PDA

View Full Version : Tomb withdrawal symptoms!!!



RebeL_fARmeR
15th Jul 2003, 16:09
One thing I noticed. I myself absolutely LOVED The Hall of Seasons, yet I've also seen thousands of times people posting about how much they love The Hall of Seasons and all the levels associated with it. Everybody's been raving about how wonderful the level was and I thoroughly agree with them, but nobody seems to immensely love any of the other levels appart from the Luvre (pardon spelling) galleries.
Take the Hall of Seasons and compare its atmosphere to something like the atmosphere in the cafe in Paris. Hall of seasons is twisted, demonic, hellish, full of twisted traps, freaky monsters... the cafe... well, it's just not the same, is it?

As most of the forum members here seem to be praising Hall of Seasons I have to wonder, is Tomb Raider REALLY Tomb Raider without the tombs??? The rest of the game was good, don't mistake me there, but we just didn't get that classic "I'm raiding a tomb" atmosphere!

(Time out, gotta go) Finish this some other time...
Continued after going home for a nice relaxing shower and a can of Coke:

Where was I? Ah yes, my point: We are TOMB raiders, therefore we like raiding TOMBS. The last revelation was a massively impressive game because it was Tombs galore all the way through, just like the original game, every corner you turn there's a creepy looking tomb there.

THE QUESTION: Are they wasting potential Tomb Raider glory here? By setting the games outside of the tombs is Eidos and Core throwing away a LOT of potential game brilliance? Everyone loved TR1, for it had lots of tombs, it was tomb-tastic! Everyone loved TRLR, tombs and aincient Egyptian creepiness everywhere, it was tomb-tacular! Everyone loved Hall of Seasons, the atmposphere, absolutely tomb-azing!!!
we clearly love our tombs, so are Eidos wasting much game potential by setting it outside of the tombs?

T_Rex
15th Jul 2003, 17:29
I agree. The Hall of Season was the best level in AOD, dispite my experience of massive slow downs in the later parts. Everything else in the game isn't very Tomb Raider-ish. Even in Chronicles, I really didnt like the VCI Towers level very much because it wasn't Tomb Raider. Those levels, like the Louvre or Prague, are more Splinter Cell or MGS. I dont want to play Splinter Cell or MGS, I want to play TOMB RAIDER!

I think they [core/eidos] should stop trying to go with the 'flavor of the month' and stick to the formula that they know is a winning combination for Tomb Raider. Actually Raiding Tombs. Although it really seems like we may never have the original Tomb Raider back. I've lost my respect for Eidos and the Tomb Raider series. As far as I am concerned, the real Tomb Raider ended after The Last Revelation.

Mangar The Dark
15th Jul 2003, 17:55
Originally posted by T_Rex
As far as I am concerned, the real Tomb Raider ended after The Last Revelation.

Agreed.
"The Last Revelation" did a fantastic job of bringing us full circle in the series. The first game was all about ancient cultures and tombs. Then we strayed away from those ideas for parts 2 and 3, and in part 4 we were back to TR's roots. And then she "died," and I was glad. I felt like they did the series justice, and killed her off as a means of preventing themselves from milking it any further. It was as if they wanted to end the series with some dignity. Even the title, "The LAST Revelation" seemed to indicate that this was the end.

...and then came Chronicles.
:rolleyes:

Godfather
15th Jul 2003, 18:05
Guess I'm the only one then who's seen too many tombs. I looove running around in real-life cities like France and/or Prague. Makes it easier to relate to and the atmosphere is much more realistic and pleasant. Eventually tombs begin to look all the same, no? :confused:

Anyway, cities for me people. Like Max Payne in the beginning ... cooool! :cool: :D

Grave_Robber
15th Jul 2003, 19:49
The whole of the Tomb of ancients was great including the hall of seasons and getting into the tomb through the dig. By far the best bit of the game.

One thing about the tomb was it didnt really make sense, obviously the entrance u went through couldnt have been the main entrance. Plus in hall of seasons u did these life threatening puzzles which was all abit pointless as if lara had some grappling hook she could have just climbed to the 1f anyway also getting to the painting was daft, what happens if the roof didnt colapse over time, she wouldnt be able to get it. if she smashed that grate at the bridge it would have made her life abit easier. well gameplay over realism.

***Terra***
15th Jul 2003, 20:05
I agree the Hall of Seasons is a great level [not that far in, just done Neptune's Hall, and I can't play any more of AOD because I'm on holiday damnit] and I love the tombs, but I think we need other areas like the cities and the louvre to take the storyline in different places. Plus these areas do make you appreciate the tombs a lot more!:)

salvestrom
15th Jul 2003, 20:47
I'm with Terra. Non-Tomb levels help to make a story more complete and have always been part of the game - the mining site at the end of TR1 isn't a tomb :P. Although it is set in some cavernous area which is underground and dark and full of traps set by the sadistic mining company... :)

Still, take me to a city, or any other outdoor non-tomb area (nevada, the oil rig) and I'll be happy, as long as it's done well, and it's in the name of moving the story along so we can get into a tomb somewhere =D... I really thought we were going to Turkey til a cut scene said they'd bought the Sleeper to Strahov. Then the game ended and all we'd had was Halls.

An interesting hypothetical question: Take out Hall of Seasons. NOW what do you think of TRVI??

Sal.

Godfather
16th Jul 2003, 11:31
Originally posted by salvestrom
An interesting hypothetical question: Take out Hall of Seasons. NOW what do you think of TRVI??

A bit weaker obviously as I enjoyed these four separate rooms where you had to jumps from one moving pole to another or jump from one piece of collapsing road to another without falling into a sea of lava. But eventually, I'll always enjoy raiding more than tomb raiding. ;)

bye for now

CatSuit&Ponytail
16th Jul 2003, 11:58
Originally posted by RebeL_fARmeR


THE QUESTION: Are they wasting potential Tomb Raider glory here? By setting the games outside of the tombs is Eidos and Core throwing away a LOT of potential game brilliance? Everyone loved TR1, for it had lots of tombs, it was tomb-tastic! Everyone loved TRLR, tombs and aincient Egyptian creepiness everywhere, it was tomb-tacular! Everyone loved Hall of Seasons, the atmposphere, absolutely tomb-azing!!!
we clearly love our tombs, so are Eidos wasting much game potential by setting it outside of the tombs?


Sorry. I actually preffered the Jungle levels with all the trees and birdsong and such. I also like water levels a lot... And cats. I have to have lots of BIG cats.......

RebeL_fARmeR
16th Jul 2003, 12:08
Maybe I sould've rephrased, I'm not necessarily a Tombaholic! I'm more an adventureaholic!!!
What I think makes a good Tomb Raider is going adventuring somewhere that's creepy, twisted, forbidden, haunted, gothic, scary... you don't really get that in, say, an offshore oil rig! Although the alternative levels like the oil rig are enjoyable they're just not the same... you with me? :confused:

And trees, yeah, trees rock too! Take the Ireland levels of TRC, HOLY COW! The number of times I've played through them, it's like REAL LIFE adventuring, it's more realistic, it's like you ARE Lara slipping out of the house at 3:00am to go exploring, totally realistic plot, so submerging... man, I wanna go play it RIGHT NOW!

owen10
16th Jul 2003, 12:54
Swimming is one of my favourite Tomb Raider staples, and I was pleased to see it on numerous occasions. A few more water-based puzzles wouldn't have gone amiss though.

I didn't mind the change of scene personally, as I don't want to be playing the same environments I've traversed through in past games with fancier graphics. With better structuring, the calm town levels could have made for a welcome respite from the relentless raiding. But they put Paris in too soon, and Prague (Monstrum Crime Scene) was obviously never completed to fill a similar purpose.

I've no real problems with the environments used, as variety and diversity are strengths in my book. However, I wish a greater emphasis had been placed on free-roaming exploration.

T_Rex
17th Jul 2003, 18:19
Originally posted by salvestrom
Non-Tomb levels help to make a story more complete and have always been part of the game - the mining site at the end of TR1 isn't a tomb :P. Although it is set in some cavernous area which is underground and dark and full of traps set by the sadistic mining company...


Forgive me, but I have no idea what you are talking about. Are you talking about the last level in TR1 when you encounter Natla's 3 henchmen? Correct me if I am wrong, but wasnt that the path to the lost city of Atlantis? Technically a tomb-like area?

I think that we may be expressing the word "tomb" in a too literal sense. By us saying we miss the old "Tomb Raider" style environments means we miss the wilderness, the lost temples, the ancient buildings, the underwater cities, the sunken ghost ships, endless caverns, etc. Not necissarily just Egyptian "tombs" where someone is buried or something.

Just thought I would clarify.

D3v1L80Y
17th Jul 2003, 18:46
Originally posted by T_Rex
By us saying we miss the old "Tomb Raider" style environments means we miss the wilderness, the lost temples, the ancient buildings, the underwater cities, the sunken ghost ships, endless caverns, etc. Not necissarily just Egyptian "tombs" where someone is buried or something.


Exactly. Very well put, T-Rex. Tomb Raider doesn't necessarially have to be actual gravesites, just 'ancient' sites. The Great Wall, the jungles of India, The Collesium...etc. These were not all tombs, per se...just ancient sites, ruins and the like. I don't really care to see Lara visit the same locations again, but at least keep it in the same vein as those places. The game is called "Tomb Raider" not "Urban Ghetto Warehouse Raider"

Mangar The Dark
17th Jul 2003, 20:27
I'm with T-Rex. It doesn't have to be "tombs" per se, but I DO like ancient, mysterious locations far more than cities and such. I think part of that can be attributed to the fact that the ancient locations are usually easier to believe in the context of the game. I remember wandering around Rome and Venice in previous TR games and thinking, "Where the hell is everyone?" I mean, it was broad daylight, and not a single soul on the street other than some guys trying to kill Lara. The game engine simply couldn't do these locations convincingly. The other problem is that the types of puzzles often found in the city locations don't make sense for cities. Why would I have to pull a lever on one side of the street to open a door on the other side? I can except this logic better in a tomb-like environment.

Now, having said all that, I did think the City Of The Dead in TLR was done pretty well. It kept that spooky atmosphere, and a good sense of exploration. Plus, it was supposed to be abandoned, so it made sense that it was empty.

moe888uk
17th Jul 2003, 20:51
"Urban Ghetto Warehouse Raider". haha very funny devilboy. Agree with that as well, the environments should be places that might exist in the real world and havent be explored before. Dont know what anyone else thinks about tombs again, but I definitely wana go back to tombs again and fight off those egyptain gods(as described in the mummy movies and stargate). Tombs are just scary and get you into the game. But no not another dinasaur, im bored with them. Dont wana play jurassic park, wana play tomb raider.