TR3 Graphics are Ahead of it's Time

[New Dwight]

Originally Posted by TombRaiderTim

Dwight, you are well known here for causing problems constantly and it isn't just in this thread, as a lot of people on this forum knows. Quit lashing out at everyone and get back on topic or don't bother at all. If you still cannot act decent, then it is no wonder Michael will not accept any levels or requests off of you.

Dude you clearly have thin skin enough to completely lose it when someone has a different opinion about XYZ. Learn how to take it bold and move on.
Bye with that.

Whether my three-year old level sets gets to trle.net is not a big deal. It only needed a walk through not present on the current hosted site.

I stated my opinion which is on topic. It ends there. You chose to derail it yourself by the simply fact you cannot handle others opinions on such a matter.

[paulojr_mam]

To be fair, gameplay has a space in this discussion. Much more of TR3 is "interactable" compared to most other games (including MGS). And I imagine it takes more processing of (complex) colision because of that. Even then, the game is better looking than most other games on PS1.

[Dermahn]

Originally Posted by paulojr_mam

To be fair, gameplay has a space in this discussion. Much more of TR3 is "interactable" compared to most other games (including MGS). And I imagine it takes more processing of (complex) colision because of that. Even then, the game is better looking than most other games on PS1.

Everyone who thinks that TR3 was ahead of its time needs to step out of their bubble and play some other games. Go ahead and google "best looking PS1 games". I guarantee you that TR3 is not part of any of the lists. Metal Gear Solid has amazingly detailed areas; Core Design couldn't even come close to that by the fifth game. I know we all love Tomb Raider but you need to realise that the games were dated by TR2.

[Reggie]

Originally Posted by Dermahn

Everyone who thinks that TR3 was ahead of its time needs to step out of their bubble and play some other games. Go ahead and google "best looking PS1 games". I guarantee you that TR3 is not part of any of the lists. Metal Gear Solid has amazingly detailed areas; Core Design couldn't even come close to that by the fifth game. I know we all love Tomb Raider but you need to realise that the games were dated by TR2.

Indeed. I love all the classic TR games and the visuals (not graphics in a technical sense) were often good, especially with how colourful TR3 was but as someone who is building custom levels, I draw direct inspiration from how detailed Metal Gear Solid 1 was. I work with the textures and every single one was used correctly, in a believable, well proportioned environment. Regarding interactability, Tomb Raider was a platformer, Metal Gear Solid was stealth/action. For MGS1, it was possible to use every single wall or surface to lean up against in a crouching or standing position, crawl under nearly any object, knock on it to distract guards and with every instance, pre-programmed fixed camera shots added a cinematic and strategic element to each interaction with the level geometry. It wasn't as a expansive as a typical TR3 level but that wouldn't serve the purpose of MGS1's gameplay anyway. It was all about claustrophobia, tight spaces, dark corners. TR3 was about exploration, open spaces. There is some overlap though - both games involve some degree of puzzle solving and both games include trapdoors and lasers which can kill, both also include dedicated Boss levels.

Are TR3's graphics ahead of their time? No. But that doesn't change the fact it's a good looking game (imo). As a trle level builder, it would take a lot of work to even replicate a typical Metal Gear Solid 1 level but it's entirely possible. I have no doubt that with a different workflow and adaptation (smaller levels for example), the TR3 engine could produce a level which looks like MGS1 level - possibly more doable than TR4 which lacks stealth/AI and laser traps. Maybe I should attempt something in the unofficial TR3 editor at some point.

[_Seth]

I guess when I said the graphics are ahead of their time, I mainly meant that there are effects present that even current and last gen games don't bother to feature:

Originally Posted by _Seth

Water surface ripple rings when running, wading or lapping through water.
Air bubbles which rise to the water surface to create a ripple ring.
Shell casings that bounce off onto the ground.
Footprints left behind in sand and mud.
Echo filter for SFX in certain areas.
Different footstep sounds to match the surface tread.
Up to 3 harpoon spears that stick in walls shot at, at one time.
Underwater blood clouds.
Visible breath in cold areas.

Metal Gear Solid does look better overall, sure, and when you take into account the blockiness of TR3 it does undo some of the visual appeal, but considering how wide open TR3 is and how the clever texture work hides some of the blockiness, I'd say it's arguably on a level.

[ReH_]

Originally Posted by Dermahn

Everyone who thinks that TR3 was ahead of its time needs to step out of their bubble and play some other games. Go ahead and google "best looking PS1 games".

Indeed, a lot ps1 games has better looking graphics. But that doesn't change the fact that TR3 was nicely done and balanced between graphics and gameplay. Tomb Raider has always been an open world game, where you could explore all the corners of a map, things that many games at that time lacks, this counts for the graphics as well. When we say "TR3 Graphics are ahead of it's time" we mean that few games gave the freedom of exploration that TR gives, especially TR3 that came with much more details on the map compared to TR1 and TR2.

Originally Posted by Dermahn

I guarantee you that TR3 is not part of any of the lists. Metal Gear Solid has amazingly detailed areas; Core Design couldn't even come close to that by the fifth game. I know we all love Tomb Raider but you need to realise that the games were dated by TR2.

You are missing a point though: Chronicles was a completely rushed game, Core Design was split into two just to work on two completely different engines. They didn't have time to complete both of them. (Chronicles has a lot of bugs, especially on VCI, and i don't even need to quote AoD) This explains why the fifth game wasn't so "detailed".
And what do you mean "dated by TR2"?

[SrDanielPonces]

Originally Posted by ReH_

You are missing a point though: Chronicles was a completely rushed game, Core Design was split into two just to work on two completely different engines. They didn't have time to complete both of them. (Chronicles has a lot of bugs, especially on VCI, and i don't even need to quote AoD) This explains why the fifth game wasn't so "detailed".

ok but we are not judging the game by how rushed it was, we're judging them by what was delivered lmao

Originally Posted by ReH_

And what do you mean "dated by TR2"?

TR1 had the excuse to be blocky because it was developed for sega saturn.
TR2? not so much, considering it was being developed mainly for the Playstation (Sure, we had vehicles and some new hair, but that's about it).

[ReH_]

Originally Posted by SrDanielPonces

ok but we are not judging the game by how rushed it was, we're judging them by what was delivered lmao

Maybe not, but it still influences in a game development. They didn't have time to improve those things. We have to consider that.

[SrDanielPonces]

Originally Posted by ReH_

Maybe not, but it still influences in a game development. They didn't have time to improve those things. We have to consider that.

no we don't lmao again, we're not discussing what the developers went through, but yes the game that was delivered

[Tomb Raidering]

Originally Posted by ReH_

Indeed, a lot ps1 games has better looking graphics. But that doesn't change the fact that TR3 was nicely done and balanced between graphics and gameplay. Tomb Raider has always been an open world game, where you could explore all the corners of a map, things that many games at that time lacks, this counts for the graphics as well. When we say "TR3 Graphics are ahead of it's time" we mean that few games gave the freedom of exploration that TR gives, especially TR3 that came with much more details on the map compared to TR1 and TR2.

The thing is, that’s not graphics. That’s gameplay, and graphics ≠ gameplay.

Originally Posted by SrDanielPonces

ok but we are not judging the game by how rushed it was, we're judging them by what was delivered lmao

Agreed. The GP back then didn’t care about the conspiracies and schemes between Eidos and Core. They cared about the final product they got.

TR1 had the excuse to be blocky because it was developed for sega saturn.
TR2? not so much, considering it was being developed mainly for the Playstation (Sure, we had vehicles and some new hair, but that's about it).

True tea.

Originally Posted by ReH_

Maybe not, but it still influences in a game development. They didn't have time to improve those things. We have to consider that.

İf we want to compare things, we have to be unbiased. Forget all those Eidos vs Core drama you’ve read about on the internet and such. Forget what’s Tomb Raider. Forget what’s (giving an example on topic) MGS1. Now, take a look at both. Concentrate on one thing: either graphics or gameplay, not both. Which one’s better? That’s how one can fairly decide imho.