PDA

View Full Version : Core vs. Crystal Dynamics



pinkangel07
11th Mar 2007, 01:36
Who do you think would have done a better job with Anniversary?

BTW, am I allowed to post a link here showing where a video of the
Core-made trailer of Anniversary is? I think everyone will have the same opinion then about who would have been better.

and if anyone knows how to make a poll, please enlighten me. I seem to have forgotten, and i wanted this to be a poll.

Treeble
11th Mar 2007, 01:46
I think polls have been disabled since because they were becoming a tad pointless. I don't think that you can post a link to the canned version simply because it's meant to be forgotten and regarding who'd do a better job, well, Crystal stands tall.

munchkin
11th Mar 2007, 01:48
Who do you think would have done a better job with Anniversary?

BTW, am I allowed to post a link here showing where a video of the
Core-made trailer of Anniversary is? I think everyone will have the same opinion then about who would have been better.

and if anyone knows how to make a poll, please enlighten me. I seem to have forgotten, and i wanted this to be a poll.

Having seen the video for cores version i can hand on heart say Crystal Dynamics have done and are doing a much, much better job with much more inventiveness and love. Core lost the love for Lara and it is painfully obvious watching the video, where as watching the CDynamics video's it is equally obvious they are falling in love all over again ;)

beccaxx

aussie500
11th Mar 2007, 01:55
You post a link to Cores version and you will most likely be banned, so please do not.

As much as l prefer the original gameplay and wanted to see my favorite game in more realistic graphics, l think l would have prefered Crystal Dynamics version. If they had both been released l would have brought both, would have even brought a PSP if Cores had been exclusive to PSP since l so desperately wanted to play a version based on the original areas. Crystal Dynamics have redone all the areas, so they will seem like new, they were not afraid to change things a bit, and have added features that will add more to the game. Playing Cores would have been like revisiting the classic Tomb Raider 1 with a few extra moves, better graphics and some added suprises, but basically the same game. Crystal Dynamics will be more like remembering a classic. Memories are not exact they can be influenced by our emotional response, our impressions when we first played the game, going back and replaying the original does not always live up to the memories we had of the game. l expect Crystal Dynamics to stun me with their interpretation of the areas. l might not be thrilled about the easy gameplay, but l will still like the game. Unlike Legend where we got no reward for exploring and hardly anywhere to explore, l expect to be encouraged to explore in this one :D

pinkangel07
11th Mar 2007, 02:03
so i definately posted the video link via youtube then deleted it because i thought it was too risky. Then I saw you post and was like, "Whew, glad I deleted it!"

thank goodness Core didn't make it is all I have to say to those who still are unsure if CD should have made it.

dhama
11th Mar 2007, 05:06
Latest score..... Core Design 1 Crystal Dynamics 1

Without Core Design and there wouldn't have been Tomb Raider at all, and without Crystal Dynamics there wouldn't have been a new lease of life for Tomb Raider. So overall, they both stand equal.

The banned video? why even bring it up anynmore?

Taylour
11th Mar 2007, 06:03
Latest score..... Core Design 1 Crystal Dynamics 1

Without Core Design and there wouldn't have been Tomb Raider at all, and without Crystal Dynamics there wouldn't have been a new lease of life for Tomb Raider. So overall, they both stand equal.

The banned video? why even bring it up anynmore?

you make a really good point, but I think TRA will determine who is better with Lara. I personally think CD will be winning after the release. :D

LisaB1962
11th Mar 2007, 16:10
I think TRA will determine who is better with Lara. I personally think CD will be winning after the release.

How do you figure? I don't think taking someone else's game and "re-imagining" is any litmus test for the creative skills of anyone. Sheesh, I could "re-imagine" TR1 and have it be fun. So could any other TR fan probably.

I don't consider Legend a very good Tomb Raider game. I could count on one hand the moments I felt like I was playing Tomb Raider and not any other recent 3rd person action/adventure. I'm not saying it wasn't a well-executed game, but the things that (IMO) made Tomb Raider Tomb Raider were mostly absent.

My hope is that CD, by taking a long hard look at what captured the imaginations of gamers, will understand what the game of Tomb Raider was all about, and henceforth create games accordingly.

As far as the trailer, I guess what I thought was interesting were how many "Legend" moves were in the trailer done by Core. Of course, POP had been released by that point, so anyone could imitate it, but I'm reading comments that CD brought all this wonderful stuff to the table, and I just don't see it. The heroine and set up were created by other people, the move-set was created by other people, the button-sequences were invented by other people. Measure, mix, and bake---voila! New game? :scratch:

Or is everyone's memory so scarred by AOD that a fully complete and glitch-free game makes Legend more wonderful than it actually is?

I'm not trying to take away anything that CD did do, which was deliver a commercially successfully game that guaranteed us more games. But had Legend been the first "Tomb Raider" game released, I wouldn't be as in love with the series as I am.

sophie22
11th Mar 2007, 16:30
as much as i love the core games i think crystal dynamics saved their arses to be fair, until legend tomb raider was a dying star, nothing ground breaking or new or should i say new in a good way was being done, they were playing it save, churning out the same old, as much as i love dthe same old its clear the gaming industry doesnt work like that. crystal brought the beauty and fresh image that core just couldnt, i think this was because core were too emotinaly attached to the game, crsytal came in and just looked and listened to what the fans wanted and made the game without trying too much to keep the old stuff, it may have been risky but it worked.
although the core version looks interesting and i would buy it, its clear to see the crystal version quality of graphic wise takes it to the next level, cores version looks very 4 years ago, crystals looks like its using the cutting edge of every aspect of the technology that is available through the ps2. i do feel sorry for core, it was their baby, but if they cant keep up then its just not right to not give the fans the best when crystal can offer that.

Rivendell
11th Mar 2007, 17:00
I'd have / will enjoy both Core's and Crystals.
I liked the way Core make the games, and Crystals are enjoyable, they just need to do things a bit better.

On the subject of TR:A, I think I would've disliked less things about Core's TrAE than I'll probably dislike about Crystals TR:A, but saying that there's still lots of things I'm really looking forward to with Crystal's. I believe it's going to be a great help for them when making future games.

:thumbsup:

digifan
11th Mar 2007, 18:10
IMO this is a totally unfair comparison. Core Design started the franchise with advanced polygraphics tools at the time. They had progress over the years bringing finer details and more fluid environments into the world of Lara Croft. Crystal Dynamics came into play years later with Legend build upon the Quake game engine. As a result the graphics and controls were stunningly beautiful and easy to understand. Both game developers has their own faults and strengths. By comparing them is like trying to compare apples to grapefruits. Aside from the fact they are both fruits there is no other similarities we can use. :rasp:

Case dismissed.

pinkangel07
12th Mar 2007, 02:44
IMO this is a totally unfair comparison. Core Design started the franchise with advanced polygraphics tools at the time. They had progress over the years bringing finer details and more fluid environments into the world of Lara Croft. Crystal Dynamics came into play years later with Legend build upon the Quake game engine. As a result the graphics and controls were stunningly beautiful and easy to understand. Both game developers has their own faults and strengths. By comparing them is like trying to compare apples to grapefruits. Aside from the fact they are both fruits there is no other similarities we can use. :rasp:

Case dismissed.

TR1http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y154/Katie_Lucky_Number_7/th-tr1-004.jpg

TR2http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y154/Katie_Lucky_Number_7/th-tr2-018-1.jpg

TR3http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y154/Katie_Lucky_Number_7/th-tr3-010.jpg

TR4http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y154/Katie_Lucky_Number_7/th-tr4-024.jpg

TRAhttp://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y154/Katie_Lucky_Number_7/th-tra-009.jpg

To me, they didn't do a whole lot as far as advancement. Granted, Anniversary came a long time after the first five, so I'd expect it to be better. These are renders, I didn't have the time to get in-game and cut out from the background and all that other stuff. I think the from TR2-TR5, there was little Core did to improve the graphics. I played Spyro from before those games and it had better graphics. TR1 was pretty bad as far as graphics, but that was mainly technology, they couldn't even give her a ponytail.

And I feel that when Core tried to improve their graphics, (i.e. Angel of Darkness) they crashed and burned (so maybe that's a little too harsh, oh well) for gameplay. The story line was good, it just was one of those games where it was OK.

aussie500
12th Mar 2007, 03:22
Crystal Dynamics came into play years later with Legend build upon the Quake game engine.

Legend has nothing to do with the Quake game engine

sophie22
12th Mar 2007, 07:21
Legend has nothing to do with the Quake game engine


i thought i had hear they used the quake engine, at some point the quake engine was mentioned:scratch:

dhama
12th Mar 2007, 08:58
i thought i had hear they used the quake engine, at some point the quake engine was mentioned:scratch:

I hear that Legend is based on the 'Legacy of Kain' engine, and Anniversary is based on, and is an advanced Legend engine. So these are the building blocks.

The Quake engine, bloody excellent in it's time btw, is excellent for first person perspective games.

rabid metro
13th Mar 2007, 05:05
How do you figure?
...
I'm reading comments that CD brought all this wonderful stuff to the table, and I just don't see it. The heroine and set up were created by other people, the move-set was created by other people, the button-sequences were invented by other people. Measure, mix, and bake---voila! New game? :scratch:
...
I'm not trying to take away anything that CD did do, which was deliver a commercially successfully game that guaranteed us more games. But had Legend been the first "Tomb Raider" game released, I wouldn't be as in love with the series as I am.

sigh ...
*politely avoids stating the obvious*

comparing core design with crystal dynamics isn't a well-formed issue, in my opinion.
core design made a unique contribution to video-gaming- tomb raider.
we are grateful! Thank you, Core ...

"old-school" tomb raiders take note: while Legend clearly owes its existence to the classic,
Legend is intended to be a new beginning,
(i.e. more than just classic tomb raider in new clothes).

IMO, with Legend (et al.), the developers at crystal dynamics are doing two things well:
--paying sincere tribute(s) to the past tomb raider games, and
--building a viable brand!
crystal dynamics would be moot if tomb raider had already been a viable brand ...

under crystal dynamics, tomb raider is born anew, increasing in popularity as time goes on.
10th anniversary is a good developer element for crystal dynamics,
allowing them to ingest what made tomb raiding great.
(hopefully) they will digest this properly, and create a new (legendary) experience,
that people can fall in love with (for the first time, all over again).
in some ways, i suppose these "newbs" could be like you in 10 years ... :)

with all due respect, remove your chains from Legend (et al.).
hold onto your memories, instead.
crystal dynamics is really trying to make that possible ...
and also leave a (growing) space in your heart for a new prodigy.


Tune In: Sting (The Dream of the Blue Turtles) If You Love Somebody Set Them Free :) ;)

_mil
13th Mar 2007, 09:26
To me, they didn't do a whole lot as far as advancement. Granted, Anniversary came a long time after the first five, so I'd expect it to be better... And I feel that when Core tried to improve their graphics, (i.e. Angel of Darkness) they crashed and burned (so maybe that's a little too harsh, oh well) for gameplay. The story line was good, it just was one of those games where it was OK.

Well, the gameplay graphics couldnt really get that spectacular because they where working with the same main system (play station) and they didnt take the risk of changing the look of the game per upgrade of the pc... that much...

Plus, who would of bought a copy of aod if it looked exactly the same as what it did of the original systems. it wasnt until directx 9 that pc gaming took off (what recent games run on), and it wasnt the upgrading of the graphics that the game came to a brutal mini-stop, it was the time schedule that eidos gave them, i'll give you the same amount of people, write a game trilogy, concept, make, learn new programing, program, one dead line and no excuses and release and see how ya go... just for fun :rolleyes: :p


all crystal have really done, is given lara a new look. think of it as the show the swan and put it into concept. a mother (core design) giving birth to something beautiful, but to some she wasnt enough, her father (eidos) couldnt give a dang, and sent her off to a surgeon (crystal dynamics), her father refused to take her back to her mother, and ran off with the sergeon... you know... that old chest-nut.

shmeh..... lol, i love to go on about total crap. its my think you know..


but yeah, as rabid metro said:


comparing core design with crystal dynamics isn't a well-formed issue, in my opinion.
core design made a unique contribution to video-gaming- tomb raider.
we are grateful! Thank you, Core ...

Lara Cruz
13th Mar 2007, 14:09
IMO Core is way better, i like CD`s work and i will buy the games they release.
But noone made a better lara then the creators themself, and Anniversary looks very good, but that grappeling thing... lara dosent need that, she dosent need Z & A Either. In the old games it was simple: 'im a tough girl, dont you dare to blend into my buisness' while CD`s lara is more 'im silly, dangerous but careful''.
But CD does a good job, they really do. I hope anniversary will give me the TR feeling again, though i doubt it. i think its dead.
So im a core fan, and i hope to see their tomb raider products again.

ditom
13th Mar 2007, 14:40
For me the winner is CD because they made Lara beautyfull and now she looks like human not like pinocio.

Lara Cruz
13th Mar 2007, 14:42
IMO great graphics dosent make a great game.

LisaB1962
13th Mar 2007, 16:18
All I want is to play Tomb Raider.

And Legend was not Tomb Raider. Sorry, but it wasn't. Tomb Raider at is core (no pun intended) had nothing to do with Lara or with tombs---it had to do with exploration and the "what do I do now?" feeling. That feeling of isolation and dread, the thrill of actually finding something. Without that, then it's just like anything other good 3rd person action adventure game like PoP or GoW--run me through some platforming, battle droves of enemies, throw in the occasional puzzle to break up the action and wow me with cut scenes.

I agree that Eidos has a share of the blame for the downfall of Core, but when I look at AOD I think Core was going down too many dead ends that were never going to work--the role playing aspect being one of them. It's tough to say whether more time would have made AOD a good game.

As I said before, I hope that by really looking over the original they will understand what made Tomb Raider games different from other action/adventure games.

Alexlovesguns
13th Mar 2007, 19:55
I think Core's version looked great and i have to agree about Legend, its a good game featuring Lara Croft but not a pure TR game.

I played and replayed the old games alot, i beat Legend in 3 days and when i tried to replay it i just couldnt, there was no value like there was in the old games. I dont play TR to unlock outfits...

The old gameplay, music, design etc are still apretiated by many fans.
What happened to Core could happen to Crystal too, the early TR games were all very alike because back then they were pushing one game wright after the other but they were still good and lenghty.

TR:A doesnt look much diferent from TR:L, they just removed some overdone gameplay elements and added the prince of persia wall run. Some people are even happy that TR:A looks more "classic" and would like it stay that way.

ditom
14th Mar 2007, 12:15
IMO great graphics dosent make a great game.

Yes but CD made great game with great graphic.

gaetano
15th Mar 2007, 00:28
All I want is to play Tomb Raider.

And Legend was not Tomb Raider. Sorry, but it wasn't. Tomb Raider at is core (no pun intended) had nothing to do with Lara or with tombs---it had to do with exploration and the "what do I do now?" feeling. That feeling of isolation and dread, the thrill of actually finding something. Without that, then it's just like anything other good 3rd person action adventure game like PoP or GoW--run me through some platforming, battle droves of enemies, throw in the occasional puzzle to break up the action and wow me with cut scenes.

I agree that Eidos has a share of the blame for the downfall of Core, but when I look at AOD I think Core was going down too many dead ends that were never going to work--the role playing aspect being one of them. It's tough to say whether more time would have made AOD a good game.

As I said before, I hope that by really looking over the original they will understand what made Tomb Raider games different from other action/adventure games.

Sold! I buy that:thumbsup:

gsusfrk
15th Mar 2007, 02:19
to be honest, no matter what or even who makes the game, tomb raider is tomb raider and theres no arguing with that. lol Who cares about graphics, cuz when the first TR came, man all I cared about was the action and scariness she provided WHENEVER AND WHEREEVER! I mean like i was suspensful of every corner, and really it literally was every corner...unfortunately I check every corner I go around now :S... sadly. anyways! uh... lets jus make peace and say that Lara...even as a computer generated...."person"... is still beautiful and you know still is alive...somehow.... unrealisticly :S.. But hey it's a game, that people are obsesed over, and I wouldnt blame them.:o just know that people will always find something wrong with every game, so come on and just wait and see before you judge what its going to be like. You wouldn't like it if you were a Core or Crystal designer and were reading this u wouldnt be impressed. So do 2 others as you would like to be done to yourselves.

LisaB1962
15th Mar 2007, 15:55
I don't think anyone is judging anything, but I do think we are saying "hey, you forgot one very important thing. See if you can work that in next time."

You know, with all this emphasis on graphics, I do wonder why anyone cared at all in the early days? But we did---and I think it's because Tomb Raider captured out imaginations. No, Lara didn't look "real," the environments didn't look "real." I still chuckle at the flames as Lara burns to death. :p

But there was something about Tomb Raider that sucked us in, and it didn't have to do with how it looked or how it played. It had a soul that called to us raiders, and that soul was somehow missing from Legend.

gaetano
15th Mar 2007, 22:09
I don't think anyone is judging anything, but I do think we are saying "hey, you forgot one very important thing. See if you can work that in next time."

You know, with all this emphasis on graphics, I do wonder why anyone cared at all in the early days? But we did---and I think it's because Tomb Raider captured out imaginations. No, Lara didn't look "real," the environments didn't look "real." I still chuckle at the flames as Lara burns to death. :p

But there was something about Tomb Raider that sucked us in, and it didn't have to do with how it looked or how it played. It had a soul that called to us raiders, and that soul was somehow missing from Legend.

Absolutely, and that's what the fans missed with the years passing. The game was becoming too linear etc. as you said somewhere else. I hope the game team haven't missed the goal this time, exploration, speculation, etc. Lara's big boobs are just an excentricity, an eye blink to gamers on top of the ice cream.It's already preordered and I'm just waiting the minute it load and the theme begin...and the screen come alive...:cool: