PDA

View Full Version : ?Game too short? Or people playing below their level or using cheats?



Astara
14th Dec 2006, 02:12
I got to the point of the Time Trials a few weeks ago.

Reading through various posts many people complained about the game being too short. While we can all wish that the current game would last, at least, until the next one comes out, but going with a finite end point, was the game "really" too short (Note: I'm not arguing against a desire for a longer game, but just looking at details of this game.

All of my first trips averaged ~4-6 hours per level. It was on "beginner" difficult and I was using Stella's Walkthroughs (http://ombraiders.net/stella/tomb7.html). I didn't have alot of hope of completing the TimeTrials (TTs) and getting to see all the "extras" (out of stubbornness, I resisted using anyone else's "saved games").

In trying to increase my speed, I finally broke down and bought a USB game console (~29-39 bucks, Logitech USB, Rumblepad2 (the rumbling feature is pretty lame... on a 1-10 scale, where, IMO, say rumble is 10, this might be a 2; unless the double or triple the weight and use an external power supply, I don't think the Rumble feature is worth it for this game (have Rumble turned up to max adjustable value of 150%).

My best time in any of the levels was on Bolivia Redux, so I attempted it for my first TT. It needed a limited number of keys/buttons/knobs, limited thinking, limited strategy and it required the shortest attention span and had the quickest repeat after failures. Within a few weeks I got it. *yeay!*

Only "cheat[sic]" that seemed to enabled was "Hide texture". One source I read claimed "One-Shot-Kill" should have been enabled, but I didn't see it. :scratch:

Next level "to fall" was England . It took a while to polish flame my jumping technique :mad2: . Even though the Dragon is the "BOSS" (what's that stand for, anyway?!) for that level, the first two flame jumps were hardest part of that level for me. The Dragon battle is still significantly easier on my keyboard than the gamepad (just too touchy, even turned to minimal sensitivity).

Side note: My trackball(s): Dual(L+R) Kennsington Turbo Mouse Pro's (wireless, USB Mac & PC compatible), 5-year warrantee. So far, BTW, Kennsington has been great supporting the warrantee. Have had few problems, but when I've had a need for repair, they've sent a replacement promptly. Also, the "Dual" is my adjective and means I use one for each hand. It's not a supported configuration, and might not work with the wired (haven't tried it). However with the wireless, both trackballs talk to the same 1 receiver. As long as I don't try to use both at the same time, they work fine. As far as the "receiver" and computer are concerned, only 1 "mouse" is connected. I alternate hands for whatever is most convenient & comfortable to reduce wrist strain (prevent RSI flareup).

The "mice" 4 main cursor buttons (+wheel doubling as middle click). One of the other four is programed for click&hold: in game: pull trigger and hold. It frees my fingers for other tasks -- very helpful!

After that came England, I got my first "useful cheats" -- "Health Damage Immunity" (only damaged from falling. Also, to my surprise, I noticed "1-Shot Kill (I thought this should have been available after just BolivRedux", but hadn't seen it.
____________________________________________

From there I've made progress with the earned , "cheats". With the "1-shot kill" and "damage immunity", I have found other other TT's "just slightly" (alot?!) more accessible. Practicing reducing my times, I'd gone through all the levels multiple times on beginner and still those times were 1.9-4X the listed TT limits.

With "cheat codes, I then got Peru, Japan and WestAfr.(Ghana). I am close to getting Bolivia (very close, have gotten to crossing final bridge to final battle), Kazakhstan (have to stay awake during motorcycle rides) and Nepal).

So here is where I am wondering for those who thought the game was too short or who "did it in an afternoon": just how is one defining "done"?

I have difficulty in believing people "really" finished the game off so quickly. By finished, I mean:
1) Used no 3rd-party "saved-levels" or "walk-throughs". (This is
probably the easiest for those who finished it quickly after it came out as these were likely not available).
2) Played through all levels on "Advance" (preferably from the very start, as anyone who "does he game" in an afternoon really ought to be admitting that they are "Advanced") and retrieved all "rewards" (game reads "100% complete).
3) Completed all Time Trials.
4) Doing all the above using no cheats (in game or out).

---------------

Admittedly, this is my first LC:TR game -- my first computer game of any sort (other than the rare chess game), but are people really finishing everything? Or are many of those complaining meaning: "I went through all the new content on the easiest/medium setting, and now my input-queue for 'fresh content' is exhausted. Finding rewards or TTs are just boring busy-work. Game too short. ;^O "

As said at the beginning -- none of this should be construed to mean I wouldn't like games any longer in the future. I do have some issues with people who say "game was too easy, should be harder next time", if they are not choosing the "advanced" settings and avoiding "cheats". If they are wanting the "easiest" settings to be harder / more impossible, that's going to block or dissuade new people from getting started. Making more "gradations" of difficult beyond the currently most difficult levels of this game would be great for those wanting "harder", but they also need to use those options -- from the beginning -- not using shortcuts.

FWIW -- I don't want difficult to be increased by adding boring, repetitious busy-work. That's like uncreative teachers who can't teach and compensate by assigning loads of repetitive, boring homework. Quantity doesn't make up for lack of quality.

Peace & Happy Raiding,
A*A

p.s. - Do wish they'd add level and costume editors as extras -- let "us" people "play"! :big grin:

Terminatorvs
14th Dec 2006, 13:05
I think it took you that much time because you're new to games. It took me about an hour to complete every level on Hard (except Bolivia and Bolivia redux), as I was watching all the cut scenes and sometimes just stopping and staring in all directions admiring the beauty of the levels. I completed the TTs from the first go - all except Japan. So, I think it was short.
Shutting up now.

Treeble
14th Dec 2006, 14:03
It took me ~6 hours on the first go to reach the end, watching every cutscene, and another 3 or 4 hours to complete 100% by collecting rewards and playing Time Trials.

When I got it on the GameCube just last week, I finished it with 100% completion under 5 hours, and that's watching EVERY cutscene just as well (trying to spot any possible differences between the GCN and PS2 version).

So yes, it is a very short game.

I've only ever used cheats for fun, when I really had nothing else to do. Even when playing time trials I can't stand using them to 'help' completing the game.

StarChampagne
14th Dec 2006, 17:48
Hi Astara :)

The game took me a while to complete because I didn't play for very long each day, but I found the game very short in terms of actual gameplay. There were few levels, and the time-trials did not take me that long to finish (although the last one was an absolute horror).

I'm no expert in games, but in comparison to others I have played Legend was very short. Tomb Raider 2 and 3 were extremely long, and Tomb Raider 4 was absolutely colossal. And for me, the time trials lengthened the gameplay but not the actual length of the game.

This is why I found the game to be short. Also, this sounds obvious, but the more games you play the more you become used to traversing levels and the quicker you become. Playing Tomb Raider 2 in particular, where each level is gigantic, might be a reason Legend seems so short for me. And I did play on Hard, but I had to resort to a walkthrough once or twice :whistle:

Astara
15th Dec 2006, 03:56
I wouldn't have even thought someone could play the game and not have watched the cut scenes -- Seems like the provide both back-story and clues.

I'm unlikely to ever play through TR1-3 since they won't work on MS's new & improved XP (even though it supposedly has compat. modes).

Finished the TT's (w/cheats). Even w/cheats, I found it challenging to simply cover the distance of each level in the time required, let alone fight anyone. "Mehbee" I'll go back and retry w/o cheats, but at least I finally got to the end.

I was just starting to figure out how much the jumps were affected by length of holding jump key (especially important on jumping fire-pits in England, I found). I also just discovered a hint to when she was going to jump in a "random" direction -- i.e. by looking at where she's looking.

There seems just so much detail in the scenes, to take in, and play at full speed. About the only way I made progress on the TT's was by virtually having the route memorized in my head. Maybe my brain just needs a faster processor...:-).

I'd bet that each level could be made into a 2-3 hour movie if a director were so inclined, there's so much scenery.

A slight problem on my part -- that I saw more thoroughly in a friend who started on level "1"(Bolivia). With him, he's used to face-to-face, paper DND games -- not so much visual cues. With the visual factor, he wanted to explore every nook and cranny to see what would happen if he did "X" in each separate location. I, too, was a tad disappointed that there weren't multiple routes, or that so many levels were like one-way doors -- that and the "disappearing objects": if you save and come back or come back after a death.

I found little nits to have problems with through-out, but I also tend to look at things differently than most people. But little "nits" like: why no "health packs" in Lara's Home? or none in the Kazakhstan infirmary.

I'm probably really not used to game controllers (having just purchased one a month ago). Went from controls not being responsive enough on keyboard, to being "touchy" on gamepad.

Maybe there is a trade-off between image quality and final length? Maybe I'm comparing in the wrong direction, but I guess I didn't hear too many comments about how the Lara Croft movies were too short.

Weren't the early games based on square grids? In this one I think they moved to using hexagons, but to "populate", then manually draw a full level seems like alot of work for not so much final product.

I know in early DnD games, a 20x20x10 maze could easily give weeks of play, but due to random factors, there were _many_ ways of playing a game -- different classes, abilities, races, equipment, "monsters"...it could be difficult for someone to ever "finish" such a game -- but they weren't so "goal" oriented as the TR games, where the focus seems to be on getting to some level of "complete" for various "rewards".

Suppose they got rid of the "% complete" thing, and the only unlocked rewards were those you found "randomly" during game play -- i.e. - they wouldn't necessarily be in the same place during two different games. Would people feel "gypped"? Suppose there was no "one path", but only a collection of, maybe, items that were spread pseudo-randomly?

Maybe one thing that made older game play take longer -- in many games there was no "save" while you were in the "dungeon" -- might be equivalent to only allowing one to save progress and items in Croft Manor -- and if you got killed, you could restore from last save in Croft Manor. Add to that, the factor that levels would be reinitialized when you left them. I.e. -- items and enemies wouldn't necessarily be in the same place, and you might encounter different mixes of enemies (or monsters). You really couldn't go through a level on "autopilot", since it'd be different each time.

I must say -- the auto-save feature in TRL makes game play more fun in some ways, but more predictable and easily "beaten" as well.

Anyone see the episode of StarGate SG1, where Tilk gets stuck in VR, and the computer keeps adjusting the game each time Tilk died to add one more level of difficulty? I wonder how many people would find such a game "fun"...certainly, some might enjoy the challenge -- but that game just seemed "unwin-able" until Tilk got support from other team members. Of course the added "feature" of real, physical, "shocks" each time he died, growing more lethal with each round probably added some extreme "interest" (a majorly enhanced Shock-feedback gamepad...).

Certainly such games would be very different from Legend, but how can you pack, say, the detail that might go into a 40-hour long movie, while making it easy to "breeze" through each scene?

Might be some challenge to generate something that has long game play and that has as much visual detail and synchronized music as legend has. Dunno.

As compute power gets cheaper, it may be easier to do some of these things, but to expand a 3-D world seems like it would increase exponentially in requirements, compared to computers that aren't really even increasing in speed at a constant rate any more -- but seeming to slow to a logarithmic increase. At _least_, I hope they start taking advantage of increases in parallel processing -- finding a good use for quad & higher processors :-).

Guess I need alot more practice to get faster, but at the same time, I like to think about things that would make games more difficult for experienced players, yet still approachable and entertaining for beginners, since everyone has to be a beginner sometime. Also, I'm sure what one person find challenging, another will find to be no problem.

"They" say it's hard to please all of the people all of the time, though...:-)

A*a

p.s. - Terminatorvs -- for some reason, I think of the X-Men's "Colossus" when I see you write. :-)

Terminatorvs
15th Dec 2006, 07:54
Good news, Astara - old TRs work on XP - you've got to download some stuff from www.tombraiderchronicles.com and voila. (I'm replaying the classics now.) You heard right - TR's 1-5 levels were of the grid system - all of the levels were blocky.
And I don't know, who "Colossus" is. :scratch:

ditom
16th Dec 2006, 21:58
It took me 5 hours.It's too short.

Astara
17th Dec 2006, 01:57
Good news, Astara - old TRs work on XP - you've got to download some stuff from www.tombraiderchronicles.com and voila.
You heard right - TR's 1-5 levels were of the grid system - all of the levels were blocky.
And I don't know, who "Colossus" is.
---
I found the stuff you mentioned. Might have to give it a try. I'm sorta going backwards. I'm finding bargains various places -- _had_ to see how bad TR6 was for myself. Omygawd! At least it installed and ran the first time (which is better than about 30% of the new software out today). I uninstalled it soon after. I just got 5 (which claimed to be XP compatible, but wasn't (at least not out of the box); it's at least running now, though it seems "touchy". "4" just dies when I start it. This is with the special patches for XP and setting compat for Win98&ME.

I just noticed with "5", I had to set compat to Win2000 to get it to work. When set for Win98&ME, it crashed at the beginning just like "4" did.

I'll probably post on the tech forum if I can't get them working -- though if "5" "stays up", it might keep me busy for a while and I might just let "4" "rest" for a while.

I figured I had best chance at getting "TR5" to work as it claimed to be XP compatible. Then I thought I might have a chance with TR4, as I'd heard of others getting it to run on XP. Heard of many people having problems with 1-3, but don't know if they knew about all the special patches.

One thing that may be a "wildcard" -- I'm using "SP2". I don't know for sure, but from the dates, it looks like the XP compat patches were originally designed for XP(0) or XP1(XP-SP1). XP2 is the least compatible version. I had (have) several programs that were XP-SP1 compatible, but not SP2 compatible.

Microsoft slipped in a large feature update in Service Pack 2 that hurt performance and compatibility for a fair number of programs :-( . Even programs designed for XP had problems with SP2... :doh!: Of course MS was hoping no one of importance would notice -- and as for "end users" -- well, if you aren't a large volume company, MS doesn't really care what you think. :rasp:

They "could" have opted for compatible changes, but didn't. They also wanted to make sure XP-SP2 was "crippled" (like reducing max memory from 4GB to 3GB just as user systems began to become available with 4G; makes so much sense! :confused: ). Apparently they wanted to give people "an incentive" to pay for a more expensive upgrade (Vista is about 50% :eek: more expensive for equivalent functionality than XP).
Most computer products go down in price due to competition -- but MS -- their product increases by 50% -- even when the economy is in the tank :mad2: ! Arggg; just mention MS, and I rant :nut: !


Colossus is a "mutant" (like about all of the people on the "X-Men") -- from Russia (now, why would I associate him w/you...gee...:D ). He had a short cameo role in X-Men-II (movie) helping the children escape from the school when it was attacked, and another short spot in III, at the beginning, when Wolverine asked him to do a "Speedball Special". The "Special" is when Colossus, maybe one of the physically strongest of the X-Men tosses Wolverine 100-200 feet at an enemy. At the start of III, Colossus tossed Wolverine directly at the head of a "Sentinel" (a ~50 foot tall mutant hunting (and killing) robot). I seem to remember in the final fight scene in III, Wolverine getting tossed (I'm "guess-remembering" :whistle: it was by Colossus, I think he's the only one strong enough) at Magneto for a frontal assault while other X-Men moved in from the back.

He's very susceptible to Magneto's magnetism (makes sense, as he is 100% steel). He's has had building and mountains fall on him without getting scratched. He doesn't need to breath while in steel form. He is susceptible to damage from some acids and _very_ extreme heat (much higher than a human could tolerate, but steel eventually melts). Think he also got K.O.ed by someone using 5 trucks full of liquid nitrogen crashing into him from 5 directions. He did recover, though with the help of a healing mutant.

Yeah--I'm going off on a bit of a tangent. A friend of mine and I were discussing Lara in the context of other games -- he likes "strategy games" (doesn't consider TR's strategic enough) where one moves armies and ships into position, then "activates" the move -- which can take a while to process on an older computer -- definitely not real time. That's one aspect he doesn't like about TR -- if you aren't real fast on a mouse/keyboard and/or gamepad, you are at a distinct disadvantage. But he granted that if Lara was in one of his games, she's probably represent an entire platoon of soldiers given her skill and fighting level.
:D

A*a

Legend_of_Lara
24th Dec 2006, 06:56
It took me 5 hours.It's too short.

is it non-stop????:eek: :eek: :eek:

Treeble
24th Dec 2006, 13:28
Playing non stop and skipping the cutscenes all together, you can finish the game under 01:30. I know that because I've done it at least twice by now. Still didn't get any closer to the fabled 01:10 I read about, I think my best time was around 01:15-01:20. :)

Legend_of_Lara
24th Dec 2006, 14:15
Playing non stop and skipping the cutscenes all together, you can finish the game under 01:30. I know that because I've done it at least twice by now. Still didn't get any closer to the fabled 01:10 I read about, I think my best time was around 01:15-01:20. :)
oh what!!!:eek: i finished the game about 2 months!:( if we add hours to eachother it will make 15-20 hours!!!:eek: :eek: :eek:

Advent-Tidus
2nd Jan 2007, 20:02
cutting through cut scenes, and dying like maybe a couple of times, I beat the game in only 1 hour and 50 minutes, im still trying to see if I can get it to about 1 hour and 30 minutes.

yatesDELTA
2nd Jan 2007, 22:57
wow osme people are fast

im on 9 hours 20, near the end of japan, on easy and used a walthrough a few times

but i havnt played any gamesa for at least 3 years