Always did love the story of The Last Revelation however....

[Non-Denominated]

wouldn't it have been Ubercool if, on the last level of the Temple of Horus, instead of Set just throwing projectiles at Lara, she had to survive Horus and Set throwing each other around the chamber and smashing the cavern into sand? I had always thought they should have used the Unreal Engine to remake the old Core Tomb Raiders up to par like Legend, Anniversary,m and Underworld, but hey, that's up to those who own the rights to these great games. I really wish I could have helped with developing, but I don't know the first thing how to go about it. I read and hear about remastering L, A, and U. Sure, but what about 2, 3, 4, etc. ? I played the first installment of the Survivor trilogy but I really do prefer the older games. Sometimes the more simplistic things are, the more popular they are as they appeal to a more general audience I suppose.

[Lanzagranadas]

Honestly, Temple of Horus is my least favorite final level in the classic TR games. The final boss "fight" isn't even a fight, you just have to climb and escape, rendering all the weapons and ammo you have left worthless.

And the enemies in the level are.... bats. Seriously? who thought that putting f-ing bats as the only enemies in the final level of a TR game was a good idea? The enemy scalling in TRIV is a mess, you're in the final region with a lot of strong weapons and the game's still throwing annoying tiny enemies like bats, baby scorpions, and scarab swarms.

Anyway, have not played NG+ yet, but at least they made Seth an actual boss fight there.

[Tilarta]

Would not using Unreal require remaking the entire game again from nothing?
I don't know if that would be within the scope of their project allocation.

Personally, I am relieved the team stayed away from Unreal, as I find modding the remasters much easier with their custom software models.

[ProbusVerus]

Originally posted by Lanzagranadas:

Honestly, Temple of Horus is my least favorite final level in the classic TR games. The final boss "fight" isn't even a fight, you just have to climb and escape, rendering all the weapons and ammo you have left worthless.

And the enemies in the level are.... bats. Seriously? who thought that putting f-ing bats as the only enemies in the final level of a TR game was a good idea? The enemy scalling in TRIV is a mess, you're in the final region with a lot of strong weapons and the game's still throwing annoying tiny enemies like bats, baby scorpions, and scarab swarms.

Anyway, have not played NG+ yet, but at least they made Seth an actual boss fight there.

Well if you play in NG+ you get what you want in the final level

[chakkman]

Originally posted by Lanzagranadas:

Honestly, Temple of Horus is my least favorite final level in the classic TR games. The final boss "fight" isn't even a fight, you just have to climb and escape, rendering all the weapons and ammo you have left worthless.

And the enemies in the level are.... bats. Seriously? who thought that putting f-ing bats as the only enemies in the final level of a TR game was a good idea? The enemy scalling in TRIV is a mess, you're in the final region with a lot of strong weapons and the game's still throwing annoying tiny enemies like bats, baby scorpions, and scarab swarms.

Frankly, considering that most other bosses are just "run around in circles, and shoot as much as you can", that particular end boss is a welcome change. At least, you have to use some tactics there, instead of just dumb nonstop fire.

I'm not a fan of boss fights in general, but, that's something the Crystal Dynamics Tomb Raiders surely did better.

[Teratus]

To be honest I found that the final encounter with Set was significantly easier in NG+ because we have to kill him.

It was much harder in the normal game escaping the cave with Set constantly harassing you.
NG+ made it easier by making him killable XD

I think NG+ should have had you defeat set multiple times with each defeat disabling him temporarily giving you some breathing room to climb up without being pummelled by his attacks.
Make it so his attacks do extreme damage as well and this fight would be very fitting for NG+

Current NG+ fight completely trivialises him imo.

[Lanzagranadas]

Yeah, the boss fights weren't a masterpiece, but the Atlanteans, Xian warriors, Tinnos mutants, and the bosses in I-III do a good job at justifying the arsenal Lara has at that point in the games.

TRIV gives you super grenades, poison arrows, explosive arrows, a ton of shotgun shells... and the pay-off in the last level is a boss immune to weapons and a bunch of tiny enemies taken from the first level of the first TR game, very anticlimatic.

[Cú/Moon]

Originally posted by chakkman:

I'm not a fan of boss fights in general

Resisting..... urge....to.....respond....negatively

[Non-Denominated]

Hahahaha. LmAarsei!

[chakkman]

Originally posted by Lanzagranadas:

Yeah, the boss fights weren't a masterpiece, but the Atlanteans, Xian warriors, Tinnos mutants, and the bosses in I-III do a good job at justifying the arsenal Lara has at that point in the games.

TRIV gives you super grenades, poison arrows, explosive arrows, a ton of shotgun shells... and the pay-off in the last level is a boss immune to weapons and a bunch of tiny enemies taken from the first level of the first TR game, very anticlimatic.

There is no rule that boss fights have to justify a weapon arsenal though, right?

[Lanzagranadas]

Originally posted by chakkman:

There is no rule that boss fights have to justify a weapon arsenal though, right?

When a game keeps gradually giving you more tools to fight (like stronger weapons and more ammo types), that means more combat and stronger enemies to fight towards the end.

That's not a rule, just something games usually do for reasons known as game balance and common sense. Or would you rather put stronger enemies in levels where the player has only one or two weapons because there isn't any rule against it?

[paulaus333]

Originally posted by Lanzagranadas:

Originally posted by chakkman:

There is no rule that boss fights have to justify a weapon arsenal though, right?

When a game keeps gradually giving you more tools to fight (like stronger weapons and more ammo types), that means more combat and stronger enemies to fight towards the end.

That's not a rule, just something games usually do for reasons known as game balance and common sense. Or would you rather put stronger enemies in levels where the player has only one or two weapons because there isn't any rule against it?

I agree that there should be stronger rather than weaker enemies towards the end of a game to justify more powerful weapons and abundant ammo. If the game had a few more stronger minor enemies (other than bats), I would go along with that.

In the case of Set / Seth / Sutekh however, I REALLY like the end boss in The Last Revelation. It's my favourite TR game after the original. I love the idea of having an adversary that is so powerful that it cannot be fought by mortals and can only be incarcerated, never destroyed permanently. That to me is more intimidating.

I think that the curse unleashed by Lara when she removed the amulet (or whatever, it's been a while since I played the game!) ensured her death. Her raiding was in this case reckless, but she atoned for it. The collapse of the pyramid and seeming death of Lara bothered me years ago, but I am happy with the boss fight and ending as an older person. I never played TR V and VI.

I respect your opinion though.