PDA

View Full Version : My opinion of TRL


Verdilet
13-05-09, 20:27
I first played Legend around the time of its release (summer 2006, if I remember rightly) and seeing as TR4 was my only TR experience back then, I was quite impressed. The game’s flaws, however glaring they may have been, did not bother me at that point and having had so little experience of the classics, it was hard to find fault with TRL. After TR4’s long, complex sets of levels, it was quite refreshing to play shorter and more linear ones (bearing in mind I was quite young back then) and the “Hollywood-style” storyline seemed like a good thing, as did the inclusion of the headset.

A year passed, and then I heard of TRA’s release, so I went and got myself a copy. When I realised it was a remake of the original, I was eager to try more of the series, so I got a copy of AOD as well. By this point, I was hooked. I got TRC for my 13th birthday (November 2007), TR2 for Christmas (incidentally, around the time of its 10th anniversary) and TR1&3 soon after. But although I always preferred TR1 to TRA, Legend remained a firm favourite when I joined TRF in April. I even remember saying in one of my posts that it was one of my favourites. I think the reason for this was because it was essentially the game that introduced me to the series (even if I had already played TR4), but since then, Legend has slowly but surely become one of my least favourites.

You see, I played the first two levels of TRL this evening and was bored stiff. After all the time I’ve spent with the classics, the controls seemed really awkward and the level design is unremarkable, to say the least. It doesn’t help that there are so many cutscenes and flybys either, and after all this time, I’ve finally come to the conclusion that the headset does in fact ruin the atmosphere (notice how I say “headset”, not “Zip and Alister”? I still like the characters, that much hasn’t changed). Not that there was very much atmosphere to begin with. The tomb in Bolivia is quite atmospheric, but for the most part, that ambience is replaced by constant music. I don’t particularly like Legend’s soundtrack anyway. The music in earlier TRs was much more atmospheric.

Another thing that annoyed me was the combat. It’s hard to say why exactly, but I found the shootouts in the classics to be much more fun than Legend’s tiresome routine of “shoot one mercenary, lob a grenade at another one, slide tackle another one etc.”. Shooting them on the motorbike was equally tiresome, but what really annoyed me was when Lara got caught by one of their grenades. It usually means sudden death, and can result in having to repeat the entire fight.

So there you have it; my not-quite-as-favourable-as-it-used-to-be opinion of TRL. A bit surprising, you might think, considering Legend was one of the first TR games I played. I know it’s not exactly unheard of to dislike TRL, but I didn’t think this was normally the case for those who played Crystal’s games first and then most of Core’s games afterwards. I’d certainly be interested to hear if anyone else has had similar experiences...

Lemmie
13-05-09, 20:33
I agree kind of. Legend has kind of fallen of the radar for me - the story is easily memorable, and there's not a lot that is special about the game itself. I think that I just remember how much I enjoyed it when I first played, compared to now when it is just a little dull.

Mytly
13-05-09, 20:41
I most certainly don't hate TRL - it's still my favourite among CD's 3 games - but I like it a lot less now than I did 3 years ago. I had played most of Core's games before playing TRL, and though it struck me as very different from these earlier games, it wasn't necessarily different in a bad way - just different. There were tedious moments (the long bike chases, for instance) and far too much chatter (which I ignored mostly the first time around), the Mommy plotline sucked royally, and the game was way too short. But it was fun, on the whole, even if it wasn't the game of the century or anything. It still is fun for me - I must have played it about 25-30 times ;). On the whole, I think that TRL, though it wasn't a Tomb Raider in the sense that the Classics were, was still pretty good as a game.

Off topic: Verdilet, you're only 14 years old?! :eek: I could have sworn you were older.

Smog
13-05-09, 20:42
Whenever I play Legend, I do so with a "finish it before the end of the day" mentality. While it's (more) fun to immerse myself in a "proper" TR title, it's also fairly entertaining to just blitz it through Legend in an afternoon. The game is easy and well-paced (read: short), so it's difficult to get bogged down and stop playing. The England and Kazakhstan levels are moody and well-designed, the graphics are still appealing and, while Z&A can get tiresome, it's easy enough just to shut them up at the Options screen.

Because I know what to expect, I don't go into Legend hoping for a Last Revelation-style experience. And because I usually play the games in order, I always start playing after completing a playthrough of AOD (which I maintain is awful, tiresome and no fun at all), so Legend feels like a (decidedly shallow) breath of fresh air. Maybe if you accept Legend for what it is, you might enjoy it more. Sure, it's no Core classic, but it's an enjoyable little game in its own right. :tmb:

Mytly
13-05-09, 20:48
@ Smog - well said. I think I agree 100%. :tmb:

Tony9595
13-05-09, 21:15
I love Tomb Raider Legend, I really love it.

I´ve always thought of it as a great, no... AWESOME game! but never a Tomb Raider game.

I agree with Smog :)

Ilie_Fusarau
13-05-09, 21:17
@ Smog - well said. I think I agree 100%. :tmb:
Me too , Legend is really a innovative/enjoyable game (at least to me) ^ ^ .

Verdilet
13-05-09, 21:46
...the story is easily memorable, and there's not a lot that is special about the game itself.

I think that was one of Crystal's main mistakes; they focussed to much on the storyline, which is all very well, but it seems a lot of people don't like the storyline anyway. Considering that was (possibly) also one of Core's main mistakes in AOD, you'd think they might have been more concerned with the gameplay.

It still is fun for me - I must have played it about 25-30 times ;).

I replayed it quite a lot as well, and that might actually be one of the reasons I didn't enjoy it so much this time. Although it's been a while since my last playthrough, I remembered exactly where to go and what to do, so I didn't need to think too much about it.

Off topic: Verdilet, you're only 14 years old?! :eek: I could have sworn you were older.

Yup, that's right.;)

And because I usually play the games in order, I always start playing after completing a playthrough of AOD (which I maintain is awful, tiresome and no fun at all), so Legend feels like a (decidedly shallow) breath of fresh air.

It might help if I did it like that. The controls were perhaps one of the main problems for me this time, but I can imagine that might be different after playing AOD.

Maybe if you accept Legend for what it is, you might enjoy it more. Sure, it's no Core classic, but it's an enjoyable little game in its own right. :tmb:

It's strange, but I wasn't really expecting to enjoy Legend as much as I used to when I played it today. I was kind of wondering what I'd think of it now, but I hadn't really expected it to seem this dull.:(

I´ve always thought of it as a great, no... AWESOME game! but never a Tomb Raider game.

I used to think of it a bit like that too. It's just that this time, I didn't even enjoy it as a non-TR game.

Me too , Legend is really a innovative/enjoyable game (at least to me) ^ ^ .

I have to admit, it is innovative in many ways and a lot of the new features do work quite well.:tmb: They just don't seem to add a huge amount, if you see what I mean.

Anyway, thanks for your replies. I think I'll continue replaying Legend and see if I enjoy the later levels a bit more. After all, it was just the first two I played today.:)

Ward Dragon
13-05-09, 22:38
It doesn’t help that there are so many cutscenes and flybys either, and after all this time, I’ve finally come to the conclusion that the headset does in fact ruin the atmosphere (notice how I say “headset”, not “Zip and Alister”? I still like the characters, that much hasn’t changed). Not that there was very much atmosphere to begin with. The tomb in Bolivia is quite atmospheric, but for the most part, that ambience is replaced by constant music. I don’t particularly like Legend’s soundtrack anyway. The music in earlier TRs was much more atmospheric.

You can turn off the voice volume and music volume in the options menu if you want to only hear the sound effects in the game :)

On another note, personally I've never understood the desire to replay a game over and over again because once I know where to go and what's going to happen, I get bored easily doing it a second or third time. I usually win a game once and then shelve it for several years before replaying it so that I forget the level design and can explore it for real during my replay. Perhaps if you give Legend a rest and come back to it in a few years you'll enjoy it more :)

Azerutan
13-05-09, 23:44
Well, I play TR since I can remember and Legend did it for me :) It was fun, you could actually control Lara and it was enjoyable to replay it - I finished it in 3 days which was not really that impressive, I had finished Chronicles in 2 weeks and AOD in one week (amazing...). Anyway, I like Legend, I don't over-think about it, my teen-times when TR was all over my mind are long gone, now I just appreciate TR games for what they are, not from a fanatic point of view...

:}hello friend
14-05-09, 02:00
When I got TRL when I was 11, I thought the graphics were great, the new combat moves, more secrets, outfits, and a lot of other things made it appeal to me. But still, it's my least fav TR game... but I LOVE all of the TR Games, although I like classic Lara better, I like this game... despite it being short and easy...

Jedd Fletcher
14-05-09, 03:28
You've argued some very valid points. However, Legend still remains my favourite Tomb Raider game. Perhaps it's because I'm a complete novice and prefer easier, more linear games. It may also be that Legend was the very first TR game I played and got me hooked as a serious Tomb Raider fan. I've replayed parts of Legend several times and really enjoyed the repeated experiences, somehow. I beg to differ on the level design - I thought Legend's level design was simply stunning - the perilous heights on levels such as Nepal and Japan were dizzyingly thrilling. I also liked the good variety in environmental elements, and how a cityscape such as Tokyo was thrown in to balance up the tombs and caves.

I will agree about the combat however, that I found frustrating and very rote. The motorcycle sequences in particular I did not enjoy as much as the rest of the game, as they seemed more like rail-shooters than racing levels - and I couldn't stand repeatedly being killed by trees. The reticules also did not seem to know which enemy to favour, and it was very difficult switching between guns and grapple for boss fights such as Rutland and the underwater serpent in England.

Still, I rate Legend very high, as it was an immersive experience for me. The game world was very well crafted and even three years after the fact I find the environments and graphics to stand up pretty well. The story with Mommy and Amanda was cliched at best, but it did give Lara good motivation to explore some breathtaking locales. Oh, and Zip and Alister, I liked. For some reason, it took away just the right amount of loneliness and foreboding in those caves and whatnot.

Verdilet
14-05-09, 06:42
You can turn off the voice volume and music volume in the options menu if you want to only hear the sound effects in the game :)

Yeah, true.

On another note, personally I've never understood the desire to replay a game over and over again because once I know where to go and what's going to happen, I get bored easily doing it a second or third time. I usually win a game once and then shelve it for several years before replaying it so that I forget the level design and can explore it for real during my replay. Perhaps if you give Legend a rest and come back to it in a few years you'll enjoy it more :)

I don't know why it is, but I normally enjoy a game when I replay it even if I know where to go. That's what I normally get from the classics, anyway. I may not get lost anymore, but I can appreciate the level design, if you see what I mean. Having said that, I've been trying not to replay the classics too much recently, as I think it would be best to save them for a time when I've forgotten certain details. With Legend, I hadn't played it for several months so I thought I'd have quite a balanced opinion of it, but I probably won't play it again for a while after this playthrough.

From reading everyone's replies, I think maybe people think I'm judging Legend a bit harshly. I do, however, remember levels such as Japan and Nepal being a bit more enjoyable than perhaps the first two levels, so we'll see how things go when I continue this evening.:)

Ashnod
14-05-09, 08:34
I want to start a positive trend. Something that will probably rehash old territory, but I want to celebrate what we liked about TRL without going into what we didn't like. HINT HINT.

My opinions only, obviously.

Some things that I feel Legend did right:

1) Ammunition. You picked it off of people who actually carried the firearm. None of this *find it behind a locked door of a previously undiscovered Egyptian tomb* crap.

2) Health packs - see above.

3) Limited weaponry. This really bugs me in other TR games as much as it bugs me in games such as Half-Life 2. I really don't see Gordon Freeman being able to move effectively carrying a pistol, a .357, a crossbow that fires heated rebar, a rocket launcher, the Overwatch rifle, the sub-machine gun, the gravity gun (which if we base it on when Alyx held it is actually pretty darn big), a shotgun, AND the extra ammunition for ALL OF THEM. Same with Lara, and PARTICULARLY with Lara, given the acrobatics she employs.

Legend limited you to one extra weapon (I'm not counting grenades for either Lara or Gordon) across her back in addition to the pistols. You have to choose which weapon you're going to carry. That was a bold move considering Lara's past as a walking armory, and I was elated to have it. I was initially happy that TRU made you chose which weapon you would carry at the start of a level, and then sad to learn you could switch it while in level. Grrrrrrrr. That was a step backwards.

4) The introduction of the grapple. It's been refined since then, and is a lot better than it was in Legend these days, but Legend gave it to us. (The grappling HOOK in TRC aside)

5) The Headset. I know that legions of die hard fans HATE the Headset with the white hot intensity of a thousand suns, but it was the right thing to do in my opinion. I feel the idea that Lara is a luddite and would shun the advantages technology gives her in the field is ludicrous. She didn't use it in the earlier games because it didn't exist in the portable fashion that it currently does. It is SMART of Lara to carry items like this, to remain connected in someway to the outside world while she is adventuring.

6) Lara does not exist in a vacuum. Alister, Amanda, Anaya, Nishimura, etc. The people that Lara knows and that know her. Legend wasn't the first game to do this, TLR gave us Von Croy and TRC gave us Zip for example, but acknowledging that people other than antagonists exist in Lara's life goes a very long way into fleshing out who she is, how people relate to her, and how she can get things done.

7) Little unnecessary swimming. I know someone is going to try throwing the Paraiso puzzle in my face here, but I think that was done effectively. It was cramped, very little breathing room when you got into the main chamber, and you were working with a mechanism that was designed specifically to flood/drain the temple.

The amount of hidden underwater switches and levers and trapdoors that seem to crop up without any true design sense in TR in general astounds me. Of note, the timed door-switch in TR1's Atlantis level in the water by the slanted wall with the spike pits and boulder traps is such an example.

8) I actually cared about the story. I know this is another polarizing issue, but plot is a big motivator for me in a game like Tomb Raider. I hadn't felt drawn in or curious about the plot of TR since TR1. I'm not going to debate the impact of it on Lara as a character, but I wanted to know more about the Dais network. I wanted to know more about the monomyth. I wanted to know more about the Excalibur swords, about Amanda's connection to it all, everything.

I cared about the Scion/Natla story in TR1. I cared nothing at all for the stories as presented in TR2, TR3, and TRC. (I had not played TLR or AoD when I first played Legend).

When Legend was over, I WANTED the next game. It was nice to feel that for TR again.

9) The Carbonek Ruin. There is a difference between having Lara in modern environments and having Lara explore the wreck of a modern environment. One of the things that TR2 did very well was to give us the "tomb" of a modern construct and let us explore it with the Maria Doria levels. The contrast plays out well against primitive tombs; I think we as fans are sometimes hesitant to allow Lara to explore modern settings; the ruin of a massive structure built in the modern era can be a fascinating place to investigate. Forgotten Tesla equipment and toxic coolant can be just as exotic as carved rock and dart launchers.

10) The climb upwards in Tokyo. Dizzying and beautiful.

Eddie Haskell
14-05-09, 18:18
I have often wondered what "they" really thought of the game as they were creating it. Did they think that it was easily the equal of the classics? Or perhaps far better? Was the real goal of this game to completely change the dynamics and lower the bar for the future? I have many more such questions...

Ward Dragon
14-05-09, 20:08
4) The introduction of the grapple.

6) Lara does not exist in a vacuum.

9) The Carbonek Ruin.

10) The climb upwards in Tokyo. Dizzying and beautiful.

These I agree with :tmb: The grapple was a good idea although it wasn't properly implemented until TRU (specifically thinking of the puzzles in Beneath the Ashes). Lara having allies to talk to during cutscenes is alright too. The actual ruins of the Carbonek experiment were very nicely done, and that's one of the few places where I thought the headset was actually done right.

1) Ammunition.

2) Health packs - see above.

3) Limited weaponry.

5) The Headset.

7) Little unnecessary swimming.

8) I actually cared about the story.

I felt that having limited ammunition and healthpacks was a very bad thing because it totally killed my incentive to explore and try to find extra healthpacks and ammo just in case I needed them later on. There was no need to conserve healthpacks or ammo and that really took out a large portion of the strategy and suspense for the game. I was also disappointed with how short Lara's breath was while swimming and therefore how short the swimming sections had to be. I was thrilled when lengthy swimming sections returned in TRA and especially TRU.

Regarding the headset, the idea of it isn't that bad, but how it was implemented was absolutely terrible. It was so distracting and most of the time the dialogue was very silly and unnecessary, which made me hate it even more. I'm a little nervous about whether the headset will be in the next game because it returned in Beneath the Ashes and while it was not used very frequently, Zip's dialogue was still really dumb and annoying.

Finally, about the story, I think I would have been so much more interested if it had focused upon Amanda and King Arthur much more and given more explanation along those lines instead of making Lara's personal reasons the main motivation. I felt like providing this new motivation for Lara came at the expense of finding out the answers that I actually wanted to know. Even after having completed TRU, I still don't have most of those answers to the questions that I actually found to be interesting.

Lemmie
14-05-09, 20:13
2) Health packs - see above.

Ah yes. The perfect way to pick up a health pack - running into it with a motorcycle! :D

But on the whole I agree with your points. I do remember that I was very interested in forthcoming sequels because of the storyline and the plot. However I think they kind of lost interest in it themselves by the end. I felt the Underworld plot was a bit of a cop out.

Tony9595
14-05-09, 22:16
You can turn off the voice volume and music volume in the options menu if you want to only hear the sound effects in the game :)

You´re right, it adds a lot to the atmosphere :D

A-WZR15m5aY

MMAN
14-05-09, 23:18
This thread reminded me that I tried to replay Legend with the AMOWO release but then just kind of went off, and this was with next-gen mode and the headset "off".


1) Ammunition.

2) Health packs

3) Limited weaponry.

4) The introduction of the grapple.

5) The Headset.

6) Lara does not exist in a vacuum.

7) Little unnecessary swimming.

8) I actually cared about the story.

9) The Carbonek Ruin.

10) The climb upwards in Tokyo.

1 and 2: There are potentially other things to find, so I'm indifferent overall if it was done right, which is kind of where the problem lies, as I found Legend's system removed a lot of the motivation to explore, especially as artifacts gave you no in-game non-endgame reward whatsoever beyond the pistol upgrades (and the pistols are so powerful as it is that that's just salt in the wound).

3: All limited weapon load-outs do is lead to trail and error gameplay in most singleplayer games (that is, ones not as easy as Legend), or make every weapon so powerful there's little point in the choice, and either way only being able to carry one extra weapon is way too small a number (not to mention just as unrealistic as carrying ten). Also,the system was just as extremely unbalanced as most of the rest of the series with the only worthwhile extra weapon being the Shotgun (and the MP5 for one particular section).

4: I'm overall positive for the grapple, but not even Underworld's most advanced implementation has shown any real imagination in its use. It definitely has potential though.

5: You had me at the first sentence, so... I'll leave it at that. I in no way see Lara as a luddite though.

6: Agreed, assuming you mean it on its own and not as some extension of the headset.

7: Well, with Legend's swimming controls I can only agree ;) .

8: Also agreed, except I find it goes way too far and ends up getting in the way of the gameplay rather than enhancing it like it could have done. Plus it leads into Underworld which completely deflates most of the pay-off of the Legend plot-line (which does effect the game as story-based as Legend, as I now know most of the "hooks" in Legend don't really go anywhere).

9: Agreed. One of the best levels (forgetting the bike part), but I've never had a big problem with modern settings when it's done right.

10: The only parts of Tokyo I liked (considering the rest is just combat arenas), so I guess I agree.

Ashnod
15-05-09, 06:16
I felt that having limited ammunition and healthpacks was a very bad thing because it totally killed my incentive to explore and try to find extra healthpacks and ammo just in case I needed them later on. There was no need to conserve healthpacks or ammo and that really took out a large portion of the strategy and suspense for the game.

I never had incentive to explore for healthpacks or ammunition. I was always disappointed in TR when I'd come across a new area and the only thing I'd find is more shotgun shells. If the necessity to use them was there obviously I also felt relief, but I don't think the purpose of exploring of a level should be to locate these items and I never searched a level hoping to find more of either of them.

I was thrilled when lengthy swimming sections returned in TRA and especially TRU.

:tmb:

Regarding the headset, the idea of it isn't that bad, but how it was implemented was absolutely terrible. It was so distracting and most of the time the dialogue was very silly and unnecessary, which made me hate it even more. I'm a little nervous about whether the headset will be in the next game because it returned in Beneath the Ashes and while it was not used very frequently, Zip's dialogue was still really dumb and annoying.

This never bothered me. I know it bothered a great many fans, but I actually enjoyed it. Nothing much else I can say on it, though.

Finally, about the story, I think I would have been so much more interested if it had focused upon Amanda and King Arthur much more and given more explanation along those lines instead of making Lara's personal reasons the main motivation. I felt like providing this new motivation for Lara came at the expense of finding out the answers that I actually wanted to know. Even after having completed TRU, I still don't have most of those answers to the questions that I actually found to be interesting.

Strangely, I never really felt the Amelia motivation really kick in until Nepal - up to that point it hadn't really dominated the story that much. I agree that more answers on the Dais Network, the Wraith Stone, Atlantis, etc would have been nice, though.

Ah yes. The perfect way to pick up a health pack - running into it with a motorcycle! :D

Lol. You'll notice I didn't include any motorcycle part in my list. :D



1 and 2: There are potentially other things to find, so I'm indifferent overall if it was done right, which is kind of where the problem lies, as I found Legend's system removed a lot of the motivation to explore, especially as artifacts gave you no in-game non-endgame reward whatsoever beyond the pistol upgrades (and the pistols are so powerful as it is that that's just salt in the wound).

Yeah. Again, finding ammunition in these places always bothered me. My immersion breaks when you come across pristine uzi ammo in the middle of some dusty corridor.

I'd rather explore these places simply to explore them, not because I need some in game pick-up.

3: All limited weapon load-outs do is lead to trail and error gameplay in most singleplayer games (that is, ones not as easy as Legend), or make every weapon so powerful there's little point in the choice, and either way only being able to carry one extra weapon is way too small a number (not to mention just as unrealistic as carrying ten). Also,the system was just as extremely unbalanced as most of the rest of the series with the only worthwhile extra weapon being the Shotgun (and the MP5 for one particular section).

Why is one extra weapon too small a number?

I never really had a problem with any weapon being useless, either, but mileage varies by player.

6: Agreed, assuming you mean it on its own and not as some extension of the headset.

Yes, as in fleshing out the the world itself, not as people she would be in constant communication with. I like knowing that Lara was on a student dig in Paraiso and things went poorly, and that she wasn't the only survivor. I like knowing that Lara had people that would call her a friend, and not acquaintances like Pierre.

8: Plus it leads into Underworld which completely deflates most of the pay-off of the Legend plot-line (which does effect the game as story-based as Legend, as I now know most of the "hooks" in Legend don't really go anywhere).

I think this is more TRU's fault than TRL's, unfortunately. I remember being extremely let down storywise the first playthrough of TRU because my TRL expectations were not met. Once I moved past that, I'm more accepting of how everything worked out.

Ward Dragon
15-05-09, 06:30
I never had incentive to explore for healthpacks or ammunition. I was always disappointed in TR when I'd come across a new area and the only thing I'd find is more shotgun shells. If the necessity to use them was there obviously I also felt relief, but I don't think the purpose of exploring of a level should be to locate these items and I never searched a level hoping to find more of either of them.

Not that there were many areas off the beaten path in Legend to begin with, but not having anything to find that was actually relevant to the gameplay made exploration feel even more pointless. Secrets should consist of items that actually help during the gameplay in some way or another (health, ammo, a key to an awesome new place to explore, etc.) The only exception I'd make is if there were unique secrets like the relics in TRA where each one had a little description to go along with it. Those were interesting to find and read about.

Strangely, I never really felt the Amelia motivation really kick in until Nepal - up to that point it hadn't really dominated the story that much. I agree that more answers on the Dais Network, the Wraith Stone, Atlantis, etc would have been nice, though.

Nepal is where it kicks in full-force, but it influences the entire game. Lara is so focused upon finding her mother that she fails to think about anything else and therefore she doesn't ask relevant questions such as what Amanda wants. I mean, nowhere in the entire game did she actually ask Amanda what she was up to or make any indication that she was trying to find out. She was only concerned with getting the sword fragments herself and didn't care about Amanda's motivations. The only reason I even have a clue about what Amanda wanted is because her unlockable bio says she was a hippie who wanted to bring enlightenment to the world :p

Not to mention the story seems to hinge on there being a lot of daises and swords, but we only know of two of each from the actual game unless I missed some. Did the area with the Rutland battle count as a dais? If so then there were three I can think of. Three in the entire world is hardly "everywhere" :p The game should have expanded much more upon the daises and Amanda's motivations. The mother part was totally unnecessary because Lara already had a personal stake in the story even without that -- isn't it enough to discover that her old friend didn't really die and seems to have changed into someone else? That would be motivation enough for me :p Instead Lara kind of ignores that and focuses upon her mother because the story is too crowded and the game too short to properly expand upon everything that is covered.

Ashnod
15-05-09, 07:08
Not to mention the story seems to hinge on there being a lot of daises and swords, but we only know of two of each from the actual game unless I missed some. Did the area with the Rutland battle count as a dais? If so then there were three I can think of. Three in the entire world is hardly "everywhere" :p The game should have expanded much more upon the daises and Amanda's motivations.

Agreed, or at least touched more upon in TRU.

I count

1) Bolivia
2) Nepal
3) Helheim
4) England, if the one in Arthur's Tomb wasn't just a replica.

These are those we know of. Whether or not any others exist, or survived time and elements, remains unanswered.

Ward Dragon
15-05-09, 07:19
Agreed, or at least touched more upon in TRU.

I count

1) Bolivia
2) Nepal
3) Helheim
4) England, if the one in Arthur's Tomb wasn't just a replica.

These are those we know of. Whether or not any others exist, or survived time and elements, remains unanswered.

Ah, I didn't realize Lara was supposed to be standing on a dais when she said she'd been finding them everywhere :p Although she didn't know of the Helheim one when she said that, so that line still seems out of the blue to me, like either the story was rushing to get to the conclusion or else the dialogue was written with some extra levels in mind which were never actually developed. In any case, TRU had way too much material to cover as well, although I think they did the best job they could have to answer all the questions in one game (short of making the game 2-3 times longer, which I certainly would have liked :whi: Too bad they didn't have the time)

Edit: Again, the mother story was unnecessary for TRU (although once brought up in Legend they had to finish it). In TRU, Lara could have done the first two levels just fine without any connection to her mother (finding Thor's Hammer is cool enough, and she'd certainly want it to kill Natla based upon her past experiences with the Atlantean). Then after Alister got killed, Lara could have been motivated by revenge and wanted to kill Amanda. Natla could have told her that Amanda had already gone to Avalon, therefore no need for additional motivation requiring the mother. And of course the TR1 story was just fine without the addition of the parents storyline from TRA. I think that in future games they should keep the story relatively simple so that it can properly be developed. If they try to cram too much into it then things will get left out and it will feel incomplete.

Ashnod
15-05-09, 07:21
Ah, I didn't realize Lara was supposed to be standing on a dais when she said she'd been finding them everywhere :p Although she didn't know of the Helheim one when she said that, so that line still seems out of the blue to me, like either the story was rushing to get to the conclusion or else the dialogue was written with some extra levels in mind which were never actually developed. In any case, TRU had way too much material to cover as well, although I think they did the best job they could have to answer all the questions in one game (short of making the game 2-3 times longer, which I certainly would have liked :whi: Too bad they didn't have the time)

When did she say they'd been finding them everywhere? The only thing I recall off the top of my head is her saying the sword in stone legend pops up everywhere.

Ward Dragon
15-05-09, 07:35
When did she say they'd been finding them everywhere? The only thing I recall off the top of my head is her saying the sword in stone legend pops up everywhere.

She says in Arthur's Tomb, "Swords in stones, Alister. They're part of the monomyth. There wasn't just one Excalibur or one Merlin. We keep seeing
swords and daises all over the world because they were everywhere." When I first heard that I was like, "What? We have? I only remember two!" :p

Ashnod
15-05-09, 07:40
She says in Arthur's Tomb, "Swords in stones, Alister. They're part of the monomyth. There wasn't just one Excalibur or one Merlin. We keep seeing
swords and daises all over the world because they were everywhere." When I first heard that I was like, "What? We have? I only remember two!" :p

Well, to be fair, at that point England, Bolivia, and Nepal does spread them out across the world. I'm willing to bet there is one for every major continent.

Ward Dragon
15-05-09, 07:40
Well, to be fair, at that point England, Bolivia, and Nepal does spread them out across the world. I'm willing to bet there is one for every major continent.

As the saying goes, it's much better to show us than to tell us :p

Ashnod
15-05-09, 07:43
As the saying goes, it's much better to show us than to tell us :p

Yeah, and it will probably show up as an Easter Egg in TR X or TR XI just to make us say "HEY!!!!!"

Ward Dragon
15-05-09, 07:50
Yeah, and it will probably show up as an Easter Egg in TR X or TR XI just to make us say "HEY!!!!!"

It would be cool to see a reference here or there :D I do want the next game to have an independent story though. It should be a fresh start without any baggage from the previous games.

Tyrannosaurus
15-05-09, 07:53
I have often wondered what "they" really thought of the game as they were creating it. Did they think that it was easily the equal of the classics? Or perhaps far better? Was the real goal of this game to completely change the dynamics and lower the bar for the future? I have many more such questions...

They obviously didn't have the PC in mind when they made it. It seems like it was made to please the magazine writers. But the condescension both they and the reviewers seem to show toward the original TR series bothers me. "No, you guys really weren't having fun, and those games really weren't good." Just like the makers of 4th edition Dungeons & Dragons. I don't recognize that as the same game. Or hell, 3rd edition for that matter.

Eddie Haskell
15-05-09, 13:07
They obviously didn't have the PC in mind when they made it. It seems like it was made to please the magazine writers. But the condescension both they and the reviewers seem to show toward the original TR series bothers me. "No, you guys really weren't having fun, and those games really weren't good." Just like the makers of 4th edition Dungeons & Dragons. I don't recognize that as the same game. Or hell, 3rd edition for that matter.

I tell you, I just don't understand this "compromise" mentality that is quite often expressed in here concerning the series. It goes hand in hand with "multi-consumer group think", and the fear that Lara will vanish forever.

Every individual has their own ideas, opinions, hopes, best, worsts, etc. While all of these are quite often expressed in here on a regular basis, many times the same individuals who criticize and take stands against various game parameters also throw excuses and aid to CD and EIDOS when they fail on those fronts, and admit that they will buy any new TR game irregardless of its content.

The TR fandom is multifaceted and fractured. No two fans think alike on all issues, and the fans are divided into many camps. This is a direct result of all the alterations over the course of the series, and to the attraction and repulsion of those same elements by the many disparate fans. If we were to gather all of this forum into a stadium and asked them all to organize by all of the various game parameters they endorse it would be a madhouse. Where would I go...let's see...the group that does not care about the story or Lara's hair, needs precise controls, no headset, uses flares, etc...

In the classics, they used a formula that worked. The standards were set, and whenever you loaded a TR game you knew that the game would be one more piece in a continuing saga. Graphics change, animations are improved, but the nuts and bolts deep inside should not. If drastic and dramatic change is deemed necessary, than call the game something else.

Tony9595
15-05-09, 14:20
She says in Arthur's Tomb, "Swords in stones, Alister. They're part of the monomyth. There wasn't just one Excalibur or one Merlin. We keep seeing
swords and daises all over the world because they were everywhere." When I first heard that I was like, "What? We have? I only remember two!" :p

And I didn´t even notice that it was some dais...

The first time I finished Bolivia I thought that she was standing on the Scion :vlol:

The floor around the daises reminds me of it somehow :confused:

Reggie
15-05-09, 18:54
I tell you, I just don't understand this "compromise" mentality that is quite often expressed in here concerning the series. It goes hand in hand with "multi-consumer group think", and the fear that Lara will vanish forever.

Every individual has their own ideas, opinions, hopes, best, worsts, etc. While all of these are quite often expressed in here on a regular basis, many times the same individuals who criticize and take stands against various game parameters also throw excuses and aid to CD and EIDOS when they fail on those fronts, and admit that they will buy any new TR game irregardless of its content.

The TR fandom is multifaceted and fractured. No two fans think alike on all issues, and the fans are divided into many camps. This is a direct result of all the alterations over the course of the series, and to the attraction and repulsion of those same elements by the many disparate fans. If we were to gather all of this forum into a stadium and asked them all to organize by all of the various game parameters they endorse it would be a madhouse. Where would I go...let's see...the group that does not care about the story or Lara's hair, needs precise controls, no headset, uses flares, etc...

In the classics, they used a formula that worked. The standards were set, and whenever you loaded a TR game you knew that the game would be one more piece in a continuing saga. Graphics change, animations are improved, but the nuts and bolts deep inside should not. If drastic and dramatic change is deemed necessary, than call the game something else.

*Bursts out into Applause*
Couldn't agree more, Eddie.

Verdilet
15-05-09, 18:56
I've just finished replaying Legend, and although I did enjoy Nepal, I've more-or-less come to the conclusion that I just don't like Legend anymore. After playing the classics so much, it just seems boring. I know it's best to just appreciate it as a non-TR game, but I still didn't like it. A shame, perhaps, but there you go.:( I will probably come back to it in several years though, and maybe I'll enjoy it more then.

In response to points that have been made in this thread, I definitely prefer the pickups in the classics. Having a thousand health packs and weapons may be unrealistic, but it made the game more interesting for me. And although Legend may have done some other things right, it just doesn't seem like enough to make up for the other blunders in this game.

Re: storyline, I don't expect many people to agree here, but I actually find TR2's storyline to be the most interesting of the series. All it needed was to be fleshed out a bit more and it would have been perfect. It focussed on the more interetsing things (the dagger of Xian and Marco Bartoli) whereas Legend focussed too much on Lara's mother and not enough on Amanda and the "stone dais monomyth". Also, Lara's existence in a vacuum in the classics never bothered me. There's something I like about the idea that she's on her own in these adventures, although I'm also not bothered by some involvement from Zip, Alister and whoever else comes into the story.

Ashnod
15-05-09, 19:06
In the classics, they used a formula that worked. The standards were set, and whenever you loaded a TR game you knew that the game would be one more piece in a continuing saga. Graphics change, animations are improved, but the nuts and bolts deep inside should not. If drastic and dramatic change is deemed necessary, than call the game something else.

It worked for you, and for some. It did not work for me, and for others. I was driven away from TR by the time of TR3, and that had nothing to do with controls or difficulty. I liked TR1, but I liked what followed less and less.

I don't think the formula was perfect.

Mytly
15-05-09, 19:36
The game should have expanded much more upon the daises and Amanda's motivations. The mother part was totally unnecessary because Lara already had a personal stake in the story even without that -- isn't it enough to discover that her old friend didn't really die and seems to have changed into someone else? That would be motivation enough for me :p Instead Lara kind of ignores that and focuses upon her mother because the story is too crowded and the game too short to properly expand upon everything that is covered.
I agree 100% that the mother part was unnecessary. The sword-and-dias part of the story was the most interesting part for me, and I was rather disappointed that TRU didn't go into detail about them at all, and veered off in a completely different direction. At the end of Legend, I had so many questions and theories about the diases and their purpose, and yet TRU just dismissed them in passing or plain ignored them. For example:
Me: Who built the diases?
TRU: The Atlanteans presumably?
Me: Why?
TRU: Err ... because they were bored and they didn't have TV in those days? :p
Me: What exactly is Excalibur? Is it one weapon or many?
TRU: Excalibur? What's that? Oh yeah, that sword thingy. We kinda forgot about it in the whole game, then remembered about it later, so we just altered the final cutscene and stuck it in.
Me: What happened to the one Lara already had?
TRU: Uhhh .... :o
:rolleyes:

She says in Arthur's Tomb, "Swords in stones, Alister. They're part of the monomyth. There wasn't just one Excalibur or one Merlin. We keep seeing
swords and daises all over the world because they were everywhere." When I first heard that I was like, "What? We have? I only remember two!" :p
As Ashnod, pointed out, there were three diases by that point. And don't you think that if you saw a highly magical piece of equipment in 3 completely unrelated places (and the last 2 within a span of a few days), you'd be justified in a little hyperbole by saying you were seeing them "everywhere"? ;)

Verdilet
15-05-09, 19:43
Me: What exactly is Excalibur? Is it one weapon or many?
TRU: Excalibur? What's that? Oh yeah, that sword thingy. We kinda forgot about it in the whole game, then remembered about it later, so we just altered the final cutscene and stuck it in.
Me: What happened to the one Lara already had?
TRU: Uhhh .... :o
:rolleyes:

That occured to me as well. I always expected Excalibur to be involved in TRU one way or another, since Lara took it with her at the end of Legend, but Crystal did seem to have forgotten about it.

Mytly
15-05-09, 19:52
That's probably why they changed the ending - in the alternate ending, Lara doesn't have Excalibur. ;)

Tony9595
15-05-09, 19:56
I also wanted to know more about King Arthur and the way he was related to Excalibur and Avalon :(

]{eith
15-05-09, 20:00
Verdilet, you're so much younger than I thought you were! :p
Anyway, I agree with everything you said - Legend has its good points, surely, but for the most part is pales in comparison to other games in terms of level design, atmosphere, music and sometimes, at least for me, even visuals - all the high poly/high res textured models in the world won't make me like it if it's poorly lit, although the lighting in Legend is still miles ahead of Anniversary (which remains my favourite despite this major personal gripe of the last three titles).

Ward Dragon
15-05-09, 21:35
I agree 100% that the mother part was unnecessary. The sword-and-dias part of the story was the most interesting part for me, and I was rather disappointed that TRU didn't go into detail about them at all, and veered off in a completely different direction. At the end of Legend, I had so many questions and theories about the diases and their purpose, and yet TRU just dismissed them in passing or plain ignored them.

TRU did explain the daises (Natla calls them a travel network for the Atlanteans) but it was done rather quickly and was clearly not the main focus of the game so the revelation was just kind of like, "What? Oh yeah, that's what I thought. Moving on..." :p

As Ashnod, pointed out, there were three diases by that point. And don't you think that if you saw a highly magical piece of equipment in 3 completely unrelated places (and the last 2 within a span of a few days), you'd be justified in a little hyperbole by saying you were seeing them "everywhere"? ;)

That particular line just seemed like it came out of nowhere to me. I think there should have been more build up before Lara came to her little realization there.

Ashnod
17-05-09, 08:09
Random Legend thing -

Tonight I ninja'd through the PE Beams in Takamoto's penthouse instead of using the metal sphere as a shield.

I've been playing Legend forever and I never noticed the beams don't remain on constantly until tonight.

Always fun to run into something you hadn't done before.

:)

Reggie
18-05-09, 12:18
First of all I'd just like to say how thankful I am that Crystal have actually listened to our suggestions over the years. I can clearly see they have because TRL, a game I hadn't touched for 3 years got a dusting off last night and yours truly attempted to replay it.
I say attempted because the first two levels totally bored me (on so many tedious levels I won't go into) so I skipped past them and got to Japan. The outfit, what can I say? it just a symptom of how horrendously superficial and 'sexed up' Crystal tried to make TR. It feels so cringingly 'hollywood' in its presentation and gameplay that its like I'm watching satire until I realise its actually supposed to be serious!
The combat shows its flaws to its fullest extent in Legend as the weaponry is uninspired and the method of picking off enemies becomes repetitive after about 10 minutes of gameplay. This wouldn't be such a big problem had the rest of the gameplay been ok but no. The levels are totally unconvincing and uninspired. They seem to have a brutally utilitarian nature to them - in other words, they're like playgrounds with an all the fun taken out.
And what about the graphics? well I've been playing TR:AOD a little bit lately and the big thing I've noticed is that TRL was a massive step down in terms of graphics. Everything looks flimsy - like a cheap film set lacking in detail and any decent lighting. I'd go as far as to say it all looks a bit amateur at times - with only some occasional moments that impress.
The music and voices are best left switched off if you're looking for atmosphere but if you're a masochist or you actually like listening to the horribly cliched 'could see it coming from a mile off' lines then by all means leave the settings as normal.
Unfortunately the flybys which spoil every potential level was the final straw for me. I was at Ghana by this point and I was in the dam room. 'Oh good' I thought, now I get to do some puzzle solving *Cue camera showing exactly where I need to go*. :rolleyes:

This game is mediocre as it is but atrocious as a Tomb Raider title and not worthy of the name. I'm just thankful that Crystal took what we said seriously. Underworld still bears the legacy of white ledges, symeteric gameplay and an obsession with being 'hollywood' and 'film-like' but overall I can be happy that as I switch off this rubbish game, the Tomb Raider series didn't continue further down that road.

adventurerLara
18-05-09, 14:56
Tomb Raider Legend is my least favourite CD game, but thats not to say I dislike it. I only say this because Anniversary and Underworld were overall better games IMO.

Verdilet
18-05-09, 16:33
Reggie, I agree 100%. :tmb:

*laralover*
19-05-09, 09:42
I agree with Reggie too :o

ZipandAlister
19-05-09, 19:40
First of all I'd just like to say how thankful I am that Crystal have actually listened to our suggestions over the years. I can clearly see they have because TRL, a game I hadn't touched for 3 years got a dusting off last night and yours truly attempted to replay it.
I say attempted because the first two levels totally bored me (on so many tedious levels I won't go into) so I skipped past them and got to Japan. The outfit, what can I say? it just a symptom of how horrendously superficial and 'sexed up' Crystal tried to make TR. It feels so cringingly 'hollywood' in its presentation and gameplay that its like I'm watching satire until I realise its actually supposed to be serious!
The combat shows its flaws to its fullest extent in Legend as the weaponry is uninspired and the method of picking off enemies becomes repetitive after about 10 minutes of gameplay. This wouldn't be such a big problem had the rest of the gameplay been ok but no. The levels are totally unconvincing and uninspired. They seem to have a brutally utilitarian nature to them - in other words, they're like playgrounds with an all the fun taken out.
And what about the graphics? well I've been playing TR:AOD a little bit lately and the big thing I've noticed is that TRL was a massive step down in terms of graphics. Everything looks flimsy - like a cheap film set lacking in detail and any decent lighting. I'd go as far as to say it all looks a bit amateur at times - with only some occasional moments that impress.
The music and voices are best left switched off if you're looking for atmosphere but if you're a masochist or you actually like listening to the horribly cliched 'could see it coming from a mile off' lines then by all means leave the settings as normal.
Unfortunately the flybys which spoil every potential level was the final straw for me. I was at Ghana by this point and I was in the dam room. 'Oh good' I thought, now I get to do some puzzle solving *Cue camera showing exactly where I need to go*. :rolleyes:

This game is mediocre as it is but atrocious as a Tomb Raider title and not worthy of the name. I'm just thankful that Crystal took what we said seriously. Underworld still bears the legacy of white ledges, symeteric gameplay and an obsession with being 'hollywood' and 'film-like' but overall I can be happy that as I switch off this rubbish game, the Tomb Raider series didn't continue further down that road.

What are you saying?:hea: Legend had incredible graphics. Were you playing on PS2 or PC? Those versions are ugly. Angel of Darkness' graphics were muddy and the textures were ugly even for the time it was released. I don't know about the PC version but the PS2 version is one of the ugliest games I've ever played. But, of course your a blind Core fanboy who can't accept anything good about the CD games.

If Core made the biggest pile of turd on Earth you would praise it and say it's much better than the CD games.:rolleyes:

MMAN
19-05-09, 19:52
Angel of Darkness' graphics were muddy and the textures were ugly even for the time it was released.

Err... No. The graphics were one of the only aspects of AOD that were (deservedly) praised in pretty much every review of the game. I played it for the first time a few weeks ago and, bad as I found the game, the graphics still hold up pretty well for a game that came out early last gen. Also, while Legend's graphics are technically much better in other areas I definitely found AOD's lighting much more interesting than Legend's (and all the current TR's) white fetish.

Azerutan
19-05-09, 20:09
Err... No. The graphics were one of the only aspects of AOD that were (deservedly) praised in pretty much every review of the game.
True, something I LOVED about AOD is the fact you could see inside Lara's head and those funny eyes from behind, and those graphics = DEAR LORD! (I don't even believe in God) :vlol: I actually remember the reviews not being at all impressed by AOD's graphics, but hey, it's been 6 years, my memory ain't that good anymore...

TombRaiderLover
19-05-09, 20:11
Felt like re-playing Legend today, so popped the disc into the PS2. After cringing through the first couple of cutscenes, I resumed playing. The animations were choppier than I remember, so I guess Anniversary wasn't the only one with over-responsive controls, then. As soon as Zip started chattering away, I muted the dialogue in the Options menu, as well as the music. It felt good. Still, it couldn't save the game. I've never loved Legend, but it's worse than I remember. Very dull, very easy, and that crate/pressure pad "puzzle" bores the hell out of me. The combat is also a lot less fun than I remember. I tried replicating the style from the Classics, jumping from side to side and avoiding bullet-time, but it was still crap. Anyway, I got halfway through Peru, turned it off and played AOD instead.

Verdilet
19-05-09, 20:17
But, of course your a blind Core fanboy who can't accept anything good about the CD games.

If Core made the biggest pile of turd on Earth you would praise it and say it's much better than the CD games.:rolleyes:

And what does that make you? A blind Crystal fanboy who can't accept Core fans' opinions? :rolleyes:

@TombRaiderLover: That's pretty similar to the experience I had. It's a shame, really. :(

Super Badnik
19-05-09, 20:37
My opinon on Legend. It is nearly my least favorite TR. Now, don't get me wrong, Legend is a decent game and i do find it fun to play, not as fun as other games in the series though. However, i probably don't have to mention for the hundredth time how linear it is. Yeah, TR shouldn't be that linear, theres still a bit of exploring, but extremely limited. Not to mention that it was focused on combat, with it being arquabley the most challenging part of the game, not that it was that challenging, apart from on hard mode.

Final thoughts, Legend was a pretty good game, but failed as a Tomb Raider game.

Reggie
19-05-09, 22:30
What are you saying?:hea: Legend had incredible graphics. Were you playing on PS2 or PC? Those versions are ugly. Angel of Darkness' graphics were muddy and the textures were ugly even for the time it was released. I don't know about the PC version but the PS2 version is one of the ugliest games I've ever played. But, of course your a blind Core fanboy who can't accept anything good about the CD games.

If Core made the biggest pile of turd on Earth you would praise it and say it's much better than the CD games.:rolleyes:

If you had taken the trouble to read previous posts you would see the only thing I'm getting at is that Legend is awful. This is my opinion and I think I've argued my corner without entering the realms of blind fanboyism. Crystal have actually gotten it right (more or less) 2 out of the 3 times in their attempts to make a game worthy of the title 'Tomb Raider'. As for graphics, yes I do play it on the PS2 and correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the PS2 version sell more than any other? Ergo most people are playing, by your own admission an ugly looking game. TR:AOD is not an ugly game because every location's architecture looked convincing and solid while the lighting brought everything to life in a way we never saw until TRU. I think comparing the PS2 versions of TR6 and TR7 and arriving at the conclusion that TR6 is indeed the better looking game, is a fair conclusion to make.

Sega Saturn
19-05-09, 23:49
I liked Tomb Raider: Legend, it was fun. :D
The only Crystal Tomb Raider series game I like. Anniversary was boring and Underworld was an epic fail.
Angel of Darkness' graphics were muddy and the textures were ugly even for the time it was released.
No. The best point of the game is graphics. Even reviews confirm it.

Were you playing on PS2 or PC? Those versions are ugly.
No they aren't. Gamecube version was inferior, original Xbox is equal to PlayStation 2 and PC has definately the best graphics. Unless you're running it at and very low resolution in a widescreen monitor. Lara in the Xbox 360 version looked like a silicon doll. Same thing for Next-Generation mode of PC.


If Core made the biggest pile of turd on Earth you would praise it and say it's much better than the CD games.:rolleyes:

No.
If Crystal made the biggest pile of turd on Earth you would praise it and say it's much better than the Core games. :rolleyes:

Dia2blo
20-05-09, 03:09
True, something I LOVED about AOD is the fact you could see inside Lara's head and those funny eyes from behind, and those graphics = DEAR LORD! (I don't even believe in God) :vlol: I actually remember the reviews not being at all impressed by AOD's graphics, but hey, it's been 6 years, my memory ain't that good anymore...

I definitely remember reviews slating the graphics for AOD. At a time when games like Halo and Knights of the Old Republic were on the horizon, AOD did not hold up graphically. I mean just look at those hands!

But i'm not trying to start some sort of AOD vs. Legend war here. I love both for different reasons, although i have to say, that after leaving Legend for a few months between its release and the lack of hype for anniversary, when i delved back into it then, it felt like a whole new game.

I can't entirely explain why, but i actually truly enjoyed Legend, even though i can clearly see all its faults and issues.

Ward Dragon
20-05-09, 03:21
Let's not start another Core vs. Crystal war here :)

Regarding graphics, AOD and Legend had different styles. AOD focused on having a lot of details in the environment (posters, litter, pictures on the walls, etc.) and having colored atmospheric lighting. It made the game feel much dirtier and gritty. Legend on the other hand focused on having higher resolution graphics (and next-gen textures in some versions of the game) with everything looking clean and sharp, plus the lighting was mainly white. These different styles give different feelings to the games.

Personally I prefer the grittier AOD approach because tombs are supposed to be dirty and I like seeing lots of little details in the game like pebbles and debris at dig sites or photos on people's desks on the rare occasion of an urban level. I want to feel the individuality of every place that I visit in the game. I don't want to feel like everything is immaculate and one hallway is interchangeable with another because there's nothing to set them apart from each other. Having a lot of details is great, and I mean that in terms of putting lots of little things into the levels to make each part feel unique and believable.

ZipandAlister
20-05-09, 19:15
And what does that make you? A blind Crystal fanboy who can't accept Core fans' opinions? :rolleyes:





I'm not a CD fanboy. I think every TR game is simply average. None of them are great but, none of them are bad(except for AOD and TRC. Those were bad.). Crystal's games just aren't as great and Core's only great games were TR1 and TR2. TR3, TR4, and TRC were exactly the same and made very little improvements. AOD was an epic turd. TRL wasn't bad but wasn't good. TRA was okay. TRU wasn't bad but, not good.

So, I'm not a Crystal fanboy or a Core fanboy. Anyway, if Core made the biggest turd ever you Core fanboys would praise it.

MMAN
20-05-09, 19:51
None of them are great...

Core's only great games were TR1 and TR2.

Err...

Super Badnik
20-05-09, 20:25
Oh, God, not more Core vs. Crystal crap:hea:

TombRaiderLover
20-05-09, 20:58
I'm not a CD fanboy. I think every TR game is simply average. None of them are great but, none of them are bad(except for AOD and TRC. Those were bad.). Crystal's games just aren't as great and Core's only great games were TR1 and TR2. TR3, TR4, and TRC were exactly the same and made very little improvements. AOD was an epic turd. TRL wasn't bad but wasn't good. TRA was okay. TRU wasn't bad but, not good.


Why on earth are you on a TR forum if you think every TR game is simply average?

Reggie
20-05-09, 22:25
I'm not a CD fanboy. I think every TR game is simply average. None of them are great but, none of them are bad(except for AOD and TRC. Those were bad.). Crystal's games just aren't as great and Core's only great games were TR1 and TR2. TR3, TR4, and TRC were exactly the same and made very little improvements. AOD was an epic turd. TRL wasn't bad but wasn't good. TRA was okay. TRU wasn't bad but, not good.

So, I'm not a Crystal fanboy or a Core fanboy. Anyway, if Core made the biggest turd ever you Core fanboys would praise it.

So why are you here? Did you join just to have a dig at me?

alisteravenger
23-05-09, 14:59
I can't really say I dislike TRL, seeing as it was the first TR game I played. However, when I got stuck in Bolivia, I gave up on the game completely, until about a year later when my friend told me how to complete the puzzle.

I can't say I dislike Crystal either, because the only core TR games I've played are TR1 when I was playing my aunt's Playstation years ago and TRAOD, which of am bored of already.