PDA

View Full Version : Put extra hard difficulty in new Tomb Raider!



grkljan
15th Oct 2009, 20:15
I've played the last three TR games and I've noticed that, compared to the previous one, they are very easy. I have nothing against putting easy levels in the game but there should as well be one very very hard difficulty which is really challenging and takes some time to complete. What do you think?


I apologise if this thread already exists. If it does, then lock or delete mine.

nikkinickels
15th Oct 2009, 20:17
i agree, the hard modes felt like medium at least, or between easy and medium, so i hope they make it hard so that it'll take us longer and we'll actually feel accomplished when we finish a level

Tihocan
15th Oct 2009, 20:47
The issue for me is the difficulty rating has to alter the logical thinking difficulty. And the Hard mode - actually has to be hard.

The puzzles need to be better, I feel that was the lacking part in the recent games. The combat, whilst far from difficult, didn't really bother me in that sense (well, except for the actual implementation).

jayjay119
15th Oct 2009, 21:01
I agree but now Cd has 2 different audiences who think 'hard difficulty' are two completely different things. The first group, who are fond of the classic games think hard entails creative platforming and puzzle solving, the other group thinks battling their way through 1000 mercs and surviving is hard. I think the best thing to do would be to include 2 different difficulty criteria. An action difficulty level and a puzzle difficulty level that you can set separately like you could in earlier Silent Hill games,

Gemma_Darkmoon_
15th Oct 2009, 22:58
I think big battles like Willard, Dragon, Takamoto, Centeurs are needed back. More shock attacks and group ambushes (like TRA Lost vally Raptures) would keep up excitement a difficulty more. Backtracking exploring puzzles rather than roadblock style puzzles would be nice too.

Both harder puzzles and big battles need to be there. If they can't make vastly longer games they need to be harder. Bigger multi-room room puzzles like Frances Folly and Hall of season and big searching puzzles like the Dora levels would be great.

DarthVader#1
16th Oct 2009, 04:22
I really wish they would put in more difficult puzzles. The ones they've been putting in the games lately are so easy it's almost insulting. I also agree that they should put in the big battles again. tomb raider underworld was severely lacking in that department. The best they did were the thralls and it only took a couple swings with thor's hammer to kill them.

Ants_27_
16th Oct 2009, 06:48
Could they not move the checkpoints further away? Isn't that what that dragon rising game does on one of it's hard modes?

Failing that, they could take a leaf from Uncharted's book (and other games) and have easy, normal, hard, crushing modes. Crushing on Uncharted really is difficult, if you don't play games too often (me)

d1n0_xD
16th Oct 2009, 07:45
Yeah, it should be more difficult :D The game's supposed to be a challenge, so that I won't stop until I solve the puzzle. I'm all for harder difficulty :thumb:

And btw, grkljan, are you from Balkan?

EyeShotFirst
16th Oct 2009, 08:13
I would like the levels to have more than one way to important places. It should be on a choose wisely basis. So if you had a sewer level you could make several tunnels. One tunnel could be fairly normal and yet another tunnel could be infested with big nasty monsters. Or another could be horribly booby trapped.

I think the bosses should be very hard but there should be no more usage of the Adrenaline Dodge. I think there should be several ways to beat a boss. Adrenaline Dodge could be a fast way. Regular shooting and dodging could be good too. I just don't want to be forced to use that move again.

John Carter
16th Oct 2009, 15:41
The recent games have had tighter and more coherent stories (yep, I know that's a subject of much disagreement and debate ;)), so the experience is more linear. Larger environments do not necessarily make larger games, as the TRU Maya temple ballfield might attest. All you can do there is look around and kick pots, or rush in to the hole in the ground on your motorcycle.

I rather like to sprinkle puzzles that are part of the game but not really "necessary" to the story line,like the "Egyptian shooting gallery" in TR 4.

josh1122
16th Oct 2009, 23:04
Hard levels dont exist in video games anymore(Demon's Souls is the exception)

jayjay119
16th Oct 2009, 23:48
Hard levels dont exist in video games anymore(Demon's Souls is the exception)

to be fair, how many different levels of difficulty can there be when all you're doing is shooting from behind a rock?

josh1122
16th Oct 2009, 23:58
to be fair, how many different levels of difficulty can there be when all you're doing is shooting from behind a rock?

Like I said, there's no such thing as difficult levels. The only game ive found hard the last quite a few years has been Demon's Souls, which really its just a case of being smart in that game,common sense rules all lol

nikkinickels
17th Oct 2009, 01:41
well make it harder like when Lara gets hit, more health gets taken away, and that the people/creatures she fights will have better aim and won't be as stupid, like in legend when i'd run toward a mercenary in hard mode and the ass still missed me when shooting

josh1122
17th Oct 2009, 01:53
well make it harder like when Lara gets hit, more health gets taken away, and that the people/creatures she fights will have better aim and won't be as stupid, like in legend when i'd run toward a mercenary in hard mode and the ass still missed me when shooting

That happens in a lot of shooting games, they're never going to hit you 100%. Like just in the recently played Uncharted 2, i could stand there at times and run straight at me and they'd miss, even on hard, its ridiculous but i definitely see what your talking about

Tihocan
17th Oct 2009, 04:23
In combat, difficulty should affect not only damage and accuracy, but enemy behaviour. The difference is made when rather than shooting at your cover and occasionally dropping to reload, your enemy takes a shot and zeros your position, while their buddies sneak around to shoot at your sides. Or when the tigers attack they can grab at you as you jump over them, or worse pin Lara to the ground and have more attacking you while you struggle free.

In puzzles, the idea for the developer should be to make it as difficult as possible, but then place states for each weakening difficulty - for example if you consider the underwater entrance in TRU, the three parts should have been protected by three smaller puzzles for hard, but for medium the parts are instead placed nearby and for easy they are in the wall already.

I honestly think that more gameplay should be given to reward the braver player.

IvanaKC
17th Oct 2009, 20:28
I want to see really hard tomb raider. Like when a monster/something is behind your back, you are so scared and if you don't think fast you die, if you do you have to try hard to run away or save your life. And smart enemies...that would be awesome.

Ants_27_
17th Oct 2009, 20:46
As far as A.I. goes, the only games that I've found difficult have been Uncharted and Killzone 2. Let's look at Underworld (the ship level) the guards could quite easily see you, even though they did nothing. The same goes for uncharted (the breaking in level thingy) the guards could easily have seen you but they didn't, make sense?:scratch:

Moving on:

What about a better damage system (bare with me), say an arrow sticks in Lara, the longer it's in your health depleats every so often until that arrow is removed. Right I mean like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUB4TpDUtOU That type of idea anyway, not necessarily as painful.

The concept of different wounds effects you. Damage to the legs stops you sprinting and jumping...

nikkinickels
17th Oct 2009, 21:20
oh my god, i had to put my waffle down, but that was amazing, i'd like to see that in the new TR

tombraidergal
17th Oct 2009, 22:04
omg that was horrible. too much blood for me thank you. ;p

josh1122
17th Oct 2009, 22:52
Want a hard game? play Demon's Souls, nuff said or take a gander at Ninja Gaiden Black

JRod108
17th Oct 2009, 23:04
I agree but now Cd has 2 different audiences who think 'hard difficulty' are two completely different things. The first group, who are fond of the classic games think hard entails creative platforming and puzzle solving, the other group thinks battling their way through 1000 mercs and surviving is hard. I think the best thing to do would be to include 2 different difficulty criteria. An action difficulty level and a puzzle difficulty level that you can set separately like you could in earlier Silent Hill games,

Pure genius. That is the only customizable/choice idea I have liked in about forever. The only thing I would add is the option to choose both at the same time.

Tihocan
17th Oct 2009, 23:16
the guards could quite easily see you, even though they did nothing


Yes. Very disappointing.



What about a better damage system (bare with me), say an arrow sticks in Lara, the longer it's in your health depleats every so often until that arrow is removed...
The concept of different wounds effects you. Damage to the legs stops you sprinting and jumping...

I suggested this, along with a more solid combat mechanic, a while ago in a different thread. It was rejected in favour of rolley bouncy combat and simple damage.

Max 28
18th Oct 2009, 03:03
What about a better damage system (bare with me), say an arrow sticks in Lara, the longer it's in your health depleats every so often until that arrow is removed. Right I mean like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUB4TpDUtOU That type of idea anyway, not necessarily as painful.

The concept of different wounds effects you. Damage to the legs stops you sprinting and jumping...

Oh gosh that was quite horrible. :o :p Noises and blood and he broke back his foot and fingers. :eek: *throws up* I'm so squeamish these days. :p Or the screen could just lose colour and become foggy?

I think for a harder difficulty I agree that I don't just want the combat levels to change. Although I guess it might take some creative ingenuity but to have different levels on puzzles. We all want TR to stay puzzle oriented with at least half the games challenge being puzzles. So these need to change on difficulty levels, or else it's only a part of the game that's getting harder with the combat and damage taken.

Ants_27_
18th Oct 2009, 07:27
I suggested this, along with a more solid combat mechanic, a while ago in a different thread. It was rejected in favour of rolley bouncy combat and simple damage.

I know some people said that the video (far cry 2) would probably be a bit violent but I would love that kind of idea. Have any of you played Metal Gear Solid 3? What about the health system (not sure what to call it) on that? This:
http://image.com.com/gamespot/images/2004/screen0/914828_20041118_screen006.jpg

On the subject of combat now, I think they should do away with auto aim, that would make it more challenging. Did I already say this?:scratch: Or, doesn't Wet allow you to aim with one gun but the other uses auto aim?

Ants_27_
18th Oct 2009, 07:47
Sorry for double post thingy:

I think they should put a bit more effort into the combat of TR. I know people will get on their high-horse and say: "OMGZZZZ that not TR!!!!". I also know that if I bring up games like Wet and uncharted, those fans that are obsessed with Lara (those who nearly have panic attacks over hair, eye colour or whatever) will say that Uncharted and Wet are repetative and are crap, why am I not surprised?:scratch:

My point is that tougher A.I. and 'proper' combat would add to the difficulty level of all the modes (very easy, easy, normal, hard, crushing...) Yes that is exactly what others have been saying but it really is true.

IvanaKC
18th Oct 2009, 12:32
As far as A.I. goes, the only games that I've found difficult have been Uncharted and Killzone 2. Let's look at Underworld (the ship level) the guards could quite easily see you, even though they did nothing. The same goes for uncharted (the breaking in level thingy) the guards could easily have seen you but they didn't, make sense?:scratch:

Moving on:

What about a better damage system (bare with me), say an arrow sticks in Lara, the longer it's in your health depleats every so often until that arrow is removed. Right I mean like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUB4TpDUtOU That type of idea anyway, not necessarily as painful.

The concept of different wounds effects you. Damage to the legs stops you sprinting and jumping...




OMG! I play that game all the time and I din't say a thing about health system?! Shame on me! Far cry 2 is so goooood! And when you are fighting you have to be quick to heal yourself otherwise, well...we know. I wanna see that in TR

Tihocan
18th Oct 2009, 12:40
I know some people said that the video (far cry 2) would probably be a bit violent but I would love that kind of idea.

Oh yeah! I didn't mean to have what FC2 does, that would kill the TR fanbase. I would be more interested in seeing Lara take a round to the leg for instance, and have to hobble over to somewhere safe to patch up.

I would also be interested in a semi-interactive cover mechanism. What I mean is if an enemy is on another side of some barrier, Lara would simply run lower to the ground, and if crouched next to one, simply shoot over the top of it. No extra action from the player is necessary, and adds a realism to the game without adding complexity.

What Would Lara Do? She wouldn't stand up like an idiot and get shot.

Ants_27_
18th Oct 2009, 13:11
Oh yeah! I didn't mean to have what FC2 does, that would kill the TR fanbase. I would be more interested in seeing Lara take a round to the leg for instance, and have to hobble over to somewhere safe to patch up.

I would also be interested in a semi-interactive cover mechanism. What I mean is if an enemy is on another side of some barrier, Lara would simply run lower to the ground, and if crouched next to one, simply shoot over the top of it. No extra action from the player is necessary, and adds a realism to the game without adding complexity.

What Would Lara Do? She wouldn't stand up like an idiot and get shot.

I think fallout 3 would be the best example (that I know of) because each limb gets crippled doesn't it while your in combat?

As for cover mechanism, I think they should just add a proper cover system, Uncharted, Gears of war, e.c.t. I mean she is supposed to be able to do anything, yet fails at using cover.

Similar to this perhaps:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-bdTT6lQTc culd make the overall game slightly more challenging.:cool:

nikkinickels
18th Oct 2009, 18:28
ooo i'd like to see that kind of movement, that game looks interesting too, glad people say it's "halfway done" since it was "cancelled" once before

Ants_27_
18th Oct 2009, 18:52
ooo i'd like to see that kind of movement, that game looks interesting too, glad people say it's "halfway done" since it was "cancelled" once before

It does look very cool:cool:

Anyway, I think that TR could still have a chance at making itself popular once more, all it needs is to cover more aspects of gaming that other people enjoy. For example:

A melee system made up of many different attacks, punches, kicks, takedowns.
A damn good cover system
A stealth approch (allowing the game to be played two different ways)
Great character interaction

For the last one I'll use uncharted again (I completed it before and is the last game I've played so it is easier to recall), one thing I noticed was the witty remarks between Drake and whoever is about:

Chloe "is that a ancient Tibetan ritual dagger in your pocket?"
Drake "well, maybe I'm just happy to see you" To me that type of thing is what makes characters outshine the rest (I mean, the conversations that don't really add anything to the plot, just there for humour).

I still also think auto-aim should be thrown out of the window and never looked upon again, that adds more of a challenge (I know I said this before)

Tihocan
19th Oct 2009, 11:09
As for cover mechanism, I think they should just add a proper cover system, Uncharted, Gears of war, e.c.t. I mean she is supposed to be able to do anything, yet fails at using cover.

I don't think I'd like to have a 'lock' type cover for Tomb Raider. It works for Gears because they are slow, aim free and totally rely on that cover to survive. Locking would just slow her down (very much like how that video describes).

Lara would more use it to advantage, as currently she just rolls around a lot, or strafes in and out of view. Also, it's not natural to use cover only when you are directly adjacent. Lara should be able to use cover simply because it exists between her and the target, and be fluid enough to shoot over it or move away from it if necessary, or even edge back slightly if exposed.

Ants_27_
19th Oct 2009, 14:16
I don't think I'd like to have a 'lock' type cover for Tomb Raider. It works for Gears because they are slow, aim free and totally rely on that cover to survive. Locking would just slow her down (very much like how that video describes).


True, but I looked at my stats for Uncharted 2 and it said I'd spent 1:14:43 in cover. I didn't realize how much I prefer having a good old cover system in a game. Granted I know its a case of each to their own. Again I would prefer TR to allow for a 'over the shoulder' type of gun play that requires you to aim, alas Resident Evil, Uncharted, Gears, MGS, e.c.t.

But, why doesn't CD follow the path of MGS4 (I think it was MGS 4) and allow for people to chose between auto-aim (like all the TR's) or an over the shoulder shooting mechanic. My point being that a cover system (like Uncharted) could beimplemented for use by gamers who want to use the option of free aim instead of auto aim, thus those who don't want a cover system don't need to use it because they can stick to auto aim.:scratch: I hope you understand what I mean...

Edit - it is MGS 4 that allows you to turn auto-aim on or off:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBOBWjOXoNU

grkljan
19th Oct 2009, 18:43
I think that concerning difficulty there should be player tailoring as it is now in TRU but ofcourse with one extra hard difficulty. The thing which is very dumb in most new games is that by difficulty its mainly meant combat. There should be more ways to get to certain spot in each level and on hard difficulty for example one could be disabled or covered with something so you cant go that way. Many edges should be destructible by lara coming on them (that exists now as well but is almost unnoticable) which would add more speed to the game. This way not only combat becomes challenging but environment as well. As for many ways to kill a boss it sounds stupid because then, if the boss could be killed just by shooting, everybody would kill him that way, it's better to put unique killable bosses. Combat is on current hard difficulty in TRU still too easy, especially human enemies. They just can't be more stupid than animals, they should use cover and be indeed harder to take down than animals that just rush. Second, ammo amount should be reduced significantly. The TRU concept is good (you can't find ammo in the environment, you just have certain amount in your bag) but still there should be a little bit less ammo which automatically leads to implementing melee combat because Lara has also melee fightning skills. Stealth should not be implemented as it somehow doesn't fit into the Tomb Raider world. Tomb Raider has way too little combat and enemies. Some may say that it's because Lara doesn't fight but explore but actually the TR games are getting shorter and shorter. If the game was longer then more fightning would be welcome and nobody would complain. Artifacts as well, too easy to find that it's a shame. I like the idea of adding levels with more fightning and then other ones with less (like in TRU Natla's ship vs.Thailand). Overall, put more difficulty so we don't just complete all levels and throw the DVD in the box and wait for the new one which is equally short and easy to complete.

Ants_27_
19th Oct 2009, 19:39
Combat is on current hard difficulty in TRU still too easy, especially human enemies. They just can't be more stupid than animals, they should use cover and be indeed harder to take down than animals that just rush.

Stealth should not be implemented as it somehow doesn't fit into the Tomb Raider world.

Bold - In my opion this is why Tomb Raider has lost popularity over the years. People assume it won't fit into a universe so therefore developers don't try and create a new experience by creating new gameplay mechanics.

Look stealth should be added but most people assume that you have to sneak, why can't TR allow for different gamers to play the game i.e. someone who plays splinter cell and someone who plays COD will prefer different approaches in games.

As for animals and humans that is the bad thing. We all know the how humans walk (well we should) and we probably know how each animal hunts differently, so my point is that using creatures that are real involves high expectations from gamers, whereas an imagined creature can act however the developer see fit. Like we know humans would take cover during a shootout e.c.t.

Tihocan
19th Oct 2009, 22:13
I didn't realize how much I prefer having a good old cover system in a game. Granted I know its a case of each to their own. Again I would prefer TR to allow for a 'over the shoulder' type of gun play that requires you to aim, alas Resident Evil, Uncharted, Gears, MGS, e.c.t.

I guess my main concern is that the game would end up having an excuse to be a shooter, and I would lose any desire to play it.



... allow for people to chose between auto-aim (like all the TR's) or an over the shoulder shooting mechanic. My point being that a cover system (like Uncharted) could beimplemented for use by gamers who want to use the option of free aim instead of auto aim, thus those who don't want a cover system don't need to use it because they can stick to auto aim.:scratch: I hope you understand what I mean...


Actually, I do like the idea of choice. If I could chose between 'sticky' cover and loose cover, I would chose the latter; and if between auto and manual aim, I'd choose the former.


Bold - In my opion this is why Tomb Raider has lost popularity over the years. People assume it won't fit into a universe so therefore developers don't try and create a new experience by creating new gameplay mechanics.

Look stealth should be added but most people assume that you have to sneak, why can't TR allow for different gamers to play the game i.e. someone who plays splinter cell and someone who plays COD will prefer different approaches in games.

As for animals and humans that is the bad thing. We all know the how humans walk (well we should) and we probably know how each animal hunts differently, so my point is that using creatures that are real involves high expectations from gamers, whereas an imagined creature can act however the developer see fit. Like we know humans would take cover during a shootout e.c.t.

I don't think that's why TR has lost popularity, to be honest. I also think that stealth play should be an option, but not a 'stealth on by button' mechanic ala AOD. Lara should just be bloody quiet when unarmed and approaching an enemy out of FOV, and be able to knock them out with her (apparent) kickboxing skills.

Ants_27_
20th Oct 2009, 07:03
I don't think that's why TR has lost popularity, to be honest. I also think that stealth play should be an option, but not a 'stealth on by button' mechanic ala AOD. Lara should just be bloody quiet when unarmed and approaching an enemy out of FOV, and be able to knock them out with her (apparent) kickboxing skills.

Bold - True:thumb:

As for the stealth thing again I wouldn't want it to be a 'on by button' either. I know I will probably get called a fanboy of some sorts because I keep bring up uncharted but I enjoy the franchise and if that makes me a fanboy, so be it.:lol:

Sorry, I sometimes do ramble a lot:D

Anyway. Uncharted (or I should say Drake) actually has different movement styles, if he has not been seen he will crouch allowing silent takedowns. But again it's a choice, if you don't want to sneak it doesn't matter. Except in one of the early levels.

Right, back to Tomb Raider. I think they should stop giving every single move Lara has at the beginning of the game, and instead deliver them over the course of the game. I mean it stops the game from becoming repetitive as quick and there is always something new (well, until you get all the moves.) I know it might not add to the difficulty but it could add some tension if you can't sprint or something.

Tihocan
20th Oct 2009, 13:21
I know I will probably get called a fanboy of some sorts because I keep bring up uncharted but I enjoy the franchise and if that makes me a fanboy, so be it.:lol:


Seriously, if Uncharted has now surpassed Tomb Raider in exploration, combat mechanics and straight up entertainment - then bring it up as much as you like. I get the s**ts with these people who say "Uncharted sucks, whatever" - no, it does not suck. Read the reviews, look at the sales figures. Lara has real competition. And the second one is stronger, apparently.

And no, I have not even played Uncharted.



different movement styles, if he has not been seen he will crouch allowing silent takedowns.
...
Right, back to Tomb Raider. I think they should stop giving every single move Lara has at the beginning of the game, and instead deliver them over the course of the game.

Not sure I agree. Sometimes level design is enough to allow you to use abilities with more creativity and usefulness.

I'm also in favour of better CQC. Lara busts a slick move on Larson in TR1, it would be nice if she could do that in-game. The jump kick in TRU was woeful. Which surprised me, actually - the game had target locking so hand to hand shouldn't have been that bad.

I would be happy if I could execute a solid crescent kick to an enemy's head, and know that it really hurt.

Ants_27_
20th Oct 2009, 15:05
Seriously, if Uncharted has now surpassed Tomb Raider in exploration, combat mechanics and straight up entertainment - then bring it up as much as you like. I get the s**ts with these people who say "Uncharted sucks, whatever" - no, it does not suck. Read the reviews, look at the sales figures. Lara has real competition. And the second one is stronger, apparently.

And no, I have not even played Uncharted.

Thankyou. I mean I don't love Uncharted more than TR because they are different, though similar at the same time. I mean (for me) Uncharted carries story-telling somewhat better. My reason being that Drake has friends, companions that all conflict with one another, whereas TR is Lara on her own (mainly) talking to herself. But I love 'em both just as much.:D I never could see why some people can't love more than one franchise, it means some are missing out on some very cool games.:eek:

For me, games are all about how well they tell the story, and of course gameplay:cool:


Not sure I agree. Sometimes level design is enough to allow you to use abilities with more creativity and usefulness.

I'm also in favour of better CQC. Lara busts a slick move on Larson in TR1, it would be nice if she could do that in-game. The jump kick in TRU was woeful. Which surprised me, actually - the game had target locking so hand to hand shouldn't have been that bad.

I would be happy if I could execute a solid crescent kick to an enemy's head, and know that it really hurt.

Actually, I think angel of Darkness had a 'good' fighting system (perhaps not as indepth as Uncharted or the bourne conspiracy game(s)) but the problem with it was how slow she went about it. Fix that and make her have a couple more moves and make the enemy counter, I'll be happy. Also, what about if on hard, Lara would die if she touched fire unless she found water (alas the classics).

jayjay119
20th Oct 2009, 15:49
Thankyou. I mean I don't love Uncharted more than TR because they are different, though similar at the same time. I mean (for me) Uncharted carries story-telling somewhat better. My reason being that Drake has friends, companions that all conflict with one another, whereas TR is Lara on her own (mainly) talking to herself. But I love 'em both just as much.:D I never could see why some people can't love more than one franchise, it means some are missing out on some very cool games.:eek:

For me, games are all about how well they tell the story, and of course gameplay:cool:

I agree, for me uncharted was a bit too shooter styled but its not to say people cannot like it as much as TR. The thing about TR is that feeling of solitary exploration, I like feeling that i'm alone in a tomb that no one knows about, but I like how Lara has friends in cut scenes etc in older game, TR4 did this really well by having Werner and Jean Yves. For me running around a temple in the middle of a jungle doesn't sound like a place T-Mobile or ATT would have reception for lara to talk to her friends, nor does having a camera crew in tow whilst in the middle of a gun fight or leaping over chasms seem realistic.




Actually, I think angel of Darkness had a 'good' fighting system (perhaps not as indepth as Uncharted or the bourne conspiracy game(s)) but the problem with it was how slow she went about it. Fix that and make her have a couple more moves and make the enemy counter, I'll be happy. Also, what about if on hard, Lara would die if she touched fire unless she found water (alas the classics).

I agree AOD had a revolutionary combat system compared to the other games, it was actually quite solid but wasn't really executed properly like so much else that had to be cut down for that game.
I really like the idea of Lara burning to death if she doesn't find water, no i'm not a sadist its just realistic, I cannot abide the way she bounces off things like blades, spikes and fire in the past 3 games, for me thats one of the things that gives the games this childish theme the series has gained.

Ants_27_
20th Oct 2009, 17:42
I agree AOD had a revolutionary combat system compared to the other games, it was actually quite solid but wasn't really executed properly like so much else that had to be cut down for that game.
I really like the idea of Lara burning to death if she doesn't find water, no i'm not a sadist its just realistic, I cannot abide the way she bounces off things like blades, spikes and fire in the past 3 games, for me thats one of the things that gives the games this childish theme the series has gained.

I mean no matter how rubbish the gameplay, graphics, story are, stuff that harms us in real life, (let's just stick to fire for now) makes the game feel real even if the game doesn't look real... Does that make sense?:scratch:

That creates the realism of games (not just that) but it also allows the developer to create 'fun' gameplay, knowing that the game is in someway grounded in reality.

josh1122
20th Oct 2009, 18:25
I agree AOD had a revolutionary combat system compared to the other games, it was actually quite solid but wasn't really executed properly like so much else that had to be cut down for that game.
I really like the idea of Lara burning to death if she doesn't find water, no i'm not a sadist its just realistic, I cannot abide the way she bounces off things like blades, spikes and fire in the past 3 games, for me thats one of the things that gives the games this childish theme the series has gained.

I disagree

Derr403
20th Oct 2009, 19:55
I agree AOD had a revolutionary combat system compared to the other games, it was actually quite solid but wasn't really executed properly like so much else that had to be cut down for that game.
I really like the idea of Lara burning to death if she doesn't find water, no i'm not a sadist its just realistic, I cannot abide the way she bounces off things like blades, spikes and fire in the past 3 games, for me thats one of the things that gives the games this childish theme the series has gained. I'd also have to agree/disagree. She doesn't bounce off spikes. However, I do like the idea of burning to death if a water source is not found. As for the stealth, I think it was well used (as it's the only one ever used in the TR series, but it's still good and provides a whole other puzzle concept to the game).

Arthur Pendragon
20th Oct 2009, 21:06
They should make the next one extra hard, not violence hard, but strategic hard!!!!

Ants_27_
21st Oct 2009, 06:32
They should make the next one extra hard, not violence hard, but strategic hard!!!!

They should do both:cool:

Why? Because the game can be grounded in reality, things that harm you in the outside world harm you in the virtual one.

Well, in my eyes anyway...

Tihocan
21st Oct 2009, 07:31
Call me sadistic (yes, I don't care) but the unarmed combat should allow for moments when there's just you and him - and be a reasonable match up.
Sure, guns are fun, but there's gotta be something said for a game that does that right - without all the crud theatrics. A fist fight boss would be a good idea, in my books. Using the environment to your advantage, tripping them off their guard... good fun.

jayjay119
21st Oct 2009, 14:51
They should make the next one extra hard, not violence hard, but strategic hard!!!!

I've said it many a time before and i'll say it again. In the player tailoring menu ( which WILL be in the next game Cd, yes?) they should include 2 difficulty menus that let you set the difficulty of combat and puzzles individually * la early silent hill games.

grkljan
23rd Oct 2009, 19:19
I've said it many a time before and i'll say it again. In the player tailoring menu ( which WILL be in the next game Cd, yes?) they should include 2 difficulty menus that let you set the difficulty of combat and puzzles individually * la early silent hill games.

I agree although it could be put into one player tailoring menu.