Underworld Follows The Footsteps Of The Angel Of Darkness [Archive]

Mr.Bouncer

25-01-09, 16:22

Tomb Raider Underworld
The Game We've Impatiently Waited For

Since the official announcement of TR:U in Jan.31.2009 till the release date, the hype about TR:U was growing larger and larger by the release of each little piece of art or info or music from the game, until the announcement of the 360 DLC when many people wanted to boycott TR:U as the Tomb Raider franchise always been a Sony PlayStation exclusive aside the PC versions and Gold extensions of some of the classic TRs but the still the hype was too high to get the game down only by preferring the 360 over others.

But when the game was released and many players who played the game on different platforms experienced minor and major bugs, Specially the Wii version which was almost a complete failure, but Eidos / CD wanted to fix them with Patches although not all of these glitches were fixed with the Wii Patch, while PS3 users didn't have ANY update for the game or DLC or anything else (without discussing reasons) but there weren't that much of major bugs for the PS3 (according to my PS3 experience) but the major problem which all users faced even the preferred 360 version users was that the game wasn't as big and epic as it was supposed to be as well as being as short as Legend (or a little bit longer) not the DOUBLE as Eric Lindstrom (The Ex-Creative Director) previously and numerously announced in several interviews.

Many people (including me) were named Whiners and some even got BANNED here as we started to complain about the Eric Lindstrom and CD employees as the game was below expectations if you look at it from certain angles but now Eidos itself fired 30 of these employees including Eric Lindstrom (Last Friday) because of the LOW SALES RATE that was obvious after the HUGE complaints written on forums and blogs beside Reviews of Magazines and Gaming & Entertainment Sites.

Rumors started to fly from fansites & forums claiming that Tomb Raider : Underworld was RUSHED and trimmed to be released in time, and they wanted to cover the major trimming effect with DLC for the 360.

And today I found this article online on TombRaiderChronicles.Com concerning the DLC and some official info about them by Eric Lindstrom and his two colleagues who knew everything about this subject : ERIC LINDSTROM DEFENDS DLC CONTENT (http://www.tombraiderchronicles.com/headlines3594.html)

And a good friend of mine who's here on this forum with us have made an outstanding thread listing the material that were omitted from TR:U due to unknown reasons some are slight and others are major 'A Whole Part Of The Jan Mayen Island Was Removed Featuring BikeRide Outside The Ruins".

Here's the link to that thread : All Things That Were Omitted From TR:U by : _Tomb_Raider_ (http://www.tombraiderforums.com/showthread.php?t=144086)

All in all, after the huge hype and amazing work on renders and trailers which successfully managed to positively electrify us since Jan.1.2008 till the release day just like what happened with The Angel Of Darkness which we've spent 3 years waiting for and then it turned to contain numerous bugs (although it had a very Epic plan and storyline) and half of the game was omitted to be released in time which was the reason to fire Core from the development of another Tomb Raider part.

So finally Tomb Raider : Underworld almost followed the same footsteps of The Angel Of Darkness.

I wonder what will Eidos plans be this time ? will they give another chance to CD to re-invent another TR which is Well Planned and Programed ? or the rumors about UbiSoft or E.A. buying Eidos and continuing The Tomb Raider Franchise ?

This articles (which is also posted in another thread talks about the official dismissing of 30 Employees of CD including Eric Linstrom and an indirect announcement of "Another Tomb Raider".

EIDOS CULLS WORKFORCE, LOOKS AHEAD (http://www.tombraiderchronicles.com/headlines3593.html)

IceColdLaraCroft

25-01-09, 16:26

I don't know about the rest of you, but I'd rather have the game be delayed (as it's something we're actually used to with TR) than have gotten parts of it cut and then redist. as exclusive DLC.

Mr.Bouncer

25-01-09, 16:29

I don't know about the rest of you, but I'd rather have the game be delayed (as it's something we're actually used to with TR) than have gotten parts of it cut and then redist. as exclusive DLC.

I totally agree with you ...
they've also removed an amazing option which was already added in the Beta version which was Using the camera to take screenshots from the game and even timed photo shoot so that u can get Lara in front of the camera !!!!! (the beta the testers used on 360 NOT the one released on XBL or for PC)

MattTR

25-01-09, 16:31

Since the official announcement of TR:U in Jan.31.2009

Hmm? 2008 you mean? :D

But the hype has died down, and the commotion about the DLC and all the other problems (glitches, how it was rushed, plot/story) has now died down, I don't think I'm ready for another heated discussion.. :(

ajrich17901

25-01-09, 16:33

I would have rather they had an extra 4 months to get rid of the bugs, and also so they wouldnt have to cut anything. But thats eidos they rush every TR out in time to make huge $$. But you are right this was AOD all over again, and it sucks to go through it again, im surprised the reviewers didnt rip apart this game like they did AOD.

IceColdLaraCroft

25-01-09, 16:45

I think the story was a lot better played out than AOD, i can see similar issues (that eidos never learned from), but it wasn't as BAD as AoD. I would have liked to have less bugs and better options (replay the level).

I dont understand this "we need to get it out on time" regardless of when the game is released it's going to make money. It's Tomb Raider...there are always going to be people that buy the game. Part of the reason it didn't do so well was that people kept saying how short it was and that there weren't any boss battles.

Probably issues that were related to it being pushed out of the gate because of a deadline.

conorcroft2001

25-01-09, 16:50

AOD was crap.

Simple as that.

Don't compare the 2 games.

Underworld was better.

Conor

ajrich17901

25-01-09, 16:52

AOD was crap.

Simple as that.

Don't compare the 2 games.

Underworld was better.

Conor

Opinions differ AOD actualy has a huge fanbase so yea.
Also what realy urks me is that eidos actualy made it that no poor review for underworld could be published till after the first week it was out.

toxicraider

25-01-09, 16:54

AoD has a better storyline and gameplay feel imo, it's just the controls and glitches were a bit awksome.

Mr.Bouncer

25-01-09, 16:56

Opinions differ AOD actualy has a huge fanbase so yea.
Also what realy urks me is that eidos actualy made it that no poor review for underworld could be published till after the first week it was out.

AoD has a better storyline and gameplay feel imo, it's just the controls and glitches were a bit awksome.

Exactly ... and AOD wasn't crappy at all ...

ajrich17901

25-01-09, 16:58

Exactly ... and AOD wasn't crappy at all ...

Na, AOD was just a tarnished masterpiece, people just like to make it out to be worse then it realy was. The story was amazing and the soundtrack was friken amazing.

IceColdLaraCroft

25-01-09, 17:06

This isn't an AoD thread this is meant to chat about how it was "rushed" into production and things were taken out to make it less Epic.

Megalith

25-01-09, 17:08

im surprised the reviewers didnt rip apart this game like they did AOD.

Maybe Eidos spend some of that 90 million propaganda in the right places/pockets...:whi:

Mr.Bouncer

25-01-09, 17:14

Na, AOD was just a tarnished masterpiece, people just like to make it out to be worse then it realy was. The story was amazing and the soundtrack was friken amazing.

do u remember Alex C. (feat Yasmin K.) - Angel Of Darkness ? it was AWESOME the song I daily play on my 8GB iPod Touch :tea:

and about the game being RUSHED well it was ... and the 360 exclusive DLC made fans more furious about the game ... even the marketing was all wrong as most sales went to PS3 version while DLC were for 360 so not so many will buy the DLC

Kiss-Bite

25-01-09, 18:04

Tomb Raider Underworld
The Game We've Impatiently Waited For

[B]A Whole Part Of The Jan Mayen Island Was Removed Featuring BikeRide Outside The Ruins".

]

I've just played the PS2 version & that missing section I think was in the ps2 version, an icy assault course up the side of the mountain that Lara has to navigate on the motorbike.:D

I just hope the next TR game is released only when it has been play tested enough, bugs Ironed out & the finished product is a solid polished one. I know game development has deadlines & budgets & publishers have targets etc.. but releasing a game that feels like a beta does harm in the long run.

Annoying as a delay in a games release can be usually it's better for it in the long run. AOD had a great story, great music & there was a good game underneath the flaws, shame really. It felt more unfinished then buggy to me, where as TRU shocked me with the amount of bugs & glitches it had!:confused:

irjudd

25-01-09, 18:05

For me, AOD was a massive letdown, while Underworld was a slight letdown.

When I first heard of this awesome "Tomb Raider Next Gen!" coming out I was so excited to see something of a direct continuation of the cliffhanger in Last Revelation. What happens to Lara that she escapes entombment in Egypt???

But what we got was a buggy unfinished game that barely even touched on those events and instead focused on some convoluted theory about Nephilim.

Underworld on the other hand gave me expectations of "Being better than Legend!" and what we got was a game better than Legend.

Zebra

25-01-09, 18:05

If Underworld would've followed in AoD's footsteps it would actually be good ;). But it didn't so it isn't.

Squibbly

25-01-09, 18:14

I don't think these two games can even be compared. Underworld didn't share all of the same massive faults AoD had. It had it's problems, but it generally did well for the most part.

_Tomb_Raider

25-01-09, 18:17

I've just played the PS2 version & that missing section I think was in the ps2 version, an icy assault course up the side of the mountain that Lara has to navigate on the motorbike.:D

Yeah, but in ps2 verson you have the road, but originaly it was suppose to be a kid off open world...:( Well atleas you got somethink!

And yeah, AOD was great game and it just died...same with TRU, great game and now what is happening!:(

cardmonster

25-01-09, 18:19

I don't know about the rest of you, but I'd rather have the game be delayed (as it's something we're actually used to with TR) than have gotten parts of it cut and then redist. as exclusive DLC.
I entirely agree, but that wasn't a financially viable proposition. Eidos / Crystal Dynamics needed to make a return on their investment, and the game needed to be released when it was. In the words of a wiser man, games are never finished, they are simply released.

Angelus

25-01-09, 18:23

Na, AOD was just a tarnished masterpiece, people just like to make it out to be worse then it realy was. The story was amazing and the soundtrack was friken amazing.

But the gameplay (which is important in y'know, a game) was awful.

Hairhelmet12

25-01-09, 18:24

But the gameplay (which is important in y'know, a game) was awful.

How was it awful? it wasent even that bad! And if you say she ran like she was under water, she dident.

If Underworld would've followed in AoD's footsteps it would actually be good ;). But it didn't so it isn't.

Exactly! Well said.

I dont think though that Underworld was that bad, it swasent as glitchy eather, but i never really had any problems with glitches in AOD So i wouldent really know. but there are some hilarious, annoying, glitches in TRU.

TRWii

25-01-09, 18:25

How many times must this be said? Nothing was cut out of the game.

The process of development involves many different ideas, some that are used, some that aren't. Just because something is rendered or played around with doesn't mean it was "cut" from the game for some malicious purpose. As Eric Lindstrom said, the bike area outside of Valhalla was extremely problematic even for the programmers. It added frustration to the experience so it was excised.

The logic on this message board is astounding. By the same token, we should list everything that was suggested in the first developer's meeting about "Underworld" that didn't end up in the game.

This is so tiresome. Maybe the franchise should just die... Some of the fan base is awful.

Angelus

25-01-09, 18:27

She didn't run like she was underwater... she ran like a tank.

Do we really have to get into the five year old AoD argument?

Hairhelmet12

25-01-09, 18:29

She didn't run like she was underwater... she ran like a tank.

Do we really have to get into the five year old AoD argument?

*sigh* as tempting as it is...no..Not in this thread unfortunately...

Even though i never faced any glitches that stoped me from compleating the game, just that horrendous boss battle with kurtis and the and that bos thing cant remember the name, god the aiming thing i couldent figure out...

Squibbly

25-01-09, 18:30

She didn't run like she was underwater... she ran like a tank.

Do we really have to get into the five year old AoD argument?

My favourite way to describe Lara's movements in AoD is like a shopping cart full of bricks with a broken wheel on top of melted butter and marbles. :(
On the PS2 version at least. Ugh. lol

Hairhelmet12

25-01-09, 18:33

My favourite way to describe Lara's movements in AoD is like a shopping cart full of bricks with a broken wheel on top of melted butter and marbles. :(
On the PS2 version at least. Ugh. lol

LMFAO! i never thought it was that bad.. even though i was probly..7 or 8 arountd that time i think...it wasent that bad for me.

Squibbly

25-01-09, 18:34

LMFAO! i never thought it was that bad.. even though i was probly..7 or 8 arountd that time i think...it wasent that bad for me.

lol, did you ever replay it?

Hairhelmet12

25-01-09, 18:37

lol, did you ever replay it?

Yeah ive replayed it since then...why?

I remember i was so sad when i beat the game, cause i was up alone and everyone was in bed and i had no one to tell :( and a nother reason i was sad there was no stinkin replay level!

TRWii

25-01-09, 18:37

My favourite way to describe Lara's movements in AoD is like a shopping cart full of bricks with a broken wheel on top of melted butter and marbles. :(
On the PS2 version at least. Ugh. lol

Haha, yup. I rented the game for PS2 recently to see if it was really THAT bad... I couldn't even get past the Parisian roofs. The controls were that terrible.

Squibbly

25-01-09, 18:38

Yeah ive replayed it since then...why?

Because you said you were 7 or 8 and never noticed, so I was just wondering if you had played it since then because I never stopped running into these issues. :p Ah well.

I still don't think these two games can be compared in any way.

mizuno_suisei

25-01-09, 18:40

AOD didnt take me 5hours to complete :rolleyes: and the bug comparison..far out. If Crystal ever touched AOD (Whether it be Remake or continuation) There would then be no one left at CD to build :) Im no AOD fanboy (TR2 Fanboy :D ) But I don't see how anyone can seriously think TRU is any better than AOD whatsoever.

TRWii How many times must this be said? Nothing was cut out of the game.
I'm sorry, but if that sentance had a face, I'd laugh in it.

Hairhelmet12

25-01-09, 18:41

Because you said you were 7 or 8 and never noticed, so I was just wondering if you had played it since then.

Oh yeah, well i can remember playing it for the first time and beign so happy (well, i was happy with any TR game then, LOL) and i never had any glitches with stoped me from completing the game. guess i was lucky. i never found the dual pistols it said in the guide i went around that room for 20 min like "WHERE ARE THAY?!" latter to find out when i found this forum thay where never in the game, when i finished theg ame for the first time i was like "But where were the dual pistols? :("

cardmonster

25-01-09, 18:41

LMFAO! i never thought it was that bad.. even though i was probly..7 or 8 arountd that time i think...it wasent that bad for me.
I enjoyed it at the time, and was something of an apologist on the Eidos message boards. Time hasn't been kind to it however, and while playable enough it highlights the awkwardness of marrying the original control scheme with cinematic camera angles. The game didn't have any real direction as its developers strived to satisfy the wide-ranging demands of its investors, ultimately satisfying none. Underworld could not be accused of making the same mistakes and the series is better for it.

But I don't see how anyone can seriously think TRU is any better than AOD whatsoever.
I can, largely because it is.

TRWii

25-01-09, 18:45

AOD didnt take me 5hours to complete :rolleyes: and the bug comparison..far out. If Crystal ever touched AOD (Whether it be Remake or continuation) There would then be no one left at CD to build :) Im no AOD fanboy (TR2 Fanboy :D ) But I don't see how anyone can seriously think TRU is any better than AOD whatsoever.

TRWii
I'm sorry, but if that sentance had a face, I'd laugh in it.

I think it's funnier that you like AOD is better than Underworld.

And if you read my whole post, you would understand what I meant when I said nothing was cut out.

mizuno_suisei

25-01-09, 18:49

Yes I did read your whole post. But ofcourse they created stuff and cut it out, it happens with every game.

Cardmonster,

Yeah, we obviously have different opinions. I guess I'm just a major fan of Core's Tomb Raiders. I was just very dissapointed that the last 3 games didnt live up to what Core gave me.

Alex Fly

25-01-09, 18:49

Underworld follows undoubtedly the footsteps of AOD... I'm not going to compare Underworld to AOD as it's not the whole point of this thread (even if several persons have already turned it into a Underworld vs AOD war but I'm not surprised).

I've stopped following the Underworld news after the first trailer as I wanted the game to be a complete surprise for me. The game seemed promising and everyone was excited about it.

Then the announcement about the exclusive 360 DLC has been made and made a big part of the fans disappointed (like the majority of us aren't 360 players).
I personally have been disgusted about this announcement and this has killed a lot my impatience for Underworld.

Then the game came and despite some bad points I have to say I really enjoyed it but at the same time I was expecting something else too, something more spectacular etc... something very different.

And finally we've discovered the truth when the 30 employees from Crystal Dynamics have been fired, Eidos is behind all of this.

Like usual it's Eidos who have taken some bad decisions, rushed CD to release a game as soon as possible because for them quantity (I mean by numbers of Tomb Raider games : 1 game / year) is important than quality.

Several additional months of development could have been a lot better for Underworld, and I already thought the same thing for Anniversary.

Instead of rushing CD, making some exclusive DLC available only for 1 single platform and taking other rubbish decisions, try to release decent games Eidos and let the developers take their time to do their job !

Underworld is already the 9th Tomb Raider game that has been released and apparently Eidos didn't take any lessons from all their previous mistakes.
When are you going to wake up guys ? I mean, seriously ??

So after having played Underworld, read each news about the DLC and followed the various important discussions here, I feel exactly like I felt after AOD (even if this time it's not for the same reasons).
I have enough of everything, I feel tired about the franchise, I don't even know if I'm still a fan to be honest, I'm lost. And I'm very unhappy too !
I think really a break is necessary (a couple of years) and that the next Tomb Raider game should be radically different from what we have seen till now.
Oh, and I wouldn't mind a new publisher too !

You will have to do a lot to regain my faith Eidos, but I'm afraid it's too late for that. You disappointed me too much and now you have pratically killed my interest for Tomb Raider. So thank you and congratulations for that, your company has no longer my support. Enough is enough ! :wve:

I wish the best to Crystal Dynamics for the future, and I hope this time Eidos will give them all the time they need to make a Tomb Raider worthy of its name.

Hairhelmet12

25-01-09, 18:50

Yeah stuff was cut out of the game, but, you get that in ANY game its not like thay take stuff out ofonly tomb raider, that makes stuff for the game, have a disscusion, if thay dont like, that toss it out! its nothing new here people!

mizuno_suisei

25-01-09, 18:51

If you were directing that at me HairHelmet12, then you basically copied my post.

Tear

25-01-09, 18:53

AOD was crap.

Simple as that.

Don't compare the 2 games.

Underworld was better.

Well said.:)

Sekhraider

25-01-09, 19:24

The only thing i would compare in these two disasterous games, would be gameplay (TRU) vs storyline (AOD). Til this day, I have played AOD at least 3 or 4 times and I have played TRU only once. I doubt that I will ever play TRU in its entirety again unless I am extremely bored.

I find this interesting though. AOD had superb storyline. The gameplay wasnt too good and a bit slow at times. TRU had an okay storyline but some of it did not make sense. Gameplay was really good but too short. Everything was solved in cutscenes. The player really didnt have the freedom to investigate the story like AOD did. I would've liked to see TRU with more time to battle some of these vilians once and for all. I would've also loved to see a real ending and not some open-ended anti-climatic one. For me, I believed and loved the idea of the ancient race of, Nephilim looking to revitalize their culture (AOD). It had the plot and it had that spookiness and suspense. If you didnt like the gameplay, AOD made it up in some really good storylines within the game.

TRU, however, I did not like the idea of bringing Natla back b/c I felt her story was already done and I would've liked to see someone else come back from her time and just as lethal. Maybe Tihocan or something. For me, I felt TRU was just compiled of what fans what to see. Yes we all wanted to see what Avalon was like, where Lara's mom really was, and how everything was connected. Instead we got some stuff that looked like it was pieced together. When I say this, I mean the locations and how mythologically it did not make sense for Lara to be travelling to these places to find evidence about Avalon. I didnt understand the merging of the myths about Atlantis and Avalon together. These places really existed in different times altogether. See if CD had really weaved something tremendous together to make this plausible, I would've no doubt believed it. But honestly it seemed like various ideas thrown together with Natla and Amanda on the side. In this sense, I think this was why TRU failed in my book. There were too many stories going on within this game. Lara looking for her mother and the truth about Avalon but then finding out that Natla was involved so now she had to make a connection with Atlantis too and deal with her ex-friendship with Amanda. I mean thats tooo much. Its like the 3rd movie in the Matrix. Tooooooo much stuff going on. At least with AOD, it was plain and simple, Lara was looking for the killer of her mentor and along the way she uncovers a plan by some mysterious people to bring back this ancient race of Nephilim to bring some type of apocalypse.

This is the true thing about Core's games, they had great story and mystery. As the player, you were discovering things with Lara. And Lara didnt always know what she was getting into. Everything really was a mystery for her. And that made it cool. With CD, however, everything was already put out there for the player. So there was no mystery from the beginning. You knew everything. So really is was the gameplay that made CD's games worth playing. Their TRL did have potential b/c they brought the whole excalibur/Avalon idea to the franchise and it seemed promising. It was exciting. TRA was a let down b/c once again the mystery was gone and everthing was changed.

If CD does make another TR game, I would really love to see them try to make an original story that has mystery and suspense in it. Their gameplay is great, all they need to make a solid and valid story not something compiled together to make something. I want to really see what they can do. And I hope Eidos gives CD time to work out the kinks and mistakes b/c I will not be picking up another TR game if its crazy and disasterous as TRU. That game had a lot of potential and it just didnt crazy everything through. Oh well...

conorcroft2001

25-01-09, 19:41

Well said.:)

Woo-hoo lol.

Someone with a bit of sense!

AOD had a great score, decent graphics and an ok story.

But she moved like a forklift truck (thought of Legend for a second lol and even that forklift truck moved better than AOD Lara). The controls for PC and PS2 were abysmal.

Underworld was and is in a completely different league to AOD in terms of quality, gameplay, story and score etc.

Conor

conorcroft2001

25-01-09, 19:43

TRU had an okay storyline but some of it did not make sense.

Read a bit up on Norse Mythology and it will make sense to you.

Read the in-game journals too.

That's what I did.

Made it all much clearer.

It was an excellent story.

Conor

Seb_01225

25-01-09, 19:46

tbh i like underworld, and aod, they are both good, but the thing i don't understand about all the glitches that are in these two games, i've never encountered any in aod from start to finish, same with Underworld.

they're both good games, the only thing that i didn't find that great about underworld was the storyline as there have been alot better in the past

Evan C.

25-01-09, 20:08

Both TRU and TRAOD where bad games,the difference is that their mistakes are different.

Sekhraider

25-01-09, 20:27

Read a bit up on Norse Mythology and it will make sense to you.

Read the in-game journals too.

That's what I did.

Made it all much clearer.

It was an excellent story.

Conor

Thats the point, I shouldnt have to read a journal to find the answers. If Lara is reading hieroglyphs on walls to discover more about Norse mythology why do we already begin the game knowing almost half of what we're supposed to be discovering? In the Core games, these locations Lara found were new not only to her but to the player as well. We discovered things with her and that was exciting. In the CD games, its like she already knew everything about the locations even the fact that, there were Norse relics underneath the Shiva/Kali ruins. How would she know that if she had never been there? I do not neccessarily like to take time out to read journals in a game. The one in TRA was ridiculous b/c Lara already knew about the location of all three rulers' tombs, that doesnt make sense when she is visiting this place for the first time. I think this is b/c her father was an explorer (according to CD) and saw all these places leaving his daughter a journal. I also did not agree with this. According to Core's bio, Lara's parents had nothing to do with exploring or excavating at all. So therefore everything Lara ever discovered was entirely brand new. What ruins the fun is already knowing what youre going to be discovering and this made for a non-tomb raiderish feeling for me.

I do find Norse mythology very intriguing but my question is what does it have to do with Atlantis and Avalon? If you read into mythology that pertains to Norse and other cultures mentioned in TRU, there is no similarity b/w what Vikings called "Avalon" as apposed to what the Maya believed was "Avalon" or the cultures of Thailand. Like I said, these were ideas that were thrown together to make some type of sense for a game. And they did not. Read some info from www.pantheon.org or Encyclopedia Mythica. There's some good material. One thing to note is Between Norse and Maya mythology, there is a mentioning of 9 levels of Hell or the Underworld. And with Avalon, Morgan who helps to heal Arthur, is joined by 9 underworld maidens in doing so. So if anything I think making the connection of the number 9 would've helped the TRU connection:

http://www.pantheon.org/articles/r/ragnarok.html
http://www.pantheon.org/articles/u/underworld.html
http://www.pantheon.org/articles/h/helheim.html
http://www.pantheon.org/articles/a/avalon.html

Overall, TRU was not entirely a bad game, but I think that throwing too many ideas into one game makes for a bad and confusing experience. The only thing that made me not return the game was some of the level design and some of the features. But I was not amused by the lack of replay value, unlockable features, or the rushed ending.

Wow, no offense but that text (first post) was quite painful to read, not due to the content but due to some of the poor grammar and sentence structure.

Full stops go at the end of sentences, not paragraphs.

Aye ya ya. There fixed. ;) None offense taken. I do like to write a lot but grammar sometimes does get the best of me. :)

SailorTaurus

25-01-09, 20:51

Wow, no offense but that text (first post) was quite painful to read, not due to the content but due to some of the poor grammar and sentence structure.

Full stops go at the end of sentences, not paragraphs. ;)

tombraider123

25-01-09, 20:59

I do like TRU but in my opinion it can't touch the amazing game that is AoD.:jmp:

krycekuva

25-01-09, 21:12

what? you are comparing a stretched stroy from TRA-TRL-TRU with the incomplete TRAOD? AOD with 2 arts missing, gives much more info and interesting points to discuss than the three last parts did. its true that AOD hag glitches, but that's it. theres nothing else story/location/characterwise wrong with the left overs from AOD. indeed those few elements left are many times better than the same new trilogy elements.

sadly its true that the effect overall is the same. unhappy people playing an unfinished over expensive game...:mad:

belter_21

25-01-09, 21:14

"Many people (including me) were named Whiners and some even got BANNED here"

mmm let's just say I don't like Bjork's "Army Of One" anymore ;)

@ the grammar kings, lol

Zebra

25-01-09, 21:45

I can, largely because it is.

What exactly do you think is better in TRU and why?

KIKO

25-01-09, 21:46

There are always big hypes for every tomb raider game and in most of the times it doesn't corespond to what you'd expect.

Comparing AOD to TRU, well there's something very different about them:
Core planned it to be big.
Crystal planned it to be short.

Core always planned challenge.
Crystal always plans fun + a bit of puzzling just to no let it dry out.

Core planned the confusing and hard.
Crystal planned the beaultiful and easy.

Nowadays games don't bring challenge anymore but fun. Thankfully there is a large amount of exception :p

AOD had a great story and so did TRU but AOD was more detailed.
AOD failed in gameplay, TRU didn't ok. But it failed on lenght and AOD didn't.

I think TRU didn't follow the same footsteps. They just spent more time doing it and that told something to fan's mids which raised the expectactives.
Magazines do that all the time. Get durt, slippery ledges, mini puzzles part of large puzzles, more than a dozen of ways to reach bhogavati :p OMG magazines, well they're a bunch of liars.

Cochrane

25-01-09, 22:00

TRU a second AOD? Frankly, this statement... well, it amuses me.

I think on the outset, yes, there is a certain similarity: Both have a lot of stupid bugs. However, AoD has several game-braking bugs, TRU not really. TRU is full of glitches, AoD has true bugs. I know there are people who pretend that there aren't any, since they've never seen them or weren't annoyed by them, but such selective vision isn't helping anyone when trying to be objective.

TRU's story, while horrible, was consistent and did not contain any unrealistic jumps. AoD, on the other hand, contains serious gaps (how did that Lara know that shape-shifter?) as well as oddities such as you receiving a gun less than five minutes before losing it in a cutscene again. In Underworld, the controls worked well (although I didn't like their general idea). Swim controls have even improved a lot over Legend, while I found controls in AoD were generally worse than in Chronicles (more sluggish, doing things I didn't want them to do). In terms of game length and challenge, Underworld was an improvement over Legend, which you can't say if you compare Angel of Darkness to The Last Revelation (seeing how Chronicles is just a clip-show). Underworld is poor on new gameplay ideas, but there is nothing sticking out as seriously wrong. Angel of Darkness... Well, I feel stronger now. Finally, double guns as well as level load times deserve a mention.

I realize some people like Angel of Darkness, and I can even see why some people like it better than Underworld, seeing how AoD had a story that was slightly less offensive and had more new (though failed) ideas. However, this thread is about how well the game was implemented. Angel of Darkness was not better executed than Underworld.

Dennis's Mom

25-01-09, 22:11

However, this thread is about how well the game was implemented. Angel of Darkness was not better executed than Underworld.

Agreed. From the agonizing slowdowns to being able to lie down with impunity during the final boss battle, AOD was frustration. No amount of interesting story, or cool cutscenes made the game fun to play. *sigh* And I soooo wanted it to be fun. :(

TRU is not perfect, but I had fun with most of it. I can't say I liked the bike, but then I don't think there's ever been a vehicle in TR I liked using. :D

belter_21

25-01-09, 22:22

AoD should have stayed true and been mainly about raiding...but it had one eye on Metal Gear Solid and keeping up with the new games of the (then) times...TR lost its soul with AoD; and never got it back - but TRA came very close with St.Francis Folly and TRU with one or two levels imo. We need a new game that is so good that people stop mentioning AoD...it is far from the yardstick.

Los Angeles

25-01-09, 22:26

Cochrane

25-01-09, 22:55

AoD failed in gameplay? No, dear. it didn't!!!

Underworld did, 'cause it didn't have any gameplay at all. But AoD - No! There were so many things you could do in AoD. In TRU you only could climb ledges... Puzzles were a joke in TRU...

Let's put things in perspective here. First of all, compare TRU not to AoD or any Core game, but to Legend and Anniversary. I think you'll find that gameplay has vastly improved, with more routes to a target, true confusing riddle-rooms and puzzles that actually nearly deserved the name. No, it doesn't come close to what Core did, but I doubt that this was ever the goal at all.

On the other hand, AoD didn't fail? Actually, AoD is full of failures, utter, terrible failures. Lara's leveling-up was just turned into an annoying puzzle element. Kurtis's special powers were also pretty useless, seeing how all they did was activate a cutscene in certain places. Getting money, selling and purchasing things was never used realistically. The betting on the box fight didn't work at all in any way. The many healing and weapon options only confused people, especially since even the Taser works at long range. All boss fights have some serious bug either for or against the player.

How was Underworld any failinger than Angel of Darkness in these areas?

Mr.Bouncer

26-01-09, 07:40

i like the way u put things together...
and ur ryt ... TR:L n TR:A were gr8 but TR:U wasn't ...
AOD had the same huge hype of TR:U but both failed in making this hype come to reality
and both games had many great parts which were removed due to unknown reason

krycekuva

26-01-09, 08:55

i dont know where to discuss this,.. but,.. what was the point on using debris?... not to ge lost in a entire linear game?... i think it was a waste of resourcess, and a stupid mention since the second half of the enemies where thralls, and you werent supposse the let them RIP by jumping/destroying them...

Mr.Bouncer

26-01-09, 11:10

I STRONGLY SUGGEST A REMAKE FOR TR:AOD
just to make the people who hate it know that AOD was so distinguished but never given the chance and never being given to the right hands and right conditions to rise up so it DOES need a Re-Invention and i think a great sequel or AOD-Based story can be made after the Remake.

me_myself_i

26-01-09, 13:55

I'm sorry - but are you all stupid?

This is TRF, probably one of the greatest TR forums online. The people here - you people - are the people that MATTER to the development of a game. And CD made both an immensely clever and immensely insane decision by listening to you for the latest outing of TR.

Underworld is a great game. It has great graphics, good music, and a fantastic storyline. A lot of research was obviously put into it, and I applaud - APPLAUD - CD for taking some risks with the story. For bringing Natla back, for killing Alistair, and for not reviving her mother. Do you realise how hard that is to do with a game that is this popular?

You've got to realise that you're NOT THE ONLY fans here. A bunch of other people love playing Tomb Raider too - whether they're housewives, or fifteen-year old emo kids, or businessmen in their spare time - they all count. Sure, they don't post on this forum 24/7, but that doesn't make them ANY LESS OF A FAN than you are. Their input into the game is just as important. And believe it or not, THEY WILL HAVE DIFFERENT OPINIONS. CD CANNOT RELEASE A GAME TAILORED INDIVIDUALLY FOR EACH OF YOU, and you should not expect them to do so.

After Legend was released, people complained ever so much about Zip and Alistair and the constant speaking, about the lack of tombs, about the lack of weaponry, etc etc. So what do CD do in Underworld? They remove Z/A, increase weapons, and virtually tie a story around exploring various tombs and legends and myths; the story is basically in essence a very solid TR game.

Sure, things were cut from the game. THAT HAPPENS WITH LOTS OF THINGS IN LIFE. Initially, when you start a project, you brainstorm. You WANT to make the game as amazing as possible. You think of all these cool things you can incorporate. And it being TR, and the opinion of fans being so important, you speak about all these things. You let people know.

Several months down the line, you have to reprioritise. Is it THAT important to have dynamic weather in a game where most time will be spent underground? No. That's the answer, and that 'no' is a decision worth lots of money. Like in films, and books, and yes, other games, cuts have to be made. It's not a personal attack against fans - it's not because the game "had to be rushed". Eidos have to make money - they cannot realistically delay TRU until they deem it "good enough to be complete", because by that point in time, they will have released TRU and have acquired enough feedback from it to be able to release an even better game.

Feedback and criticism, NOT complaints.

I understand that this is hard for you to understand, but Eidos is NOT out to make a game for you. Yes, some games like Uncharted, Assassin's Creed, etc etc have done it "better". What's "it", however? The ability to traverse a free-roaming world? That's as much TR as the FPS-style Mirror's Edge is.

It actually disturbs me to see this reaction from fans. From FANS!! People who are supposed to support the developer and not act like spoilt brats. I personally rank TRU among my favourite TR games. Some parts of it I really don't like, such as the Naga bit in Thailand, but I think the graphics are a really good upgrade, and that the storyline and gameplay have improved sufficiently.

Now, onto the DLC. If Microsoft, or Sony, or Nintendo came up to you and offered you £500k (fictitious sum of money) to use your existing engine and develop a level to promote their system, which answer will you choose?

a: Yes, thank you! *signs contract*
b: No. I will stay loyal to my fans.

Come on. It makes sense for Eidos to release this, and you know, it's time to be mature about it.

I have been a long-term reader of these forums, but the arrogance and stupidity of some people on it really irks me. TRU is a great game. It could have lasted longer, but it is currently incredibly replayable. Treasure Hunt, or just replaying the game... sure, there aren't many costumes, but this is not DRESS-UP LARA.

No doubt most of you will quote parts of this post - which was really heartfelt - and make a mockery, or protest, or say that I took you out of context or "the point is that-". At this stage I don't care. It's not Eidos that lost my trust; it's the people of TRF.

Rai

26-01-09, 15:22

TRU is a great game. It could have lasted longer, but it is currently incredibly replayable. Treasure Hunt, or just replaying the game... sure, there aren't many costumes, but this is not DRESS-UP LARA.

Although I agree with a lot of what you said, I wanted to highlight this point. Replayability shouldn't be about rewards. It should be 'Oh I liked that, let's do it again' kind of thing. The Core games were great games, and people play and replay over and over and for what?
Not rewards, because there weren't any, but because they enjoyed the game. TRL and TRA offered incentives/rewards for replay value but even after 100% people were still replaying them. I know I have. I haven't even finished TRU yet, but I know I'll replay it at some point.

Thank you for taking the time to make your very valid points. I see too much complaining when, a lot that was in TRU was asked for in the first place. :)

Unfortunately, it seems that complaining is the 'in' thing right now and no matter what Crystal do, there will always be those who disapprove.

Donnie901

26-01-09, 16:07

I totally agree with you me_myself_i!! :)

Cactusman

26-01-09, 16:11

I hope no one is seriously claiming that Underworld is as crap as AoD. If you do, then I seriously question if you ever played AoD...

Is underworld all it could have been? Probably not. But it's not a bad TR game by any means. And I still believe sales might have been much higher had it been released at another time, with or without the extra content.

Quasimodo

26-01-09, 16:27

No doubt most of you will quote parts of this post - which was really heartfelt - and make a mockery, or protest, or say that I took you out of context or "the point is that-". At this stage I don't care. It's not Eidos that lost my trust; it's the people of TRF.

What would you honestly expect after basically calling most of the forum a bunch of whinging children? And hey, you might as well be ready to take it if you're willing to dish it out.

Big whoop about the graphics, the storyline, and the sound - we're talking about a game, not some animated movie . All that stuff is nice, but it's not enough to make for a great game.

I suspect only a small handful of people are actually naive enough to assume that CD would tailor a game just to suit their specific demands. C'mon. And you come here yelling at us like we're all like that?

We're not the only fans? Well no ****.

If you've been active on the forums earlier this month, you'd know that even some CD employee(s) admit they made some mistakes. Take a look at the size of the bugs and glitches thread for this game - hell, we even have a tech support forum specifically for this game! I don't remember the past two games needing all that.

Love the game, hate the game - I don't care. I just get sick of folks marching in here and nagging us because we aren't being 'good fans'. :rolleyes:

Mr.Bouncer

26-01-09, 16:57

I'm sorry - but are you all stupid?

Excuse me ... are you a lawyer of CD or Eidos ?
and even if you were one you have no right to call any of us stupid

the game was messed up while it was amazing in Beta, u can check the link supplied at the first post of this thread and you'll know how many amazing things were cut out of the game, doesn't that make it similar to what happened to AOD ? and we don't want a tailored game we want a game that ALL people u mentioned with different opinions will like it just like MGS4 which no one was whining about it's programing or storyline or graphics are anything cuz it was WELL-DONE it took it's time to come out but it was really worth the wait.

but in TR:U we've waited so long (almost a year) but then the result wasn't even as strong as TR:L which took like 3 years ince AOD then it was A SMASH HIT from all side except for the SHORT gameplay but all the unlockables and the locations were new and stunning and enough to give the game a high lasting appeal.

but here it's just that u finished the game and found the EASY 6 relics n it's OVER even the treasure hunt isn't a big deal, the environment was pretty boring in Treasure Hunt beside the game being too greedy in unlockables and so short.

but still we enjoyed playing it but we wish for a TR9 that will really satisfy all by providing most of the basic essential elements that most people like and the ones who don't like can have the chance to IGNOR it for example outfits unlocks is amazing to me but if some else doesn't like it, he/she can simple avoid unlocking them or choosing them. and so on about other options, we wanna get close to Lara the woman we loved not just some killing machine or running and grappling machine.

Angelus

26-01-09, 17:04

What would you honestly expect after basically calling most of the forum a bunch of whinging children? And hey, you might as well be ready to take it if you're willing to dish it out.

Big whoop about the graphics, the storyline, and the sound - we're talking about a game, not some animated movie . All that stuff is nice, but it's not enough to make for a great game.

I suspect only a small handful of people are actually naive enough to assume that CD would tailor a game just to suit their specific demands. C'mon. And you come here yelling at us like we're all like that?

We're not the only fans? Well no ****.

If you've been active on the forums earlier this month, you'd know that even some CD employee(s) admit they made some mistakes. Take a look at the size of the bugs and glitches thread for this game - hell, we even have a tech support forum specifically for this game! I don't remember the past two games needing all that.

Love the game, hate the game - I don't care. I just get sick of folks marching in here and nagging us because we aren't being 'good fans'. :rolleyes:

Very well said. :tmb:

Tear

26-01-09, 18:15

gremlinta

26-01-09, 18:51

<sigh>
Next Thread...

Anarae

26-01-09, 19:29

Drama queen. :p

Underworld is in no fashion following in the footsteps of Angel of Darkness. It is not nearly the glitchy hell Angel of Darkness is, nor does it have such an amazing and complex storyline as AoD.

Whether you look at AoD as a disaster or a potential holy grail, Underworld matches neither. Underworld is fun and a fantastic game (my personal storyline issues aside) all by itself. No need to compare the Second Series to the First, because depending on what continuation you favour the other will always be beneath it.

Dennis's Mom

26-01-09, 19:35

No need to compare the Second Series to the First,

Exactly! Each game should be compared to a standard, not to each other.

Zebra

26-01-09, 19:50

I hope no one is seriously claiming that Underworld is as crap as AoD. If you do, then I seriously question if you ever played AoD...

You turned it upside-down:
I hope no one is seriously claiming that AoD is as crappy as Underworld. If you do than I seriously question if you have ever played AoD...

;)

TRWii

26-01-09, 19:53

You turned it upside-down:
I hope no one is seriously claiming that AoD is as crappy as Underworld. If you do than I seriously question if you have ever played AoD...

;)

Quoted as support for Cactusman's post and to show how utterly insane some of the TRF fans are.

Quasimodo

26-01-09, 20:00

Quoted as support for Cactusman's post and to show how utterly insane some of the TRF fans are.

Well aren't you sweet :)

RoseTyler

26-01-09, 20:02

Excuse me thread starter, but AOD is far superior to Underworld :wve:

Ward Dragon

26-01-09, 20:04

I'm sorry - but are you all stupid?

Quoted as support for Cactusman's post and to show how utterly insane some of the TRF fans are.

Come on now, no need for name-calling :)

Moon-Safari

26-01-09, 20:12

Kittypower

26-01-09, 20:32

i think some of us need to learn what a bad game is.

TRWii

26-01-09, 20:34

i think some of us need to learn what a bad game is.

That's an opinion, not a fact.

Kittypower

26-01-09, 20:37

That's an opinion, not a fact.

I thunks thats theres somes bads games outs theres thats ares alot wourses thans underworlds ands peoples need to reliezes its nots thats bads. Why did i even post my previous post.

Los Angeles

26-01-09, 20:44

i think some of us need to learn what a bad game is.

Go and replay your favorite game, then you'll see. :)

TRWii

26-01-09, 20:47

Go and replay your favorite game, then you'll see. :)

Why are you named Los Angeles if you're in Michigan?

jackles

26-01-09, 20:49

Keep this thread on topic please.

Anarae

26-01-09, 21:08

Excuse me thread starter, but AOD is far superior to Underworld :wve:

LOL. As one of the most enthused haunting the "give AoD the second chance it deserves" threads, I still gotta disagree here.

Storyline wise, Angel of Darkness takes the cake. Level Design, it probably wins too. That's why it is my favourite title.

But Underworld is fantastic in its own right and I don't think it is beneath AoD in any fashion.

That's an opinion, not a fact.

I thunks thats theres somes bads games outs theres thats ares alot wourses thans underworlds ands peoples need to reliezes its nots thats bads. Why did i even post my previous post.

Right, Underworld was great -- but you gotta understand that some people just were not impressed. And there is always that party of Those Who Are Never Pleased, you kind of have to pick them out and ignore them.

Angelus

26-01-09, 22:03

Why are you named Los Angeles if you're in Michigan?

Why are you named TRWii if you're neither a tomb raider or a Wii?

Squibbly

26-01-09, 22:08

Cactusman

26-01-09, 22:18

Not begrudging AoD fans their love of that game, but to me it was the nadir of the series. I have never played Chronicles though.

Some of the things I loved about the TRU plot were the way they wrapped up her mother's story-line and the way her conflict with Amanda eventually was "resolved". I had mixed feelings about killing Ailistair. It was done for dramatic purposes, but I kind of feel they sacrificed an interesting side-character for far too low of a return or reward.

Sekhraider

27-01-09, 01:47

AOD and TRU are 2 very different games with 2 completely different sets of problems.

AOD suffered: too much depth and not enough execution with bad risks taken.
TRU suffered: not enough depth and not enough execution with no risks taken.

They both failed because of Eidos pushing deadlines, or maybe developers not being able to reach important deadlines, but the outcome were 2 very different games. To compare them is apples and oranges. TRU will never have the mood that AOD had, and AOD will never have the functionality of TRU.

I think you summed it up nicely. :) Though the two games had some interesting plots and chain of events, there was something missing from the two that made them not as achievable as far as what a solid game should be. I still like both but there still are those "what ifs". Fact is, these games are finalized and out there for playing and though they werent deemed as "successful," us, the fans will still talk about them.

Mr.Bouncer

10-02-09, 14:01

A member called Nomedo here stated this list of failures in TR:U production n marketing and I find it quite suitable to explain why AOD had even better sales than TR:U :

Eidos gets accused of "review score blackmailing"
reviews were worse then TRL/TRA
stocks in free fall and workers gets cut
PS2 version gets delayed by "the holidays"
DLC level gets delayed by "a Microsoft related technical error"
As a result the sales are worse then TRAoD

Zebra

10-02-09, 14:10

Underworld is a great game. It has great graphics, good music, and a fantastic storyline. A lot of research was obviously put into it, and I applaud - APPLAUD - CD for taking some risks with the story. For bringing Natla back, for killing Alistair, and for not reviving her mother. Do you realise how hard that is to do with a game that is this popular?

Where are the risks? The only risk of those is bringing Natla back. Not many people cared for Alister so killing him was no risk. And that her mother would die was pretty clear. Leaving her alive would've been a risk because than we'd have another happy family chapter in the history of TR :rolleyes:. The storyline was everything but fantastic. The music was good, yes. Graphics were good, too. But the most important thing wasn't: Gameplay. It wasn't bad. But it wasn't real TR gameplay. It was just that boring, unchallenging ledge-hopping introduced with TRL.

Dennis's Mom

10-02-09, 14:42

Zebra

10-02-09, 15:09

I thought killing Alistair was cheap and unnecessary. It didn't add anything but shock value.

Shooting her mother was not surprising--the surprise was that I thought it was actually well-done. It was at the wrong point in the game, but it was a nice, brief, understated boot in the groin for Lara. In a world where crying and screaming passes for good drama, it was nice to see someone take the acting lesson "see how small you can take it and still have the same effect." ;)

But it was too short. Lara searches for her mother for her whole life and when she finds her she decides in 15 seconds to just shoot her? I think it would've been better if Amelia had been turned into something like Boaz in AoD.

Dennis's Mom

10-02-09, 15:24

aussie500

10-02-09, 16:20

No, that would be too obvious and undermine the acceptance. What's happening is she's accepting what she's known all along--her mother is dead. Her little girl fantasies were just that--fantasies born out of youth and guilt. I think in that moment Lara truly "grows up." I also think the sudden realization that "happy endings" are pipe dreams will change her into harder individual. She didn't get a happy ending, why should anyone else? Life sucks; all that's left is the challenge, making the most of the moment you've got. People who believe in happy endings just get suckered into being manipulated by those that learned the other lesson first.

Actually the new Lara grew up thinking she had been responsible for her mother dying in Nepal, it was Richard Croft that believed Amelia was still alive. It was not until Lara activated the dais in Bolivia she even considered her father had been right. In the end both in a way both had been correct. Lara had no problem accepting her mother was dead, the problem she had growing up had been accepting her father might have been right and her mother was still alive somewhere, Lara tells us in Legend she pitied her father for thinking that. Having finally accepted he could have been right Lara wanted the truth no matter what, and was willing to risk opening Helheim which her father had had refused to do. Yes seeing her mother standing there Lara would have got her hopes up, who would not have. Had nothing to do with little girl fantasies, though having to shoot what remained of her mother might have been a replay of childhood nightmares. Yes Lara probably grew up, but l think not into a harder individual, she would have realised finally she is human and makes mistakes, because she almost made her final one in thinking she could handle Natla.

The risk was not only in releasing Natla, who had already proved mass murder and destruction was her main aim in life, but in opening Helheim and bringing about the total destruction of the world by starting Ragnarok. When Richard had first started on the same path Natla was already free, it had been opening the door to Helheim that Richard had thought to big a risk to take. Lara opened the door knowing Helheim probably contained a weapon capable of destroying the world, and knowing Natla would use it. Lara believed she would be able to kill Natla before she got up to any mayhem and without Amanda's help would have died for that mistake and the world would have been destroyed.

underpushunter

10-02-09, 17:03

AOD was REALLY bad . TRU is way better!

Mason Cain

10-02-09, 17:10

I enjoyed TRU a lot, though its flaws were legion.

However, comparing it to the travesty of AoD is a bit harsh, regardless of how poor the sales have been.

Immortalis08

10-02-09, 17:22

I don't think Underworld was anywhere near the disaster that AOD wrought.

tranniversary119

10-02-09, 17:24

Theres a huge difference with both games..
TRU: Enjoyable
AOD: Was enjoyable..somewhat.

Kiss-Bite

10-02-09, 17:32

I enjoyed AOD for it had strengths but huge weaknesses as well. I think in fairness TRU is a much better game if compared to AOD, but TRU has strengths & very obvious flaws as well. I can see a comparison in them both in the context that they both conjure up a certain negativity when I think about them in comparison to the other TR games. Both AOD & TRU have things I do genuinely like about them but equally there are things I was really unhappy about as well.

daventry

10-02-09, 17:51

Explain to me why Poeple Hate AOD so much, because the main reason is that Eidos rushed Core to much so that the Game could get released.

The Story and Myth were great.
Lara and Kurtis moved like Oafs, not Cores fault.
Way to many Bugs and Loose Ends, not Cores fault.
Huge Parts of the Game and Story with Characters were cut, not Cores fault.

TRU has the same Spirit as AOD, but TRU had time to be worked on when TRL were in the making.

TRU got its Flaws, but nothing compared to AOD.

Altair

10-02-09, 17:56

You can't compare AoD to TRU, in both their greatness and their flaws.

Actually the new Lara grew up thinking she had been responsible for her mother dying in Nepal, it was Richard Croft that believed Amelia was still alive. It was not until Lara activated the dais in Bolivia she even considered her father had been right. In the end both in a way both had been correct. Lara had no problem accepting her mother was dead, the problem she had growing up had been accepting her father might have been right and her mother was still alive somewhere, Lara tells us in Legend she pitied her father for thinking that. Having finally accepted he could have been right Lara wanted the truth no matter what, and was willing to risk opening Helheim which her father had had refused to do. Yes seeing her mother standing there Lara would have got her hopes up, who would not have. Had nothing to do with little girl fantasies, though having to shoot what remained of her mother might have been a replay of childhood nightmares. Yes Lara probably grew up, but l think not into a harder individual, she would have realised finally she is human and makes mistakes, because she almost made her final one in thinking she could handle Natla.

The risk was not only in releasing Natla, who had already proved mass murder and destruction was her main aim in life, but in opening Helheim and bringing about the total destruction of the world by starting Ragnarok. When Richard had first started on the same path Natla was already free, it had been opening the door to Helheim that Richard had thought to big a risk to take. Lara opened the door knowing Helheim probably contained a weapon capable of destroying the world, and knowing Natla would use it. Lara believed she would be able to kill Natla before she got up to any mayhem and without Amanda's help would have died for that mistake and the world would have been destroyed.

Overconfident methinks. Lara needed a reality check and in that way, I can see the value in killing Alister. I wonder if Lara sees his death as a 'casualty of war' or if she sees it as a result of her carelessness. It was a no brainer after Legend that her employees/friends needed better protection.

I believe Lara knew Amanda would help her (though there may have been a bit of hesitance). After Amanda saved her from Doppelganger and told Lara that she'd rather her be dead, but the world needed saving. Amanda basically told her she'd do what it took, even if it meant working with Lara, to save the world.

Alternatively, Amanda could not escape without Lara. She needed Lara to hold up the rock in order to escape. If Amanda had not grabbed Lara's hand in that moment, Lara could have moved away, thus dropping the piece of the stone she was holding. Then they'd both be stuck there. Of course that it debatable, because Amanda may have been able to escape through the dias faster than Lara could move.

In the end, I think it was obvious they both needed each other to survive and through self-preservation (or perhaps Amanda's selfless desire to save the world), they were willing to put their differences aside for a half a second.

Of course after, it is obvious Amanda is still unforgiving and Lara is still looking to give Amanda a good thrashing.

thevman

10-02-09, 18:41

Immortalis08

10-02-09, 18:44

Hmmm, follow in Aod's footsteps?? Nah, it surpasses it! :p At least I got to play AoD! :ohn: I still can't get TRU. :hea: And AoD was a long full game, not this shorty episodes CD has been churning out. You wanna compare? Not a good idea.

Well despite the fact that you haven't yet played TRU, you can't compare the PS2 versions of AOD and TRU seeing as how all the energy was focused on AOD for the PS2 while the majority of the resources were focused on the current gen platforms of TRU. So yeah, I wouldn't necessarily call it a smart comparison. I will agree on the length between the past PS2 CD game and AOD though.

Zebra

10-02-09, 19:17

Phys

10-02-09, 20:13

I disliked AOD but I loved Underworld greatly; even with parts cut from it. I wish people would stop saying its following the same footsteps as AOD. It's like comparing Lara with Nathan Drake .. -.-

mikael201

10-02-09, 21:44

aod was so better in a lot of way , i can understand people who prefer underworld and his stupid story

The_Underworld

11-02-09, 00:40

They're both good games! THE END! :mad:

No need to compare them and no need to whine about the one you like the least. They were made by different people (Core- CD)

Robsters85

11-02-09, 13:28

I loved underworld i got it for PC and i am truely surprised hearing Eidos might get bought up :( by ea we are doomed and that people are saying its bad :( ?? Underworld great

AOD was a mess but yeah def an unfinished great game under it all very sad for core

right now tomb raider future doesnt look bright with recession and fact ppl are putting underworld down so much

Mr.Bouncer

13-03-09, 17:01

the only problem with AOD was that half the game was removed which made us curious to know it and also the extremely heavy movement of Lara N Kurtis, but the rest wasn't that bad and i think both AOD n TR:U are the only TRs that can be compared cuz they had so much in common Good n Bad :

01. Both titles were amazing a refering to dark and epic gameplay and story.
02. Both were over-hyped.
03. Both weren't given enough time in development.
04. Both had flaws that covered their luster.
05. Both were given to the wrong hands.
06. Both were Low-Rated & Gained Lowest TR sales.
07. Both caused some developers to be fired (or whatever you call it).
08. Both had parts CUT-OUT (AOD to finish in time, and TR:U for the sake of MS contracts, fortune and DLC).

Except for TR:U story, I mean the short gameplay and the only Mother thing wasn't really as strong as the title UNDERWORLD which deserved a way longer and more complicated story.

Dooch

13-03-09, 17:45

Mr.Bouncer

13-03-09, 22:32

In a way I agree Eidos has been making and made some very wrong decisions. No wonder everyone seems to pick on them.

First they have Core which made excellent memorable games which I still join to play today. Then we got Crystal which introduced new fans to the game although adjusting it, which I wasn't and still am not so keen on.

AOD and TRU were both rushed and feel unfinished and could have been amazing games given the time needed to make them outstanding.

I Strongly agree with you ... and I'm not bashing nor ranting nor trolling nor i have any kind of phobia from developers, If the developers and producers work right and reach the point (making all fans happy) they won't be criticized at all like Konami and Kojima Productions did with Metal Gear Solid 4

paulwork

14-03-09, 07:29

There are quite a few parallels you can draw with TRU and AOD:

The obvious one is that both AOD and TRU made their debut on the next generation of consoles. AOD marked the shift from PS1 to PS2, and TRU marked the shift from PS2 to PS3.

Both TRU and AOD don't have the mansion as a side-level (hmph...) and both games were similarly buggy in their own ways.

Both TRU and AOD were cut to pieces. The cutting for AOD is now public knowledge. The cutting for TRU is still elusive, but the suspicion is that parts of what now is BTA, and maybe a few other things besides were cut out of TRU/moved elsewhere.

Yet... I am less forgiving about TRU than AOD. AOD didn't have the benefit of:

- increased financial backing
- larger development teams & supposed "creative" consultants backed by a huge publicity machine
- whatever benefit Tobi Gard brings
- hindsight, lessons learned and 10 year's experience.

TRU did.

Mr.Bouncer

14-03-09, 08:09

Supernova

14-03-09, 08:24

Yeah.....there is not a chance in the world that you can compare these two games with each other, but still people try to.

First next gen title?! Try Tomb Raider Legend for the 360 ;)

Spong

14-03-09, 08:46

First next gen title?! Try Tomb Raider Legend for the 360 ;)

That was a port to gain a little extra pocket money, Legend was a PS2/PC title. It certainly wasn't the intended début that Underworld was ;)

Mr.Bouncer

14-03-09, 09:38

That was a port to gain a little extra pocket money, Legend was a PS2/PC title. It certainly wasn't the intended début that Underworld was ;)

absolutely right ... and everyone knows that after Bill Gates left Microsoft for his colleague and he failed the company so he tried to increase sales with 360 n DLC.

Carbonek_0051

14-03-09, 09:42

absolutely right ... and everyone knows that after Bill Gates left Microsoft for his colleague and he failed the company so he tried to increase sales with 360 n DLC.

Really? Is that fact?;)

Link please?:)

Mr.Bouncer

14-03-09, 10:34

Really? Is that fact?;)

Link please?:)

not a link it was on a magazine i read here ... called Sayedati ... and it had a two pages article ...

Carbonek_0051

14-03-09, 10:36

not a link it was on a magazine i read here ... called Sayedati ... and it had a two pages article ...

Scans then?:whi:

Mr.Bouncer

14-03-09, 10:37

Scans then?:whi:

that was like 5 months ago ... and I don't need to lie about that, no one's payin' me to bash Eidos or make up things outta nowhere ...

and this is some proof of their failure :

http://failblog.org/2008/07/02/microsoft-fail/

Lara's Nemesis

14-03-09, 10:49

It's a fair point to say that AOD and TRU were both rushed out but I can't see any other comparison with the games. For me it was a total task to finish AOD but I loved every minute of TRU.

The only problem I had with TRU was that it was way too easy compared to the earlier games. I don't really blame the makers for this tho. Unfortunately most games these days are dumbed down. Maybe they think people don't have the patience anymore or are they underestimating their audience? I always found it more satisfying when you managed to work something out for yourself. Even if it did take half the night.:)

Also, I don't doubt for a second that some stuff was kept back to be released as DLC. This is something that really annoys me these days. Fair enough if you are adding something extra to the game but too many companies are conning people by holding back content from the original. :hea: