View Full Version : is 'ico' partly to blame for the aod criticism?...

28th Jun 2003, 16:27
(i realize this is kinda 'apples'n'oranges' in a way...)

i'm not sure there's ever been a more loving or better done tribute to another game series than 'ico', which was clearly inspired by tr. on the other hand, i wonder if the fact that the tr-style gameplay in 'ico' was handled so flawlessly has ended up hurting the original by comparison?...

i guess what i'm saying is, if i had to recommend either 'ico' or 'aod' to someone who'd played neither, the 'imitation' would win hands down over the 'original', which is kinda weird (& unfortunate)...

28th Jun 2003, 17:14
excuse me?!

"ico" was in no way, shape or form a tribute to tomb raider. for one thing, the gameplay is totally different. for another, both yorda and queen have anatomically possible physiques (at least as much for somebody concieved only to be a spirit vessel...). for yet another, tomb raider is/was a gigantic flop in japan (home of ico).

so please do tell, what leads you to believe ico was/is a "tribute" to dear Lara?

as for tomb raider's panning, if people didn't think it was crap they wouldn't say it was crap. nuff said :)

28th Jun 2003, 18:12
so please do tell, what leads you to believe ico was/is a "tribute" to dear Lara?

not so much a tribute to lara (you forgot to mention she doesn't have horns), but to the grandious-environment, 'where do i go / what do i do next?, climbing / jumping navigating puzzle-style trademark tr gameplay? - absolutely! i mean there're aspects of the gameplay either modified (combat) or not there at all, but for you to say 'the gameplay is totally different' makes me wonder whether we're talking about the same 'ico' or not :) ...

i'm not saying it was done deliberately, btw... but it's sure as hell there. & it was done very, very well...

& sometimes, part of the reason people think something's crap is because they've seen it done better?...

28th Jun 2003, 22:55
I will repeat SuzieCroft line here when I say "Excuse me???"

If you're going to use that argument numb, then Mario 64 is a tribute to Tomb Raider, and every other large leveled/environment/jumping puzzled/adventure game/ blah blah blah. And that Tomb Raider would just be a larger hack of Prince of Persia/Pit Fall/Ecco the Dolphin/etc.

You're argument makes absolutely no sense.

ICO is a FANTASTIC game and has not one ioda to do with Tomb Raider and vice versa.

The reasons for people not liking Tomb Raider come down to it's gameplay, mostly. From what I've read on these forums anyway. People have come to expect something from Tomb Raider that was not necessarily what they had in mind when this newer one came out.

I can assure you that if this Tomb Raider had been close to ICO you would have heard so. If you strip away the dissimilarities between the two games, all you have similar is the "exploring open areas" card, which, in my book, cannot be pinned as created by Tomb Raider.

28th Jun 2003, 23:21
Originally posted by Nivbed

I second that! *BIG thumbs up*

29th Jun 2003, 00:02
reason people think something's crap is because they've seen it done better

well, uhhh, yeah. that's kind of how "crap" is defined by being compared to the best or something better. if the "crap" was the only thing out there then i guess it would be the best and would no longer be crap. that's what makes crap; seeing it done better.

29th Jun 2003, 01:57
Tomb Raider is Prince of Persia.......in 3D

29th Jun 2003, 02:04
No. All of those games were to get people ready for the 'Deathtrap Dungeon' remake for XBox.

29th Jun 2003, 23:54
ICO's gameplay was more like Prince of Persia.