Jason Moyer on 15/6/2016 at 01:37
Anniversary
Nameless Voice on 15/6/2016 at 01:56
In my opinion, Anniversary is the best.
It captures the classic Tomb Raider feeling (isolation, exploration, platforming and puzzle solving, minimal combat), while having modern graphics and controls, and without any of that modern game silliness (apart from the aforementioned handful of QTEs, which are at least a fairly nice form of QTE.)
scumble on 15/6/2016 at 21:14
I've put that on the wish list for later. I now remember that "remaster" of the original emerging. I've only ever played a demo of the original Tomb Raider on the Playstation.
I'm still going on the reboot and it looks like I'm running out of game now having reached the monastery and hordes of possibly undead samurai. I thought the battle setups there were quite good and I got to use some of those dodge-hack skills I've been learning and not trying a lot.
At the last camp site and I'm not sure I can be bothered to search for more stuff - there doesn't seem to be a point to GPS caches or lighting statues up. Have I missed any useful bonuses?
Briareos H on 15/6/2016 at 21:48
Anniversary is fantastic. One of the best remakes I've seen.
I've forgotten all about TR2013 except the combat which, although it felt out of place to me, was fun and engaging. Exactly what it has to be in a modern TPS. I never really liked the combat in the previous games.
GMDX Dev on 16/6/2016 at 00:02
Quote Posted by Briareos H
Exactly what it has to be in a modern TPS.
This one drew me out of dormancy.
An overly scripted regen health cover shooter where you can't even fire from the hip or while airborne, and fine aiming slows you to a snails pace? Not to mention the scripting and combat scenarios could sometimes be bad themselves outside of pure gunplay. It's better than the previous games' combat regardless simply because you can aim yourself, yet there's many different styles of TPS combat you can take as once again demonstrated by old games rather than them all being pop-in-out regen health cover shooters, as is the dull standard these days.
Anyway, I've gave Anniversary a try recently and it seemed alright. Controls were certainly better and it didn't seem too plagued by modern design conventions or the nonsense of Legend, AoD, and that in later TR games. Some things were lost in translation I think, such as the poor draw distance of the originals creating a deeper sense of atmosphere, isolation and mystery, but getting rid of that of course has pros of its own, even if greater draw distance isn't that important as the game isn't really a shooter. Still, Tomb Raider had its moments of even feeling like a horror game and its constant fog of war and other technical oddities creating an alien atmosphere played a big part in that. I may continue to play the game anyhow and see how it pans out.
nicked on 16/6/2016 at 05:58
Anniversary is one of my favourite games ever, not just Tomb Raider games. Which is why the new one disappointed me so much, being so wildly different in style, tone and gameplay.
faetal on 16/6/2016 at 08:16
Quote Posted by GMDX Dev
This one drew me out of dormancy.
Yes, heaven forbid you don't try to police the preferences of other people who like things you don't.
Briareos H on 16/6/2016 at 09:59
Quote Posted by GMDX Dev
An overly scripted regen health cover shooter where you can't even fire from the hip or while airborne, and fine aiming slows you to a snails pace?
Not in those terms, but that's more or less what I was implying. I expect AAA third person games to have shallow and ultimately unrewarding but fun and accessible combat mechanics, and that's exactly how they felt to me. It might not be Dark Souls, but it was at least much better than the frustrating tedium of the combat in the previous Tomb Raiders.
It goes without saying that I'm not expecting deep combat from a TR game because in my opinion, combat never really was the focus in them (and I went through all the Crystal Dynamic games again last year, so hopefully my opinion is not that biased by nostalgia).
scumble on 16/6/2016 at 12:16
I think the trouble comes with trying to prove a game is objectively bad.
GMDX - I think you've made your points, and most of us aren't that incensed by Tomb Raider being a bit shallow. It's dull to keep returning for these efforts to "prove" that your opinion is better. You just end up sounding like a jerk.
GMDX Dev on 16/6/2016 at 13:37
Quote Posted by Briareos H
Not in those terms, but that's more or less what I was implying. I expect AAA third person games to have shallow and ultimately unrewarding but fun and accessible combat mechanics, and that's exactly how they felt to me. It might not be Dark Souls, but it was at least much better than the frustrating tedium of the combat in the previous Tomb Raiders.
It goes without saying that I'm not expecting deep combat from a TR game because in my opinion, combat never really was the focus in them (and I went through all the Crystal Dynamic games again last year, so hopefully my opinion is not that biased by nostalgia).
Ah, fair enough.
Quote Posted by "faetal"
Yes, heaven forbid you don't try to police the preferences of other people who like things you don't.
Quote Posted by "scumble"
You just end up sounding like a jerk.
I'm allowed to find a statement unfavorable and to object to it. You're the ones policing people.
Generally when someone is slating a particular thing, they may very well sound like a jerk to those that like that thing. Deal with it you fucking fairies.
Quote:
I think the trouble comes with trying to prove a game is objectively bad.
Nobody has been attempting to do that.
