View Full Version : TR1 Travel Notes...and why it's better than TRA
I'm replaying TR1 after many years without touching it, and more importantly, after replaying TRA several times since it came out.
I thought about some things while playing and I think it's worth mentioning them, and I hope some people can contribute with opinions and examples as well.
Please note I'm not bashing TRA for the sake of bashing, I just want to point out details that are making the play through TR1 so much more enjoyable. Also this is not a diary, there's plenty of diary and individual level ratings threads out there.
So, these are my basic "notes". :wve:
Feeling Lost.
Sometimes the disposition of things at first glance is enough to get you this puzzled feeling, as you arrive in a room and there are 3, 4, 5 different things you can spot that you have to check. Making you feel like a true explorer. "OK... where do I go first?"
http://shadowzone.com.sapo.pt/lara/arrivingatcistern.jpg
When you first enter the Cistern there's immediately a sense of being overwhelmed because you have no idea where you have to go first or how many things exactly you have to check out or are just bogus.
A curious difference in this respect, is that in some parts of TRA, as you begin a new level, you immediately arrive at what is the crucial room of that level. Taking you right into the level's "big purpose", in a way, removes that puzzled feeling and makes the site somehow look more organized. As you glance right on at the cog wheel puzzle or the Midas hand and gold bars receptable you almost instantly realise the purpose of the entire level.
Whether or not this is a bad thing it's a matter of taste and perspective, as is the question of whether I'm being partial since playing TRA, I already knew what the levels' purpose was anyway.
http://shadowzone.com.sapo.pt/lara/arrivingatlostvalley.jpg
Arriving at Lost Valley. Yeah... Nothing much is going on and you're pretty clueless.
http://shadowzone.com.sapo.pt/lara/arrivingatlostvalleyTRA.jpg
Arriving at Lost Valley in TRA. Forget the cool blur effect, this entrance is epic and pretty much shows you about half of what you need to do - not only with the giant cog wheel puzzle but also with the - I have to mention them - white ledges.
(continued below)
Multiple Tasks and Side Rooms.
People are always raving about "linear" and "non linear" but often forget what it feels to play TR1, what exactly means to play a non linear TR game. Well as I play through TR1 and TRA I realize the sense of being "lost" at first, described above, is not sufficient in itself. There are ways to make you feel like that, that eventually reveal themselves to be only illusions, when you discover there's actually only one thing you have or can do first in the area.
The most interesting permise of TR1 levels is when you simply need to complete multiple tasks revolving around the same set of rooms. The Palace Midas is one perfect example and the most enjoyable level for me, so far.
Being in the same area for a long time, travelling through a multitude of diferent rooms to find items or pull switches, sometimes in no obligatory order - that's what you get when the level revolves around the side rooms and doesn't focus excessively on the main room (ie, the room where the end objective is).
In many ways it's like being an actual archaeologist. You "work" around one site. Archaeological "sites" often consist of entire cities so... you get the point.
When TRA succeeded transplanting this concept (St. Francis Folly, Khamoon area) at some parts, why didn't it happen in others (Cistern, Atlantis)? Why the designers felt that removing side rooms in these areas would be a good thing is completely beyond me, but again, it might be a matter of perspective.
http://shadowzone.com.sapo.pt/lara/midaspalace.jpg
In Midas Palace you have an aparently overwhelming number of areas to visit and tasks to perform. On the right side route you go to two other rooms each with their own siderooms. On the front you go to a place you also get to visit twice from diferent locations. Etc.
It's not until you do some exploring around that you get to know what for and the order is often unimportant.
In TRA, Midas Palace consists of 3 organized side rooms placed visibly that lead you to complete the level in the same room you started it.
Fear and Sense of Surprise.
At 23 years old I doubted replaying a '96 game could possibly scare me, but the mummies in Egypt really got me frozen a couple of times with the unexpected way they appear in particular areas, attacking immediately with huge jumps and furious screaming. Plus they're truly vicious and tough to kill.
One interesting thing about fighting them is that most of the time you have a choice to do it from a safe spot, which made me "naively" wonder if it's even possible to kill the *******s in close battle. Of course it probably is... but I chose the coward way all the time. Having this choice in battle is interesting but I will talk more about battle in general as the game becomes tougher.
http://shadowzone.com.sapo.pt/lara/mummy.jpg
The mummy looks and sounds absolutely terrifying, and the way it drags itself around slowly when just waiting for Lara to be "accessible" is extremely unnerving at some parts.
Although not as scary, this same feeling of unexpectedness appears with many other enemies; I jumped plenty of times because of the gorillas, even though they look absolutely ridiculous and much tinier than the ones in TRA! Just the simple fact of an enemy appearing suddenly - way simpler than making a full cutscene... - is sufficient to bring this element of "fear to turn that corner". TRA does it in some parts but often ruins your first encounter with a particular enemy, making it a cutscene.
http://shadowzone.com.sapo.pt/lara/mummyTRA.jpg
In TRA, your sense of fear is mostly transmited through Lara's reaction.
Continued here. (http://www.tombraiderforums.com/showpost.php?p=2882799&postcount=17)
rr_carroll
14-07-08, 02:51
Wow, a thoughtful and detailed comparison! Also, when you reminded us of the "fear to turn the corner" factor of TR1, the "fearful Lara" picture from TRA made me literally LOL! By contrast, in TR1 you are fearful, based on experience.
Please keep it coming .
All true and fair said :tmb:
Much appreciated...
Jordan_Boi
14-07-08, 14:12
Great job there. :tmb: I can see what you're saying about being surprised. A lot of the stuff in Anniversary tells you what's coming before it actually does, yet in the original, you had no idea until you heard it behind you. It's great in the older TRs when you're walking around in a dark place, and you know something will get you, but you don't know when and how.
Eddie Haskell
14-07-08, 14:46
A very good read Encore. I look forward to reading the rest of this.
stereopathic
14-07-08, 14:56
really great stuff, Encore.
Thumbs up for that, Encore :tmb:
I am already looking forward to the next installments.
And I have to say I very much agree with you. All these "little" things that you describe, are what makes the games an enjoyable experience, imo. The screeching mummies! Even these days, having played the games over and over, knowing where they are and when they are going to appear, they still scare me out of my pants and accelerate my heartbeat.
And yes, that feeling of being almost overwhelmed when entering a room/area for the first time: where to go, what to do first, spotting something in the distance - the new games just don't have that in the same way and I miss it.
Anyway, enjoy your gameplay and keep us posted. :wve:
Really good review! :tmb:
Yes, small things makes a game have a soul and gives you the feel of actually being a part of the game's world. I missed that in TRA.
You get all things served on the plate, you just need to grab them. XD And in TR1 you had to scratch it until it falls off the plate :p Hope you dig what I want to say XD
I'm looking forward to seeing more of your travel notes :) :D
Nice post Encore. :)
I definitely agree that "Fear and Sense of Surprise" and "Multiple Tasks and Side Rooms" were really lacking in TRA.
As for feeling lost - personally, I don't think I can objectively compare TR1 with TRA, in that regard; not because TRA's level design is based on TR1's, but because I think the visuals play a huge part in this.
The draw distance limitations of the first game, added a lot in terms of atmosphere, and made sure you couldn't really see past a certain point. I think it made the levels seems harder to traverse than they actually were, in a way. Also in TRA, in part because of market trends (epicness and whatnot) and historical "sense", it's always clear what a certain level's "axis" is, like you pointed out. Structures/rooms with greater significance have visual cues that immediately make the player realize their importance (size, architectural complexity, location, etc...).
I'd say side rooms also play a big part in making level look more confusing. In that sense, TRA's formula could definitely be improved.
I must say my two biggest disappointments with TRA where the music and the absence of that "darkness" present in the original game. That's why I would love a "limited draw distance" cheat in the game. The Lost Valley completely lost it's magic by becoming more realistic (an actual sky, for instance)... So, it's not something I can objectively complaint about, in the sense that it wouldn't make much sense to not have a sky, in this day and age, but it's still something that doubtlessly made for a lesser experience when compared with the original.
You are very very right, Encore, well done! :tmb: Excellent read. I didn't explain all those great details in my reviews. :)
i totally hate it that the new lara is so over emotional. the old on never showed fear or srrow and he accent was so sexy :P
Thanks for your feedback guys! And Endow, you sure mentioned some things I was already thinking of mentioning. :tmb:
LOL at the accent, TR love, you're right, her voice in TR1 is much more "sassy" :D
I'm now just finishing Natla's Mines. But I want to finish the whole game before I write the second part of my thread. :o
Well written, agreed with everything. Waiting for your next review! :)
extremly well written :tmb:
i absolutly love when people analyze and interpret things like this. dig deeper from another perspective and answer all those questions like "why is TRA not the same as the classics?"
i look forward to reading the rest. you might also want to mention the controls/animation. it may not look like much, but it can really affect an experience. TR1 had smoother and simpler controls, a sense of nakedness and fear with the manual grab. TRA felt very "safe", you couldnt go wrong with any jump; even with the manual grab.
what TR1 lacked in graphics, it made up for in animations. smooth and realistic. grunts, sounds of effort, actually bumping into walls.
TRA has it the other way around, the realism of the graphics get dismantled as you play. it gets fast, choppy, and unrealistic.
Thats why I didnt like TRL/TRA as much as the oder games.. they lost their fear factor and 'lost' feel:o
Although I enjoy them, I felt the mummies in TRA were pathetic compared to TR1's - I had TR1 when I was 5 or 6 and the mummies gave me a heart attack LOL, the way the pounced around corners and made the groaning zombie noises being all slow, then screaming and jumping on ya:p
Darkness.
The constant darkness (already mentioned by Endow) seems to be a consequence of the limited technology of the time, and yet, I often wondered throughout the game about how much of TR1 typical and unique atmosphere is achieved through this effect (because even though the following games, imo, all have an amazing atmosphere as well, there's something quite diferent about TR1).
In general, I believe this is because the darkness not only makes the game less pretty and more scary/atmospheric, it also makes some areas look bigger than they might actually be, and it even makes the levels harder - at least in terms of finding items and secrets, considering things are as bright as the spot they're in, and nothing is surrounded by an unnatural glow.
http://shadowzone.com.sapo.pt/lara/shpinxTRA.jpg
Even though the Sphinx area looks gorgeous in TRA, in TR1 the darkness surrounding it makes the area look extremely creepy, desolate, dangerous.
This same darkness lends a very diferent aura to the flying mutants, whom - like many other enemies due to this element - come literally flying out of the shadows.
http://shadowzone.com.sapo.pt/lara/shpinx.jpg
http://shadowzone.com.sapo.pt/lara/shaft.jpg
That creepy big dark shaft....
Those Messy Textures!
Throughout this game I often noticed how confusing and messy the natural formations replicated in TR1 can get! And of course, they're undoubtedly ugly (let's not forget this is 96). Yet, trying to pinpoint exactly why playing TR1 is a more rewarding, challenging experience, I paradoxically realized this is one of the small details that contribute!
Looking at a place from the distance and not detecting much at first glance certainly has made the play through harder. It's not easy to know immediately when a certain block is climbable.
But, despite this being a consequence of the limits back then, the natural evolution of this curious dificulty to modern "ledge hopping" and advanced graphics era, would be easy: ledges in natural formations should remain confusing, leading you to try and grab things you're not really suposed to or that lead you nowhere. Basically, exploring. But instead.... well, we all know the rest (http://shadowzone.com.sapo.pt/lara/arrivingatlostvalleyTRA.jpg).
Trial & Error.
So we see, it's the little details that make TR1 more challenging, many of which I already mentioned; and this general encouragement of the "trial and error" concept is certainly one of the most interesting.
In TRA, a simple change in how Lara interacts with the ledges and surfaces was enough to diminish it. She now is "magnetically" attracted to the things she can grab. Positioning Lara for a tough jump - a major experience in TR1 - could have been even more challenging without the "grid" system, but it's not.
The jump sequences in TRA don't require much precision, often relying on timed sequences and the mechanical difficulties of using the grapple or the camera angle, to make it somewhat hard. What this does in effect is making them faster too, adding to a smaller gaming experience.
http://shadowzone.com.sapo.pt/lara/blocks.jpg
Big jump/grab/pull-up sequences in TR1 are often slow parts where there's always some chance of failing sometimes repeatedly, and where Lara displays obvious effort (as pointed by Twilight btw). In TRA, these - possibly too boring for modern gamers - where replaced by fast, light, elegant displays of Lara's acrobatic skills, which combine with the clearer path and "magnetic" effect to practically remove any chance of failure.
(note: look how confusing the path is because of these "messy textures" ;))
Continued here (http://www.tombraiderforums.com/showpost.php?p=2896723&postcount=43). :wve:
Great, Encore.:D I agree with pretty much everything you said, and I like the screenshots too.:tmb:
stereopathic
20-07-08, 21:40
i didn't realize how much scarier the atlantean shaft looks because of the draw distance in TR1. and more great stuff, Encore. loving it. :)
I agree with Everything Encore has said on the thread.
The lack of mystery and exploration really sucks in TRA/TRL.
I really believe they could have recreated the effect of the limited draw distance by making the lighting darker with distance and perhaps a depth of field effect.
Some of the areas (like Egypt/Lost Valley) could have been set under a spooky star lit sky.
A also think that they messed up by making huge cutscenes out of every boss. It actually makes them less scary and get rid of the tension. When the T-Rex came around the corner in TR1, you didn't expect it and didn't have time to prepare. It was freaky. Lara looking scared in a cut scene is really stupid, contrived and patronizing. That's not Lara Croft. She is used to these kinds of things in her field of work. The player should be the one that is scared and Lara should be the fearless hero!!!
mr-showtime
22-07-08, 14:18
wow. great post. i have the same feelings towards anniversary aswell. it looks and feels great to play for sure, and on its own is a pretty good game. but theres something about tr1 that sets it apart from all the others. you pointed out that the darkness feel to the original and the unexpected events and enemies were a significant feature of this game and they really do make the difference. for instance even now 12 years on playing the colliseum or city of khamoon at night is really amazin and the feel of isolation is so prevalent. this is wat makes it so special. i remember being 13 wen the 1st game came out and it completely overwhelmed me. the size of the levels, the enemies, and the traps all made it untouchable. but for me the game would not have felt as good as it did if it were not for the incredible soundtracks on each level. the tr theme, along with st. francis folly and palace midas themes were out of this world, and even the symbol crashes or background crackle music all made the atmosphere great. dont get me wrong TRA is a cool game and i loved it, but it no way compares to the original
mr-showtime
22-07-08, 14:22
one more point is that i feel another reason why people have sum problems with how TRA turned out compared to the original is the fact that no matter how good they made anniversary, everyone who had played the original knew were to go and wat to expect at every turn. so its no surprise really that it doesnt have the same feel to it. just a thought
Blue_light
22-07-08, 14:41
I certainly enjoyed reading that and I can't wait for more :D
@ mr-showtime: I'm no mod (and don't wish to), but if you have an opinion, I advice you to edit your previous post, instead of double post.
once again, great reading :tmb:
and i was mentioned :D
its funny how all the technological limits actually helped the gaming experience. the limitations actually increased creativity also.
the save system really affected the gameplay. TRA's checkpoints gave a feeling of safeness, frustration, and limitation. even if you died, there was no penalty. it took the fear of death away. she'd even have a full health bar after it loaded. if you died and were very far from a checkpoint, then you'd have to do the same long sequence again and again. and finally, it limited the freedom of saving anywhere. like the IC's, the game instructs you when to or not to do something.
Ward Dragon
22-07-08, 19:11
Very well-thought-out and insightful analysis, Encore :tmb: I look forward to the next part :D
its funny how all the technological limits actually helped the gaming experience. the limitations actually increased creativity also.
the save system really affected the gameplay. TRA's checkpoints gave a feeling of safeness, frustration, and limitation. even if you died, there was no penalty. it took the fear of death away. she'd even have a full health bar after it loaded. if you died and were very far from a checkpoint, then you'd have to do the same long sequence again and again. and finally, it limited the freedom of saving anywhere. like the IC's, the game instructs you when to or not to do something.
Yes! The saving system is a really big deal for me. Being allowed to save anywhere encourages me to take big risks, try something stupid, and really explore the level. If I'm constrained to checkpoints then I tend to play it safe while resenting that I would lose a lot of work if I actually played how I want to play.
Yes! The saving system is a really big deal for me. Being allowed to save anywhere encourages me to take big risks, try something stupid, and really explore the level. If I'm constrained to checkpoints then I tend to play it safe while resenting that I would lose a lot of work if I actually played how I want to play.
Exactly... the *:cen:* checkpoint-system is a pain in the arse :( Meh, I SO wish we'd have the unlimited saves... meh meh meh! Why do all the good stuff go away:p
rr_carroll
22-07-08, 20:18
... meh meh meh! Why do all the good stuff go away:p
You're probably asking a rhetorical question, but many things are dumbed down over time, to increase mass-market appeal. The ultimate will be reached when you load the disk and the game plays itself for you. Oh wait, this is called a "movie"!
Lud's Gate
22-07-08, 22:48
thought the big mutant was good on tomb raider one but the natla battle was extremely weak. i did it on my first go!!
if i had the playstation or xbox TRA i'd play it all the time. however, i have the Wii and it is ruined by that stupid archaelogical toolkit, and impossible time trials because you have to sit and brush at the screen.
i have just heard they will be returning in Underworld... the joy...
Very nice! I never really realised it but the thing you told about the different meetings with an enemy are really true, In TR I the enemies suddenly showing up really shocked me, but in Anni they tell you: "Okay, you are going to fight now, good luck".
You are right about the fact that the idea from the level is much more clear in Anni than in TR I, but the cog wheel puzzle looks beautiful in Anniversary.
I also think (and this could be something many people disagree) that they removed a lot of little halways because they don't really add something. They chose to combine the things in less rooms. I think this is also something from today's games.
Camera Obscura
23-07-08, 00:12
Very wonderful comparison. I truly believe that Crystal Dynamics should read this thread. Although you talk about TR1/TRA, you address many points which I think will improve and expand CD's experience and understanding on the critical elements of the Tomb Raider franchise, thus helping them to make better quality games in the future. :tmb:
In TR I the enemies suddenly showing up really shocked me, but in Anni they tell you: "Okay, you are going to fight now, good luck"
Oh tell me about it... all the cut scenes that show the enemies ruin it. I wanna be surprised by them :(
The ultimate will be reached when you load the disk and the game plays itself for you. Oh wait, this is called a "movie"!
LMAO :D
Ward Dragon
23-07-08, 20:31
Although I completely agree with you that TR1 was much more challenging and the fear to turn the corner thing is so true, but most of the atmosphere and difficulty, as you've said, came from the limitations of the technology, so i don't think CD could ever recreate it, without being torn apart by critics and more than likely, fans.
If they made the levels at night, mainly Lost Valley and Egypt, with a lot less light then it would still look realistic according to today's graphics but it would retain a lot of the atmosphere from TR1. Having the dark mysterious TR1 environments suddenly take place in blindingly bright daylight kind of spoiled the wonder and the tension of exploring the area. In contrast, the manor actually did take place at night and it was very atmospheric :D
And I'm not saying all levels should be at night in a new game, but for TRA all of the levels should have been at night to simulate the darkness and fog of war (don't know how else to call it) from TR1 :)
"HOLY :cen: A T-REX! AARRGGHH!"
You know you all did it the first time! :vlol:
Yeah, I did :D
Richie11291
23-07-08, 21:06
If they made the levels at night, mainly Lost Valley and Egypt, with a lot less light then it would still look realistic according to today's graphics but it would retain a lot of the atmosphere from TR1. Having the dark mysterious TR1 environments suddenly take place in blindingly bright daylight kind of spoiled the wonder and the tension of exploring the area. In contrast, the manor actually did take place at night and it was very atmospheric :D
And I'm not saying all levels should be at night in a new game, but for TRA all of the levels should have been at night to simulate the darkness and fog of war (don't know how else to call it) from TR1 :)
Yeah, I did :D
:vlol: We all did!
Your right though the manor was atmospheric, not to mention Winston appearing in random locations! And the only level out of the last two games that made me truly uneasy was Arthur's tomb, the fact that you couldn't dive, the weird moaning and the darkness, a very unnerving place.
but most of the atmosphere and difficulty, as you've said, came from the limitations of the technology, so i don't think CD could ever recreate it--
I somehow have a feeling that no matter how many TRs CD will make, the atmosphere just will not be what it was in the older TRs. but what's with that:confused: If the graphics would still be as poor as they were in TR1 for example, would Legend and Anniversary feel more TR to me than they did now... or honestly, whats with the lost TR-feeling??
The most interesting permise of TR1 levels is when you simply need to complete multiple tasks revolving around the same set of rooms. The Palace Midas is one perfect example and the most enjoyable level for me, so far.
Being in the same area for a long time, travelling through a multitude of diferent rooms to find items or pull switches, sometimes in no obligatory order - that's what you get when the level revolves around the side rooms and doesn't focus excessively on the main room (ie, the room where the end objective is).
In many ways it's like being an actual archaeologist. You "work" around one site. Archaeological "sites" often consist of entire cities so... you get the point.
Yep,that's where Crystal has dropped the ball so far. They've basically removed a large portion of what made the classics so great........EXPLORATION. The feeling of being lost and having to search for a way to get from point a to point b. You may be able to see point b but getting there is the hard part.
Crystal from the very beginning in interviews seemed to detest having to walk for "miles" (as they put it) in the classic games. So they make the game much easier and create one large room with a couple puzzles in it. No sense of getting lost or anything, everything is out there plain as day to see (and easy as hell to get to). Just makes for an extremely easy adventure that you can breeze through in no time. BRING BACK THE CHALLENGING, EXPLORATION BASED GAMEPLAY THAT ACTUALLY MAKES YOU THINK!
Eddie Haskell
24-07-08, 13:32
Yep,that's where Crystal has dropped the ball so far. They've basically removed a large portion of what made the classics so great........EXPLORATION. The feeling of being lost and having to search for a way to get from point a to point b. You may be able to see point b but getting there is the hard part.
Crystal from the very beginning in interviews seemed to detest having to walk for "miles" (as they put it) in the classic games. So they make the game much easier and create one large room with a couple puzzles in it. No sense of getting lost or anything, everything is out there plain as day to see (and easy as hell to get to). Just makes for an extremely easy adventure that you can breeze through in no time. BRING BACK THE CHALLENGING, EXPLORATION BASED GAMEPLAY THAT ACTUALLY MAKES YOU THINK!
I would give anything to have been in the room when (and if) the originals were being played by the CD team for reference material and for their own edification. I imagine that they were not impressed by them for the most part, for much of what made the original games great was discarded for their wholesale, infantile and flashy changes. I visualize a moment after the series was deposited in their lap, and a large chunk of the CD design team were watching one of their own play TR1 (I am a fly on the wall):
"Mannnnn, look at those cheezy graphics!"
"I can't believe that anyone thought this game was good, you're just running around without much to do!"
"All you do is shoot the enemies? Booooorrrring! We'll liven this up soon enough!"
"What's with the camera? I can't see much of Lara at all!"
"You know, if we eliminate most of the boring stuff in this game it might actually be pretty good!"
"Hey, what's with the incremental turning?"
"Geeeez! We all know that today's gamers would never play this. I mean, where's the gimmicks and where's the gadgets? And what's with the silence, we need to add some communication to this mess. For God's sake this is the new millennium and everyone is constantly wired. No one will understand why Lara is not."
Just a few examples, I would have overheard many more...:D
the save system really affected the gameplay. TRA's checkpoints gave a feeling of safeness, frustration, and limitation. even if you died, there was no penalty. it took the fear of death away. she'd even have a full health bar after it loaded. if you died and were very far from a checkpoint, then you'd have to do the same long sequence again and again. and finally, it limited the freedom of saving anywhere. like the IC's, the game instructs you when to or not to do something.
YES this is a great point, although it doesn't set just TR1 apart, but all the classic TR games. I miss it desperatlely. Crystal seems to think the players need some kind of safety net to play TR?
thought the big mutant was good on tomb raider one but the natla battle was extremely weak. i did it on my first go!!
I have to agree here. I thought the big mutant would make for a much better final boss in TR1. But combat in general isn't very sophisticated, it was obviously not the major point here.
"Mannnnn, look at those cheezy graphics!"
"I can't believe that anyone thought this game was good, you're just running around without much to do!"
"All you do is shoot the enemies? Booooorrrring! We'll liven this up soon enough!"
"What's with the camera? I can't see much of Lara at all!"
"You know, if we eliminate most of the boring stuff in this game it might actually be pretty good!"
"Hey, what's with the incremental turning?"
"Geeeez! We all know that today's gamers would never play this. I mean, where's the gimmicks and where's the gadgets? And what's with the silence, we need to add some communication to this mess. For God's sake this is the new millennium and everyone is constantly wired. No one will understand why Lara is not."
Just a few examples, I would have overheard many more...:D
:vlol: Sadly this might be true because otherwise they would NOT have done much of the incompreensible choices they made for TRA..
I would give anything to have been in the room when (and if) the originals were being played by the CD team for reference material and for their own edification. I imagine that they were not impressed by them for the most part, for much of what made the original games great was discarded for their wholesale, infantile and flashy changes. I visualize a moment after the series was deposited in their lap, and a large chunk of the CD design team were watching one of their own play TR1 (I am a fly on the wall):
"Mannnnn, look at those cheezy graphics!"
"I can't believe that anyone thought this game was good, you're just running around without much to do!"
"All you do is shoot the enemies? Booooorrrring! We'll liven this up soon enough!"
"What's with the camera? I can't see much of Lara at all!"
"You know, if we eliminate most of the boring stuff in this game it might actually be pretty good!"
"Hey, what's with the incremental turning?"
"Geeeez! We all know that today's gamers would never play this. I mean, where's the gimmicks and where's the gadgets? And what's with the silence, we need to add some communication to this mess. For God's sake this is the new millennium and everyone is constantly wired. No one will understand why Lara is not."
Just a few examples, I would have overheard many more...:D
You sure have a selective ear :P
I can't assume I know a lot about it just because it fascinates me (or because of my small experience with it), but I reckon you people have a very romantic idea of what game designing is all about. Specially when it comes to designing a game for a long established franchise with the intent of shaking things up. Perspective - it's everything.
Don't forget people who work in videogame developing love videogames. Otherwise they wouldn't have survived this long in such a stressful line of work. To think that most of them didn't play TR1 (one of the most popular games of all time) back in 1996 and loved it, like pretty much everyone else, is a bit naive I'd say.
I understand the urge to justify some of their decisions, but I think you don't give them enough credit.
Eddie Haskell
24-07-08, 15:05
You sure have a selective ear :P
I can't assume I know a lot about it just because it fascinates me (or because of my small experience with it), but I reckon you people have a very romantic idea of what game designing is all about. Specially when it comes to designing a game for a long established franchise with the intent of shaking things up. Perspective - it's everything.
Don't forget people who work in videogame developing love videogames. Otherwise they wouldn't have survived this long in such a stressful line of work. To think that most of them didn't play TR1 (one of the most popular games of all time) back in 1996 and loved it, like pretty much everyone else, is a bit naive I'd say.
I understand the urge to justify some of their decisions, but I think you don't give them enough credit.
You get credit for doing something worthwhile, beneficial or good. Not the opposite. In that case you get the blame...:(
@Endow: Sure they love videogames and working on them. No one questioned that. I am however questioning what exactly did they like - or disliked - in TR1 that made them change it and whether some of those things they disliked were part of what made TR1 so good.
Again, imo.
That's just it. It's not all about liking or disliking an element. It's about trying to guess what the audience will connect with. You can't blame them for the changes they made considering the overall positive feedback they got from gamers after the last two games. If people generally like your work (and make no mistake that, however streamlined it might seem, it's something tough to pull out) how are you supposed to read the signs?Legend and Anniversary are not my idea of a perfect TR but Crystal are trying, that much is obvious;and listening to the fans' complaints too. Slowly but surely.
What more can you ask them? To try and mimic an 12 year old formula authored by a completely different group of people with different sensibilities of their own? Publishers already have (too much of) a say in how the game should tackle the market (Eidos wants accessibility and profitability just like any other publisher); if they don't have some space of their own to try and come up with cool concepts then what's the point in developing sequels anyway? We already got enough games using the same old (and loved) engine. We already have a level editor to come up with our wildest ideas using that paradigm. It's the franchises' 9th iteration. Change is inevitable.
That's not to say I wouldn't like to see a sequel coming close to the glory of the original TR (my favourite by far), but I'm willing to accept the game can't cater to me alone. I ask you Eddie, didn't Crystal do anything right?Were the last two games so horrible that people found no redeeming qualities? If so, why bother hoping for a comeback "to the roots"?
The present/future can't rewrite the enjoyment we felt with past games.
But using TRA's example in particular - what would be the point of doing a 100% true remake of an awesome game?
Eddie Haskell
24-07-08, 15:45
That's just it. It's not all about liking or disliking an element. It's about trying to guess what the audience will connect with. You can't blame them for the changes they made considering the overall positive feedback they got from gamers after the last two games. If people generally like your work (and make no mistake that, however streamlined it might seem, it's something tough to pull out) how are you supposed to read the signs?Legend and Anniversary are not my idea of a perfect TR but Crystal are trying, that much is obvious;and listening to the fans' complaints too. Slowly but surely.
What more can you ask them? To try and mimic an 12 year old formula authored by a completely different group of people with different sensibilities of their own? Publishers already have (too much of) a say in how the game should tackle the market (Eidos wants accessibility and profitability just like any other publisher); if they don't had some space of their own to try and come up with cool concepts then what's the point in developing sequels anyway? We already got enough games using the same old (and loved) engine. We already have a level editor to come up with our wildest ideas using that paradigm. It's the franchises' 9th iteration. Change is inevitable.
That's not to say I wouldn't like to see a sequel coming close to the glory of the original TR (my favourite by far), but I'm willing to accept the game can't cater to me alone. I ask you Eddie, didn't Crystal do anything right?Were the last two games so horrible that people found no redeeming qualities? If so, why bother hoping for a comeback "to the roots"?
The present/future can't rewrite the enjoyment we felt with past games.
But using TRA's example in particular - what would be the point of doing an 100% true remake of an awesome game?
There are an exceptionally small list of things that I despise completely, that is to say everything about it. Liver is one of them, and so is rap music. I cannot say that the CD games have no redeeming qualities, but the sum total is a lopsided loss for me. The attributes that they neglected to keep, combined with the gadgetry, gimmicks, movement quirks and poor camera implementation made the games a pathetic excuse for a Tomb raider game. A gamer who was not acquainted with the previous games would not know any better, and therefore would set their standards based on these games. Perhaps these new gamers would see the same stuff that they liked in similar, modern games and therefore find TR enjoyable on that level.
Sure, change is inevitable. But the devil is in the details as they say. What do you change? How do you change it? Is there change only for sake of change? Did you eliminate some innate, important components that defined the series?
Endow I apreciate you bringing discussion to this thread but I hope you're not purposedly trying to hijack my thread by saying things like "what would be the point of doing a 100% true remake of an awesome game?"
I'm sorry but that's just not the point of this thread.
Anyways allow myself to continue.
Puzzles.
Maybe some people will disagree with me on this one but here goes.
It's interesting that, because they obviously didn't like vast levels with multiple rooms in a disorganized fashion, the creators of TRA seemed to have thought it was important to have a diferent way of making it feel "tomb raiderish". They changed the essence of puzzles in the game.
I observed with some curiosity that in TR1, the most classic of classic TRs, there's not that many individual puzzles, and those that do exist aren't even very complicated. Most are based on the same permises, like a section of moving blocks, a switch puzzle (and in Midas the switch puzzle even has the instructions nearby!), and then one or two good puzzles that are mostly based on dificult jumping sequences but not really hard in itself.
You see, playing TR1 I felt that the levels, or at least big chunks of these levels, were the actual puzzles. Their intricate nature in particular sections is what made them so. Whereas, in TRA, they have removed this intricate complex design and seem to compensate with actual, specific, puzzles that are limited to one room.
http://shadowzone.com.sapo.pt/lara/vilcabamba.jpg
Vilcabamba, one of the "chopped" levels in TRA, is a perfect "puzzle level" in TR1.
http://shadowzone.com.sapo.pt/lara/Egyptpuzzle.jpg
In TRA's Egypt, they made a couple of interesting individual puzzles like this on in Sanctuary of the Scion. Are these enough to make us forgive the many large scale puzzle levels that were discarded?
The simple type of puzzles in TR1 got more sophisticated later, and achieved some brilliant results in TR:The Last Revelation, even in the first 2 sequels; however, those Core games still kept the complexity of the levels alongside. I will not buy the idea that just because a level has some puzzles like the one above, it automatically makes it classic TR (and this is relevant to TRU since many thought the underwater puzzle shown in the footage is brilliant classic Tomb Raiding).
An example outside this thread's main subject is the Nepal level in Legend, which features a great puzzle (the scales) that doesn't save it from being one of the most pathetic excuses for a TR level I've played (and here of course it's just a very personal opinion - I just have a grudge against that level..).
Combat.
Combat is not very sophisticated in TR1. However, there are some interesting things about it.
1. You have freedom of choice as to how you will face your enemies. In many combat spots, you can choose whether you will fight hand-to-hand (so to speak) on the same level as your foe, or whether you will go for that handy spot above it and shoot it from safety. In TRA there are some areas where you can do this as well, however, throughout the game you get a sense that the game forces you to use adrenaline dodge and punishes you if you don't. It seems because so many people said combat sucked in classic TR games, CD is constantly trying to make something out of it using weird tricks like the AD; however, it is my belief that by simply making the enemies tougher, fighting them in a completely free way would be hard enough.
http://shadowzone.com.sapo.pt/lara/trex.jpg
Killing the T-Rex in TRA, an obvious example of lack of choice, was a big disapointment for older fans and I can see why. In some ways the revamped battle looks so simplified and "arcade", that TR1, that 96 game, seemed more sophisticated than that... After all it got this "stealth" mode! ;)
2. In TRA, a great deal of combat situations were ruined by cutscenes. I already mentioned that these cutscenes removed the element of surprise... Well, the element of surprise made some fights in TR1 quite special. But even worst than that is the concept of limiting your involvement in the battles themselves because of an interactive cutscene.
http://shadowzone.com.sapo.pt/lara/trexTRA.jpg
Killing big foes in TR1 was clean, raw, simple situations. And.. it was a lot more fun. I was never a fan of interactive cutscenes to begin with; but to have Lara kill or strike the killing blow in some major enemies - T-Rex, Larson, the skater kid, Kold - while you, the PLAYER, just stare at it and dumbly push a button from time to time.... That was sad, cheap and.. ironic. Because they seem to want to remove the suposed boredom out of combat, and yet made it even more boring.
3. One small thing I'm picky about: Lara falling down repeatedly in the middle of combat whenever an enemy so much as touches her. Is making Lara seem weaker in combat part of the "humanizing Lara" strategy?
http://shadowzone.com.sapo.pt/lara/getup.jpg
Get up!!!!! GET UP!! Is what I find myself shouting in the middle of these battles.
Continued below.
There are an exceptionally small list of things that I despise completely, that is to say everything about it. Liver is one of them, and so is rap music. I cannot say that the CD games have no redeeming qualities, but the sum total is a lopsided loss for me. The attributes that they neglected to keep, combined with the gadgetry, gimmicks, movement quirks and poor camera implementation made the games a pathetic excuse for a Tomb raider game. A gamer who was not acquainted with the previous games would not know any better, and therefore would set their standards based on these games. Perhaps these new gamers would see the same stuff that they liked in similar, modern games and therefore find TR enjoyable on that level.
Sure, change is inevitable. But the devil is in the details as they say. What do you change? How do you change it? Is there change only for sake of change? Did you eliminate some innate, important components that defined the series?
Great questions. And do you find they have easy answers? Do you find it easy to identify what defined the series in the past? Take me for example. TR3 is the exact opposite of what I consider TR. For some it's the highpoint of the series. For me, TR2 brought many unwanted changes (mercs, vehicles, city levels, more action and weaponry etc). Why can't a parallel be drawn? Wasn't my disappointment as justifiable as yours? And yet, no one questions the validity of TR3 as a TR game.
As for "A gamer who was not acquainted with the previous games would not know any better, and therefore would set their standards based on these games", I think you're being a bit selective again. There are huge numbers of people out there who played both the older and newer games, and a great percentage of them couldn't be happier about the change. It's something that seems hard to accept around here.
EDIT:
Endow I apreciate you bringing discussion to this thread but I hope you're not purposedly trying to hijack my thread by saying things like "what would be the point of doing a 100% true remake of an awesome game?"
I'm sorry but that's just not the point of this thread.
I kind of resent that comment considering that I've made clear how I prefer TR1 and how I agree that there are elements that could have been better implemented. I have no intentions of hijacking anyone's thread, and I thought this was more than just a monologue on my part.
Is it really necessary to go so off topic here? I mean seriously...
And do you find they have easy answers? Do you find it easy to identify what defined the series in the past?
That's exactly what I'm trying to do in this thread, not about the series but about TR1 specifically. Do you even care to comment on what I say?!?! I mean if you disagree with my points just say it but if you want to argue with Eddie about this then I'd suggest PMs?!?
Is it really necessary to go so off topic here? I mean seriously...
That's exactly what I'm trying to do in this thread, not about the series but about TR1 specifically. Do you even care to comment on what I say?!?! I mean if you disagree with my points just say it but if you want to argue with Eddie about this then I'd suggest PMs?!?
I thought I had commented on what you said, before. The merit of your thread is exactly explaining the finer points of what make it a lesser TR game. If the topic wasn't meant to be discussed then I'm sorry. I won't go any further.
Eddie Haskell
24-07-08, 16:33
My apologies Encore, Endow always brings out the Tolstoy in me... ;)
Again, great analysis Encore. The combat components that you mention are a particular annoyance of mine. As basic as the fighting is in TR1, the simple fact that you choose the time, particular place and methodology (and sometimes even IF!) for the action makes it vastly superior in my book. Your point about the difficulty is extremely pointed; CD could go a long way in making the so-called "normal" battle methods a superior challenge and an individualistic affair, instead of heavily software/computer controlled IC's or similar method.
Again, top notch! :tmb:
Great post once again. I was shouting 'YES, YES I AGREE! THAT SO SUCKS' inside my head while reading the Combat -part :D
Nitro Typhoon
24-07-08, 17:42
I agree with everything you mentioned - if TR1 was updated with new graphics, it would definitely be the best TR game for me.
I hope CD see this thread and try harder to bring back the classic features :)
silver_wolf
24-07-08, 18:51
very good posts, Encore. CD should seriously read this, because what goes for TR1 goes for any good TR. You've nailed what makes a good TR on the head! :tmb:
Blue_light
24-07-08, 19:05
The Interactive cutscenes ruined the game, even if I enjoyed seeing them, because it feels like a movie. But it just takes all the fun part away. I wanted to kill the human enemies and the T-Rex by old-fashioned way (a.k.a. by the player), like in TR1. Like you said about the element surprise, IC's ruin it. I first played TR1 with no sound on because of the music which appeared in the middle of the silence, and every single bit of the game made my heart beat really fast because the enemies never gave a sign warning they were coming, and when I faced the T-Rex for the first time, I screamed really loud and turned off the PS :p
In TRA, I played with the sound on all the time since the enemies make a noise which means they're approaching, and the T-Rex cutscene for me it was like "oooh the T-rex is coming. Big woop". And the IC which we "kill" it was really frustrating me because the signs weren't appearing (it's a common bug for some people, and that made me use a saved game), and that made me think "Jeez, Why can't I just kill it normally like it was in the old one?"
The humam IC weren't better either. They were just boring. I mean, Lara is doing all the fun part without us? That sucks! Not to mention that Lara doesn't kill anyone besides Larson.
Wow this my biggest post ever :D
Melonie Tomb Raider
24-07-08, 19:23
SO true. I hate being introduced to scary monsters through cutscenes. Takes all the scariness away. :(
silver_wolf
24-07-08, 19:31
unless they're really creepy, then it doesn't matter.
Especially the cut scene that show the t-rex.. I mean, you are meant to be surprised by it, the t rex in TR1 was HUGE cos you just kept running and suddenly notice.. "hmm, the ground is shaking" and the next thing you know, the king of dinosaurs is standing in front of you, roaring and scaring the sh*t outta you :D In TRA you could basically go and make some popcorn and then sit and watch while the t-rex does some showing off, killing some raptors and then chasing Lara. And then finally, the interactive B.S comes along and then you FINALLY get to fight it. You've had like effing 5 mins to calm yourself down and think before the fight begins.
Also the cutscene that shows those catmummies in Egypt... man, the look on Lara's face, seems like she's more scared than the player though in the older TRs it was totally the opposite :p
Camera Obscura
24-07-08, 20:24
Encore, make sure that when you finish your analysis, you go spam the living hell out of Crystal Dynamics' inbox. ;)
Ward Dragon
24-07-08, 21:36
So very very true about the combat, IC's, everything! I suppose someone could make the argument that we played TR1 so we know a T-rex is coming and therefore there's no surprise. However, I think that instead of figuring "screw it" and making it into a cutscene, they should have gone out of their way to bring back that surprise.
For example, imagine that we walk through that cave and enter the actual Lost Valley at night. The valley is large and complicated, with trees and rock formations dividing it up into not really a maze, but something that does have to be explored and can't be taken in all at once from a single vantage point. Similar to the TR1 level layout, but more complex with more pathways and more branching dead ends. As we walk around exploring the place, we hear a growl here, feel a few heavy footsteps shaking the ground there, catch a glimpse of a tail through the trees to the side, etc. We know we're being hunted and we don't know when the T-rex will strike. Building up the tension like that would make it truly shocking when the T-rex finally does coming running out at us from the darkness with no immediate warning. Then we'd have to choose whether to stand and fight it or try to find a safe hiding place somewhere in the Valley, or perhaps even to try to get around it without killing it at all. So much better than being forced to kill it in an arena with IC's to ensure it dies in the proper fashion to allow us to progress.
silver_wolf
24-07-08, 23:00
that sounds awesome.:(
Jordan_Boi
24-07-08, 23:36
Ugh. The ICs, they're pathetic. I swear, everytime I play through Anniversary, it takes me AGES to do the T-Rex one, the buttons show at stupid times.
Ugh. The ICs, they're pathetic. I swear, everytime I play through Anniversary, it takes me AGES to do the T-Rex one, the buttons show at stupid times.
The T-rex in anniversary was WAY too big and stupid looking IMO, the first time I saw it and fought it I was just like What?
Not very intimidating at all TBH, especially since it was introduced formally with a cutscene, in broad daylight - without any sense of impending doom at all.
TR 1 however, even after replaying it never fails to make me get all edgy and make Lara run away and cower in a corner until it can be neatly disposed of. :p
Good times.
I'm just so bummed I lost my copy of TR1! :(
I have to say though, I was never, ever at any point scared of the first Natla - she looked like a menopausal wag with bad cosmetic surgery, but TRA's Natla was amazingly intimidating, alien-looking and (in monster/scorched-mode) quite terrifying!
unless they're really creepy, then it doesn't matter.
Which they never are.
:o
Richie11291
25-07-08, 12:11
I'm just so bummed I lost my copy of TR1! :(
I have to say though, I was never, ever at any point scared of the first Natla - she looked like a menopausal wag with bad cosmetic surgery, but TRA's Natla was amazingly intimidating, alien-looking and (in monster/scorched-mode) quite terrifying!
Yeah, old Natla looked crap! And that accent went through my head. I think CD ruined the final fight, it was brilliant in TR1 because it was a huge room and it was so dark towards the ceilling that you couldn't see her coming. Then she kept shouting stuff at you and it felt so intense. Then when she comes again your stuck on the top of a tiny pillar unloading everthing at her, praying she dies before can get to close to you. It was such a brilliant fight.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3284/2701299272_71f7e32b2d_o.jpg:)
Richie11291
25-07-08, 13:40
:vlol:
rr_carroll
25-07-08, 15:50
"Zzzzz..."
Hey, tomb raiding is tough work!
Eddie Haskell
25-07-08, 15:56
...as the music shifts to Brahm's lullaby... :vlol:
Yes Lara, it's safe to take a nap, no real danger here...:D
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3284/2701299272_71f7e32b2d_o.jpg:)
"Wait, mr. big-torso-monster-thingy... I'm a bit sleepy... let me take a nap and then I can throw that non-existing butt of yours down to the boiling lava, okay, chap?... zZzZzZzZzZzZz
Oops... now I can't get up... my leg got stuck in the damn floor... Aha! Now I understand why do you keep getting your fingers stuck, too! We have so much in common! LET'S GET MARRIED!"
:jmp:
Blue_light
25-07-08, 17:44
"Wait, mr. big-torso-monster-thingy... I'm a bit sleepy... let me take a nap and then I can throw that non-existing butt of yours down to the boiling lava, okay, chap?... zZzZzZzZzZzZz
Oops... now I can't get up... my leg got stuck in the damn floor... Aha! Now I understand why do you keep getting your fingers stuck, too! We have so much in common! LET'S GET MARRIED!"
:jmp:
LOL :D :vlol: Actually, the TRA torso has a butt :p Or at least a bit of it
Nice work, Encore. I knew there was something missing when I first payd Tomb Raider Anniversary. Probably because I knew what I as supposed to do and whn enemies would come.
^That is indeed true and might explain some of the "magic gone", but still, when I made this replaying of TR1 I also knew most of the solutions and paths, and it didn't prevent me from enjoying it so much. :)
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3284/2701299272_71f7e32b2d_o.jpg:)
ahahahah This is so awesome :vlol:
*mutant pokes Lara with a stick*
...nah it's hopeles..
*game ends*
Ok I supose its time for one final observation here!! After replaying TRA again. ;)
Atlantis.
I think focusing on Atlantis is absolutely essential, and it's why it's the only section that gets a special mention by me here. Why?
I think what happened with Atlantis can be used as an example of two very distinct ways of interpreting the TR experience.
In TR1 Atlantis takes place around one central, dark shaft with several tiny platforms along the way, each leading to side rooms with their respective "microcosm" of things to do and puzzles to solve.
In TRA this was substituted by a test of your "mastering of the controls". All the side rooms were removed and instead you have only the central shaft, in which you ascend through much larger platforms and acrobatic trials between them.
http://shadowzone.com.sapo.pt/lara/atlantis_sideroom.jpg
http://shadowzone.com.sapo.pt/lara/atlantis_sideroom2.jpg
http://shadowzone.com.sapo.pt/lara/atlantis_sideroom4.jpg
Some of the interesting side rooms removed in the remake.
Some people say the reason for this was time constraints on the creation of TRA. But, considering what happens throughout much of the rest of the game, I can't help but feel this choice reflects CD's updated interpretation of Tomb Raiding, in the light of everything focusing on Lara's physical skills. All it takes for you to become confortable with this new Tomb Raiding is basically mastering the controls. Whereas in the original game, it was your mind that was involved in playing the game, today it's much more a physical thing.
Atlantis was also updated in visual terms, and this time undoubtedly for the worst. Even with the graphics of 1996, the whole Atlantis section had a lasting impact that still worked with me today, with those fleshy, pumping textures accompanied by the unforgetable heartbeats.
You felt like you were inside this strange, part artificial, part organic, structure. Even Lara's footsteps over this creepy creature-like ground left me slightly disgusted, not to mention entering rooms that were made of these textures right from top to bottom.
http://shadowzone.com.sapo.pt/lara/yuk.jpg
Can you believe I actually hesitated in entering this room because it looked so disgusting? Hah!!
Everything was changed into an alien spacecraft type decoration, much accomodated to Hollywood design style. A huge part of what made Atlantis so freaky and scary is gone and turned into something much more familiar.
Comparing these two levels side by side is one of the most perfect ways to see what the banalization of Tomb Raider means. It means dumbing down the level design, and also not daring to think out of the box in visual terms, instead fitting everything into familiar cliches.
The same happens with later TR games, for example, all it takes is comparing the London city area from TR3 with the Japan city area in Legend, and you'll see how much less ambitious and more Hollywood type CD's games really are.
Final Boss Battle.
The only situation where Atlantis was improved as was expected in a remake with today's technology was, in my opinion, battling with Natla. Granted, in TR1 you had this much larger, epic area in which to fight. The location was a lot more interesting. But killing Natla was simply too easy (as mentioned before in this thread) specially after the tough Torso battle.
In TRA you can see they noticed this weakness and tried to compensate for it by introducing a more "layered" boss battle (you have to kill her wings and then kill her by shooting into a specific area). Even if this battle is somehow made dull by the excessive dependance of the Adrenaline Dodge, and the final Interactive Cutscene, at least I recognize the effort.
The problem is they seemed much more eager to update boss battles for today's more challenging standards - for better [Natla, Centaurs] or for worst [T-Rex] - than to update the gameplay quality as well.
I just ran out of time, will write a conclusion later and add some screenshots to this post. :wve:
Oh my, don't even get me started. When I first heard that there will be a remake of TR1, I first thought about Atlantis especially, and I so waited to see the flesh-walls in new graphics! And what happened.................I found myself in a bunch of different, grey rooms. Nothing left about the disgusting and awesome flesh-rooms or the heartbeats... meh, don't wanna be a whiny nut but the atlantis section was a real turn off (lol) for me, I can't believe that they changed THAT part so much. And for worse. TR1 atlantis was great, TRA atlantis was... well.. ye know. A well.
Blue_light
31-07-08, 19:35
Another great piece of review Encore :tmb:
It just happen that I played TR1 Atlantis yesterday after a long time, and it was "magical". I really can't explain my excitement for this game :jmp: The ambience, the darkness, the fleshy walls.... :jmp: I was just saying "wow, the old times :)" and "this game is so awesome!". I wish that my TR1 CD never break. ;)
In Anniversary, Atlantis ,or in that case, The Great pyramid, really was the level that most disappointed me, and most of the fans. It was.... EMPTY. It's all I have to say :D :whi:
Ward Dragon
31-07-08, 21:45
Brilliant analysis, Encore :tmb: TRA's levels focus on solving central puzzle rooms while TR1's levels focus on exploring intricate passageways. It definitely feels different.
(Totally off topic, but I just saw The Dark Knight today in Imax and I totally love your avatar :jmp: He was just perfect, beyond perfect, and I am so sad that's all I'll ever see of it)
Oh my, don't even get me started. When I first heard that there will be a remake of TR1, I first thought about Atlantis especially, and I so waited to see the flesh-walls in new graphics! And what happened.................I found myself in a bunch of different, grey rooms. Nothing left about the disgusting and awesome flesh-rooms or the heartbeats... meh, don't wanna be a whiny nut but the atlantis section was a real turn off (lol) for me, I can't believe that they changed THAT part so much. And for worse. TR1 atlantis was great, TRA atlantis was... well.. ye know. A well.
If fleshy walls make that big of a difference to you (as they do to me) then take a peek at my Core Style Atlantis mod. I used the fleshy Atlantis textures from the cancelled Core AE. The mod covers both Atlantis levels in TRA.
Download it here and run it with TexMod if you have the PC version of TRA.
http://www.tombraiderhub.com/tran/modding/other04.html
Otherwise, check out these before and after pics on Photobucket (navigate the album by hitting the "back" button on the preview panel at the right to see them in order):
http://s48.photobucket.com/albums/f214/WraithStar/Anniversary%20mod/?action=view¤t=Original1.jpg
^^^HOLY CRAP... :eek:
You did an amazing job.... I really didn't keep up with the Core AE thread and media, and I never used mods on my games, so I really had no idea those textures were available. Awesome. *claps*
Ward Dragon
31-07-08, 23:19
^^^HOLY CRAP... :eek:
You did an amazing job.... I really didn't keep up with the Core AE thread and media, and I never used mods on my games, so I really had no idea those textures were available. Awesome. *claps*
Thank you. I'm so glad you like it :D I made it back around November when the textures were first made available. It really makes me happy that people are still enjoying it :D
Blockoland
02-08-08, 06:19
Great thread with some great observations.
MermaidLara
04-08-08, 07:51
Cool thread, but to be honest I enjoyed Legend more than every other TR game other than the first. CD has changed alot in TR but they are changes that I welcome and obviously game reviewers do as well.
Fallen.Angel
05-08-08, 06:27
Very nice comparison. It's very true. Anniversary was fairly predictable, really easy not to get lost. The original was more challenging, which is always a plus!
tombinator
05-08-08, 15:34
Very nice comparison. It's very true. Anniversary was fairly predictable, really easy not to get lost. The original was more challenging, which is always a plus!
Saying Anniversary was predictable isn't really a fair point, as it was a remake. But in terms of more challenging i'd have said each one was more challenging than the other in different ways, i think in TR:AE mastery of controls and camera was challenging in itself (didn't play with auto-grab). In all honesty i didnt find TR1 that challenging, it just had more chance for exploration, you just had to look around a bit more. More time consuming than challenging, but still, i would always choose to play TR1 over any game in the series, maybe even choose it over any game ever, and i don't actually have a reason for it, lol!
Its perfectly fair. They made the level design super simplified - much more than the original TR! They could have made them more complex and more room for free exploration instead of being totally linear.
Not only did they not improve upon the original in level design, they made things radically worse.
Having said that, i love a few of the new puzzles in TRA, but that doesn't make up for the faults.
Tomb Raider should be about mystery, exploration..
jeffrey van oort
06-08-08, 18:47
You are a real talented reviewer Encore. I reckon you should continue on.:) It's absolutely going to be a famous thread.
I think TR1 was better than Anniversary because in anniversary they cut too much out. Anyway encore nice job! :tmb:
Palace Midas
08-08-08, 16:26
http://shadowzone.com.sapo.pt/lara/Egyptpuzzle.jpg
In TRA's Egypt, they made a couple of interesting individual puzzles like this on in Sanctuary of the Scion. Are these enough to make us forgive the many large scale puzzle levels that were discarded?
Forgive my poor english. Have you played the Wii version of TRA because some puzzles are very different and more challenging. The dark corridors in Colosseum where Gorilla's are lurking in the shadows. I was very scared when a gorilla jumps out of nowhere in that dark corridor. That was not included in the PS2/Xbox/PC version of TRA. Or the new doors wit the cog mechanism puzzles when you entered the large temple at the end of City of Vilcabamba. I like the Wii version the most because its more challenging. The Wii-controls are a little difficult to get used to it and because of that i think the Wii version of TRA is more like the original TR then the other versions of TRA.
And why are there so many topics here which contains allways the same thing: Why is Anniversary not as good as the original. We all know that TR1 is better and i think that too. But there are good aspects too about Anniversary. It's a bit sad that everybody acts like Anniversary is the worst TR ever. I allways disliked Angel of Darkness. And that game was not even from Crystal Dynamics.
^ Woah that's totally not my point. If I thought TRA was that bad I hadn't replayed it so many times like I said in my first post. But consider this thread as being about the reasons why TR1 is so good and the elements TRA failed to recreate, and even more broadly, a comparison between two diferent styles of gameplay, "classic" and "modern" TR. It's not a "bashing" thread - again, like I clearly stated in my first post.
Ultimately this is only a personal opinion thread too.
And no, I don't own a Wii.
MadCroy101
08-08-08, 18:55
The Reason why Tomb Raider 1 is better is because its way better, simple:D
YES YES and YES Encore everything you said is basically what I've been trying to say! Seriusly Crystal D needs to see this..(it's funny because as I'm reading this, I'm listening to the original TR soundtrack, which is a beaut and still stands up to today's standards....)
But we still gotta be fair with this one since they did say it was a reimagining, not a remake...but still, it doesn't change the fact that TRA ruined what TR1 was for some of us....
And yes like me, I still play TRA a bunch of times...simply because I have no other new game to say.I still loved it at first but the more I love it, the more I find myself not liking it as much. I notice more and more of what TRA wasn't :( .
Seriously, every single observation points you pointed out as well crafted and like wow. I'm THIS SAD that this TR1 magic isn't in today's games...I'm just so lucky this was my first PS1 game AND my first Tomb Raider game. Seriously, Eidos could have handed Core one final job before kicking them the boot...[spoiler]I'm not sure if it's still allowed to link footages but remember...not sure if you've seen the footage I'm talking about but I'm not sure if it's safe to even discuss about Core's version of TRA, which is around youtube...ask for me the link if you want to see it otherwise search it up yourself but just to be safe we're talking about the same one, ask me if you like...
Conclusion.
I guess it's time to end this thread logically.
So, the big question: did CD really intend for Anniversary to be a better game than the original? I don't know. But personally, I'm inclined to say no. Considering this game was like a "gold" game in between the creation of Legend and Underworld, I'm pretty sure that it wasn't a very important project of the team, and I guess the whole point was simply to readapt the original TR game to the concept of gameplay and storyline of the new continuity.
Now this is where this thread really means something: by reimagining TR1, one of the best games ever made (by relatively general consensus), according to the new style of the modern TR, it was inevitable to spark comparisons not just between the two games but between the two styles. It is, in fact, much easier to notice the new approach to TR of Crystal Dynamics when you have these two games with the same permise but their diferent approaches.
In my opinion, it's not that CD needs to "learn" anything; but by using TR1 as a template, it clearly allowed them to make a game that's much more into the general concept of Tomb Raider than Legend was. Nevertheless, it also makes evidence of some of their biggest weaknesses. For creative choice reasons or for marketing reasons, the fact is they somehow seem scared of being too ambitious with the level design.
They are clearly capable of more - for example, they connected the Egypt area in a very good way, also adding many traps and puzzles that the original could only dream of; and still, the levels continue to feel more organized and develop faster, because they're lacking the boldness of the "chaotic" and rich network of rooms of the original.
Other more drastic changes such as Atlantis, Midas or the Cistern, present a clear option for simplified design and heavy dependance on acrobatics, rather than item finding and other tasks around side rooms.
Smaller details such as the darkness or the textures, seem to be a paradoxical consequence of improved graphics. With today's technology, I guess it would be illogical to not take advantage and build much more beautiful and lush environments. It's my opinion that this can still be coupled with a lot more exploration to build for a better experience - for instance, Lost Valley in TRA looked much better and less creepy, but it was not the lack of darkness that made it less exciting, it was its smaller size, linearity (due to the terrible T-Rex arena), and lack of side alcoves and crevaces to explore.
Basically, I think the level design is lacking in complexity. On the one hand, things like atmosphere, cutscenes and battles, white ledges and other things, could probably become less disrupting if the levels were huge and had plenty of side rooms and side tasks anyway. On the other hand, smaller levels can be made bigger if for example less is put into cutscenes and ICs, Lara is allowed to grab and climb more than just a defined set of ledges and poles in the room, and battle is a bit more freestyle.
So, my opinion is that CD's style of TR games has improved with TRA, but it still lacks a bigger attention to particularly important details and it most importantly lacks the complexity of the original levels. Make things bigger. More chaotic. More challenging. More tasks, more keys and levers and switches to find. Don't just introduce a puzzle here and there to get us stuck and then progress as easy as ever once we get by it; make the whole level a puzzle! :D
Great conclusion, Encore.:tmb: I agree with most of what you've said in this thread.
Very well said, Encore, good job. :tmb: I agree that they have lots of work to do with linearity and exploration, plus the combat. In TRL was awesome (for me) targeting freely with the mouse, but combat in TRA is frustrating for me..... damn too fast enemies and stupid targeting. :hea:
Only two levels were recreated well in TRA, and that was in my opinion St. Francis Folly and City Of Khamoon. The rest was way to small in comparisson with the original TR. How can they ****ed up The Coliseum and Palace Midas so bad, my favorite levels of all time??? And why is the first crocodile in Palace Midas and not in St. Francis Folly? Missed the crocodiles and panthers also in the Obelisk of Khamoon. Shame!!!
Ward Dragon
10-08-08, 20:25
Beautiful conclusion, Encore :tmb: :D I agree with everything you've said. From the magazines and interviews about Underworld it sounds like they are trying to adopt the approach you outlined. However I'll believe it when I see it and so far I haven't seen it yet in any of the screenshots or the brief gameplay footage. I'm really hoping that's just because of the game being an early build or whatever excuse they're giving and that the final game will be much better. (I still don't understand why they'd show gameplay footage a year old -- if they had shown me a year ago I might have been impressed, but now?...)
in these arms
10-08-08, 21:53
*Raises Drink*
;) 110% agreed.
I was looking forward to Atlantis in TRA because it was a my least favorite world in TR I. Hopefully they had made it a little more fun to play. But knowing that they got rid of all the incredible atmosphere ...that just sucks.
Forgive my poor english. Have you played the Wii version of TRA because some puzzles are very different and more challenging. The dark corridors in Colosseum where Gorilla's are lurking in the shadows. I was very scared when a gorilla jumps out of nowhere in that dark corridor. That was not included in the PS2/Xbox/PC version of TRA. Or the new doors wit the cog mechanism puzzles when you entered the large temple at the end of City of Vilcabamba. I like the Wii version the most because its more challenging. The Wii-controls are a little difficult to get used to it and because of that i think the Wii version of TRA is more like the original TR then the other versions of TRA.
And why are there so many topics here which contains allways the same thing: Why is Anniversary not as good as the original. We all know that TR1 is better and i think that too. But there are good aspects too about Anniversary. It's a bit sad that everybody acts like Anniversary is the worst TR ever. I allways disliked Angel of Darkness. And that game was not even from Crystal Dynamics.
TRAOD is by far my least favorite also. And as much as I love the classics, I never thought CORE is better than CD. CD revived the series and added many good new elements into the game(eg. secrets to unlockable stuff), they also successfully attracted new fans thus expanding the TR fanbase. Sometimes I think some old fans(including myself) are a bit too hard on CD.
For example although I 100% agree with you encore, you could change your title from: "TR1 Travel Notes...and why it's better than TRA" to "What's lost in TRA from TR1 and how to improve future TR games". Just in this simple way you can show a little bit more courtesy to CD.
I don't see how the title is insulting, I had a general idea of using this thread to pinpoint exactly what makes a classic TR game better than a modern one as I was in the midst of playing TR1; because that is my opinion. But as you realize throughout the thread my opinion eventually turns out to be not as radical as it may seem. If people wanna judge it from the title, too bad... Also, if people just wanna reduce this to a Core vs CD thread, it's also their choice, but no one can say my opinions weren't described in a constructive manner. :)
Ward Dragon
27-08-08, 23:03
I don't see how the title is insulting, I had a general idea of using this thread to pinpoint exactly what makes a classic TR game better than a modern one as I was in the midst of playing TR1; because that is my opinion. But as you realize throughout the thread my opinion eventually turns out to be not as radical as it may seem. If people wanna judge it from the title, too bad... Also, if people just wanna reduce this to a Core vs CD thread, it's also their choice, but no one can say my opinions weren't described in a constructive manner. :)
Definitely. This thread is the epitome of constructive criticism :tmb: You didn't in any way bash TRA or insult Crystal. You just explained how TR1 did some things better, such as level design, and you gave clear examples to show what you meant. I really hope Crystal reads this and takes your advice to heart :D
I don't see how the title is insulting, I had a general idea of using this thread to pinpoint exactly what makes a classic TR game better than a modern one as I was in the midst of playing TR1; because that is my opinion. But as you realize throughout the thread my opinion eventually turns out to be not as radical as it may seem. If people wanna judge it from the title, too bad... Also, if people just wanna reduce this to a Core vs CD thread, it's also their choice, but no one can say my opinions weren't described in a constructive manner. :)
Well I didn't see your title insulting either;) But "judge it from the title" many people will do. So that's why I suggested that. Because before I read the posts I DID think it is going to be a Core vs CD thread. However it is your choice.
And I do love this thread for its contents. Hopefully what I said won't be a bother to you :)
Conclusion.
I guess it's time to end this thread logically.
So, the big question: did CD really intend for Anniversary to be a better game than the original? I don't know. But personally, I'm inclined to say no. Considering this game was like a "gold" game in between the creation of Legend and Underworld, I'm pretty sure that it wasn't a very important project of the team, and I guess the whole point was simply to readapt the original TR game to the concept of gameplay and storyline of the new continuity.
Now this is where this thread really means something: by reimagining TR1, one of the best games ever made (by relatively general consensus), according to the new style of the modern TR, it was inevitable to spark comparisons not just between the two games but between the two styles. It is, in fact, much easier to notice the new approach to TR of Crystal Dynamics when you have these two games with the same permise but their diferent approaches.
In my opinion, it's not that CD needs to "learn" anything; but by using TR1 as a template, it clearly allowed them to make a game that's much more into the general concept of Tomb Raider than Legend was. Nevertheless, it also makes evidence of some of their biggest weaknesses. For creative choice reasons or for marketing reasons, the fact is they somehow seem scared of being too ambitious with the level design.
They are clearly capable of more - for example, they connected the Egypt area in a very good way, also adding many traps and puzzles that the original could only dream of; and still, the levels continue to feel more organized and develop faster, because they're lacking the boldness of the "chaotic" and rich network of rooms of the original.
Other more drastic changes such as Atlantis, Midas or the Cistern, present a clear option for simplified design and heavy dependance on acrobatics, rather than item finding and other tasks around side rooms.
Smaller details such as the darkness or the textures, seem to be a paradoxical consequence of improved graphics. With today's technology, I guess it would be illogical to not take advantage and build much more beautiful and lush environments. It's my opinion that this can still be coupled with a lot more exploration to build for a better experience - for instance, Lost Valley in TRA looked much better and less creepy, but it was not the lack of darkness that made it less exciting, it was its smaller size, linearity (due to the terrible T-Rex arena), and lack of side alcoves and crevaces to explore.
Basically, I think the level design is lacking in complexity. On the one hand, things like atmosphere, cutscenes and battles, white ledges and other things, could probably become less disrupting if the levels were huge and had plenty of side rooms and side tasks anyway. On the other hand, smaller levels can be made bigger if for example less is put into cutscenes and ICs, Lara is allowed to grab and climb more than just a defined set of ledges and poles in the room, and battle is a bit more freestyle.
So, my opinion is that CD's style of TR games has improved with TRA, but it still lacks a bigger attention to particularly important details and it most importantly lacks the complexity of the original levels. Make things bigger. More chaotic. More challenging. More tasks, more keys and levers and switches to find. Don't just introduce a puzzle here and there to get us stuck and then progress as easy as ever once we get by it; make the whole level a puzzle! :D
you think like me but say it much better! lol. i agree with everything you have said, it is EXACTLY what i couldnt put into words which made TR1 better than TRA - although i still love TRA just proves games are never the same as the oldies...yet
The game is very good if you think of it as a completely separate game.
But what I hate the most is the drastic change in the way the worlds look past Greece.
Egypt and Atlantis look like utter crud.
When you play The original tomb raider you do get a bit scared or it makes you jump and has a huge amount of atmosphere. I have to say T R anniversary is a great game but is dosnt feel the same as the original and it dosnt make you jump as much as Tomb Raider 1
trunderworld28
03-09-08, 17:27
very good. i completely agree with everything that you laid out on the table. everything that was described was exactly what i was feeling about both games.
I love your atlantis comparison:)
The new atlantis was a major disappointment for me mostly because of the major cut-down and the textures...I was hoping for blood, muscles, big dirty hanging veins and more blood everywhere! Dripping from the ceiling!
At first I though Anniversary was a turning point after Legend...it was in some aspects, and I have confidence in them to make Underworld amazing...[although she seems to act like a monkey in the footage to me] I just feel disappointed with the majority of the levels in Anniversary [especially in Midas what happened there???] Therefore I hardly ever reach to play it...even though I can't play the first 5 'cause they don't work on my damn laptop!
Your comparison was a lovely read Encore and the screenshots helped alot, I love to see visual comparison though :)
vBulletin® v3.8.4, Copyright ©2000-2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.