PDA

View Full Version : The Lara Croft Worship Page - TR6 Review



OriginalBryGuy
24th Jun 2003, 19:27
Hi everyone! My name is Bryan, and I'm webmaster of 'The Lara Croft Worship Page'

If you've heard of it, cool! If not, oh well, now is your time to check it out.


Like the rest of you I've been waiting to get my hands on TR6 and finally did last week. I've been playing it and well...I'm deeply disapointed. I'll refrain from putting up the whole review but you're welcome to check it out here! I'm also going to post more when I get the chance.

http://www.originalplots.com/tomb/reviews/tr6/tr6_review.html

I heard TR6 is delayed for Europe, which I think is ridiculous and I honestly hope that TR6 for the PC is better then it was for the PS2. For the record tho I feel the game suffers from bad game design. The PS2 hardware shouldn't be blamed.

Oh well, hope to see you guys and gals back here on the boards!

Maybe we should all form a group to go to England and slap some people around and show them how to make a Tomb Raider game we'd all be proud of!

Take care!

Bryan

total_inferno
24th Jun 2003, 22:36
you are an Udder moron it is people like you that should be slaped:mad: .

Mangar The Dark
24th Jun 2003, 23:11
Originally posted by total_inferno
you are an Udder moron it is people like you that should be slaped:mad: .

(you mean "utter moron," unless you're referring to cows. lol.)

Anyway, did I miss something? I honestly don't know what could warrant such a rude response. What did he say/do that was so terrible? I read his review, and thought it was well-written, and he backed up his opinions. Or are people just not allowed to say anything negative about the game, even if they back it up?

tomb_raiding
24th Jun 2003, 23:16
Here we go again :rolleyes:

Vida Eterna
24th Jun 2003, 23:18
I haven't played the game yet, so I cant argue, or agree:p

One thing I really disagree with:


More emphasis on action. We just want to pull out our Uzi's and blast away bad guys. Jump around while doing it with good control and use the D-pad! Use the physics and smooth character animation from Tomb Raider 1 as a base! Surely the code for that is laying around collecting dust somewhere

Isn't this what all the TRs since the original were criticised for? Tomb Raider 1 was known as the first game that offered the perfect blend between puzzel and action. You seem to like TR1 so much, yet now you say that you want an action oriented game? Is it just me or is that somewhat of a contradiction?

Mangar The Dark
24th Jun 2003, 23:26
Originally posted by Vida Eterna
I haven't played the game yet, so I cant argue, or agree:p

One thing I really disagree with:



Isn't this what all the TRs since the original were criticised for? Tomb Raider 1 was known as the first game that offered the perfect blend between puzzel and action. You seem to like TR1 so much, yet now you say that you want an action oriented game? Is it just me or is that somewhat of a contradiction?

Yeah, I agree with you on that. Less action, more exploration is what elevates TR above mindless shooters. I also thought that was an odd point in the review.

total_inferno
25th Jun 2003, 00:07
i have my opinion abouth the guy... apperantly I read his review.. he says that it is not worth buying.. I don't know this guy seems to hate AOD.. I have played it for 3 hours at my friends house.. no slow down at all. .and not one bug have I seen.. I got to the third level you see.


manger read the review again carefuly.

midroth
25th Jun 2003, 00:18
... We just want to pull out our Uzi's and blast away bad guys. ... Guess, you should look for an ego shooter... or go army.

Mangar The Dark
25th Jun 2003, 01:12
Originally posted by total_inferno
i have my opinion abouth the guy... apperantly I read his review.. he says that it is not worth buying.. I don't know this guy seems to hate AOD.. I have played it for 3 hours at my friends house.. no slow down at all. .and not one bug have I seen.. I got to the third level you see.


manger read the review again carefuly.

I did read the review already, and I'm not saying I agree with every point he makes, I'm only saying that we don't need to bash everyone who comes on this forum and says they're disappointed with the game. He states WHY he didn't like the game, and whether or not you agree with his reasons, he's entitled to them.

As I already said, I disagree with him about the "more action" angle, but at least we know why, in his opinion, the game isn't good. That's far better than people who just say mindless things like, "It rocks because it's Tomb Raider!" or "It sucks because it's Tomb Raider."

And maybe you didn't experience any bugs, but apparently a LOT of other people have, so consider yourself lucky.

I haven't had a chance to even play the game yet, but I appreciate being able to read the opinions of others who have. From reading his review, I know that I might like the game better than he did, simply because I don't think TR should be about action. Also, from reading his review, and from reading the posts of other people on this forum, I know to expect some difficulty with the controls, and some frustration with slowdowns and occasional bugs. I WANT to know these things before shelling out $50 for a game. On the other hand, I know that a lot of people here think the game is very good in spite of its flaws. That's also important to know... it means the good parts must be very good.

OriginalBryGuy
25th Jun 2003, 02:31
Wow, I go out for some White Castle and POW everyone chimes in. It's great! How are ya all doing fellow TR fans!

Honestly, I can't blame a guy named 'total_inferno' to flame me can I? I guess that has to be expected. lol Ferno is just as passionate about the Tomb Raider franchise as I am, and that's good.

Trust me, I'm really trying desperately to find something good about the PS2 version of AOD besides the graphics and the music, I really am. I admit wholeheartedly I have yet to finish the game..never said I did, but yes I am way past level 3 thankyouverymuch. lol. The control is really crushing my enjoyment of the game and my review may change a bit down the road but I doubt by very much.

I think most AOD TR fans agree with me that having only one control scheme, enemies that 'blink' out, slow load times, and overall glitchiness is really a huge fumble that shouldn't be glossed over. If future games are to be made these issues need to be addressed and Core needs to know it now!

I'm a true TR fan. I have every game, all the action figures, posters, movie banners as well as a whole site dedicated to the game since the start. I soooooo wanted AOD to be 'THE' Tomb Raider game to own. I just don't feel it is.

From TR1 to TR6 Core has slowly been taking Lara out of her element. What the heck is a Tomb Raider worth if she isn't raiding tombs? TR1 had its share of problems. It was blocky, it was sparce, the camera caused a lot of problems but you know what..it created an atmosphere that the other games including 6 just haven't duplicated. It was very unique for its time, and even today if you play it, you'll still have a fun experience. I had always hoped each sequel would build from that. Lara has improved, but gameplay in my opinion just dropped through the floor. The game engine was a repeat of the last with minor tweaks and even at TR6 we still see glitches that really came up here and there in all the TR games. Besides graphics and music, has anything really improved here?

I loved TR1 so much because I got a feeling like the tombs really hadn't toched been by human hands in hundreds of years. (yes I realize it was still just a game. Stay with me people!) The levels were huge and expansive. You had to truck it for what seemed like miles just to pull a switch and run to a door before it closed. Even if the door shut, it was fun shooting bats, wolves and the occasional bear...ok the bears were a little weird (as if dinosaurs weren't? heh heh..you know what I mean right?)

With the introduction of more human characters in TR2 the whole gaming experience started to become just like every other game out there. They all have human opponents, why be more like the standard? I for one, loved the puzzles and the cliffhanger jumps hundreds of feet in the air. There were areas where you couldn't even see the top or bottom once you were at the top. Precision jumping had you scared that if you messed up she'd be falling far. Heck, the cracking of Lara's neck after a good fall was satisfying to some. I know, sadistic, but true. I don't know, is any of this making sense? TR2-6 just hasn't had the same impact.

And for those that believe Tomb Raider is better without the 'action' you could be nuts. Why did we like the Indiana Jones movies? Cause Jones talked to a lot of people and gave lenthy exposition about the Ark? No, because in order to get these artifacts he had to get through traps and kick ass. Same with the Tomb Raider franchise which is an obvious rip off. Anyone notice why the TR movies are doing well? Cause (hallow as their plots might be) they realize that 'action' is what drives the story in Tomb Raider's case. The game should be just as 'action' packed.

(pulls fake Uzi's out and sprays slobber in haphazard ways)

And here's my point...there is a time and place for humans in the world of TR without question, I just don't thing they should be an 'emphasis' when it comes to the gameplay (hence talking to people and hoping you come up with the right answer). It just slows everything down and doesn't create an atmosphere of wonder or exploration. You also get a sense of being somewhere someone else has been therefore nothing seems really 'new'.

I'm sure I may not win much support for 'going back to basics' when it comes to story, control, and atmosphere but one thing is for sure....I have more fun playing through the first four levels of TR1 then I do TR6. I agree that's not how it should be. TR6 should be the cream of the crop. I do honestly wish TR6 was the real deal. I just don't feel it is.

But those who are preaching the PC angle..you could be right. Patches and upgrades could 'fix' a lot of the issues I'm talking about tech wise. You're still going to sit through more story then gameplay I think, but at least you might be able to control Lara better then us poor PS2 owners!

But how about this...did anyone notice a little uh...jiggle to Lara that wasn't there before! I'm all for that!:D

phoenixrising
25th Jun 2003, 10:21
It's been SEVEN friggin years since the original TR ... get over it!!!
Maybe you also prefer playing with pacman or pong or something...

BarbMc
25th Jun 2003, 12:30
Seven years....and it's still a great game! :D Unlike pacman and pong (never heard of pong before) it's still very playable today. I agree with the points that OriginalBryGuy makes about what made the original Tomb Raider so good. I'd say that it was true of tomb raider 3 also, which is the first of the games that I played, and the one that got me hooked!

The comments about the video sequences which involve speaking (selectively) to other characters, slowing the game down and affecting the overall experience don't come as any surprise to me...even in Tomb Raider 3 they became irritating, but at least there was the option to click onto the next bit! It seems that in this new game we're going to be forced to watch the video sequences that require some kind of interraction.

I kinda liked the idea when I first heard about it, but having played tr chronicles again, I've got to say the thought of being forced to watch/interact with these sequences hardly fills me with enthusiastic anticipation. It's not so bad the first time round of course...but I bet most of you are like myself and play each game a few times....especially if there's a delay! <possibly several times each game and then some> and note..I'm still waiting!!!

I don't agree about the movie tho. I was really disappointed with that. It looked like tomb raider...it sounded like tomb raider..it just didn't Feel like tomb raider....it felt like a vehicle for making lots of cash for the benefit of a crap actress *she didn't convince me* and the producers etc behind the film. It didn't address, for me at least, the kind of things that make Tomb Raider the awesome experience I've become addicted to.

what things? mainly the sense of Wonder...there's so little magic nowadays..that to walk into an area that's actually impossible to go to in reality and feel like you're experiencing something incredible..........That's what made Tomb Raider addictive to me..there simply isn't another game that comes close.

So that's why..even with all the possible/probable glitches...and so on and so forth...I'll still be drawn to the shops on Friday 27th to get my Angel Of Darkness. I'll keep playing Tomb Raider till the wonder has gone ... which doesn't sound like it'll be very much longer :(

'From TR1 to TR6 Core has slowly been taking Lara out of her element. What the heck is a Tomb Raider worth if she isn't raiding tombs?'


Hmmm...mebbe that's why they've introduced a new character...Kurtis Wotamidoininatombraidergame :confused:

Mangar The Dark
25th Jun 2003, 12:54
Regarding the debate over more/less action in TR games:

I've always like TR games best when there's just enough action to keep you nervous; when you're running through a long series of corridors, and you just know something bad is lurking up ahead. It's the anticipation of the attack that gets me, more than the attack itself. TR1 did this brilliantly. TR2 was more "in your face" when it came to action, which was great for some people, but not as good for me.

OriginalBryGuy-- you mentioned that TR should have more action because action is the reason we loved Indiana Jones. You're right about Indy, but wrong about its relation to TR. Listen to the opening theme to TR1 and compare it to The Raiders March. The John Williams score tells you immediately that the movie is about action and a huge adrenaline rush. The TR theme is softer, slower, more mysterious. Rather than indicating a focus on action, it tells me that the game is about the exploration of long lost worlds, and the mysteries surrounding them, and I like that approach very much. The theme fit perfectly with the rest of the game. Incidentally, I remember being surprised by the TR theme when I first heard it, because I really DID think Lara was just going to be an Indiana Jones knock-off, and I expected the theme song to reflect this. But as soon as I heard the music, I realized the designers were going for a slightly different approach (though I'll admit, she's still a bit of a rip-off.) Anyway, getting back to the point-- TR games work wonderfully without loads of action (face it, the combat system isn't all that great anyway.) An Indy movie wouldn't work without much action. They're two different characters, and two different mediums (video game vs. movie) so I don't feel they should each take the same approach.

Ethereal
25th Jun 2003, 12:55
Yes Lara must be in the middle of NOWHERE. In a HUGE world. With some but not to many SUPERintelligent enemies who have a GOAL. Of course there must be cities to visit, so you can buy some gear there and stuff and go into the middle of nowhere agian. She must be able to choose how she wan't to complete her mission. From the airplane to wher to drop in the jungle or whatever. Who want to complete a mission too! Areas that seem chaotic, beautiful. With lots of fantasie and supernatural happenings. Hey it's an adventure! She has to find food in the jungle and there must be a DAY AND NIGHT cicles. And there must be multiplayer like he said.
I think this is what we all want. NO high tech ****.
Bring the mistery and lonelyness back! And the house!
this is what TR is about, and having the most moves possible. They DON'T have to delete the sealth stuff. You can just DON'T use it.

XanderD2
25th Jun 2003, 13:09
Originally posted by Mangar The Dark
Regarding the debate over more/less action in TR games:

I've always like TR games best when there's just enough action to keep you nervous; when you're running through a long series of corridors, and you just know something bad is lurking up ahead. It's the anticipation of the attack that gets me, more than the attack itself. TR1 did this brilliantly. TR2 was more "in your face" when it came to action, which was great for some people, but not as good for me.

Doesn't that remind you of the first and the second Alien movie? It was almost the same thing: long, dark corridors and passages in the first movie, and a monster that lurks in the shadows and in the second movie, the pure adrenaline rush, aliens attacking en masse, etc. The problem is that all sequels try to outdo their prequels, but it is this attempt that ruins the mystery of the original.

Mangar The Dark
25th Jun 2003, 13:43
Originally posted by XanderD2
Doesn't that remind you of the first and the second Alien movie? It was almost the same thing: long, dark corridors and passages in the first movie, and a monster that lurks in the shadows and in the second movie, the pure adrenaline rush, aliens attacking en masse, etc. The problem is that all sequels try to outdo their prequels, but it is this attempt that ruins the mystery of the original.

Great point. Maybe the real solution is fewer sequels, more original games/movies.

OriginalBryGuy
26th Jun 2003, 14:56
It's been SEVEN friggin years since the original TR ... get over it!!!

Get over what? TR1 is a great game. YOU get over it. Just go back and read the reviews at the time. It's getting better reviews then TR6 is getting now.


Maybe you also prefer playing with pacman or pong or something...

I do enjoy Pac-Man and Pong sometimes. You can't just discount a game because it's old. The real question is is it fun. And while we're here I'm actually building a Game Cabinet, so yea, I'll admit it...I love new games as well as old games! You'd be crazy not to.

http://www.oneilldesigns.com/mame/


TR games work wonderfully without loads of action

I can agree with that statement. I just want there to be a good balance.


The problem is that all sequels try to outdo their prequels, but it is this attempt that ruins the mystery of the original.

All sequels need to do is give us more of what we wanted from a first outing and less of what we hated. In the Aliens movie case I think Cameron did JUST that...videogames should follow the same pattern but often the teams change (just like directors and producers, and everyone else on the staff) so the new team is more focused on the new game then really finding out from the fans what we want or don't want. Eventually if they want to get paid we have to buy the game. I just wish Eidos or Core would have more focus studies, polls, and essay type questions as to what we as fans wanted. I think that would seriously solve everything.

Xcom
26th Jun 2003, 16:06
Originally posted by OriginalBryGuy
All sequels need to do is give us more of what we wanted from a first outing and less of what we hated. In the Aliens movie case I think Cameron did JUST that...videogames should follow the same pattern but often the teams change (just like directors and producers, and everyone else on the staff) so the new team is more focused on the new game then really finding out from the fans what we want or don't want. Eventually if they want to get paid we have to buy the game. I just wish Eidos or Core would have more focus studies, polls, and essay type questions as to what we as fans wanted. I think that would seriously solve everything.

I think that is a great misconception which destroys quite a lot of Hollywood movie sequels. (with a few exceptions, obviously). They think: so, people liked monsters. Give them more monsters. They liked special effects. Let's put 10 times as many special effects. They liked fighting sequences. Great. More fighting sequences. By doing that, they ruin balance and neglecting more important things such as story and script. (Mummy Returns, Star Wars:AOC, Men in Black2 and so on).

Finding out what fans want and don't want is a tricky thing. Many fans want different things. For instance, some liked the introduction of Kurtis, some hated it. Some liked introduction of the stealth factor, some hated it (yourself included). And so on.
Try to satisfy everyone and you'll end up satisfying no one. Personally, I give Core credit for stepping away from the outdated TR formula. I haven't played the AOD game yet but if it turns out to be below average, I would be able to say: too bad but at least they tried. So far, all negativity in (ps2) reviews is mostly due to technical glitches. Should Core correct those errors with next reincarnation of TR (or perhaps even with europian release for PC), the scores may skyrocket. The potential is there.

And besides, what about the people who are not TR fans? (such as myself). Those who were just curious about AOD as a game, not as Tomb Raider game. As good as TR1 concept was in 96, it will not attract many new fans now (which is necessary).

OriginalBryGuy
26th Jun 2003, 16:22
And besides, what about the people who are not TR fans? (such as myself). Those who were just curious about AOD as a game, not as Tomb Raider game. As good as TR1 concept was in 96, it will not attract many new fans now (which is necessary).

True, but putting together a sloppy game today isn't going to make new TR fans either.

Pros

Graphics
Music
Story

Cons

Enemy AI
Gameplay
Control
Grid system environments
Glitches

That's pretty much it. It's not like as fans we'd be asking Core to abide by all our wishes, but when they don't even meet the fans half way. I'd rather play a Tomb Raider game with options and features created by a fan based majority through a poll or something then just see some developer try to please us all by themselves. I think it's obvious at this point they can't handle it. Stepping out of the formula was always a bad move.

The First Tomb Raider, the TR movies, and comics are doing very well because they haven't strayed. When a TR game is released and get scores as low as 5.3 (IGN) that should be a big red flag to anyone, especially Core.

But the jury is still out for many of you who haven't played it yet. Come back when you have and let us know your thoughts tho!

XanderD2
26th Jun 2003, 16:50
Originally posted by Xcom
I think that is a great misconception which destroys quite a lot of Hollywood movie sequels. (with a few exceptions, obviously). They think: so, people liked monsters. Give them more monsters. They liked special effects. Let's put 10 times as many special effects. They liked fighting sequences. Great. More fighting sequences. By doing that, they ruin balance and neglecting more important things such as story and script. (Mummy Returns, Star Wars:AOC, Men in Black2 and so on).

Well said. The problem is that they don't see the essence of the movies, and since they cannot grasp it, they focus on the superficial things like special effects, more monsters, more explosions, even more fighting (did I mention more monsters?).


Originally posted by Xcom
Finding out what fans want and don't want is a tricky thing. Many fans want different things. For instance, some liked the introduction of Kurtis, some hated it. Some liked introduction of the stealth factor, some hated it (yourself included). And so on.
Try to satisfy everyone and you'll end up satisfying no one. Personally, I give Core credit for stepping away from the outdated TR formula.

I think Core would have been able to deliver a very good game (and I still hope that they will fix the most annoying bugs for the PC version), but unfortunately the publisher also has a word or two about the release date. And this is what happens when business considerations overrule professional decisions (remember the Challenger disaster).

MacAngel
26th Jun 2003, 16:58
Just I question..... Why is page called the Lara Croft Worship Page when it has a review that says the game isn't good? That doesn't sound like Lara Coft worshiping to me. You should make that a little (more like a lot) smaller at the top.
And of course TR1 was better- its the first one! Its a classic for god's sake!

OriginalBryGuy
26th Jun 2003, 17:28
Just I question..... Why is page called the Lara Croft Worship Page when it has a review that says the game isn't good? That doesn't sound like Lara Coft worshiping to me. You should make that a little (more like a lot) smaller at the top.

lol. Back in the day I just had one page dedicated to Lara Croft on my personal web site called 'The Lara Croft Worship Page' cause I thought she was obviously cool. haha. I then built up a huge site but kept the name.

The game isn't good in my opinion. Just cause I run a Tomb Raider site doesn't mean my judgement has to be clouded and I have to accept everything 'Tomb Raider' that I see.

I still love Lara 'in all her forms'. That's the point. Everyone covers the games so my site is trying to celebrate the women who play Lara Croft. Something I think is far more interesting.

That's about it. :D

Lr&Kt
26th Jun 2003, 17:38
I dunno... if this guy "worships" lara, why don´t put positive things on the review... its supposed to be objetive, isn´t it? looks like the guy played 2 hours of aod, got frustrated and wrote the review, here´s a reviewing tip... play the game for at least 3 days and then write something objetive, u know the usual pro s and cons of every game

midroth
26th Jun 2003, 17:39
It isn't possible to be everyones darling - for Lara not, too.
So easy is (sometimes) the world...

Lr&Kt
26th Jun 2003, 17:42
Originally posted by midroth
It isn't possible to be everyones darling ..

The midroth man thinks i´m a girl:mad: well i just like women i´m not one, and im not GAY

OriginalBryGuy
26th Jun 2003, 17:56
dunno... if this guy "worships" lara, why don´t put positive things on the review... its supposed to be objetive, isn´t it? looks like the guy played 2 hours of aod, got frustrated and wrote the review, here´s a reviewing tip... play the game for at least 3 days and then write something objetive, u know the usual pro s and cons of every game

Hey, I've been playing every day since I got it last week.

If my review was all happy and bubbly for the game just because I liked Lara, what would be the point in writing it.? Lara is cool, Core just stuck her in a suck game. :D Everything doesn't have to be a package deal. As you said, there are pros and cons.

Pros

Music (The score is great. Absolutely no problems there.)
Graphics (An obvious improvement over past games. Textures look great. Good use of particle systems but not as extensive as other PS2 games.)

Cons

Enemy AI (they just charge, then blink out of existence when they die. Lame! )
Control (one control scheme(for PS2) + Analog = suuuuck)
Gameplay (More of the same. Nothing really new or inventive. Stealth...was done in Metal Gear solid years ago. Could have been at least that enjoyable but didn't even come close)
Glitches (framerate crawl, Lara hovering, passing through objects)