View Full Version : something worries me,...
i know this is a silly theory,.. but i always thought legends was like the first episode of the whole series, and that with it, the whole tomb raider chapter will be open to lara, after she whatever happens in avalon and looses everything she need to loose, she will just move into her manor, and from them on the whole series will happen,..
but my worries come when every magazine just talk about the fact of lara being younger now that in legend,.. i personally dont really think so,.. how could that be,.. she was already shildish enought there as to be right now (AE) younger,...
its a shame... what do you all think???
I think that TR games aren't related in any form, something like if they were acting in different parallel worlds, different dimensions.
Trying to get a chronolgy between all TR games is definitively a useless thing. It was possible for TR1->TR6 but now, it doesn't work any more ;)
I think that TR games aren't related in any form, something like if they were acting in different parallel worlds, different dimensions.
Trying to get a chronolgy between all TR games is definitively a useless thing. It was possible for TR1->TR6 but now, it doesn't work any more ;)
I wish that it was the case.
But the cliffhanger ending to TR7 seemed to burst that theory.
AmericanAssassin
12-01-07, 16:04
They're all connected in some way...
I've always thought that they go in the order that they were released...
ACtually, Legend happens between TR1 and TR2. Thats what theyve always said.
So no worries...
And the games are chronological, except for Legend and probably TR8.
ACtually, Legend happens between TR1 and TR2. Thats what theyve always said.
So no worries...
And the games are chronological, except for Legend and probably TR8.
They never said that. They said that Legend was a sequel to TR1 in spirit - meaning, it's a new, fresh start to Crystal D's Tomb Raider stories.
But, as I've stated several times in the past, Legend's storyline never contradicted previous "in-game" storylines...with emphasis on "in-game" unlike the bios. So, if they really wanted, they could connect Legend to old games.
stereopathic
12-01-07, 16:17
the biography that CD put out kind of invalidates lara's entire history in the classic games. they said she dismisses the stories of her fighting dinosaurs and yetis and that she called the stories "utter rot." that pretty much gives CD license to do whatever the hell they wanna do with the timeline, including pretending that the old ones never happened.
xMiSsCrOfTx
12-01-07, 16:20
Yeah, they're all intertwined in some way, but I seriously think they confused everyone when they changed Lara's bio just like that. :p
StUdEnT rAiDeR
12-01-07, 16:21
Legend lara is not lara croft, its some woman who killed lara and took her place.
in your first post you said it was silly, why post it then krycekuva?
wondering woman
12-01-07, 16:54
I basically see it in the order they were released. So Legend is after AOD to me.
AmericanAssassin
12-01-07, 17:22
I basically see it in the order they were released. So Legend is after AOD to me.
Exactly. Whoever that person was who posted that Legend is based between TR1 and TR2 needs to provide proof.
Okay, then give me a proof, that Legend is after AoD. Because if it is, then Lara found a really good plastic surgery :p
EDIT: Legend Lara is not the one, who we saw in AoD. She acted, talked, dressed different. Plus, Legend Lara's Bio doesn't even mention Von Croy, thus Legend is a new timeline, imo.
AmericanAssassin
12-01-07, 17:45
Okay, then give me a proof, that Legend is after AoD. Because if it is, then Lara found a really good plastic surgery :p
EDIT: Legend Lara is not the one, who we saw in AoD. She acted, talked, dressed different. Plus, Legend Lara's Bio doesn't even mention Von Croy, thus Legend is a new timeline, imo.
I'm not saying my thoughts are official. However, they're more logical than the other timeline. Jeez! Why so angry???
I'm not saying my thoughts are official. However, they're more logical than the other timeline. Jeez! Why so angry???
I'm not angry at all.. Chill man!
They're bringing up the plane crash because it is a part of Lara's bio which has never been fully explained.
The plot is completely new and has nothing to do with previous games. It is not a prequel, it just goes back in time to explain what happened during the plane crash - like a flashback during a movie for example.
CD like to think of it as a completely fresh start which has nothing to do with the previous games, yet doesn't ignore them. What this means is that since Natla, Von Croy etc have died, they won't suddenly come back alive in this game. The game is set in the TR universe but will not have anything from previous games in it.
;)
Virusbuster
12-01-07, 18:32
Legend lara is not lara croft, its some woman who killed lara and took her place.
No way, she couldn't!
stereopathic
12-01-07, 18:43
I basically see it in the order they were released. So Legend is after AOD to me.
TRC throws a big loop in that because the episodes in that game took place all over her timeline.
wondering woman
12-01-07, 19:07
TRC throws a big loop in that because the episodes in that game took place all over her timeline.
oh yea, forgot about Chronicles lol, well..apart from that:p that takes place when ever it's supposed to take place.(even though it messes up the time line)
And yea yea I know Legend is a totally different Lara, But I pretend it's the old Lara and CD never changed the bio:p :D
AmericanAssassin
12-01-07, 20:20
[QUOTE=StUdEnT rAiDeR;1495900]Legend lara is not lara croft...QUOTE]
Yes, Legend Lara is Lara Croft!!!
People are reading way too much into the bios. TR1-6 bios were never needed to understand the storyline of previous games. And so does Legend bio...IMO, the bios are waist of time...you can easily understand who is LC from the games.
Not to mention that in Legend's Paraiso flashback Lara is older than the one we saw in TRC and TLR but, she still has the brown backpack though since she's older she already have TR1 outfit (though no guns). So, if you ignore the bios you can see how well Paraiso fits between Black Isle episode and TR1.
Legend Lara could be AoD Lara considering she's been through so much in AoD (lost so many people) she could actually appreciate life once again (what she lost when nearly died under the pyramid). Of course she seems extremely cheerful compared to AoD Lara, but then again, AoD Lara was extremely angry and depressed compared to Classic Lara. Psychologically, it is possible for a person to drastically change from one extremism to another after tragic experience. Also, the end of Legend showed that under the surface Lara isn't that far from being who she was in AoD.
If Crystal D wanted, they could easily place Legend in old TR timeline. But the problem is Toby Gard's ago. As long as his ego is in charge Core's TR timeline would remain separate.
AmericanAssassin
12-01-07, 20:48
Not to mention that in Legend's Paraiso flashback Lara is older than the one we saw in TRC and TLR but, she still has the brown backpack though since she's older she already have TR1 outfit (though no guns). So, if you ignore the bios you can see how well Paraiso fits between Black Isle episode and TR1
Is she older there? I always thought of her at age 19, or so, in that flashback. On a summer away-from-college archeology dig...
Is she older there? I always thought of her at age 19, or so, in that flashback. On a summer away-from-college archeology dig...
Core always referred to Cambodia Lara as 16 y/o Lara. Black Isle accurse after Cambodia (she already got the backpack) but since she looks the same I'm doubt she's much older than 17. In Paraiso, she already got the backpack, but looks much closer to TR1 Lara what means she's older than the young Lara from TRC.
AmericanAssassin
12-01-07, 20:56
Core always referred to Cambodia Lara as 16 y/o Lara. Black Isle accurse after Cambodia (she already got the backpack) but since she looks the same I'm doubt she's much older than 17. In Paraiso, she already got the backpack, but looks much closer to TR1 Lara what means she's older than the young Lara from TRC.
Ooooh...I thought you were saying younger than the original Lara. I agree that she's probably older than Chronicles Lara! :D Sorry...mistake on my part.
Ooooh...I thought you were saying younger than the original Lara. I agree that she's probably older than Chronicles Lara! :D Sorry...mistake on my part.
No biggie. :)
Moon-Safari
12-01-07, 21:39
I think that TR games aren't related in any form, something like if they were acting in different parallel worlds, different dimensions.
Trying to get a chronolgy between all TR games is definitively a useless thing. It was possible for TR1->TR6 but now, it doesn't work any more ;)
All the different Lara stories we get from the comics, movies, classics, and legend are a parallel to the different legends Lara discovered in Legend. They were all the same basic story about the same person, but was changed to fit the culture of the location the artifact was found in. Legend Lara was retold to fit the American landscape. The movie lara was built to fit the Hollywood audience. Classic British lara will always be the original. Just like the story of King Arthur. This is how I've come to terms with the horrendous bio change.
They made Lara look 10 years younger because TR1 came out 10 years ago. Legend and the other games are in no way related and it's impossible to tell, but it's pretty obvious Legend takes place after TR1 and most of the rest of the games.
CD are artists, they're not going to take what somebody else started and use it. They came in and they have to make Tomb Raider theirs....that's how us artists are, get over it and move on. The time-line was ****ed before Legend came along anyways.....since TR4, then the whole TR-5 mess......so quit acting like CD was the first to switch stuff all around in her bio.
AmericanAssassin
12-01-07, 23:48
They made Lara look 10 years younger because TR1 came out 10 years ago. Legend and the other games are in no way related and it's impossible to tell, but it's pretty obvious Legend takes place after TR1 and most of the rest of the games.
They ARE related, it's just that Legend is tweaked!!!
CD are artists, they're not going to take what somebody else started and use it. They came in and they have to make Tomb Raider theirs....that's how us artists are, get over it and move on. The time-line was ****ed before Legend came along anyways.....since TR4, then the whole TR-5 mess......so quit acting like CD was the first to switch stuff all around in her bio.
That's your opinion. So saying get over it is really out of place.
Unlike independent artists, Crystal D got TR license from Eidos to keep the money going. So, our input and opinions shape their work one way or another. If people feel that their change of the bio is bad for the series they are entitled (and even should) to state their opinion and no one has a right to tell them to get over it.
lorien elf
13-01-07, 03:48
People are reading way too much into the bios. TR1-6 bios were never needed to understand the storyline of previous games. And so does Legend bio...IMO, the bios are waist of time...you can easily understand who is LC from the games.
If Crystal D wanted, they could easily place Legend in old TR timeline. But the problem is Toby Gard's ago. As long as his ego is in charge Core's TR timeline would remain separate.
I can see how you pieced the stories together to fit Legend into the old timeline, and how it could have worked, in some places. And I see what you mean with reading into the bios a lot, at least as it concerns the games now and where each fits. I think it was fair enough to be upset or not pleased with it when it first happened, because even though some say it is unimportant and not significant in regards to LC, it was a bit offensive since it meant re-writing the past of a character we'd come to "love" and a history we were familiar with, among other things. But I'm among those who prefer not to think of ways to fit Legend into the old timeline. and I'm more inclined to believe that CD or SCi or even Toby Gard would be happy with that. It just can't fit with the other games, since underlying those stories was the fact that Lara had that one estate, inherited from an aunt who took pity on her or didn't stop caring for her, and she built up her notoriety too from publishing those works on finding Big Foot and other legendary characters which the CD people had her dismiss with such distaste. I'm not saying that to be argumentative, just that it's impossible for me to even try to imagine the two Lara's and their experiences (timelines) blending in any way. With Legend's story, the things that happened to Lara in the British version wouldn't have happened, imo, couldn't have.
Heh, good on mentioning the very last part too. :)
All the different Lara stories we get from the comics, movies, classics, and legend are a parallel to the different legends Lara discovered in Legend. They were all the same basic story about the same person, but was changed to fit the culture of the location the artifact was found in. Legend Lara was retold to fit the American landscape. The movie lara was built to fit the Hollywood audience. Classic British lara will always be the original. Just like the story of King Arthur. This is how I've come to terms with the horrendous bio change.
^Well-said.
They made Lara look 10 years younger because TR1 came out 10 years ago. Legend and the other games are in no way related and it's impossible to tell, but it's pretty obvious Legend takes place after TR1 and most of the rest of the games.
^ That's the way I understood it too, except the part about the rest of the games. I guess it's just TR1, Legend, TR8, TR9...
CD are artists, they're not going to take what somebody else started and use it. They came in and they have to make Tomb Raider theirs....that's how us artists are, get over it and move on. The time-line was ****ed before Legend came along anyways.....since TR4, then the whole TR-5 mess......so quit acting like CD was the first to switch stuff all around in her bio.
That's your opinion. So saying get over it is really out of place.
Unlike independent artists, Crystal D got TR license from Eidos to keep the money going. So, our input and opinions shape their work one way or another. If people feel that their change of the bio is bad for the series they are entitled (and even should) to state their opinion and no one has a right to tell them to get over it.
^Right, what Lior said. CD have to make it their own, probably to keep TR, and it's understandable that they wouldn't keep the old stuff but fans have a right to complain about the changes the new company/team makes. It wasn't theirs to begin with, no matter how much we like the game that they did make, and it's in no one comparable to any form of art. It's more a business to Eidos anyway. As paying customers we have a right to ***** about the changes that we don't like, the things that we miss. Maybe it's bad to whine, but it's not like we have to shut up and take it whenever Eidos disregards us....
navinloveslara
13-01-07, 09:59
I think that AE is a prequel to Legend, and after Legend, there'll be another one to finish up the cliffhanger.
The information in the bio's was never meant to be taken as set in stone, Core had previously changed it so Lara's motivation for becoming a Tomb raider in the first place was changed, all CD did try to fit everything from the games into a new bio and make it seem reasonable.
The first version of the bio we had Lara leading the sheltered life of an aristocrat till her plane crashed in the Himalayas, she was 21 and because of her life changing experience she could no longer lead her sheltered life and became a Tomb Raider, 8 years later having been disowned by her family she has the Atlantean adventure of Tomb raider 1. But then in Tomb Raider 4 suddenly she became interested in becoming a tomb raider because of a lecture of Werner Von Croys she had heard, and age 16 she went of on an expedition to Cambodia with him with her parents approval. Big difference to the original bio, she will not be disowned now, her parents approve of the life of an achaeologist, she is already a tomb raider before the crash, true it could still make her a loner, but hardly the life changing experience it was originally meant to be. Our little gypsy has already roughed it traveling all over the globe in search of adventure.
Having set Lara's age at 29 for Tomb raider 1 obviously Core were not planning on having Lara still going 10 years later. Core were the first to do away with the year of Lara's birth, and it was about time, cannot have a middle aged Lara still raiding Tombs, now she is perpetually young. But how to come up with a bio that took into account everything that had happened in the previous games, and yet stay true to the original motivation for Lara becoming a tomb raider, how to explain her need for solitude, the lack of family support and yet still give Lara time to acquire her knowledge of ancient civilisations.
Core had set Lara's first adventure with Werner Von Croy at 16, possibly she was younger when she heard the lecture that had supposedly inspired her to become an archaeologist. So her life changing experience in the Himalayas was going to have to be at a much younger age, perhaps 9 was a bit young, but l suppose they wanted her to look different to the 16 year old Lara, and most 9 year olds are pretty cluey. Lara's mother supposedly dying in the Himalayas only added to Lara's motivation for collecting and researching other similiar artifacts of power. Lara's father also being an archaeolgist was a big change, obviously they had been thinking of this when the movie was done, and the games were then changed as well, mind you we never did know what Lara's father did to occupy his time in the Core bio's anyway. Now Lara gains her early experience following dad around, when Lara is 15 he vanishes presumed dead, leaving Lara to finish of her training with Werner Von Croy, as a penniless orphan cut of from her inheritance, presumably it was her enthusiasm that got her the spot on Werners expedition, or perhaps her father had already given his approval and made his sizable contribution before he vanished.
How she supported herself during this period we do not know, but the prevalence of Lara's adventures in print could possibly be a clue. It is only natural that as a financially secure and respectable (?) archaeologist Lara would be trying to play down the fantastic nature of her previous adventures by having her lawyers disown the trashy works of fiction, no doubt in future instalements we will see a few clues to some of these "previous adventures".
Young Lara in Peru, already with her brown backpack and signature outfit has a bad experience with a mystical monster, who kills her friends. This experience would explain Lara's sudden decision to go it alone, and also to go armed and ready for danger. Lara eventually wins her legal battle to inherit the Abbingdon estates (one of which could be the previous home of Lara), but becomes estranged from her remaining family because of the struggle. We are now left with a younger Lara than the 29 year old of the original Tomb raider adventure, but she has years of experience, an obsession with artifacts of power, is a loner, disowned by her family and after all her woes probably never wants to mix with the aristocrats again. And she is no doubt packing a pair of pistols all ready for her Atlantean adventure, although no doubt she has a few other adventures first, such as an encounter with Bigfoot.
The new bio seems fine to me, perhaps 9 year old Lara was a bit over the top so to speak, but then it is Lara and she has not changed much over the years, still unflappable, unbelievable, and determined to get what she wants no matter what obstacles get in her way. As to Zip and Alister, perhaps after Lara's break from Tomb Raiding following Tomb Raider 4, and then her traumatic experiences in AOD she feels the need for a bit of support while she gets back into the swing of things, hopefully she will end up throwing the headset away partway through tomb raider 8 having finally realised how annoying all those interuptions can be
There's no way I can read that. It's hurting my eyes! :cln:
There's no way I can read that. It's hurting my eyes! :cln:
Haha I was just thinking that too, perhaps in that mass of text aussie has embeded an encrypted message. Either way its going into word and sorted into paragraphs so my eyes dont start bleeding while Im reading through
The information in the bio's was never meant to be taken as set in stone, Core had previously changed it so Lara's motivation for becoming a Tomb raider in the first place was changed, all CD did try to fit everything from the games into a new bio and make it seem reasonable.
The first version of the bio we had Lara leading the sheltered life of an aristocrat till her plane crashed in the Himalayas, she was 21 and because of her life changing experience she could no longer lead her sheltered life and became a Tomb Raider, 8 years later having been disowned by her family she has the Atlantean adventure of Tomb raider 1. But then in Tomb Raider 4 suddenly she became interested in becoming a tomb raider because of a lecture of Werner Von Croys she had heard, and age 16 she went of on an expedition to Cambodia with him with her parents approval. Big difference to the original bio, she will not be disowned now, her parents approve of the life of an achaeologist, she is already a tomb raider before the crash, true it could still make her a loner, but hardly the life changing experience it was originally meant to be. Our little gypsy has already roughed it traveling all over the globe in search of adventure.
Having set Lara's age at 29 for Tomb raider 1 obviously Core were not planning on having Lara still going 10 years later. Core were the first to do away with the year of Lara's birth, and it was about time, cannot have a middle aged Lara still raiding Tombs, now she is perpetually young. But how to come up with a bio that took into account everything that had happened in the previous games, and yet stay true to the original motivation for Lara becoming a tomb raider, how to explain her need for solitude, the lack of family support and yet still give Lara time to acquire her knowledge of ancient civilisations.
Core had set Lara's first adventure with Werner Von Croy at 16, possibly she was younger when she heard the lecture that had supposedly inspired her to become an archaeologist. So her life changing experience in the Himalayas was going to have to be at a much younger age, perhaps 9 was a bit young, but l suppose they wanted her to look different to the 16 year old Lara, and most 9 year olds are pretty cluey. Lara's mother supposedly dying in the Himalayas only added to Lara's motivation for collecting and researching other similiar artifacts of power. Lara's father also being an archaeolgist was a big change, obviously they had been thinking of this when the movie was done, and the games were then changed as well, mind you we never did know what Lara's father did to occupy his time in the Core bio's anyway. Now Lara gains her early experience following dad around, when Lara is 15 he vanishes presumed dead, leaving Lara to finish of her training with Werner Von Croy, as a penniless orphan cut of from her inheritance, presumably it was her enthusiasm that got her the spot on Werners expedition, or perhaps her father had already given his approval and made his sizable contribution before he vanished.
How she supported herself during this period we do not know, but the prevalence of Lara's adventures in print could possibly be a clue. It is only natural that as a financially secure and respectable (?) archaeologist Lara would be trying to play down the fantastic nature of her previous adventures by having her lawyers disown the trashy works of fiction, no doubt in future instalements we will see a few clues to some of these "previous adventures".
Young Lara in Peru, already with her brown backpack and signature outfit has a bad experience with a mystical monster, who kills her friends. This experience would explain Lara's sudden decision to go it alone, and also to go armed and ready for danger. Lara eventually wins her legal battle to inherit the Abbingdon estates (one of which could be the previous home of Lara), but becomes estranged from her remaining family because of the struggle. We are now left with a younger Lara than the 29 year old of the original Tomb raider adventure, but she has years of experience, an obsession with artifacts of power, is a loner, disowned by her family and after all her woes probably never wants to mix with the aristocrats again. And she is no doubt packing a pair of pistols all ready for her Atlantean adventure, although no doubt she has a few other adventures first, such as an encounter with Bigfoot.
The new bio seems fine to me, perhaps 9 year old Lara was a bit over the top so to speak, but then it is Lara and she has not changed much over the years, still unflappable, unbelievable, and determined to get what she wants no matter what obstacles get in her way. As to Zip and Alister, perhaps after Lara's break from Tomb Raiding following Tomb Raider 4, and then her traumatic experiences in AOD she feels the need for a bit of support while she gets back into the swing of things, hopefully she will end up throwing the headset away partway through tomb raider 8 having finally realised how annoying all those interuptions can be
Well said! :tmb:
I agree, very well said, now I don't have to write such a long reply to another one of these threads about Legend being before the other games, I'm so tired of these threads.
vBulletin® v3.8.4, Copyright ©2000-2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.