www.tombraiderforums.com  

Go Back   www.tombraiderforums.com > Tomb Raider Series > The Angel of Darkness

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 03-04-20, 22:49   #41
Caesum
Tomb Raider
 
Caesum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Poland, Warsaw Gender: Male
Posts: 11,628
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by paulojr_mam View Post
You guys should stop lying. It's so clear that Core is at no fault concerning AoD and only Eidos is guilty.
Or maybe some of you should stop being delusional and just realise that even Core was not infallible. The company is dead and that alone shows they just weren't up to the task while other Eidos' developers are still thriving today.

Last edited by Caesum; 03-04-20 at 22:51.
Caesum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-20, 12:51   #42
_Tomb_Raider
Professor
 
_Tomb_Raider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,815
Default

In my opinion, both take the blame to a certain extent.

Edios was too dependent on TR games for income and profit, hence, they made mistake by forcing Core veterans to publish another game before "NextGen" TR game instead of using all resources to publish a "ground-breaking" game which would lead to even more profit in the long run (AOD trilogy; Kurtis games etc.).

Core, on the other hand, was struggled with making everything work on PS2 while being badly mismanaged with no coordination. This resulted in constant delays and damaged moral of the staff who probably lost any passion for the project. Still, with veterans joining at the end of 2000 they got payed for two and a half years (!) to finished the game and somehow managed to fail.

The more we discover how hectic development was, the more I am baffled by mistakes made by both.
__________________
Avatar from Inna Vjuzhanina AOD characters collection.

Last edited by _Tomb_Raider; 04-04-20 at 14:03.
_Tomb_Raider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-20, 13:27   #43
Greenapple968
Relic Hunter
 
Greenapple968's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Barkhang Monastery
Posts: 9,337
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Caesum View Post
Or maybe some of you should stop being delusional and just realise that even Core was not infallible. The company is dead and that alone shows they just weren't up to the task while other Eidos' developers are still thriving today.
I personally do believe that Core did start to go downhill; I didn't consider Chronicles to be as good as the first four TR games and I thought that AOD was worse than Chronicles. The whole debate of Core VS Crystal often attracts controversy; people can get quite heated when comparing those two companies. You are right that Core no longer exists, whereas Crystal is still alive and kicking. However, the majority of people on this forum prefer Core's TR games to Crystal's, which would indicate that Core are generally more appreciated than Crystal.

I myself prefer Core to Crystal, but I try to avoid these heated debates of Core VS Crystal. At the end of the day, whether other people prefer Core/Crystal really doesn't make any difference to my life, the same way that me preferring Core/Crystal doesn't make any difference to life of others. As long as people aren't causing harm or loss to someone or something, then I think they should be entitled to their hobbies.

Quote:
Originally Posted by _Tomb_Raider View Post
In my opinion, both take the blame to a certain extent.

Edios was too dependent on TR games for income and profit, hence, they made mistake by forcing Core veterans to publish another game before "NextGen" TR game instead of using all resources to publish a "ground-breaking" game which would lead to even more profit in the long run (AOD trilogy; Kurtis games etc.).

Core, on the other hand, was struggled with making everything work on PS2 while being badly mismanaged with no coordination. This resulted in constant delays and damaged moral of the staff who probably lost any passion for the project. Still, with veterans joining at the end of 2000 they got payed for two and a half year (!) to finished the game and somehow managed to fail.

The more we discover how hectic development was, the more I am baffled by mistakes made by both.
This makes a lot of sense to me.

At the end of the day, talking about Core VS Crystal probably isn't going to achieve anything as Core are now history and that probably isn't going to change, which is unfortunate for some people.
__________________
It only takes one person to be right.
Greenapple968 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-20, 13:58   #44
Error96
Explorer
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Huddersfield, UK
Posts: 902
Default

I think rushing out chronicles too quick left much of the Core team burned out. I gather there was a lack of co-ordination at Core but it was bad to put out an unfinished game which is Eidos's fault. I heard before launch Core's team were told Eidos would go bankrupt if the game wasn't put out within weeks. Sales of AOD saved Eidos and they replayed Core for by . taking their IP and giving it to Crystal.

I think AOD had lots of potential but ultimately was a failure due to Eidos.
__________________
Go team GOLD - It's time for Lara to get her dual pistols back
Error96 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-20, 15:04   #45
dg1995
Explorer
 
dg1995's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 602
Default

One huge failure of Core was this that they thought that fans want a dark TR game where they can talk with npcs , have some stealth sections and rpg mechanics.

While in reality, fans just wanted a TR game with better camera and controls.(Which Crystal Dynamic just delivered that in legend and managed to make lots of money)
dg1995 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-20, 15:37   #46
Greenapple968
Relic Hunter
 
Greenapple968's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Barkhang Monastery
Posts: 9,337
Default

Wasn't Angel Of Darkness intended as a trilogy; weren't there meant to be direct sequels to AOD? Direct sequels done by Core Design? If so, then AOD wasn't given the opportunity to show its full potential. Had the trilogy gone ahead like planned, then I would have tried the next game and depending on how I felt about that game, I might have tried others as well.

I'm not the biggest fan of AOD, but I still consider it to be better than the Crystal TR games that I've played.
__________________
It only takes one person to be right.
Greenapple968 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-20, 19:30   #47
VictorXD
Relic Hunter
 
VictorXD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: ♓︎ Venus ♓︎
Posts: 9,160
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by paulojr_mam View Post
You guys should stop lying. It's so clear that Core is at no fault concerning AoD and only Eidos is guilty.
Gurl, no.

If Core had no fault in AOD's failure they would have finished the game by the time it was released. If companies today can deliver a longer, more graphically demanding, harder to code, with much more details and a full experience within 3 years of development, than Core should have been able to do that 20 years ago.

The BS of "Core needed more time for development" needs to die already. Eidos ****ed up a lot when it came to AOD, but so did Core. We've even had several Core design members tell us the mess it was when developing that game. If even the people who worked on it recognize it was a mess, it's no delusional fanboy that will be able to claim otherwise.
__________________
Persecution to all non Luds Gate believers may God's wrath fall upon you sinners

Last edited by VictorXD; 04-04-20 at 19:32.
VictorXD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-20, 18:51   #48
TRExpertgamer
Explorer
 
TRExpertgamer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Home
Posts: 919
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by paulojr_mam View Post
You guys should stop lying. It's so clear that Core is at no fault concerning AoD and only Eidos is guilty.
I absolutely agree with you on that 100% because Eidos have literally stole that over-ambitious victory away from Core Design right after Eidos have insisted TO RUSH this game right out of the door from Core Design.
__________________
We all create destiny. Not just you!
TRExpertgamer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-20, 05:52   #49
XXIIXX
Historian
 
XXIIXX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 485
Default

In the grand scheme of things yes, it is a failure, but not as big a failure as some people make it out to be.

I personally don't consider the game to be that bad, I actually like it. I think it has some of the best storytelling ever in a Tomb Raider game. I didn't care much for the stealthy, RPG-y gameplay but it's good that after four games of "more of the same" the team FINALLY tried to step things up... It just didn't work out as well as expected...

I don't think a single person is fully responsible for what happened. Eidos needed the money and Core needed more time because they didn't know how to make a current (at the time) gen game. I'd call the whole development cycle "bad timing".

Angel of Darkness turned out as a mediocre game, I wouldn't even call it a bad game, and while if it was fully realised the game may have been a masterpiece, I think that a lot of time its supporters treat it thinking "what it could have been" and not what it actually was.

Again, I don't personally hate the game but, objectively, it was a mediocre game that caused a lot of trouble for both Core and Eidos.
__________________
Everything lost is meant to be found - Lara Croft
XXIIXX is online now   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 09:31.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.