View Full Version : 360 Gamer Review of TRA 360 - 6/10
Jack Croft
26-10-07, 14:52
Full Review
http://www.gamer.tm/review.asp?id=1634&filtr=360
Not that good :(
OOPS. Quick port. But not this low.
UNDERTAKER
26-10-07, 15:04
Meh. The reviewer is simply not a fan of Tomb Raider games. He wants action and gun battles - this is not what TR is about.
Meh. The reviewer is simply not a fan of Tomb Raider games. He wants action and gun battles - this is not what TR is about.
Yes after Legend he obviously expected something simmiliar... and what he got was a Tomb Raider game :)
illuminati30
26-10-07, 15:34
"Enemies are too few and far between and when they do crop up, they’re often straightforward enough to kill."
I think he wants to go and play a shooter!
Meh. The reviewer is simply not a fan of Tomb Raider games. He wants action and gun battles - this is not what TR is about.
True, but he did make some valid points.
While the visuals are solid for the most part and can indeed impress on occasions, all too often they lack sparkle. This isn’t merely the manner in which recycled textures and use of similar architecture, coupled with the large play areas, can give a lot of the levels an unwanted sense of repetition, but also in the rigidity of it all. Much like the game from which Anniversary is derived, there are set items with which you can interact, with the rest of the environment being immune to your actions. As a result, little details – such as not being able to leave bullet holes in the wall, shoot PC monitors or fail to connect with a ledge because the game doesn’t want you to – are something of a let down.
There are other issues with the visuals as well: the collision detection is rather ropey at best, with Lara able to fall through solid objects with ease – although thankfully, this only tends to occur when you’re straying off the beaten path. The camera angles are prone to the odd dodgy moment here and there, frequently leaving you to jump blindly (and usually dying as a result), while the animation of your enemies can be a bit iffy, too.
The ones in bold are the ones I agree with the most. The rest of his review sucks, though. It seems he would rather play a short shoot-em-up rather than a long action adventure.
Oh, and look what genre he has TR:A under.
Genre: Third-person shooter
:rolleyes:
illuminati30
26-10-07, 15:49
Oh, and look what genre he has TR:A under.
:rolleyes:
Oh for **** sake! Someone needs to slap this guy! This makes me wonder if there is anything in the rumor that Xbox players tend to deviate towards shooter titles with pretty graphics.
To be honest, this is the kind of reviews i was expecting for the 360 version. I really think if they were going to make it for this version, they should do it right. However, i think this review is a bit on the harsh side, as the game retails at a reduced price.
Basically, many reviewers these days judge a game on the graphics, and the physics, the cool action sequences, and the amount of killing involved.
I doubt very much this guy has ever liked Tomb Raider.
Oh for **** sake! Someone needs to slap this guy! This makes me wonder if there is anything in the rumor that Xbox players tend to deviate towards shooter titles with pretty graphics.
To be honest, this is the kind of reviews i was expecting for the 360 version. I really think if they were going to make it for this version, they should do it right. However, i think this review is a bit on the harsh side, as the game retails at a reduced price.
Basically, many reviewers these days judge a game on the graphics, and the physics, the cool action sequences, and the amount of killing involved.
I doubt very much this guy has ever liked Tomb Raider.
You have some valid points but he does seem to know a little bit about the original more than you could know from research so I'm almost certain he has played the original. However I agree Anniversary's textures could have been a bit more glossy and a lot more saturated. It get's boring to look at after awhile. All Crystal Needed to do was bump map all the textures with a higher contrast and saturation. That would have really brang out the details tomb raider was known for.
illuminati30
26-10-07, 23:57
You have some valid points but he does seem to know a little bit about the original more than you could know from research so I'm almost certain he has played the original. However I agree Anniversary's textures could have been a bit more glossy and a lot more saturated. It get's boring to look at after awhile. All Crystal Needed to do was bump map all the textures with a higher contrast and saturation. That would have really brang out the details tomb raider was known for.
This is true. TR:A was totally colourless in some places!
True, but he did make some valid points.
The ones in bold are the ones I agree with the most. The rest of his review sucks, though. It seems he would rather play a short shoot-em-up rather than a long action adventure.
Oh, and look what genre he has TR:A under.
:rolleyes:
LOL Nice that you noticed how he categorized the game was. Well it's his views what can we do but I DEFINITELY AGREE about the bolded points you brought up from his review. The game is SCRIPTED as to how or what you do. This is why some bugs happen when we don't want them to.
IceColdLaraCroft
27-10-07, 02:13
One of the annoying things I found was that if Lara is on a rope and the camera gets to close she'll fall off as if she actually hit the camera 0_0 in Legend the Camera just backed up
Ward Dragon
27-10-07, 02:29
One of the annoying things I found was that if Lara is on a rope and the camera gets to close she'll fall off as if she actually hit the camera 0_0 in Legend the Camera just backed up
Is that what that was? It happened to me a few times but I didn't realize why she let go of the rope.
I think that score's way too low. The PS2 and PC versions were (rightfully) well recieved, and considering the only difference is slightly better graphics (which might be disappointing for a 'next gen' console), I don't think such an extreme decuction is justified. Looks like the critic just doesn't enjoy TR.
never_the_same
27-10-07, 09:00
i don't care for other's thinking, i would rate TR serial 10/10 :jmp::jmp::jmp:
my fave game!!! :jmp::jmp:
I read some other place that it got 9.5/10, so it really depends on who's the reviewer.
Shark_Blade
27-10-07, 17:11
Considering how much the frame rate is less than perfect and it is missing the wet skin effect (which is actually in the PS2 version!) I think they deserve that low score.
Considering how much the frame rate is less than perfect and it is missing the wet skin effect (which is actually in the PS2 version!) I think they deserve that low score.
piwmPBpX6os
;)
piwmPBpX6os
;)
Yup, that's what it's like on my 360 version too! :D I love it when she gets wet! :)
The review seemed much less harsh than the score.However, I'm used to reading review from critics dissapointed with the TR games.Most of the times, they're accused of being boring, lacking action-which I consider a missunderstating.
They are possibly disappointed because they expected incredible graphics like TR: Legend, but TRA on 360 isn't Next-gen it is similar to the PC version of the game. :(
interstellardave
27-10-07, 20:04
I think he was criticizing the content of the game more than graphics... I don't remember him mentioning graphics, as a matter of fact. I haven't finished TRA yet but I don't doubt that he's right that the TR series itself needs more of everything. More action is fine, so long as that's not the focus of the game. MANY more puzzles are needed, and they should be more complex than in any previous TR game. I think we all agree on that. TR1 was a classic, but I agree that the formula makes for a sparse game by todays' standards. TR should now be bigger and better in every way. I don't think we've gotten that yet, although I'm sure I'll enjoy TRA more than he did.
I read this review earlier. I don't think the person who reviewed this understands the formula of a Tomb Raider game. No wonder he didn't enjoy it that much.
It may be just the way I've read it, but I think he / she make good points, and nothing some of us on here haven't said already, maybe in different ways.
I think the action in TR:A is unscary, undifficult, routine... it needs to have the stakes raised on it. This doesn't mean turn TR into an action game (or 3rd person shooter), but it has to be more than it was in both TR:A and Legend.
Also, the limited interactivity of the environment is something we've said on here a million times already. They're talking about bullets making impacts, which doesn't both me so much, but also the limited grab ledges and other places you can actually interact with what you see around you. It's wrong.
The puzzles could do with being made more complicated too. But I'd like them to be careful here. Most of the puzzling in TR I'd like to see seemlessly integrated into the gameplay as environmental exploration - not just - here's a gizmo, stop, work out how to get gizmo going, move on and find next gizmo.
6/10 seems low, but I haven't played an next gen games yet. Perhaps they do deliver more than TR:A (beyond just graphical improvements)....
I read this review earlier. I don't think the person who reviewed this understands the formula of a Tomb Raider game. No wonder he didn't enjoy it that much.
:tmb:
I think that you need to at least like the formula and genre of Tomb raider if you're going to review it.
Woop Legend!
27-10-07, 22:36
:tmb:
I think that you need to at least like the formula and genre of Tomb raider if you're going to review it.
Alas, some reviewers don't though. They go in blindly. Fools :p
vBulletin® v3.8.4, Copyright ©2000-2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.