it marketed as such, the game was what the devs said it would be, or at least what I thought it would be based on the information that was released. If you were led to believe this was a survival game, your source was misinformed.

Originally posted by Lord Tony:

First off graphics don't mean anything when you have core gameplay values.

At 100 kPa boiling water is rather hot to the touch.

Secondly the new tomb raider was marketed as a survival game. The survival aspect is nothing more than a gimmick.

See above, the survival is handled like in a movie, it is touched upon, once as part of the storytelling as part of the story and - thankfully - not repeated into a boring grind. I guess you have us oldtimer tomb raider fans stalking the devs on the eidos forums to thank for that :p

The only reason it sold so well was because people thought it was the first Tomb Raider surivival game. Then people realized it is nothing more than just an action shooter with a subpar survival story.

Even Sqare Enix said the amount of units sold was low.

No, they said it didn't meet expectations. Afaik it sold 1 million copies in the 48 hours, a better first week then the original, and about 3 million - retail only (that is excluding digital sales) - in the first two weeks.

If the new Tomb Raider had actual survival gameplay it would have done a lot better, trust me. IF they make a sequel it won't do as well as this game, the gamers who already bought this expecting a challenging survival game have already been deceived and no longer wish to go through this a second time.

I, and many others who also have posted here, have been very happy with the game and the direction taken by CD. One can dislike it, to each their own, and voice their opinion, but yours seems to be born from blind ignorance.

Originally posted by Lord Tony:

... Then there was anniversary which was a remake of the first game and doesn't hold a candle to the first game. ....

It was pretty close to the original, perhaps even better. What it can't hold a candle to is our (changed) memories and changed appetites.

[RedRaccoonDog]

>Last of Us
>Survival Game

Pick one. Its just another 3rd person shooter with a companion mechanic and zombie like story. Sure your trying to not die from enemies, but its the same as this game. Also if you feel decieved from not checking out one of the hundreds of thousands of gameplay videos or unspoilered reviews since its release, well you have only yourself to blame for your ignorance.

[Lord Tony]

I don't even want a survival game. I wanted a puzzle game like the original Tomb Raider.

https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQvWCYgjVwwIPt5xLdVE5Qd_Sf3T6u4LsiXrRf63BXuLhnK4DNoSw

You see these monsters? They were going to be in the new Tomb Raider game and instead they took them out and replaced them with generic bad guys turning the game into an Uncharted clone.

[Supermarine]

Originally posted by Lord Tony:

Even Sqare Enix said the amount of units sold was low. If the new Tomb Raider had actual survival gameplay it would have done a lot better, trust me. IF they make a sequel it won't do as well as this game, the gamers who already bought this expecting a challenging survival game have already been deceived and no longer wish to go through this a second time.

The numbers they wanted were stupidly high. The wanted to outsell CoD which I guess would be really hard. The XO called it a failure and stepped down, but some time after the new---and obviously more realistic---officer said the sequel was already in the works.

The survival idea would have been great. The confusion was that some people misunderstood that as game genre, instead of game theme. TR has always been an action-adventure game.

[Lord Tony]

Originally posted by Supermarine:

Originally posted by Lord Tony:

Even Sqare Enix said the amount of units sold was low. If the new Tomb Raider had actual survival gameplay it would have done a lot better, trust me. IF they make a sequel it won't do as well as this game, the gamers who already bought this expecting a challenging survival game have already been deceived and no longer wish to go through this a second time.

The numbers they wanted were stupidly high. The wanted to outsell CoD which I guess would be really hard. The XO called it a failure and stepped down, but some time after the new---and obviously more realistic---officer said the sequel was already in the works.

The survival idea would have been great. The confusion was that some people misunderstood that as game genre, instead of game theme. TR has always been an action-adventure game.

Tomb Raider has always been an action-adventure puzzle game.

Majority of the puzzles in this game take about 2 minutes to solve on your first try. 1 minute if you use survival instinct!!!!!!!!!!!

[Lord Tony]

In fact Tomb Raider was always less about the action and more about the puzzles. They didn't force the action down your throat to the point where you need a cover system, regeneration health and survival instinct.

[Terminus]

Originally posted by Lord Tony:

I don't even want a survival game. I wanted a puzzle game like the original Tomb Raider.

https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQvWCYgjVwwIPt5xLdVE5Qd_Sf3T6u4LsiXrRf63BXuLhnK4DNoSw

You see these monsters? They were going to be in the new Tomb Raider game and instead they took them out and replaced them with generic bad guys turning the game into an Uncharted clone.

Full disclosure, my prior exposure to the series was the original Tomb Raider, for about 5 minutes on my friend's PC, before he fired up X vs. Tie. I vaguely remember a snow leopard.

I just finished the game, and I really enjoyed it. But to be honest, I was a little disappointed that it went to the supernatural. I mean, it was fine, and I enjoyed the story, but I saw the supernatural aspect as a little bit too much of a deus ex machina. Again, I'm not familiar with the series, so maybe that's how it is.

As far as the survival aspect, I think the pacing would've suffered if you had to deal with things like finding food, shelter, etc. Not that a game that incorporated those elements would've been bad, or not fun, but it would've been a much more deliberate pace. A Lara Croft that flings herself against cliff walls with a climbing axe is much more "heroic" than a Lara Croft that has to spend a day hunting deer to feed the camp.

Although, I do agree that deeper puzzles would've made for a richer game experience, and I think you could have done the game in that way without eliminating the action aspect.

[Starvin247]

so dont buy the game and go play the original Tomb Raider, quit your whining.

[Terminus]

I think he already bought the game, is the thing.

[GoBucks76]

The game has been out for half a year - if he didn't bother to look at any reviews or go to any sites that had a preview of the game that'son him - I always wait until a game has been out for a while to let the bugs get worked out and the price to drop - it's been on sale for a while now so it probably wasn't like he paid full price for the game...

[fenke]

Originally posted by Lord Tony:

In fact Tomb Raider was always less about the action and more about the puzzles.

The opening movie / cutscene of the original has Lara shooting a small pack of wolves, from mid-air while making a salto of a ledge above the giant stone doors she just opened. If that scene doesn't spel out action-adventure for you then I don't know what wil.

They didn't force the action down your throat to the point where you need a cover system, regeneration health and survival instinct.

I thought you felt combat was too easy in TR2013? TR1996 had unavoidable combat but luckily Lara was nigh indestructible while jumping so you could save up all your med-packs. Yo have the choice to use survival instict or not.

Originally posted by Terminus:

... I was a little disappointed that it went to the supernatural ...

It's vey much part of the series.

[Lord Tony]

Originally posted by fenke:

Originally posted by Lord Tony:

In fact Tomb Raider was always less about the action and more about the puzzles.

The opening movie / cutscene of the original has Lara shooting a small pack of wolves, from mid-air while making a salto of a ledge above the giant stone doors she just opened. If that scene doesn't spel out action-adventure for you then I don't know what wil.

Tomb Raider is an action-adventure puzzle game.

The new tomb raider is just an action-shooter with a linear adventure and horrible ♥♥♥♥♥♥ puzzles that can be solved in 2 minutes.