www.tombraiderforums.com

Go Back   www.tombraiderforums.com > Community Forums > General Chat

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 06-01-17, 15:33   #21
TR-Freak
Professor
 
TR-Freak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Deutschland
Posts: 3,940
Default

Because they attempted to reboot the series, failed and killed it off completely and made something that's not Tomb Raider.
__________________
"Your perception of good timing is...bad!"
TR-Freak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-17, 15:35   #22
wearemany
Archaeologist
 
wearemany's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Brazil
Posts: 1,062
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jajay119 View Post
It's all in the exocution. The phrase 'over the top' is not wasted here for me. Legend Lara felt so over the top and cheesey; like an exagerrated version of the character she was supposed to be and it just always felt to me like CD never really understood the character they were trying to convey. Add that together with the change in back story and the whole barbie doll aspect from back then I just could never take her seriously. Underworld Lara was much more to my taste by contrast. I really liked her.
I agree to a certain extent. Legend Lara was witty almost ALL THE TIME, I don't know if it's a bad thing or a good thing. I love her the way she is. Underworld Lara is a lot more similar to classic Lara, I agree. Both in terms of visual and personality. She was more serious. My point was that I didn't understand why people say Legend Lara isn't sassy. That's so utterly wrong.
__________________
If you think Lud's Gate is a bad level, you won't go to Heaven.
wearemany is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-17, 15:41   #23
jajay119
Tomb Raider
 
jajay119's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 17,258
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nigel Cassidy View Post
Yes the tombs and ruins aren't exactly abundant in those games, but the outdoor areas like the jungle or the Nevada desert belong more in an adventure game than stinky back alleys.
I don't disagree the environs in AoD weren't the best choice; the parisian ghetto in my opinion should have been ripped out completely and other more impressive levels placed in there but I don't see how there can be levels of accetance there. You either see TR as exploring ancient environments or you don't and TR2/3 don't fit that bill as much, perhaps, more so than AoD. Exploring the likes of the Louvre etc felt better to me than the likes of Area 51, Antarctica, London, Venice etc That's not to say that they're boring or nor fun but by the definition you gave they're equally as non-TR as AoD and that doesn't change just because you enjoy them more than the parisian back streets segment, not to me anyway.

Quote:
As is yours.
That's what I said.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wearemany View Post
I agree to a certain extent. Legend Lara was witty almost ALL THE TIME, I don't know if it's a bad thing or a good thing. I love her the way she is. Underworld Lara is a lot more similar to classic Lara, I agree. Both in terms of visual and personality. She was more serious. My point was that I didn't understand why people say Legend Lara isn't sassy. That's so utterly wrong.
You're right, it is wrong. But I think she was sassy in the wrong way. Classic Lara, to me was more witty than sassy, but when she was sassy it never felt forced or cheesy. With Legend Lara it's like CD made her so sassy making quipps every three secongs it felt too much and honestly, at time, it felt badly written. It felt very much like what an American thinks British humour and wit is like whereas Core's Lara was written by English people so it fitted. I know being American is not CD's fault but I just feel they got it wrong and it annoys me even more because they had Toby Gard as an advisor so he should have reigned it in but instead pushed it further and we ended up with a female James Bond type character. I don't know, Legend Lara has always just left a sour taste in my mouth, I guess it's hard to fully articulate why 100%
__________________
Merry Christmas, Ya filthy animal.

Last edited by jajay119; 06-01-17 at 15:46.
jajay119 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-17, 15:50   #24
larafan25
Legend
 
larafan25's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 68,046
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ermagherd589 View Post

Here's my opinion: If Core had continued after the AOD trilogy, made other games that were like TR 1-5, then it would've gotten old fast. I remember seeing people after TR3 came out saying that it was getting really repetitive. Lara goes to a place, finds an artifact, other people get there first and they have to fight each other.
I think as a collective, we are shifting to a post-verbal form of communication and expression. Could the reason be a dramatic shift in consciousness separating two groups of people? Perhaps there are no words that can truly allow these people to communicate? Perhaps all that is felt is a shockingly bad sense of dumbfoundment which might only be heard via incoherent muttering and a sigh of defeat.

Because media has actually changed so much since then. Things are very different now, particularly plot in games. Even in the Tomb Raider reboot, the plot is far from "go to place, find an artifact, other people get there first and fight". It's a lot more "go to place, find an artifact, other people get there first and fight".

Tomb Raider 1 has enough diversity, enough variety and re-workable pieces that it could keep us interested for 10 years I bet.

Everyone who is experiencing Tomb Raider as a Tomb Raider fan is at a different stage in their life. Their priorities are different, their interest level is different. Some people will take breaks. Some will lose interest. There are really numerous reasons for why some might not buy the games. So long as other, newer and exciting titles come out, attention will be diverted from Tomb Raider somewhat. It's not a big deal.

Quote:
They definitely stepped up their game with TRLR, but it was still essentially the same game style with not many new things added. Then AOD came along, Eidos completely rushed them and they went bust (or whatever happened, I can't really remember). But I am quite sure that after the AOD trilogy, they would have gone back to more of the same, and people would get bored fast.
No, this is unlikely. With the graphics increasing in the way they did and have been, people would simply be excited to see new Tomb Raider adventures with beautiful visuals. Not to mention exciting little features that can be added without compromising the game's identity or the foundational, non-changing aspects that were laid out beforehand. It is people like you, who "like all the games and all the developers" who are an example of why the smallest amount of change and variety is enough to keep people interested. That change does not need to be as dramatic as altering the history of the character, creating new universes, creating entirely new non-Tomb Raider games. These are people who are excited by the fact that it says "Lara Croft" but it looks a little different, and that's interesting and cool. Or good enough.

Quote:
So Crystal changed it. They didn't make the same game, they took the character, rebooted it and gave it a new style. This way, people wouldn't get bored. Still, the story was basically the same but it had new gameplay, much better graphics and new voice actors. And from then on Crystal owned it, making really great games that would satisfy old fans and new. They rebooted it AGAIN so, again, people wouldn't get bored. I think this was a really good business decision and they did a great job supplying new and fresh ideas every game.
That didn't really happen.

Quote:
What are your thoughts on everything that Core Design and Crystal Dynamics have done, and do you like both devs games?
I loathe Crystal Dynamics and I cannot fathom any explanation as to why they decided to steer as far away from Tomb Raider as possible. With each title they make, it's clear their relationship with Tomb Raider, and their concept of it is extremely shallow and basic. I'm not sure they really have protective eyes, in fact I think they label the series as a problem. Why else would they have spent so long trying to fix it? To raise Lara Croft as a character, to alter the games so heavily. They're truly trying to appeal to themselves, to make a game that they are convinced can be successful, and because their interest in Tomb Raider is nil, they must change it.
larafan25 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-17, 15:51   #25
Nigel Cassidy
Professor
 
Nigel Cassidy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 3,138
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jajay119 View Post
I don't disagree the environs in AoD weren't the best choice; the parisian ghetto in my opinion should have been ripped out completely and other more impressive levels placed in there but I don't see how there can be levels of accetance there. You either see TR as exploring ancient environments or you don't and TR2/3 don't fit that bill as much, perhaps, more so than AoD. Exploring the likes of the Louvre etc felt better to me than the likes of Area 51, Antarctica, London, Venice etc That's not to say that they're boring or nor fun but by the definition you gave they're equally as non-TR as AoD and that doesn't change just because you enjoy them more than the parisian back streets segment, not to me anyway.
It's the tone of the game were I think AoD has got it all wrong, it's a thriller with horror elements. A game like TR3 has the tone of an adventure story, that can be either in ruins or the outdoors. And as a reminder, TR3 has ruins/tombs in India, Antarctica and South Pacific, and outdoors in India, Nevada, Antarctica and South Pacific. So London is the only true oddball in that game, but a little urban area is also welcome in a TR story. TR3 had perhaps a little too much urban area, but then it isn't my favourite TR game either.
Nigel Cassidy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-17, 15:57   #26
Daring Do
Relic Hunter
 
Daring Do's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Geothermal Valley
Posts: 5,934
Default

Oh nonononono no no NO. We do NOT need this thread!
__________________
Raccoons are just cats with fat butts and small people hands.
Daring Do is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-17, 15:58   #27
Nigel Cassidy
Professor
 
Nigel Cassidy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 3,138
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Daring Do View Post
Oh nonononono no no NO. We do NOT need this thread!
Yeah don't worry, I'm done with it already; I explained my point...
Nigel Cassidy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-17, 16:02   #28
wearemany
Archaeologist
 
wearemany's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Brazil
Posts: 1,062
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by larafan25 View Post
I think as a collective, we are shifting to a post-verbal form of communication and expression. Could the reason be a dramatic shift in consciousness separating two groups of people? Perhaps there are no words that can truly allow these people to communicate? Perhaps all that is felt is a shockingly bad sense of dumbfoundment which might only be heard via incoherent muttering and a sigh of defeat.

Because media has actually changed so much since then. Things are very different now, particularly plot in games. Even in the Tomb Raider reboot, the plot is far from "go to place, find an artifact, other people get there first and fight". It's a lot more "go to place, find an artifact, other people get there first and fight".

Tomb Raider 1 has enough diversity, enough variety and re-workable pieces that it could keep us interested for 10 years I bet.

Everyone who is experiencing Tomb Raider as a Tomb Raider fan is at a different stage in their life. Their priorities are different, their interest level is different. Some people will take breaks. Some will lose interest. There are really numerous reasons for why some might not buy the games. So long as other, newer and exciting titles come out, attention will be diverted from Tomb Raider somewhat. It's not a big deal.



No, this is unlikely. With the graphics increasing in the way they did and have been, people would simply be excited to see new Tomb Raider adventures with beautiful visuals. Not to mention exciting little features that can be added without compromising the game's identity or the foundational, non-changing aspects that were laid out beforehand. It is people like you, who "like all the games and all the developers" who are an example of why the smallest amount of change and variety is enough to keep people interested. That change does not need to be as dramatic as altering the history of the character, creating new universes, creating entirely new non-Tomb Raider games. These are people who are excited by the fact that it says "Lara Croft" but it looks a little different, and that's interesting and cool. Or good enough.



That didn't really happen.



I loathe Crystal Dynamics and I cannot fathom any explanation as to why they decided to steer as far away from Tomb Raider as possible. With each title they make, it's clear their relationship with Tomb Raider, and their concept of it is extremely shallow and basic. I'm not sure they really have protective eyes, in fact I think they label the series as a problem. Why else would they have spent so long trying to fix it? To raise Lara Croft as a character, to alter the games so heavily. They're truly trying to appeal to themselves, to make a game that they are convinced can be successful, and because their interest in Tomb Raider is nil, they must change it.
You know, some days ago I was searching the forum because I wanted to find a certain thread. I don't even remember what thread I was looking for, but I came across these posts of yours:

http://www.tombraiderforums.com/show...&postcount=133

http://www.tombraiderforums.com/show...&postcount=150

The thread in which you said those things have almost the exact same purpose as this one. The OP is asking why Crystal Dynamics is bad from the fans' point of view, and your opinion about it changed drastically. What made you change your mind about Crystal not making any Tomb Raider games anymore and Lara Croft not being Lara Croft anymore?
__________________
If you think Lud's Gate is a bad level, you won't go to Heaven.
wearemany is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-17, 16:13   #29
Revenge
Archaeologist
 
Revenge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: France
Posts: 1,581
Default

I understand that they might not like the Tomb Raider games that Crystal Dynamics made, but I don't really get why they get so angry and insulting about it. It looks sometimes like it has nothing to do with Crystal but more with them because if whatever happens in their lives.
__________________
"Your family has the worst apples."
Revenge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-17, 16:23   #30
larafan25
Legend
 
larafan25's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 68,046
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nigel Cassidy View Post
Legend Lara, believe it or not, was mostly consistent with the Lara from 1 to 5, a confident, calm, mostly polite adventurer. AoD Lara Croft is a cantankerous walking bag of hostility that I think would be better suited as an Uncharted villain rather than the hero.
The Legend character is a walking soundbite trying to impersonate Lara based on a distant, and general perspective of who she is. With a a pinch of trying hard to literally not be unlikable.

However, I would blame many more characteristics of the game for why people don't feel like she's Lara Croft.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wearemany View Post
You know, some days ago I was searching the forum because I wanted to find a certain thread. I don't even remember what thread I was looking for, but I came across these posts of yours:

http://www.tombraiderforums.com/show...&postcount=133

http://www.tombraiderforums.com/show...&postcount=150

The thread in which you said those things have almost the exact same purpose as this one. The OP is asking why Crystal Dynamics is bad from the fans' point of view, and your opinion about it changed drastically. What made you change your mind about Crystal not making any Tomb Raider games anymore and Lara Croft not being Lara Croft anymore?
Let's find out:

Quote:
Originally Posted by larafan25 View Post
Essentially they're both very similar incarnations of Tomb Raider.
That's absolutely crazy. Fun fact: You can't relate to the feeling of not knowing what you now know. And so, when the details are made clear in your mind, in that moment, you cannot experience the opposite. You cannot experience mystery or confusion. In other words I cannot relate to the mindset I had when I held this opinion. But it's also plausible that my perspective was placed somewhere else than it is now, that caused me to feel this way. As even with what I now know, I could tell you that in a very vague sens, if we got really general about Tomb Raider, just looking at the "big stuff", then yes they're very similar.

Quote:
As for Lara herself, probably the easiest piece to touch upon, her character is the same. If you're going to paint the picture black and white, then one of the shades are missing because she's the same thing.

Core may put her in situations which show her character differently, or Crystal may change what it means to kill Larson, but in the end she's the same woman IMO.

Ignore any written changes, Lara Croft may be on a life-long quest for her mother but she still has the passion for what she does that classic Lara had, she just doesn't have that same all-around goal.
In other words, I'm saying "some of it is the same and some is not, but because I have decided, without telling anyone, that one piece of information is more important than another, it is the common piece of information that means they are the same character". Which is just inaccurate. To say "some of it is the same, and some is not, but we'll ignore the some that is not, and say it's the same".

Quote:
The issue with CD's past trilogy seems to be that Legend is essentially simplified TR, it's a simplified version of the formula and it's just a visual recreation if that makes sense.
I started to understand that the contents of Tomb Raider could be organized and classified, and that the aspects that most remained were purely visual. The subject matter. While the systems experience of Tomb Raider had been radically changed, giving birth to pleas for "increased difficulty" and "non-linearity" and "longer games".

Quote:
Anniversary is somewhat similar, it just has better level design IMO, better combat, and it puts a classic spin on the Legend mechanics.

Underworld clearly tries harder to be like the exploration-based TR games, but it also tries to be somewhat more cinematic I think. In the end I find it somewhat unenjoyable due to the roughness of the climbing mechanics.

I find this a hard subject to explain because I don't see anything as being tainted. Nothing has been wronged, just changed.
Mostly just mumbo-jumbo because it's said from such a limited idea of what Tomb Raider is. I cannot communicate with the words I used then because I use them with such little interest and meaning. Compared to now.

Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Tony View Post
Yes.

They really aren't, and I'm not just talking about graphics either. Aside from being a lot longer and more challenging, Core's games were more puzzle orientated where as CD's are mostly just action with a few easy "puzzles" here and there. CD's games are a lot more linear as well,
I'd agree with most of that, but I don't define Tomb Raider by much more than the subject matter of Tomb Raiding.

With that being said some levels in Core's games were more action-oriented. I don't think in any of the ways you've listed that CD's TR games are any less of a Tomb Raider game. Perhaps less to your liking. Mine too.
In other words, I decided to define Tomb Raider's minimum requirements as being 1/3 of the game's components. Which is just... wrong.

Quote:
Quote:
and don't even get me started on how Lara's changed. In the original games she just fought evil (cliched I know) because she could. In CD's games her whole motivation centered around her parents, whereas in the original biography her parents disowned her and thus played no part in the games whatsoever.
Well I mentioned the change in writing. That doesn't change what TR is to me and it hardly effects whether the game feels like TR. Lara Croft is practically the same character in my eyes regardless of whether she's looking for her parents. That change may overwrite a past Tomb Raider adventure, making it seem different but it doesn't change the definition of the game, to me at least. Lara Croft has always had motivations, and the entire mission of Lara's adventure after underworld was to make Natla suffer, revenge, fighting evil. She's just been given more personal motives.

None of that changed Lara to me.
The character of Lara Croft is information. She is visual information, she is audio information. You can remove her visual information from the context of the story, as you can with her audio information. These being the sound of her voice, or the shapes and sizes of her body. The colours, textures. However, you cannot remove Lara's action or behavior from her story. Her behavior informs and creates the story. In other words, any alternate story from the original story is simply not the original story, nor does it feature the original character. If so much of the character is informed by their story.

Quote:
Quote:
There are tons of other difference. The series has changed a lot. There's no doubt about that.
I don't think it's changed that much, I don't think Carbonek thinks it has changed that much either.
Gurl. Please.

Quote:
Quote:
I don't even know what this means. Speak English please.
No.
Shade detected.
__________________________________________________ ________

The reason my opinion changed is because I decided that all of Tomb Raider is Tomb Raider, and that every piece if equally valuable in creating an accurate Tomb Raider experience. Anything less is simply less. Anything different is different.

Last edited by larafan25; 06-01-17 at 16:24.
larafan25 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

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 12:53.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.