Was it? That's nice. Who's she?

Do you guys like never hear about American movies/celebrities? lol

I personally don't like a lot of American movies, some of your celebs are okay I guess. That Mean Girls film looks like it's aimed at kids/teens, I'm 36. I'm sure someone from the UK who is more your age will know everyone you know and all the films too.

Ohmyagawd le memories....

http://www.tombraiderforums.com/showthread.php?t=140694

Some of the ideas were being discussed here. So gude.

"a whole different kind of game..."

Boy is that right.

Oh how times have changed. Shame really.

Not really.

I expressed my want for a full open world game with little care for the storyline, about a few months ago and nobody wanted a part of that.

^But now you're all over the idea of having a game that's entirely story-driven. That's not 'quick and simple', which is how I'd define Core's stories (until they went stark-raving bonkers with AoD).

The thing is nobody here can define what I want because I'd be comfortable with many versions of TR.

If having a QTE in place of a cutscene, the QTE being the most control the dev can give the player within constraints of the cinematic moment, then I'm all for it.

If story driven means I can't have a map the size of Just Cause 2, with the ability to roam wherever I want and complete tasks in any order, then I don't want it.

This is why my opinion cannot be summed up into one vision, I can only cooperate with what CD give me. There are different genres of games, then there are different types of games within those genres. The new cinematic/ story driven trend is interesting, it does what it does successfully, but it's kind of crap. You attach those words to any part of a game and normally that part of the game turns to fudge on a stick. That doesn't mean I don't see possible benefits of story driven, and I do think a game can have a complex and strong narrative without ****ting all over the gameplay. Of course that wouldn't matter if you are a person who just doesn't want "story driven".

That post I made was made within the current circumstances. I didn't think we would be rebooting, so given the situation, I would want most of what I said. In fact, given this reboot I still would love a TR game which is the complete opposite.

I still don't see the difference between Tomb Raider and Assassin's Creed games. It's been said, that once we have all the tools we need to enter new area then there's no limits, right? So when we have all the things, the island will become an open world, is that right? And now tell me what's the difference? In Assassin's creed series you need to do something (ignite a tower for example) to access new area, it's not an open world when you start to play as well as Tomb Raider. You're opening new areas one by one. What's the difference then? Anyone care to explain, please?

I only played the first Assassin's Creed and I don't see much of a difference, but here are some differences that I think effect "open world".

The game can follow a structure of linear levels linked by loading screens

The game can be set in one location which the player can roam across (sandbox).

The game can be one location, split into hubs (TR I guess).

Another thing which truly affects the structure of the game is the player's abilities. If Lara could use the axe to climb all of the mountain, every face, then the structure of the game would change greatly.

Also, the platforming is different I think. I think platforming in TR will be more like Alice Madness Returns than Assassin's Creed. Assassin's Creed seems to deal more with intricate climbing maneuvers, whereas from all we've seen of TR, it looks more like running and jumping (like Alice).

They seem the same the way you describe them. I think That's how TR will work, you'll enter an open area, and be given missions, then in that area there are optional player-driven challenges which may unlock new paths or areas. The main quests will also open up new paths of course, I'm sure.

edit: I guess what I'm saying is that if the mountains we see are walls, then the game can still be "open world" but it's split into sections.

Yes and no.

TR9 is supposedly hub-based, Assassin's Creed (certainly Brotherhood & Revelations anyway) are sandbox games. As you acquire items in TR9, you'll be granted access to more hubs (which are like smaller sandboxes linked together by strict paths). Whereas in Brotherhood/Revelations you can choose to travel from A to B in any manner you want, in TR9 you'll have to follow set routes. There might be several routes leading from A to B, but you won't be able randomly wander in any old direction you feel like, you'll have to follow those set routes.

Hmmm...I'm even more confused now :vlol:

It's not like I don't understand what you two just wrote, it does make sense, but it doesn't at the same time :o

I think two better games to compare to TR would be Batman Arkham Asylum. It's an island, you can't run across it because giant mountains are in the way. Each hub is large-ish and has buildings, you can freely roam through the hub, the story isn't super strict in here, it's linear, but it's not always obvious where to go first. The hubs are connected by underground catacombs.

Then there is Prince of Persia 2008, which has one main hub with the main temple, then paths from here which are linear, full of traversal, which lead to other hubs which are large and complex, with traversal.

This is a map of one of the hubs which is interesting because it has rock outlines, then highlighted maps within those boundaries, much like that mysterious TR map...

[IMG]http://desmond.**************/Himg804/scaled.php?server=804&filename=senzatitolo1du.jpg& res=medium[/IMG]

A map of the entire island and it's hubs...

http://i663.photobucket.com/albums/u...afan25/map.png

Assassin's Creed is nothing like Tomb Raider, the point of Tomb Raider was always the challenge of working out how to get there, how to get in there, or how to get out alive. Assassin's Creed you just walk, ride or run there, the world is already open you just have to work out what to do in it. So yes probably after we finish the new Tomb Raider game we can run around playing it Assassin's Creed style. But we still had the challenge of working out how to opening it up. We get to run around and look at things after we finish the game, not before we start.

The Batman AA example is spot on :tmb:

Imagine there's the den, a village, a temple and a volcano in TR9. To get from the den to the volcano you might have to go via the village. To get from the volcano to the temple, you might have to go via the den. You won't be able to take any path that you see fit. A hub-based game, like I said before, describes smaller areas that are connected by set paths.

I made an example...

http://i663.photobucket.com/albums/u...25/sandbox.png

This is a sandbox island, on the island, the player may run from the shore on one side, to the shore on the other side, depending on what obstacles/ features lie in their way and whether they are equipped to overcome those obstacles. This could be a city, like The later Assassin's Creed games seem to be. Essentially one giant hub.

http://i663.photobucket.com/albums/u...fan25/hubs.png

This is a Hub-World island, the space between the black lines and the yellow lines can be seen as boundaries for now. The player travels in these hubs which can be connected to each other via underground hubs/ levels or paths above-ground attaching the hubs.

^Good visual representation :tmb:

In terms of how it would play, it would be just like Last Revelations' Karnak or Alexandria levels but without the loading screens.

Larafan25 are you sure you know what a hub actually is? It is the central part leading to other destinations. Your hub world would only contain a hub if that central yellow island was connected to the others.

^That's not a strict rule. Each area can be described as a hub. There could be a village hub and that could have paths leading to a volcano hub, a temple hub and a den. Those hubs could themselves link to each other or other areas beyond.

EDIT
Back in the day when the tech wasn't as good, hub-based games were what you described, like the castle in Mario64, one large area that simply connected to a series of levels. But like Batman AA shows, things have moved on and grown larger.

@Spong/larafan25/Aussie500

Thanks guys to all of you! I see that now! :hug:

The black outline is the island, the yellow outlines are the hub worlds. We know the game is made up of multiple hub worlds. I think it's accurate.

Take St. Francis Folly as an example, I'm essentially saying the tall room is one hub, and the four themed rooms are also hubs. It might not be specifically accurate, but I'm not sure what else to call the other worlds.

_________________________________________________

Anyways, Lukass and I have been disecting the Night Hub so I thought this might be an accurate representation of what we can see in the night hub...

http://i663.photobucket.com/albums/u...5/hubnight.png

Therefore anything seen in the distance would be reachable as we progress to other hubs, depending on how far in the distance they are, they may be a part of the same hub.

^ Thanks lf25, great example. What are those red lines supposed to be?

paths to other hubs or other parts of the same hub, where this area cuts off.

Remember the path beside Lara at the side of the base camp? Then the other red line is the space above the waterfall, if there is a path there (which I think there probably is as it's the way we go up to radio tower).

Also, the light gray lines are raised ground.

Right, like the night hub likely leads to other areas?

Yeah, it does make sense. I can imagine it now. Thanks again ;-)

I would say yes :tmb:

Nu prublem.

_______________________

So once the game comes out and these claims reveal themselves to be accurate, it's my job to complain for more space and them to make TR10 fully open world.

kthnxbai.

So aussie technically is right, since the hubs are the centers, with different paths (spokes) branching off to other areas.

Yes, but multiple hubs connecting to each other.

Although one hub might lead to another hub via an underground area, a hub may connect directly to another hub seamlessly, yet could still be two different hubs, I think.

Like PoP 2008, it's all one big world, but there are beats, areas of focus, clumps.

This :tmb:

I do think there may be a loading screen before interior spaces though. Which I don't mind.

I feel like I'm crawling with spiders at the thought of walking into a deep cave system with tons of rooms, yet no loading screen. It's like the game world is imploding, it can't be possible. :confused:

Maybe they can do it if they have long corridors that serve as loading periods ala Anniversary.

But that would be huge, and wouldn't it be hard to work with, supposing it would be one giant island, with tons of intricate levels around and under it?

Also, what if there is a large building on the island which we enter, the entire inside of it would need to be modeled inside and out, right? :/

True... even Skyrim has loading screens.

ew D; i cant believe it's almost been a year ago since the hobby consolas magazine and the first screens and stuff o_O feels like it was just a few months ago

Tell me about it, time really flies :(.

^Yeah, but on the plus side, we're now closer to the supposed release than we are to the initial reveal :tmb:

I feel like they even haven't announced the game yet :p

So is the release date still Fall 2012 or has it been pushed back to 2013?