PDA

View Full Version : Major twist of "Tomb Raider: Legend" spoiled in "Tomb Raider: Chronicles"!


Sifo-Dyas
10-12-08, 11:43
*************************************************
THIS THREAD CONTAINS SPOILERS OF LEGEND AND CHRONICLES!!
*************************************************

Hey

Ok - so ... I know this might sound absurd, but yesterday I suddenly noticed something. I don't know what everyone's reaction was at the end of "Tomb Raider: Legend" but I was really surprised that Lara's mother was somehow still alive (does that make me the stupidest Tomb Raider-fan all around or were there others who didn't see that one coming?).

But then it hit me! The fact that the mother of Lara Croft hadn't died so many years ago when Lara was still a little girl, shouldn't have been a surprise at all! You wanna know why? Because ... after Lara Croft allegedly died we see 3 people at the remembrance ceremony at the beginning of "Tomb Raider: Chronicles". The old man is butler Jeeves but there's also a couple which are of course the estranged father and mother of Lara Croft, right? So ........... Lara Croft's mother was alive and well and anyone could have seen this one coming from miles away, no?

............. unless off course the couple is not Lara's mother and father but just a couple that she ran into on one of ther many adventures of which she might even have saved their lives ...

What do you think, please? I would really like to know who those 2 people are ...

Bye for now

Punaxe
10-12-08, 11:46
Lara's biography has been rewritten at least once, the movies' stories don't correlate to the game franchise a lot, Crystal Dynamics never ended the AOD story... I'm not sure how serious we can take any similarities between Core's storylines and Crystal's...

Sifo-Dyas
10-12-08, 12:02
Lara's biography has been rewritten at least once, the movies' stories don't correlate to the game franchise a lot, Crystal Dynamics never ended the AOD story... I'm not sure how serious we can take any similarities between Core's storylines and Crystal's...

Makes sense, but I still try to combine all those (different) storylines. I even try to include the ones from the Tomb Raider-movies. Maybe (despite the fact that I truly like that couple to be Lara's parents) it makes a lot more sense that it's just a couple that got befriended with Lara Croft ... who knows? It may even be that friendly Frenchman from Tomb Raider 4 and his wife ... thát would make sense, no? :)

tranniversary119
10-12-08, 12:10
Yeah the two games don't mix together the only game that "is part of the series" is the original tomb raider.

Punaxe
10-12-08, 12:12
Makes sense, but I still try to combine all those (different) storylines. I even try to include the ones from the Tomb Raider-movies. Maybe (despite the fact that I truly like that couple to be Lara's parents) it makes a lot more sense that it's just a couple that got befriended with Lara Croft ... who knows? It may even be that friendly Frenchman from Tomb Raider 4 and his wife ... thát would make sense, no? :)

Surely there would be more visitors to Lara's funeral than just her parents... :p

john_york
10-12-08, 12:39
Surely there would be more visitors to Lara's funeral than just her parents... :p

I don't know - she's killed just about everyone else she's met since we've known her :D

Rivendell
10-12-08, 12:48
That couple was her parents in TRC, but legend re-wrote her biography so it's not connected anyway.

http://img213.imageshack.us/img213/2708/screen001pm2.jpg

MattTR
10-12-08, 12:52
Wow, I never knew this! I guess neither did CD. :p :p

This is very interesting though, here's the cutscene:

LLhoTFjXMk8

Lara's Backpack
10-12-08, 13:43
*************************************************
THIS THREAD CONTAINS SPOILERS OF LEGEND AND CHRONICLES!!
*************************************************

Hey

Ok - so ... I know this might sound absurd, but yesterday I suddenly noticed something. I don't know what everyone's reaction was at the end of "Tomb Raider: Legend" but I was really surprised that Lara's mother was somehow still alive (does that make me the stupidest Tomb Raider-fan all around or were there others who didn't see that one coming?).

But then it hit me! The fact that the mother of Lara Croft hadn't died so many years ago when Lara was still a little girl, shouldn't have been a surprise at all! You wanna know why? Because ... after Lara Croft allegedly died we see 3 people at the remembrance ceremony at the beginning of "Tomb Raider: Chronicles". The old man is butler Jeeves but there's also a couple which are of course the estranged father and mother of Lara Croft, right? So ........... Lara Croft's mother was alive and well and anyone could have seen this one coming from miles away, no?

............. unless off course the couple is not Lara's mother and father but just a couple that she ran into on one of ther many adventures of which she might even have saved their lives ...

What do you think, please? I would really like to know who those 2 people are ...

Bye for now

:vlol:

I actually 'lol'ed at that. I'm a Tomb Raider nerd afterall :jmp:

Ikas90
10-12-08, 15:59
This also gets me thinking of what comes first in the timeline. Tomb Raider I, or Tomb Raider Chronicles: Rome Episode. On Tomb Raider Wiki's timeline, it says that TRC's Rome episode comes before the TR1. Lara didn't know Larson and Pierre very well in TR1, but in TRC she knew exactly who they were. So how does TRC come before TR1?

Rivendell
10-12-08, 16:05
Lara didn't know Larson and Pierre very well in TR1, but in TRC she knew exactly who they were.

I guess that's down to simple mistake by the devs. However, listening to Lara's convo(s) with Larson in TR1, there's no real suggestion of whether or not she did or didn't know him beforehand. So she could have - and according to TRC, she did.

http://i36.************/1671fk8.jpg

Atlantisfreak666
10-12-08, 16:07
In the original Core storyline, Didn't Lara's parents abandon her? :confused:

Rivendell
10-12-08, 16:09
Yes, in a sense.
http://www.laracroft.tv/old_bio.html

:tmb:

Crisl
10-12-08, 16:11
I always thought that couple were Lara´s parents, so I was right! :jmp:
In her old biography, Lara´s parents were both alive, but she didn´t meet them very often... and in her new biography they are both dead and she´s desperate because of it. How ironic :whi:

Edit: Wow, I can hear Beethoven´s Moonlight Sonata in the cutscene posted above. I´ve never noticed that in the game! :eek:

TRhalloween
10-12-08, 16:12
When CD made a fresh start with Legend, they didn't take all those nagging bits into consideration because they're not important.

This also gets me thinking of what comes first in the timeline. Tomb Raider I, or Tomb Raider Chronicles: Rome Episode. On Tomb Raider Wiki's timeline, it says that TRC's Rome episode comes before the TR1. Lara didn't know Larson and Pierre very well in TR1, but in TRC she knew exactly who they were. So how does TRC come before TR1?

She did.If you watch the opening scene she seems to know Larson very well. She didn't know about Natla though.

BTW did Piere just say "Bonjour!" when the car crashed? God, stereotypes!

TombRaiderCool
10-12-08, 16:12
In the original Core storyline, Didn't Lara's parents abandon her? :confused:
In the Core Biography, after the plane crash her family disowned her after rebelling against what was expected of her as an aristocrat. :)

Sifo-Dyas
10-12-08, 17:55
In my humble opinion, it's clear that the Larson and Pierre-adventure of Chronicles comes after Tomb Raider 1 and I'll tell you why.

When Lara Croft first meets Larson, there is a clear distance between the two. You can see that they never talked to each other before. Lara Croft doesn't approach Larson sensing he is not to be trusted. Look at the very first conversation between Lara and Larson:
(Lara is reading a magazine which shows a picture of her hunting down the Bigfoot)
Larson: "What's a man gotta do to get thát kinda attention from ya?"
Lara: "It's hard to say exactly. Bút you seem to be doing alright."
Larson: "Ow. Well: it ain't me that want ya."
Lara:" Oh?"
Larson: "No. Jacqueline Natla does from Natla Technologies. You know? Creator of all things bright and beautiful. Hahahahaha!"
Natla: "Seal it, Larson."
Larson: "Ma'am."

So you see: this is a normal conversation between 2 people. Then of course: they fight each other and the conversation becomes much more nervous which ends with Larson trying to go for a surprise-hit but he still ends up severly wounded. That's right!! Severly wounded, but not dead by far.
Because not that much later, Larson ánd Pierre return.

Now, let me tell you something which is utterly irreversible. The alleged death of Pierre and Larson in Tomb Raider 1 were from gunshot wounds. They were shot down by Lara Croft but obviously not dead.
Bécause in Chronicles they return and the way they are terminated over there is fár worse than in TR1. Larson gets picked up by some monster, nearly bitten in half and thrown away like a doll (after which he vanishes from the scene once you're given control again of Lara Croft; which is ANOTHER proof that Larson is most definitely dead.) And Pierre falls down hundreds of yards ... I mean: réééaally deep ... and finally he breaks something (probably his neck amongst many other things) and dies.

Last but not least: Lara récognizes both Larson and Pierre and the 2 are afraid of Lara Croft (as they should be). Why? Because of earlier close encounters with her.

It all makes sense if you think that TRC comes after TR1. It absolutely doésn't make any sense if you think that TR1 comes after TRC.

At least ... that's how I feel about it, eh? ;)

Bye for now

godmodder
10-12-08, 18:38
BTW did Piere just say "Bonjour!" when the car crashed? God, stereotypes!

Actually, I think he says "Bon dieux!", which means "Good God!" or something in English. Stereotypes, eh? ;)

BTW: what a cozy study they are sitting in at the mansion! What mansion are they in exactly? I never knew the study was behind that left door in the main hall...

lara_bond
10-12-08, 20:00
butler jeeves? what about winston!

Sifo-Dyas
10-12-08, 21:14
butler jeeves? what about winston!

LOL! :D

Right! That's what I meant! Funny stuff! :D

So ... does my explanation of why TRC HAS to come after TR1 make ány sense at all, or not?

Any responses would be great, you know? ;)

thx

Bye for now

Ward Dragon
10-12-08, 22:02
It all makes sense if you think that TRC comes after TR1. It absolutely doésn't make any sense if you think that TR1 comes after TRC.

I agree, although I guess it doesn't matter anymore since Lara's life was essentially rebooted. If any of TR2-6 even happened in the new timeline then they probably happened differently (just look at TRA compared to TR1).

BTW: what a cozy study they are sitting in at the mansion! What mansion are they in exactly? I never knew the study was behind that left door in the main hall...

I thought it was the secret room from TR3, but the architecture doesn't make sense since it's in the wrong place.

Shark_Blade
11-12-08, 00:13
Was her mother. Anyone got her picture from trc?

Camera Obscura
11-12-08, 00:25
In my humble opinion, it's clear that the Larson and Pierre-adventure of Chronicles comes after Tomb Raider 1 and I'll tell you why.

When Lara Croft first meets Larson, there is a clear distance between the two. You can see that they never talked to each other before. Lara Croft doesn't approach Larson sensing he is not to be trusted. Look at the very first conversation between Lara and Larson:
(Lara is reading a magazine which shows a picture of her hunting down the Bigfoot)
Larson: "What's a man gotta do to get thát kinda attention from ya?"
Lara: "It's hard to say exactly. Bút you seem to be doing alright."
Larson: "Ow. Well: it ain't me that want ya."
Lara:" Oh?"
Larson: "No. Jacqueline Natla does from Natla Technologies. You know? Creator of all things bright and beautiful. Hahahahaha!"
Natla: "Seal it, Larson."
Larson: "Ma'am."

So you see: this is a normal conversation between 2 people. Then of course: they fight each other and the conversation becomes much more nervous which ends with Larson trying to go for a surprise-hit but he still ends up severly wounded. That's right!! Severly wounded, but not dead by far.
Because not that much later, Larson ánd Pierre return.

Now, let me tell you something which is utterly irreversible. The alleged death of Pierre and Larson in Tomb Raider 1 were from gunshot wounds. They were shot down by Lara Croft but obviously not dead.
Bécause in Chronicles they return and the way they are terminated over there is fár worse than in TR1. Larson gets picked up by some monster, nearly bitten in half and thrown away like a doll (after which he vanishes from the scene once you're given control again of Lara Croft; which is ANOTHER proof that Larson is most definitely dead.) And Pierre falls down hundreds of yards ... I mean: réééaally deep ... and finally he breaks something (probably his neck amongst many other things) and dies.

Last but not least: Lara récognizes both Larson and Pierre and the 2 are afraid of Lara Croft (as they should be). Why? Because of earlier close encounters with her.

It all makes sense if you think that TRC comes after TR1. It absolutely doésn't make any sense if you think that TR1 comes after TRC.

At least ... that's how I feel about it, eh? ;)

Bye for now

For these reasons I always list Rome AFTER TR1 as well. This cutscene is what I go by though. As you can see, this wouldn't be the first time Larson has ambushed Lara.

vE-i1jYM2PE

If you take into account the number of times he's ambushed her in Tomb Raider 1 and Chronicles then his comment would be justified. If you place TRC before TR1 then he's only ambushed her once, which wouldn't warrant the remarks they make in the scene.

:)

InVisibleLight
11-12-08, 05:07
It's a continuity error, CORE made. TRC unfolded in flashbacks and that segment with Larson/Pierre was supposed to be a flashback.. Whether you place if before or after, them dying in in TR1, TRA and TRC are continuity errors.

Still TR 1-3, TLR, TRC, AOD, Legend, Anniversary & Underworld are all part of the official canon storyline.

the movies & comics were separate continuity.

Sifo-Dyas
11-12-08, 11:55
If any of TR2-6 even happened in the new timeline then they probably happened differently (just look at TRA compared to TR1).

I don't know what other people think of this, but I love all Tomb Raider-games and as such: I have come up with a storyline that combines all those great videogames (and even the 2 movies) together. As for TRA ... Lara Croft was sucked back into time through a huge vortex where she had to endure her worst nightmare all over again which brought her back to 1996 - this was her punishment for releasing the Egyptian God Seth. According to Egyptian legend, if you unleash an Egyptian God, you'll have to deal with that God's punishment.

It may not be the best explanation as to why Lara Croft goes through the same adventure twice, but TRA is way too different from TR1 to choose between either games. :)

Bye for now

InVisibleLight
12-12-08, 20:54
TRA was expanded storywise by Toby Gard, to tell the story "they were trying to tell in the first place" as said on the Anniversary DVD

Camera Obscura
12-12-08, 21:36
TRA was expanded storywise by Toby Gard, to tell the story "they were trying to tell in the first place" as said on the Anniversary DVD

Oh yes because Lara was searching for her missing mother in Avalon like in the original. :rolleyes:

TRA was an attempt of "re-imagining" a game but implementing it to fit into CD's current storyline. Hitting two stones with one bird was a pretty cheap move in my opinion.

(And yes, I'm fully aware I said two stones with one bird.)

Changeling
13-12-08, 10:43
Still TR 1-3, TLR, TRC, AOD, Legend, Anniversary & Underworld are all part of the official canon storyline.
TR1-3, TLR, TRC & AoD are part of Core's official canon storyline.

TRA, TRL & TRU are part of Crystal's official canon storyline.

Core and Crystal's storylines are both different. Core's official canon storyline was to be ignored once Crystal took over the series, and Crystal's storyline is to be ignored if you replay Core's games. :)

ANYWAY :p I always thought it was her parents standing there. I mean, they may have disowned her, but it's still their daughter; the least they could do was pay their respects. :D

And, btw, I always thought that TRC happened before TR1... when Larson was flung across the garden and vanished when you played as Lara again, I thought that he just ran away. And when Pierre falls, I thought he broke his leg, not his neck. And I'm sure I read in a handbook (or something like that) somewhere which had Lara writing down her thoughts before her adventure in Rome, she said she was going to meet two gentlemen named Pierre and Larson, and it was like she had never met them before.

Oh, and didn't Lara's adventure in Ireland happen before she went on the expedition to Cambodia with Von Croy? I always thought that the events in Ireland was what made her want to become an adventurer, so then she demanded to go on the expedition with Von Croy because it had... well, exploration and adventuring in it. :p