chickdigger802
Banned
is it really though? GTAO is ass, and its an open world game... so 70% sure it won't be 60fps.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
IGN, tomb raider ps3 vs ps4 comparison video
- Thread starter dEvAnGeL
- Start date
is it really though? GTAO is ass, and its an open world game... so 70% sure it won't be 60fps.
I would say no. It wasn't worth the $4 I rented it for.
It's a very mechanically sound and pretty game that has a very bad story and very little gameplay value. Basically all style, no substance.
Most of the game is a monotonous 3rd person shooter where you shoot the same dumb AI over and over and cinematic action sequences where things blow up around you while you press/hold simple inputs. The traversal and puzzles are barely there and so simple, dumbed-down, and lacking in anything resembling challenge that they might as well not be there.
chickdigger802
Banned
its a fine game, but mp is kinda shit, so unless you really have a heavy wallet, i see no reason why not just rent it on gamefly or redbox or w/e. not really that long of a game.
Reception has been mixed amongst gamers (very positive amongst critics AFAIK). If you like Uncharted but have always wanted it to have more open environments and exploration and don't mind the story being a little flat, I'd say it's worth it. If you're expecting a classic Tomb Raider experience, a great story or think single-player games aren't worth it without a good MP mode then you should probably spend your money on something else.
I say hell yes. Also if it's $60 RRP then you should be able to find somewhere selling it for $50. At any rate, if you haven't yet played it it's easily worth the cost of any other full price game.
Wait, you didn't enjoy pressing a total of 3 buttons to
escape the exploding wreckage of a ship
Rewrite
Not as deep as he thinks
I never bought the last gen version of the game. I'd be interested in this version since to me, it's obvious that the next-gen port looks more detailed and beautiful. However, that $60 price tag does NOT look appealing whatsoever. I've seen the Xbox 360 version go up on sale for $10, brand new. I am going to wait for a price drop, personally.
FaintDeftone
Junior Member
I already double dipped on this game (bought both PS3 and PC versions) and I was ready to triple dip since this game was my GOTY last year. However, after seeing the comparison video, I do like the enhanced Lara model but the rest of it isn't significant enough to warrant a $60 purchase. We'll talk when it hits $30 or less...
Somebody didn't watch the video. They said that they created the textures in much higher resolution than what they used in the 360/PS3 versions. The PC version already uses these high-res textures and so does the DE.
ArchedThunder
Banned
Watched the video again. Face looks good to me.
Needs more AA though
The aliasing on her hair is horrid. It looks sub 1080, or does Tress FX cause large aliasing artifacts?
It would when the developer claimed the definitive version has better graphics than PC
http://www.siliconera.com/2013/12/1...ition-will-better-graphics-pc-say-developers/
AgentOtaku
Member
YUUUUUUUP
Old vs new face I'm still conflicted on, but the new skin definitely looks better. Played the game on Ultra w/Tress FX at 1440p/30fps last year, but the skin shader on the PC is probably inferior to this one. Hair seems a bit toned down from the PC, which is understandable. Lara felt like Medusa from the damn Inhumans sometimes, with that possessed pretty-ass hair.
Yep, that's it. It's noticeable.
Yep, that's it. It's noticeable.
Would anyone be able to photoshop the new face without all the bloody eye makeup? I feel like that may be very distracting about the new face and making me hate it, rather than being able to take-in each face's structure as a whole.
As for the video... the Tomb Raider logo look over the cliff edge looks better on PS3. It's too bright on the PS4, and in a lot of places this simply looks like they've jackked up the bloom effects, and made the contrast between light and darkness sharper. Not exactly impressed to be honest.
As for the video... the Tomb Raider logo look over the cliff edge looks better on PS3. It's too bright on the PS4, and in a lot of places this simply looks like they've jackked up the bloom effects, and made the contrast between light and darkness sharper. Not exactly impressed to be honest.
This version uses subsurface scattering for Lara's skin which isn't in the PC version, so yeah, the skin definitely looks better than in the PC version.
NavyPharaoh
Member
I say yeah. I didn't plan on buying this, had no interest but I didn't have nothing to play and it was $40 on amazon so I dove it. I almost quit due to some stupid QTEs but I didn't and it was in my top 5 games last year
but having the ps3 version they should be fortunate I'm willing to double dip... But not at $60, it doesn't look $60 better. The gameplay is the same.
In my opinion, whether you're a first-time buyer or not is irrelevant. I don't think this is worth $60 on principal. It's a graphically enhanced port, $40 would have been more reasonable, with $30 being ideal. If I had a PS4 and actually wanted this, I'd wait for the price to drop, because it will.
Always-honest
Banned
They need to find other tech for hair. This looks horrible.
I don't want to judge too much by watching a IGN video, and i'm sure on a HD screen the differences will be big. But in this video i'm not hyped to buy it.
Will wait for better videos.
I don't want to judge too much by watching a IGN video, and i'm sure on a HD screen the differences will be big. But in this video i'm not hyped to buy it.
Will wait for better videos.
SolidChamp
Banned
Basically the exact opposite of all of this for me.
I thought it was a thrilling, fast-paced action game that draws upon modern mechanics and borrows heavily from standout blockbusters like the Uncharted and Arkham series (in a good way). I am a huge fan of Uncharted 2 & 3, and yet I feel Tomb Raider takes what those games were doing and manages to best them (aside from story and characterization, which is good here but not stellar). It's like making Uncharted more expansive and adding more exploration and motivating you to actually want to collect and find things.
It's a gorgeous game to look at. There's a very nice balance of action and exploration, though the tombs themselves are too short and too few, what is there is very atmospheric and transporting.
I don't get the hate the game gets from a lot of people. It's tied for 2nd with GTAV for my favorite game of 2013.
But yes, the multiplayer is shit.
Dude. I get it. You don't like the game. That doesn't mean you should needlessly repeat yourself again and again how much you hate the game and discourage others from experiencing it.
TheVanillaGorilla
Neo Member
I thought it was solid but unspectacular and won't be paying full price to play it again because of a makeover.
This isn't a dick measuring contest, I actually want to see this remaster compared to the best looking version of their old build. If they said they actually went back and did more than just hit a few graphical settings on, I want to see what's different.
They seem to be using this to get a grip on the new console arcitechtures. Not a waste of money at all, if this helps them to ease into PS4Bone development.
I can't imagine why not. Is it any different from someone recommending the game?
RedAssedApe
Banned
sounds like slightly improved PC version from what I can gather?
SolidChamp
Banned
One opinion isn't supposed to drown out the other.
Yoshichan
And they made him a Lord of Cinder. Not for virtue, but for might. Such is a lord, I suppose. But here I ask. Do we have a sodding chance?
At max settings, 1080p@60fps?!
lowhighkang_LHK
Member
The PS4 shots look a lot better than how it did when I played it on PC, but I'm not spending 60 bucks for this. Will wait for significant price drop.
Fair enough. It's not easy to stay quiet when you see someone charging $60 for a port of a game from last year that you personally found incredibly boring, though.
SolidChamp
Banned
And that's completely understandable...but for people who haven't played it at all, it's perfectly fine for them to make an informed decision to buy/not buy it and (in the case of the former) experience the game for the first time and then form an opinion for themselves. Nobody should be trying to champion their opinion as the be all, end all.
Who knows? The folks over at Crystal Dynamics could be taking all of the criticism into account in an attempt to make a sequel that could win over people such as yourself.
I'd like to think this $60 price tag is an attempt to garner more leeway for the budget on the next TR game, and to sate the greedy appetites of the asshats over at Square Enix.
The developers at Crystal Dynamics strike me as a very passionate, capable bunch.
purpletentacle
Member
Looks great, not for $60 bucks tho. When this is 30 I'll be picking it up again.
AbandonedTrolley
Member
Yup looks good, didn't get last gen so the price is not much of an issue to me as i'm not rebuying.
Hell, for me all they'd have to do is actually let you play the game once in awhile. The mechanics were solid; they just never had a chance to shine thanks to the focus on narrative and spectacle.
But back more on topic, I really don't care what their reasoning may be for charging $60. It's done with such blatant intent of taking advantage of next-gen console owners during a drought that I can't but help find it disgusting.
1080p, we don't know what the frame rate is but it's most likely going to be 30fps.
-
Haven't we done this rodeo with IGN next-gen comparison videos before? People forget that comparing versions with a compressed, 720p video won't be how they will actually look like on your screen. I'd imagine even a resolution bump would be quite a big difference, but you're never going to see that in videos like this.
Yoshichan
And they made him a Lord of Cinder. Not for virtue, but for might. Such is a lord, I suppose. But here I ask. Do we have a sodding chance?
Just watched the footage on my mobile screen and my God does it look beautiful! I dunno if the small screen does all the beauty, but isn't this the prettiest looking game next-gen so far? In this genre, at least?
Laras model is WOW.
Laras model is WOW.
Canis lupus
Member
Looks good to me, will double dip when price comes down.
BocoDragon
or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
I feel I'm in a good position for this. Played only 2 hrs of the PS3 version and I've been hearing nothing but good things since GOTY discussions. I'm starving for PS4 content too.
Dunno about full price though........ I can wait.
Dunno about full price though........ I can wait.
But it's not thrilling. The story is utter crap and the gameplay is repetitive, tedious, and unchallenging. How is it thrilling when there is no danger of failing due to lack of skill?
It borrows from the Arkham games but does nothing better. The Arkham games have great level design, traversal, and combat. The detective mode that Tomb Raider copies is a very useful mechanic in the Arkham games whereas in Tomb Raider it's just a hint mode that is completely superfluous because the game is already braindead easy as it is. The RPG elements are also used well in Arkham whereas in Tomb Raider, again, they are just a pointless checklist feature. It borrowed dumbed-down traversal and a higher focus on combat from Uncharted, but it's even more dumbed down and combat-focused than Uncharted, and even if it wasn't, borrowing those particular things from Uncharted is a step down for Tomb Raider.
The game is about 80% action and 20% other stuff and does neither especially well. As Ysiadmihi has said the game is well made but doesn't let you play it. It does a decent job of fooling people into thinking it has exploration with a couple of bigger areas where linear paths cross but it really doesn't.
There's nothing really to find off the paths they put you on. The collectibles you want to find are on or very near those paths. Nothing is hidden in an interesting place that is hard to get to. The most they do is put a collectible behind a door that requires a specific item to open. The rest of the collectibles are glowing pixels that give you 5XP that aren't fun to collect at all. This contrasts with the Arkham games' Riddler trophies, which give the player puzzles and riddles to solve in order to find, and, well, the Tomb Raider games' secrets, which were challenging to find and reach and gave players useful items because weapons, ammo, and health weren't ubiquitous.
The story and characters are not good by any measure. The story is awful and the characters are 1-dimensional stereotypes that annoy more than anything.
The game would be more beautiful and atmospheric if you weren't spending most of it having shootouts every 5 minutes and running away from explosions. The island in the game is a very interesting setting but they totally dropped the ball by having the cult everywhere. Great concept for having many ruins to explore but everything is pretty much just cult shanty in different regions of the island and you spend most of your time in these environments shooting.
