Tomb Raider Forums  

Go Back   Tomb Raider Forums > General Forums > General Chat

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 24-04-18, 00:29   #31
HarleyCroft
Member
 
HarleyCroft's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2016
Posts: 4,360
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chamayoo View Post
It was a touching thread.
It was, and really enjoyable to follow ^_^
Peaceful and informative discussions between opposing sides are why I joined the forum
HarleyCroft is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-05-18, 18:19   #32
Lily.J
Member
 
Joined: Feb 2018
Posts: 274
Default

Personally, I'm just as relaxed when I play Core's Tomb Raider. ^^

And that's precisely because I'm relaxed that the game easily managed to scare me when it's premeditated.

The exploration and reflection offered by the Tomb Raider formula is in itself extremely relaxing, whether at Crystal or Core ... That's why I like to play this kind of games to calm me down with Lara. The danger with Crystal is stage differently and is perhaps less frightening.

The only TR where I'm less relaxed are the Angel of Darkness and The Last Revelation for some reasons.

.

Last edited by Lily.J; 24-05-18 at 18:31.
Lily.J is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-05-18, 01:20   #33
Zael
Member
 
Joined: Dec 2016
Posts: 301
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chamayoo View Post
It was a touching thread.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarleyCroft View Post
It was, and really enjoyable to follow ^_^
Peaceful and informative discussions between opposing sides are why I joined the forum
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lily.J View Post
Personally, I'm just as relaxed when I play Core's Tomb Raider. ^^

And that's precisely because I'm relaxed that the game easily managed to scare me when it's premeditated.
That's good to hear! And yeah, for me personally, it's very interesting to try to understand each individual's experience, to find out how/why one or another game/product/work of art did or did not resonate with one or another person.

The danger/relaxation contrast I suggested on the last page is just one thing that may stand out, when one examines the verbal content of some of the divergent responses to the games (Core vs. Crystal).

But of course, even looking at one of the player responses (to TR1) that I counted in the 'danger' category (from Cara Ellison), she does talk about something close to relaxation (what she calls 'wonder') as well:

Quote:
http://www.tombraiderforums.com/show...29&postcount=3
Question:

Completed the latest Tomb Raider [TR2013] for the third time recently, and as much as I like that game I can't help but feel I preferred the platforming and exploration of those games. As a fellow Tomb Raider fan do you pine for the days of that old school Tomb Raider?

Answer (from Cara Ellison):

Yes. Yes I really do. Listen, there’s virtue in wanting Tomb Raider to move on, but there are so few AAA games these days that let the player experience the magic that used to happen in that very first Tomb Raider.

1) Few AAA games today let the player feel vulnerable in the way that Tomb Raider allowed. The environments were...

2) Tomb Raider used to be full of tension. Many of the elements of early Tomb Raiders, particularly the first and best, had more in common with Resident Evil and survival horror than it does with...

4) There was time for wonder. These days in third person action games cutscenes happen, people talk too much, you are airdropped in and you are running from place to place as soon as you get there. There’s no respect for slow pacing because maybe the gamer might suddenly drift to sleep in the ten minutes you’d not had an explosion or someone radioing you to tell you to buck the **** up. This means that hardly anything narratively speaking is a dramatic high point any more. Because you have no dramatic low point to compare it with. Compare with the excellent opening of Raiders of the Lost Ark. There’s no talking for a really long time. It’s about discovery. Then it’s about skill. Then it’s about running the **** away. There’s hardly any man-on-man violence so that when it happens they emphasise it: the darts in the back...
So the relative/comparative emphasis in each game on danger versus relaxation certainly doesn't constitute a comprehensive explanation of the divergences that we find in player responses to the games (Core vs. Crystal).

There are distinct (though related) considerations related to mechanics and controls, which are important to explaining the response a given player has to a specific game, and which are quite relevant when comparing the Core and Crystal games:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zael View Post
This contrast (relaxation versus danger) is analogous and related to the contrast discussed earlier: a control system that is automated/accessible/relaxing enough to provide immediately fluid traversal of the environment, versus a 'complicated' control system that demands mastery/proficiency with certain mechanics before traversal of the puzzle-like environments can feel fully fluid.

And while the control system that is more automated allows for a greater sense of relaxation and comfortable immersion in a larger narrative context, the less automated system potentially allows for a greater sense of danger as well as a satisfying sense of mastery/accomplishment when surviving those dangers...
Quote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQRr3pXxsGo&t=124s
...[1:45] ...I think we also lost something in the transition to the ultra simple traversal controls we see in games like Rise of the Tomb Raider and Uncharted. The old system [in the classic Tomb Raider games] demanded expertise. You became a master of the controls, like how you learn to subconsciously flick trick in and out of every grind and manual in Tony Hawk's, and you had to act deliberately, and with intention, like -- dare I say it -- Dark Souls. And in Tomb Raider [1996], a leap across a giant chasm is almost as terrifying and rewarding as it would be in real life. Whereas that exact same jump in the decade-later remake, Tomb Raider Anniversary [2007], is so bereft of challenge that you barely even register that it happened...
Quote:
Originally Posted by MMAN View Post
The amount of mastery needed is nowhere near the same; I've been playing the original games for over ten years (and could use the basics just fine for almost as long) and still find new things I can do with what you are given to experiment or optimize my play. In Legend I could "master" all the finer points of the engine very quickly for speedrunning.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jackali View Post
...The Core games largely treat the entire game as a puzzle to be solved... The world is your puzzle. The LAU trilogy creates a world which includes puzzles and [simplifies] a lot of the aspects of more challenging [traversal] from the previous games - this makes it far more accessible to players... [LAU trilogy games] spend more time and effort on realising other aspects of the presentation... Each of these types of games are aimed at different groups of people, and it's completely normal to not fit into all (or any) of them...
In that context (noting the repeated use of the word 'mastery'), it might be worth mentioning the 'points of contrast' that some researchers have found particularly useful/illuminating, in explaining the divergent responses that different players can have to one and the same game:

Quote:
https://quanticfoundry.com/2015/07/2...on-profile-v2/
...We generated an initial inventory based on a literature review of existing models, tested it with 1,127 gamers, validated it with another 600 gamers, and used factor analysis to identify 5 groups of motivations... The factor analysis and hierarchical clustering results not only enumerate gamer motivations, they also show how the motivations are related to each other. One key challenge in studying gaming motivations is that it’s relatively easy to brainstorm and list potential motivations, but understanding the structure underlying those motivations, how they relate to each other, and how to reliably measure them require large amounts of data. The hierarchical clustering suggests that the 12 motivation factors fall into 3 high-level groupings:

The Immersion-Exploration branch covers different ways of relating to the story and design of the game world, whether via the narrative, the characters, or exploring and customizing the game world.

The Achievement-Mastery branch covers different ways or progressing through and attaining power within the construct of the game world, whether this is leveling up, completing all its missions, or gaining mastery through practice.

The Action-Social branch covers more energetic and gregarious modes of gameplay, seeking out arousing gaming experiences whether this is from playing with other people, intense gameplay, or dramatic destruction.

The first two of these high-level groupings make intuitive sense. The Action-Social branch may be the least intuitive branch, but in hindsight, it is predicted by the Big Five personality model. The Big Five model is the current gold standard in describing and measuring personality in academic psychology. In this personality framework, studies have found that Extraversion bundles together traits related to gregariousness, excitement-seeking, assertiveness, and cheerfulness - an interesting mix of traits that is broader than the popular science description of Extraversion. The Action-Social branch seems to reflect this combination of Extraversion traits...
Quote:
https://quanticfoundry.com/2015/06/1...ation-profile/
...I think most gamers, from their own gameplay experiences and playing with others online, have some folk taxonomy of some of these gameplay preferences. And we have labels for some of these preferences: 'griefers' or 'min-maxers'.

Over the past two decades, academic researchers and game developers have proposed many models and frameworks to codify these differences. From Bartle’s well-known Player Types to LeBlanc’s Aesthetics, from Lazzaro’s Fun Types to Sherry’s Gaming Uses & Gratifications, there is certainly no shortage of proposed models.

Despite the large number of proposed models, there has been a relative lack of quantitative data backing up most of the proposed models. From a statistical point of view, the following issues have typically not been addressed quantitatively...

Last edited by Zael; 25-05-18 at 01:25.
Zael is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-05-18, 06:41   #34
Lily.J
Member
 
Joined: Feb 2018
Posts: 274
Default

Well let's face it ... Yes, the mastery that requires the heartless gameplay of Core adds a non-negligible tension especially when you are in a most critical and stressful situation.

Crystal Dynamics will be more satisfied to make you master of a great stylistic flight very cynematographic when it comes to defend yourself, which is a completely different way of staging. ^^

I am one of those people who grew up with the classics and who still prefers the trilogy of Crystal, precisely because I appreciate the evolution that it has been able to bring to the level of the gameplay, which will have always rebuffed me a little, I find Lara much more developed too.

Aside from the difficulty and some atmospheres, I'm surprised that some do not take necessary step back to assert that Core's games were really poorly written (who plays Tomb Raider for writing?) And that Lara was strictly transparent. This was not the concern of the developers of the time and when they tried, the subtlety was rarely part of the trip. But some fans will tell you that Lara is an intensely and more interesting character than at Crystal, from this point of view, I will be like PlumeEcarlate, I can only associate these affirmations to a slight nostalgia quite tenacious, because if I am attached to the Lara from Core, I can not deny that Crystal served a more elaborate and loving work on Lara. (specially Legend) Although I will have preferred that Lara preserve a more sarcastic tone.

What I liked about Core was exploring worlds and solving puzzles for hours, and congratulating myself on my efforts.

What I like about Crystal is the "more realistic immersion" and a different writing less cartoonesque and more in a "Hollywood" style. Even if these new elements are not exceptional, they bring Tomb Raider to life in the most radiant way for me.

The games are getting older. And it's ridiculous to say that Core can compete with current products over time. New players are waiting to "have fun" when they get into the video game industry, and Core no longer claim this distinction in 2018 for today's players and future generations.

The games seem ridiculously out of fashion in front of standards that each year has implanted in its momentum in entertainment until today.

You should never blame yourself for not enjoying driving a wooden bike without pedals, when you grew up surrounded by motorcycles.

.

Last edited by Lily.J; 25-05-18 at 07:03.
Lily.J is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-05-18, 19:44   #35
Zael
Member
 
Joined: Dec 2016
Posts: 301
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jackali View Post
...Each of these types of games are aimed at different groups of people, and it's completely normal to not fit into all (or any) of them...
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarleyCroft View Post
It was, and really enjoyable to follow ^_^
Peaceful and informative discussions between opposing sides are why I joined the forum
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lily.J View Post
...New players are waiting to "have fun" when they get into the video game industry... You should never blame yourself for not enjoying driving a wooden bike without pedals, when you grew up surrounded by motorcycles.
Agree entirely with the three points above! Definitely an important set of considerations.

Open discussion of personal preferences (where 'discussion' includes both vigorous agreements and disagreements) tends to happen more easily and more smoothly, if each member of a community is able to do their part to ensure that there is no sense of blame or shame attached to the expression of one type of preference or another.

On that note, one minor point of clarification: while some of the folks quoted in Post #33 do seem to lament/regret that 'mastery' is often no longer required in relation to traversal mechanics and puzzle-like/exploration-oriented level design (a lament/regret that therefore resides somewhere close to the intersection of 'Immersion-Exploration' & 'Achievement-Mastery'), those folks do acknowledge that combat mechanics & design remains a 'method' through which action-adventure titles of today maintain an emphasis on Achievement-Mastery.

For example, from two of the folks quoted previously, in Post #33:
Quote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQRr3pXxsGo&t=160s
Mark Brown: Nov 30, 2015
...[1:45] I think we also lost something in the transition to the ultra simple traversal controls we see in games like Rise of the Tomb Raider and Uncharted... [2:40] [this] looks even worse when you compare it to the way the franchise's combat has evolved. We’ve gone from wildly firing at bats, to doing stealth kills, making headshots, taking cover, readying arrows, making and throwing bombs, distracting enemies, pulling down structures, and juggling different ammo types. These mechanics make combat in [the new] Tomb Raider dynamic and interesting. You have to consider your options, and figure out which strategy to use on which enemy. You can improve your abilities, both through upgrades and just practice. You need dexterity and to remember complicated control schemes. And it’s rewarding when you successfully kill a bunch of baddies. But traversal has become practically automated. Jump at the coloured ledge. Hold a direction. Press jump. Hold a direction. Surely we can do something more interesting than this? Thankfully, we can, and a number of smaller games show us that movement can still be as deep and involving as [combat]. Perhaps the most obvious example is first-person parkour game, Mirror's Edge...
Quote:
Originally Posted by MMAN View Post
MMAN: May 21, 2012
...The platforming controls in Tomb Raider are far too inaccessible for beginners, but now modern systems have gone completely the opposite way and are essentially a Skinner box where you point the control stick/keys in a direction, hammer jump and enjoy the show with little meaningful input (the only one I can think of that makes an attempt at something else is Mirror's Edge, which is basically a modern spiritual successor to the original TR's controls). Combat is the main thing that is truly improved in modern action-adventures, and that's a dead end in the first place as other genres tend to do that better, although I think Uncharted's melding [intersection] of combat and platforming is one of the few interesting modern innovations of the genre, as it actually takes advantage of it's unique aspects.

In that chasing after action and accessibility though, the genre seems to have lost sight of all the cool things it could be doing as far as providing an exploration-filled adventure, and it's only got worse as things continue to be more reigned in with arbitrary invisible walls or, alternatively, opened up so much that any level design quality gets lost in pointless emptiness. Therefore, while I love certain modern games in the genre, the first few TR's remain my favourite as they are still the ones that hint at the full potential of the genre the most (as far as the "adventure" part of "action-adventure" goes, which is the half I enjoy more as I can get my fix of action in other genres). What's especially annoying is that most of the aspects to create a groundbreaking action-adventure are already out there with a little tweaking (Uncharted's merging [intersection] of platforming and combat, the controls of Mirror's Edge and level design of the original Tomb Raiders, among other things), but it's all spread across a bunch of disparate games that only excel in those areas with no attempt to unify those strengths.
EDIT: Also, for a slightly more sympathetic view of the characterization of Lara in the original game, I would continue to recommend the 'outline' provided by Karen Leslie (pasted, in part, into this post). The even more condensed version of Karen's outline:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Karen_Leslie View Post
I can see why some may think that Lara wasn't very fleshed out as a character in the first game because she didn't have that much dialogue, but IMO what we do see of her personality is well-chosen. You learn a tremendous amount about her in the opening cutscene by how she interacts with Larson, how she interacts with Natla, the fact that she's reading, etc.

Now that I think about it, I think the writing in TR1 is seriously under-rated. Sure, the whole Search for the Scion plot is obviously just an excuse to get Lara into interesting locations, but the small amount of character interaction was well done.

I haven't played AOD or Legend yet, part of me wants to and part of me is afraid to because I know I'll keep yelling at the TV that "that's not Lara!" Of course I've been doing that with every TR since TR2 and it's never stopped me before^^.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis's Mom View Post
Agreed. CD tried to address complaints regarding Lara which I do feel were justified: even in Core's hands the idea of Lara Croft was far better than the execution, the exception being that first game. IMO, that is Lara Croft. After that initial success, Core had a tiger by the tail it struggled to control...

Last edited by Zael; 26-05-18 at 22:55.
Zael is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT. The time now is 13:08.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Tomb Raider Forums is not owned or operated by CDE Entertainment Ltd.
Lara Croft and Tomb Raider are trademarks of CDE Entertainment Ltd.