Criticism of Legend contributed to 'reboot'..?

[cephasjames]

Originally Posted by Revenge

Indeed indeed, the reboot is selling very well, what I rather meant was that it wasn't necessary, in my opinion, to change so much the global formula and to reboot the series to make it sell a lot again, instead, correcting flaws that possibly made the games annoying or not enjoyable for many peeps would have been enough and would have allowed to keep the previous formula, if Crystal actually identified those flaws correctly.
(I really struggle to explain this haha)

I see what you're saying. And I understand it. You may be right, but that's just not the direction they chose.

[ESCachuli]

Slap the reboot's TPS controls and some hordes here and there on AoD and reviews will claim it is the best Tomb Raider ever blablabla. Im sure.

[tomee]

Originally Posted by Nigel Cassidy

Hard to say for sure, but I think the reboot has more to do with the takeover from Square Enix and Crystal D getting a big financial injection allowing them to do something really ambitious that could rival Uncharted, combined with the urge to be gritty and serious and realistic because that is what Christopher Nolan did with Batman and so that is what everybody had to emulate. If criticism from the fans (and gaming press) had anything to do with it I think it is Underworld who is the main culprit.

I agree 100% with this.

[Yeauxleaux]

Originally Posted by cephasjames

Apparently these things may be what was missing from previous games and people really do like having them as part of the new games: The last two Tomb Raider games have combined for 18 million sales. $18 Million is more than the previous six TR games combined and averages out to be better selling than any TR game in the entire franchise history. Apparently, whatever TReboot is selling, lots of people are liking.

I don't think it's really fair to compare game sales today to old games, because the gaming industry has really exploded in the last 10 years and a lot more people are playing games now.

However, I do think it's fair to say that the TReboot games are made for mass-marketing. They're AAA production-level games, and they try to pack every genre into them; some platforming, lots of combat, RPG elements, some soft-horror, crafting, rudimentary attempts at semi-open world with the hubs. They do pack in a lot, for that mainstream value. They've also watered down Lara Croft to be the "everyman" everyone is supposed to relate to, rather than keeping her interesting character quirks and traits that made her unique in the older games, again to make her marketable. That doesn't make them better in substance though, it just means they're created for the mainstream mass market.

Also as much as I love the first Uncharted game (it's probably my favourite Uncharted, for the story and setting alone), it did not set any bars for platforming whatsoever. Any "platforming" that it had was crude compared to even Legend and Anniversary, and even LAU's platforming wasn't anything mind-blowing. Where UDF shone was in it's combat (which you can still see countless games continuing to replicate those basic combat controls to this day, TReboot included) and in it's "cinematic experience", story-telling and attention to detail with graphics and conceptual design.

[Artifact]

Back when Legend was released I remember an overall positive, slightly restrained, reception. As others said, Legend came in the aftermath of AOD, which gained notoriety for bugs, glitches, bad controls and general unfinishedness. Legend's smooth flow and new, elegant controls were a breath of very fresh air and everyone was optimistic. Even non-TR fans became excited, just like with Reboot (which I despise, however).

I don't think criticism of Legend is a thing, even now, more than a decade later. Yes, the game was short, and personally, there was a comical overreliance on scaling walls in Legend, Anniversary and Underworld. But I believe the excitement generated by Legend was far in excess of any voices of criticism.

[The Great Chi]

Originally Posted by Artifact

Back when Legend was released I remember an overall positive, slightly restrained, reception. As others said, Legend came in the aftermath of AOD, which gained notoriety for bugs, glitches, bad controls and general unfinishedness. Legend's smooth flow and new, elegant controls were a breath of very fresh air and everyone was optimistic. Even non-TR fans became excited, just like with Reboot (which I despise, however).

I agree with you there about Legend. I actually love the game even if the levels are short, and play it often as visually, atmospherically and musically it is a fantastic piece of work. I play it far more than Anniversary or Underworld.

The reboot TR 2013 became what it was, due all other modern games that were making money were just total violence. So the reboot followed full of blood and gore.

Hence I have to agree with you about despising the reboot, I bought the PC disk, and wish I had not, as like more modern games they had moved on to ruthlessness, viciousness and total gore. Just felt it was no longer Tomb raiding but had moved on to survivalism, just like those 'zombie apocalypse' games.

Never played the game again, and did not bother with any sequels, as to me, Tomb Raider had moved far away from what it used to be. Pity!

[CroftManiac05]

I absolutely love Legend. From Lara's assertive and sassy personality to the badass music and the battle system with the acrobatics and the slow motion kills is just... !!!
The story might not be as compelling as AOD,(but there is so much depth in it) and there are a few mistakes here and there ( streched/missing textures, Zip and Alister never shut up etc...)
It's my favorite TR and I think it is Crystal's best TR game to date.
Underworld on the other hand is the result of listening to fans too much...

[cephasjames]

Originally Posted by Yeauxleaux

I don't think it's really fair to compare game sales today to old games, because the gaming industry has really exploded in the last 10 years and a lot more people are playing games now.

There are also a lot more games being made and sold nowadays, so selling a lot in a saturated market is a pretty big deal.

[strawberry22]

I can't say I definitely feel this way, but I do feel like perhaps the fanbase reaction pushed the decision to reboot slightly. To be honest, no matter how bad you think the reboot games are, Underworld was not really a step in the right direction was it? Realistically, Legend and Underworld should have been made into one game. Both games are short and overall disappointing when you reach the end. Legend had so much potential that wasn't realised at the time.

I have to agree with The Great Chi here, Tomb Raider has become a series that follows very dull, mundane and generic modern gaming standards - plain colour schemes of brown and grey, ott violence and gore, war, "survival", the need for the main character to have some past trauma that has made them a more determined and purposeful being (parents). It's a real shame Tomb Raider went down this path, because now it's not unique anymore. Even though the previous Crystal games weren't anything compared to the Classics, I'd still consider them valuable and something of real worth. I mean, my first proper Tomb Raider experience came from Legend, and at that time I was unaware of the classics.

As for Lara herself, well, that's a controversial one. I for one cannot stand the new Lara.

[ArigatoGozymas]

I honestly think, like Nigel Cassidy said, the main reason why they did the reboot is to create some sort of a rival to Uncharted, which was selling like hot cakes and very well-received and using the big budget they're getting and the iconic title will help them push this entirely new take and huge departure from what Tomb Raider and Lara Croft were ever about.

Tomb Raider: Legend was never really a bad game. In fact, it's one of the really amazing Tomb Raider games. However, it did have multiple issues, such as how the game is quite fast paced that you almost never really explore anything, except for a few puzzles. There's too much running forward, Lara feels so "light" when you move her, and so fast as well. The addition of the auto grab kinda made it feel like the game wants you to keep moving forward at a fast speed rather than gradually traverse the world and think your way through, and the camera was way too far that Lara felt too small, unlike the previous games.

Tomb Raider: Underworld was ideal in terms of exploration, camera, puzzle-solving (though puzzles could've been better), variety in scenery, pace and balance between action and exploration. However, being kinda short and the story feeling a bit off at some moments and some locations feeling rushed, not to mention the glitches are what contributed to the mixed reaction it received.

Originally Posted by strawberry22

I can't say I definitely feel this way, but I do feel like perhaps the fanbase reaction pushed the decision to reboot slightly. To be honest, no matter how bad you think the reboot games are, Underworld was not really a step in the right direction was it? Realistically, Legend and Underworld should have been made into one game. Both games are short and overall disappointing when you reach the end. Legend had so much potential that wasn't realised at the time.

I have to agree with The Great Chi here, Tomb Raider has become a series that follows very dull, mundane and generic modern gaming standards - plain colour schemes of brown and grey, ott violence and gore, war, "survival", the need for the main character to have some past trauma that has made them a more determined and purposeful being (parents). It's a real shame Tomb Raider went down this path, because now it's not unique anymore. Even though the previous Crystal games weren't anything compared to the Classics, I'd still consider them valuable and something of real worth. I mean, my first proper Tomb Raider experience came from Legend, and at that time I was unaware of the classics.

As for Lara herself, well, that's a controversial one. I for one cannot stand the new Lara.

Quite neatly put.

I couldn't agree more with you. I feel the exact same way about the modern take and how the survival aspect and past trauma feels too generic and pushed onto Lara Croft and there wasn't even any need for that. AOD introduced a dramatic storyline and Lara wasn't how she was in its predecessors, but it made sense, it wasn't forced nor out-of-character.