View Full Version : Need. Blood. Back.
Uncharted has blood, it's rated "T for Teen". TR use to have it...but, doesn't now.
Need. It. Back.
The lack of blood doesn't really bother me until it comes to scenes like we had in Anniversary, when there's obviously supposed to be blood but there is none. Seeing Kold and Larson and Lara's hands with blood on them would have made those more realistic, and to me, more enjoyable.
TombRaider#1fan
22-10-07, 00:43
Agree 100%:D The Anniversary game looked weird with Lara cleaning her hands for no reason, and with Kold (i think thats his name) cutting himself with a knife and no blood drops.:p Just my opinion. I still loved it though!
EDIT: ^ you beat me to it domina
The lack of blood doesn't really bother me until it comes to scenes like we had in Anniversary, when there's obviously supposed to be blood but there is none. Seeing Kold and Larson and Lara's hands with blood on them would have made those more realistic, and to me, more enjoyable.
It's the same with me. I was never bothered about the lack of blood until Anniversary. Lara staring guiltily at her clean hands was kinda stupid, IMO. A bit of blood would've improved those scenes so much.
But with Larson however, I always imagined that Lara saw blood when she took the fuse because the camera never cut to a shot of her hands.
Agree 100%:D The Anniversary game looked weird with Lara cleaning her hands for no reason, and with Kold (i think thats his name) cutting himself with a knife and no blood drops.:p Just my opinion. I still loved it though!
EDIT: ^ you beat me to it domina
Yeah, when Kold slid the knife across his palm and no blood was there, I was like "Wha? That knife must be real dull..." It kinda gives the player the wrong impression. :p
I can just say about this thread... NEED.BLOOD.BACK!!!!!!! :mad::cen::mad:
need blood back and the blood must spray out like Kill Bill
I.Really.Don't need.Blood.Back.I'm not.A.Vampire.
Seriously, to add more realism to cutscenes,blood should be present,if necessary,but,during gameplay,it's indifferent,in my opinion.
Shark_Blade
22-10-07, 11:27
yeah we need blood back. The kids can handle it for God's sake. Heck they even play GTA!
So the time has come for changes and realism is what you seek too after all, CD. So be realistic, and add blood to the game. ;)
I wouldn't mind if blood was back, it would add more realism, but I seriously doubt it will be back one day.
I want blood back. Most kids play games like GTA and Resident Evil which have far worse than anything Tomb Raider's had and aren't emotionally scarred from it. Even if CD had an option to turn it off (some games do have it) would be better than none at all.
ThomasCroft
22-10-07, 16:54
Just get the blood back, for chissakes. It's not hard.
You're aiming for a teen audience. Blood is suitable for a teen audience.
:mad:
Hearing the slicing SFX when those blades in Egypt were practically chopping Lara in half without being accompanied by even a couple of red pixels was ludicrous.
Just bring it back, CD!
Yes. I want blood back too. It really looks rediculous this way. :rolleyes:
It would be interesting... Legend graphics with blood... :)
Well, from Pipi's post now I'm sure that KTEBers (like me.. :ton:, George) are all vimpaiaas!! =D
On topic: Blood is needed, because Tomb Raider is a game of harsh reality and beautiful unreality =)
maximum_123
22-10-07, 17:15
How many threads have we had on this topic :rolleyes:
Anyway, yeah It may look stupid and unrealistic but hey. Anyone noticed that Tomb Raider isn't about realism - it's about adventure and exploration. A story-driven game. My point : Is it really needed? Seriously, think about it.
Err, I got caught under Hephaestus hammer once, and there was about one million juicy crushing sounds acccompanied by all of Lara's ergh's, argh's, aaaow's, eeeow's, and uuugh's.
Apropriate much? :p
But they said in the Palace Midas spear room comment that they couldn't include blood anywhere because ESRB wouldn't accept TRA having a T, then.
Gimme blood anyway, or you'll hear me singing in Arabic. :p You won't like it... :mis:
Not gonna record my awful singing anyway.
Me wants it back too. Even if it means an M rating, i don't care. Screw child/teen friendly games.
I agree.
I'd love to see some blood like there was in previous TR games. Not too much, but a fair bit. I wish CD would stop aiming the games at kids/teens. How about young adults/adults? That's who the games used to be aimed at.
Err, BloodRayne's popular among horny people, and TR used to be popular like that before.
CD, produce Disney games instead.
LEAVE TR ALONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
PLZ!
TR GIVES YOU ALL YA WANT BUT U PPL JUST WANT MORE MORE MORE MORE MORE!!!!!!!!! :mad::mad::mad::mad::mad: LEAVE TR ALOOOOOOONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
:vlol:
If it gives us the maximum - maybe we'll want less... who knows?.. maybe... :mis:
Why not use a blood/gore on-off function? If parents are so watchful and worried, and they apparently are, according to CD's actions, the parents would turn off the blood/gore.
How many threads have we had on this topic :rolleyes:
Anyway, yeah It may look stupid and unrealistic but hey. Anyone noticed that Tomb Raider isn't about realism - it's about adventure and exploration. A story-driven game. My point : Is it really needed? Seriously, think about it.
It's definitely not needed, but it is a luxury. A luxury that CD can afford to include. Uncharted features blood and that game is rated "T for Teen", if that game can have it, then I don't see why TR can't have it back.
some blood would be ok, but not a lot of it.. and if they dont want to show blood in new TR games, then they shoudnt show how someone dies in a close up (remember when Lara killed Larson in Natlas mines? her hands was showed very close without blood. i say we shouldnt show scenes like that so close and there wouldnt be any problem with no blood thing ) :)
yea, then we could get rid of the crosshairs, which are totally UNREALISTIC. and stop staring at the health bar to see if she got shot or not.
a spray of blood is needed. dont bother with realism if ur not gonna put something as realistic as blood.
Ward Dragon
22-10-07, 22:33
From an aesthetic and immersive viewpoint, there needs to be some blood. Not a lot, but little sprays whenever someone/something gets injured.
yea, then we could get rid of the crosshairs, which are totally UNREALISTIC. and stop staring at the health bar to see if she got shot or not.
Exactly. A little puff of blood when something gets hit is so much more immersive than a big giant crosshair which tells me which enemy I'm aiming at.
oocladableeblah
23-10-07, 01:29
need blood back and the blood must spray out like Kill Bill
lmfao I love that blood it's so funny. I wouldn't want that in tr, but I would like blood.
Yes it annoys me so how when she gets attacked by lions not one drop of blood comes out of lara, it also annoys me how she slides off of spikes.:mad:
Shark_Blade
23-10-07, 05:33
Me wants it back too. Even if it means an M rating, i don't care. Screw child/teen friendly games.:tmb:I agree whole heartedly;) Screw the kids,heck the kids don't even care about blood. It's the football moms that are so over re-acting.:rolleyes:And CD are so scared to take the risk.
LEAVE TR ALONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
PLZ!
TR GIVES YOU ALL YA WANT BUT U PPL JUST WANT MORE MORE MORE MORE MORE!!!!!!!!! :mad::mad::mad::mad::mad: LEAVE TR ALOOOOOOONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
:vlol::vlol:
I want blood back as well. I don't see what's so wrong with it. I've seen blood in video games since I was like 5 years old - It never bothered me and made me go "eww" or something like that. On the contrary, if CD wants to "educate" kids or whatever, isn't showing that shooting people is doing no harm is even worse? :ton:
Yes we do... In TRA it looked so wrong when KID was shooting KOLD, and there was no blood, Jeez :pi:
Larson_1988
24-10-07, 13:12
Yeah, it would be great if they added blood in next Tomb raiders. I mean, Legacy of kain: Defiance has blood, why where that allowed?
They should have blood in future games!
Keir said they didn't put blood in TRL and TRA because they didn't want to risk a higher rating. That doesn't look like it's a fixed decision, maybe they'll change it when they see that other games still get away with a T rating. IMO it would be worth trying to include a bit of blood and more realistic deaths - if the censors don't accept it, they can still take it out again.
Shark_Blade
24-10-07, 13:40
Keir said they didn't put blood in TRL and TRA because they didn't want to risk a higher rating. That doesn't look like it's a fixed decision, maybe they'll change it when they see that other games still get away with a T rating. IMO it would be worth trying to include a bit of blood and more realistic deaths - if the censors don't accept it, they can still take it out again.Oh come on Mr. Keir, just risk it. If it's for the better of the game why not?Listen to all the outcry in this thread.We all want it. And what is business without risk?
larson n natla
24-10-07, 13:52
Uncharted has blood, it's rated "T for Teen". TR use to have it...but, doesn't now.
Need. It. Back.
I agree it would make it more ..... pleasureable when lara
" Slips of things like i dunno a cliff*
*saddistic smile*
Sara Croft
24-10-07, 14:20
I dont see what blood is so important. Sure its nice, but it wont make me think the game is any better or worse, and its not worth it if Esrb (or whoever) is gonna rate it mature.
Power-Evolution
24-10-07, 14:50
-I like blood back!
and i want visible dead enemies back (alike TR1 & 2)
I dont see what is so important. Sure its nice, but it wont make me think the game is any better or worse, and its not worth it if Esrb (or whoever) is gonna rate it mature.
Normally I'm with you on this, but in some cases, I really do think that it takes away from the game. With TRA, there was so much emphasis on the on Lara's hand or the ic nature of Kold, but there was no . It seemed really ridiculous to me.
I think a bit more realism is important because it would make the game less cartoony and 'videogame-y'. It would make it easier to immerse yourself into the game's world.
Keir said they didn't put blood in TRL and TRA because they didn't want to risk a higher rating.
That's just stupid. For games to be taken seriously, they need to be serious. If anything a higher rating would increase the popularity and sales of a game. Imagine Silent Hill or Resident Evil or any other game which involves blade/gun fighting without blood. Totally insane.
It's like you walk into a store, see a game rated 18. You'd get curious as to why, and motivates buyers more. Games rated any less would be more like the second and third options.
No one actually cares about T ratings these days. Kids play adult rated games all the time. Besides, I doubt that Blood would have any affect on kids' minds. Even Tenchu is rated 15 and still has plenty of bleeding and macabre slaughtering in it. If anything, at least make it optional.
Sara Croft
24-10-07, 17:00
That's just stupid. For games to be taken seriously, they need to be serious. If anything a higher rating would increase the popularity and sales of a game. Imagine Silent Hill or Resident Evil or any other game which involves blade/gun fighting without blood. Totally insane.
It's like you walk into a store, see a game rated 18. You'd get curious as to why, and motivates buyers more. Games rated any less would be more like the second and third options.
No one actually cares about T ratings these days. Kids play adult rated games all the time. Besides, I doubt that Blood would have any affect on kids' minds. Even Tenchu is rated 15 and still has plenty of bleeding and macabre slaughtering in it. If anything, at least make it optional.
Sure you can say its stupid and that it would increase the sales, but what do you exactly now tbh? Your not in the buisness. CD are.
If I walk in the store and see a game rated 18+, I usually don't get curious, but I just think "This is just another game with way too much blood or zombies involved.."
Most kids to get to play T games, but have you been in germany? My friend couldnt buy a 16 game (his 15). Im pretty sure germany isnt alone about that.
CD are in fact so serious about Tomb Raider that they don't take too many chances they can regret.
I don't think it has much to do with seriousness. Eidos doesn't want TR to be serious. Just like the average moviegoer, most gamers are in their early or mid teens, and Eidos wants those people to buy their games. A T rating ensures that the games will be available in as many stores as possible (some of them don't carry mature games). Silent Hill or Resident Evil both want to be art, and especially the latter is strong enough that the publishers can afford to lose a few retailers because they know they'll sell tons anyway. Many of the people Eidos wants to appeal to know Lara from the movies or because they've read about her, they're not necessarily serious gamers. Therefore, if TR can't be sold at Kwik-E-Mart, Eidos is going to feel it. They're making a loss anyway, so every copy counts. They can either make a super-serious, awesome game that every self-respecting gamer is going to want to buy or they can make 'Lara Croft for everyone'. The latter is much less of a risk.
Sure you can say its stupid and that it would increase the sales, but what do you exactly now tbh? Your not in the buisness. CD are.
If I walk in the store and see a game rated 18+, I usually don't get curious, but I just think "This is just another game with way too much blood or zombies involved.."
Most kids to get to play T games, but have you been in germany? My friend couldnt buy a 16 game (his 15). Im pretty sure germany isnt alone about that.
The point still stands, their reason for not including blood is stupid. Like I said, it wouldn't affect anyone. You really think that under age gamers are gonna go insane and out of control just because they see a few drops of blood? I highly doubt that. I think they would get into it even more.
Adding a little gore wouldn't effect the rating.
RE Code Veronica
RE4
RE0
RE Remake
Tenchu Fatal shadows
These are all 15 rated games. All of them including blood and gore, and some more than the others.
Mine was just an example, rating TR 18 would be too much. I don't think that any game in fact deserves to be rated 18. TR should be taken seriously, after all TR is Eidos. They should put as much as they can in it. It's a matter of risks, and I don't think inputting blood and gore is a huge one. Especially if made optional.
CD are in fact so serious about Tomb Raider that they don't take too many chances they can regret.
Making games short and easy...that's a huge risk if you ask me, which has been taken twice so far. If it happens again, they might regret their decision of the "short thrill rides".
it wasn't just that there was a lack of blood. they also made it a lot less "horrifying" in places where they should have: mummies etc... every room having a brilliant light source ... nothing sneaking up on you.
all that kind of thing was toned down.
Delamo1999
02-11-07, 21:52
I want blood back. Most kids play games like GTA and Resident Evil which have far worse than anything Tomb Raider's had and aren't emotionally scarred from it. Even if CD had an option to turn it off (some games do have it) would be better than none at all.
I am not a blood fan and I am glad that TRA does not have it in it. However, I see your point and would welcome a TR game that had the option to turn it off. :jmp:
Tyrannosaurus
02-11-07, 22:02
I hate bloodless combat, personally. Tomb Raider was always sort of gritty and brutal, wasn't it? I also hate blood that is too pinkish.
But what bothers me even more is that Lara isn't allowed to shoot anyone in TRA.
Ward Dragon
02-11-07, 22:33
But what bothers me even more is that Lara isn't allowed to shoot anyone in TRA.
What about Larson and Natla? :confused:
MadCroy101
03-11-07, 02:17
I think a bit more realism is important because it would make the game less cartoony and 'videogame-y'. It would make it easier to immerse yourself into the game's world.
ditto mona;)
Deepthought
03-11-07, 03:12
blood is a realy minor effect to be complaining about. In the long run, it doesn't effect the gamplay at all. I have no care whatsoever about blood, there are many other things that are a lot more important. I am not dismissing the topic, I am just stating my opinion, but I would rather is be AOD style, if it had to exist at all.
silver_wolf
03-11-07, 04:17
I want blood back, just because it's stupid for them to not have it.
Ring_of_Fire
03-11-07, 05:45
I think if blood were back the game would be rated Mature, especially for a 3D game. But I like the addition since I am sick and tired of accidentally going into random propellers and no blood/gore or body dismemberment!
I guess it is because CD thinks stuff like this shouldn't and will not happen to Lara.
kryptonite23
03-11-07, 07:54
Blood is really needed for the following for them to look more realistic and for the gamers to be more interested because they are looking for the gore factor of the game.But of course the most important thing is the gameplay and the story.
Yes i want gore!! I used to hate blood now that fear has been gotten rid of my mind. ;)
Blood makes money. :cln:
Shark_Blade
03-11-07, 08:45
Blood makes money. :cln: :vlol: Lol what does that really mean anyway?
I wouldn't mind the blood back but I don't need it to enjoy a TR game. Honestly, I didn't even notice that there was no blood in Legend/Anniversary at first. My focus is much more on other things. When Lara falls into a pit of spikes I don't need to see blood to know that she's dead.
Yes i want gore!! I used to hate blood now that fear has been gotten rid of my mind. ;)
Blood makes money. :cln:
:vlol: Lol what does that really mean anyway?Something like this.
http://www.techimo.com/photo/data/509/truth.png
silver_wolf
03-11-07, 12:34
......this is about blood....
Tyrannosaurus
04-11-07, 04:34
What about Larson and Natla? :confused:She shoots Larson in an interactive cut scene and Natla meets her demise by being crushed from a collapsing pillar. I miss the good old days where you could shoot someone as Lara and drop him that way.
kryptonite23
04-11-07, 04:36
Yes i want gore!! I used to hate blood now that fear has been gotten rid of my mind. ;)
Blood makes money. :cln:
In other words,blood is the root of all evil. :cln:
Legend 4ever
04-11-07, 07:30
The lack of blood doesn't really bother me until it comes to scenes like we had in Anniversary, when there's obviously supposed to be blood but there is none. Seeing Kold and Larson and Lara's hands with blood on them would have made those more realistic, and to me, more enjoyable.
Totally agree.
Ward Dragon
04-11-07, 17:32
She shoots Larson in an interactive cut scene and Natla meets her demise by being crushed from a collapsing pillar. I miss the good old days where you could shoot someone as Lara and drop him that way.
Ah, I understand your point now. From a character standpoint, I consider Lara murdering Larson to be far more troubling than anything that happened in the previous games. From a gameplay standpoint, though, you are correct. TRA didn't let us fight any human bosses ourselves :(
IMO, blood will add to the fear. If there is blood on the floor or something it will creep me out. Or if something jumps out from a corner I will get scared, but if it gets Lara and makes her bleed it will add to the fear.
Nathan0107
04-11-07, 17:43
Hopefully it will be back :tmb:
Deamonella
04-11-07, 20:02
But there is some blood in anniversary.When you encounter kid and kold,in the camo outfit you can see blood on lara's palms.http://i198.photobucket.com/albums/aa280/Rasema/bezimena-2.jpg
The blood on Lara's gloves is always there on the camoflauge outfit, as it's supposed to be the AoD outfit.
yep - supposed to be an easter egg :D
Tyrannosaurus
06-11-07, 18:06
I can't help but shake being bothered by the fact that Larson is supposed to be Lara's first kill, yet she's running around with a pair of pistols in her holsters anyway. I would think that's something only the seasoned adventurer would do. Didn't you get the impression from the original TR at least that Lara is such a seasoned adventurer? That her first kill must have taken place long before, and when she wasn't carrying firearms everywhere she went?
Sara Croft
06-11-07, 18:15
I can't help but shake being bothered by the fact that Larson is supposed to be Lara's first kill, yet she's running around with a pair of pistols in her holsters anyway. I would think that's something only the seasoned adventurer would do. Didn't you get the impression from the original TR at least that Lara is such a seasoned adventurer? That her first kill must have taken place long before, and when she wasn't carrying firearms everywhere she went?
Nooo.. :rolleyes:
She used her pistols to other then kill humans. For instance, she used them to get to Natla's office. :p
vBulletin® v3.8.4, Copyright ©2000-2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.