Support NeoGAF

[StuBurns]

These retcons are lame and are really tainting the game for me already.

 

[Ellis Kim]

*spasm* I want to see this game so hard!

These retcons are lame and are really tainting the game for me already.

Its not retcon if its a reboot. You wouldn't call SH Shattered Memories 'retcon,' nor would you even make that notion for Batman Begins. So why here?

 

[Linkified]

So are they "Americanizing" her to some swearing Coyote Ugly girl? I hope not. British posh Lara doesn't need to work in a pub. I guess an appearance of the Mansion will be an uncertainty as well

Nah Lara needed to pay off her student loan in order to have a good credit rating to be able to on the trip, probably.

 

[UrbanRats]

These retcons are lame and are really tainting the game for me already.

You weren't expecting deep character development, right?

 

[StuBurns]

Its not retcon if its a reboot. You wouldn't call SH Shattered Memories 'retcon,' nor would you even make that notion for Batman Begins. So why here?

Batman Begins doesn't retroactively alter the continuity of Batman as far as I'm aware, and considering Nolan's two Batman movies are the only Batman material I even vaguely care about it'd be hard for me to know or care if it did.

Retcon has a specific meaning, and this looks to be an example of doing it.

At this point, if it's true they're completely changing the background and personality of the character, the gameplay formula, why is this called Tomb Raider? Or more specifically why is she Lara Croft? Of course the reason is because it's a brand, but I personally don't think that's a very legitimate reason creatively.

You weren't expecting deep character development, right?

Certainly not, no.

 

[Jason's Ultimatum]

Sounds good. Bolded part made me laugh. Buddha? Game of the decade!

This game Buddha be good....*pause*..............get it?

 

[Salaadin]

This game Buddha be good....*pause*..............get it?

Buddhum chh

 

[StuBurns]

This game Buddha be good....*pause*..............get it?

I vishnu hadn't said that.

 

[Ushojax]

I certainly don't give a shit about the totally throwaway plot or character established in previous games. She was a pair of big wet tits that occasionally offered up a dry quip or two while raiding tombs. I'm sure that will remain the case however they handle the character and story.

 

[SolidSnakex]

At this point, if it's true they're completely changing the background and personality of the character, the gameplay formula, why is this called Tomb Raider? Or more specifically why is she Lara Croft? Of course the reason is because it's a brand, but I personally don't think that's a very legitimate reason creatively.

They already toyed with the story in Legend when they changed things up (such as her parents dying). Her general back story is still pretty much the same. A big factor here is that she's only 21 in this game. The other games have featured her when she was in her late 20's or early 30's (with the exception of some flashback sequences). So it's expected that her personality wouldn't be the same as in those games.

 

[UrbanRats]

Batman Begins doesn't retroactively alter the continuity of Batman as far as I'm aware, and considering Nolan's two Batman movies are the only Batman material I even vaguely care about it'd be hard for me to know or care if it did.

Retcon has a specific meaning, and this looks to be an example of doing it.

At this point, if it's true they're completely changing the background and personality of the character, the gameplay formula, why is this called Tomb Raider? Or more specifically why is she Lara Croft? Of course the reason is because it's a brand, but I personally don't think that's a very legitimate reason creatively.

Certainly not, no.

There wasn't really anything particulary special about Lara's character.
She was the generic strong woman stereotype and that's it, so as long as they keep that (and that isn't going away) i don't see what's really wrong.
Is the new character going to be amazing? No, but neither was the old Lara. This new one is just gonna have a bit more depth and background.
What's really wrong with this retcon? She will turn out to be something similar to the old lara in the end, but with something beyond her back, to justify it.

 

[Ranger X]

*spasm* I want to see this game so hard!
Its not retcon if its a reboot. You wouldn't call SH Shattered Memories 'retcon,' nor would you even make that notion for Batman Begins. So why here?

Even reboot shouldn't be used. There's only sequels. New installment of X IP.
Stuff was changing in sequels before and they weren't called a "reboot". It's just a buzzword that is ala mode right now and rather lame actually.

 

[Suairyu]

Batman Begins doesn't retroactively alter the continuity of Batman as far as I'm aware, and considering Nolan's two Batman movies are the only Batman material I even vaguely care about it'd be hard for me to know or care if it did.

Well, no, of course it didn't: it created an entirely new continuity. There was nothing to retcon because it was creating continuity anew. The exact same principle applies here.

There wasn't really anything particulary special about Lara's character.
She was the generic strong woman stereotype and that's it, so as long as they keep that (and that isn't going away) i don't see what's really wrong.

Generic is completely the wrong word. She is a very distinctive character, even if she has little depth.

 

[StuBurns]

Well, no, of course it didn't: it created an entirely new continuity. There was nothing to retcon because it was creating continuity anew. The exact same principle applies here.

No, it does not. We do know about Croft's past. If you think it's good or worthy of respecting during iterations is a different issue of course.

 

[Suairyu]

No, it does not. We do know about Croft's past. If you think it's good or worthy of respecting during iterations is a different issue of course.

I am really not understanding you here. How is this game, where it takes cues from previous iterations but uses them to make something new, any different from Batman Begins where it took cues from previous iterations to create something new?

You cannot retcon a story that hasn't even been written yet. This is a reboot. Completely new story. There is nothing to retcon. There is no established backround. The story of Lara Croft has been wiped clean by the reboot like the RAM of a computer is wiped clean with a reboot. Cues are taken from the previous iteration and something new is created. Again, reboot. Nothing established. nothing to retcon. Reboot.

 

[StuBurns]

I am really not understanding you here. How is this game, where it takes cues from previous iterations but uses them to make something new, any different from Batman Begins where it took cues from previous iterations to create something new?

You cannot retcon a story that hasn't even been written yet. This is a reboot. Completely new story. There is nothing to retcon. There is no established backround. The story of Lara Croft has been wiped clean by the reboot like the RAM of a computer is wiped clean with a reboot. Cues are taken from the previous iteration and something new is created. Again, reboot. Nothing established. nothing to retcon. Reboot.

I don't care what semantics you use, 'reboot' just seems like a way of saying we're creatively bankrupt and are going to rape the corpse of whatever IP we own.

It's Lara Croft, that character has a defined story, changing it retroactively is a retcon.

 

[Lord Error]

They also mentioned that they're doing a layering animation system (like in Uncharted).

They did that in Underworld as well. They just didn't do a very good job with it.

 

[Blueblur1]

I never played a single Tomb Raider game and the little I know about the character never engaged me. Because I'm open to this reboot and excited about. I'm looking forward to seeing gameplay come June.

 

[NotTheGuyYouKill]

I don't care what semantics you use, 'reboot' just seems like a way of saying we're creatively bankrupt and are going to rape the corpse of whatever IP we own.

It's Lara Croft, that character has a defined story, changing it retroactively is a retcon.

But they're not changing it retroactively, they are restarting it. Changing it retroactively means they would still be in the previous continuity and just editing the beginning of the story to something different, but that's not what's happening here... they're just restarting the story. Kinda like for Batman or James Bond in Casino Royale.

 

[Suairyu]

I don't care what semantics you use, 'reboot' just seems like a way of saying we're creatively bankrupt and are going to rape the corpse of whatever IP we own.

It's Lara Croft, that character has a defined story, changing it retroactively is a retcon.

IT ISN'T BEING CHANGED RETROACTIVELY

Or, fuckit, let's use your Batman example:

Original Batman: used a gun to shoot criminals, execution style. Was a murdering bastard who got the job done because he was the Batman.
pre-Adam West era Batman: happy, fulfilled man fighting crime for the cheery good of all and engaged in a platonic relationship with young teenage boy with questionable homosexual undertones. Also, the Joker thought it was fun to steal kid's homework.
Adam West era Batman: goofy, camp schlocky man fighting a bumbling set of rogues whose plans more frequently were on the side of the banal than the genuinely menacing.
Frank Miller Batman: child abuser, misogynist, weird fusion between extreme left and right wing and all-round cunt.
Burton Batman: lives in a gothic world and the Joker killed his parents. What?
Nolan Batman: love-sick puppy who lets his unrequited feelings for a childhood friend get in the way of job.

All of these interpretation are radically different, more so than this new Lara Croft reboot is, yet all interpretations are very much Batman.

NONE of those interpretations retconned anything because each one was an original storyline*. You cannot retcon what doesn't exist. I am not being semantic here; you are simply saying "I preferred the original character versus this new interpretation" except you're using the term 'retcon' for some reason when it doesn't apply. Maybe because you're trying to add an objective weight to your subjective opinion? I don't know. But stop using it. Your opinion is simply that you don't like the new Lara Croft background. State that. Don't try to criticise the very notion of character alteration as flawed because you have near enough every artist who ever created a cherished piece of art, every scholar who ever studied those artworks and every normal joe who ever enjoyed those pieces of art against you.

What of myths? Handed down orally over the years, changed over time depending on who was telling the tale and who it was being told to. Creatively bankrupt, right?

Fairy tales! Disney is an uncreative studio that took menacing stories designed to frighten kids into good behavior and turned them into puritan-friendly works of happiness. They totally retconned everything!!!

Literature is littered with archtypal characters who another (or even the original!) author has taken and reimagined into something new. This is not a retcon, nor is it creatively bankrupt. It is the most essential part of the creative process when it comes to constructing a canon of works - imitation, reconfiguration and reinterpretation. There are arguably only seven stories in all history, each one changed around slightly a million times over into an infinite array of original works.

But, at it's core, I really, really need you to realise:
This is not a retcon because there is nothing to retcon because this is an original storyline.
The developers are merely doing what the greatest artists in history have been doing for thousands of years.

Spoiler

That statement is not intended to make a statement on the artistic quality of the new Tomb Raider game.

* Occasionally you got weird overlap periods as Batman moved from one interpretation to the next that could very much be interpreted as retcons, but eventually each period was given a clear enough dividing line from the previous.

 

[StuBurns]

IT ISN'T BEING CHANGED RETROACTIVELY

Or, fuckit, let's use your Batman example:

Original Batman: used a gun to shoot criminals, execution style. Was a murdering bastard who got the job done because he was the Batman.
pre-Adam West era Batman: happy, fulfilled man fighting crime for the cheery good of all and engaged in a platonic relationship with young teenage boy with questionable homosexual undertones. Also, the Joker thought it was fun to steal kid's homework.
Adam West era Batman: goofy, camp schlocky man fighting a bumbling set of rogues whose plans more frequently were on the side of the banal than the genuinely menacing.
Frank Miller Batman: child abuser, misogynist, weird fusion between extreme left and right wing and all-round cunt.
Burton Batman: lives in a gothic world and the Joker killed his parents. What?
Nolan Batman: love-sick puppy who lets his unrequited feelings for a childhood friend get in the way of job.

All of these interpretation are radically different, more so than this new Lara Croft reboot is, yet all interpretations are very much Batman.

NONE of those interpretations retconned anything because each one was an original storyline. You cannot retcon what doesn't exist. I am not being semantic here; you are simply saying "I preferred the original character versus this new interpretation".

What of myths? Handed down orally over the years, changed over time depending on who was telling the tale and who it was being told to. Creatively bankrupt, right?

Fairy tales! Disney is an uncreative studio that took menacing stories designed to frighten kids into good behavior and turned them into puritan-friendly works of happiness. They totally retconned everything!!!

Literature is littered with archtypal characters who another (or even the original!) author has taken and reimagined into something new. This is not a retcon, nor is it creatively bankrupt. It is the most essential part of the creative process when it comes to constructing a canon of works - imitation, reconfiguration and reinterpretation. There are arguably only seven stories in all history, each one changed around slightly a million times over into an infinite array of original works.

But, at it's core, I really, really need you to realise:
This is not a retcon because there is nothing to retcon because this is an original storyline.
The developers are merely doing what the greatest artists in history have been doing for thousands of years.

Spoiler

That statement is not intended to make a statement on the artistic quality of the new Tomb Raider game.

I disagree.

They are not using an archetype, they are using Lara Croft. A specific character who belongs to an archetype.

And I am not saying I prefer the original character, I didn't ever write that.

 

[Grisby]

Er British people say shit alot right? And she could have worked in a bar to pay of university. So...yeah, I don't really see the problem. I don't think CD is going to completely change up her character and make her a cowboy American.

 

[Suairyu]

I disagree.

They are not using an archetype, they are using Lara Croft. A specific character who belongs to an archetype.

I didn't say archetype, I said archetypal.

And I am not saying I prefer the original character, I didn't ever write that.

Then how on earth can you have a problem with the oldest of storytelling traditions, reinterpretation, being applied to a character? What motivates that position? Why are you insisting on stubbornly sticking to a definition of a word (retcon) that you are inventing and using to supplant its actual meaning? Why are you unable to accept this is a new continuity where nothing has been established? Why do you think this is creatively bankrupt?

 

[StuBurns]

I didn't say archetype, I said archetypal.

Nor did I say I preferred the old Lara, it appears we're both incapable of reading each others posts. Perhaps we should stop trying. I'll start right now in fact.

 

[Stallion Free]

Stuburns argument and complaints make absolutely no sense to me.

 

[NotTheGuyYouKill]

I disagree.

They are not using an archetype, they are using Lara Croft. A specific character who belongs to an archetype.

And I am not saying I prefer the original character, I didn't ever write that.

I don't think you know what retcon, reboot, or archetype means... and it's not like this hasn't been done before, weren't the PS2 games essentially rebooting the series? So it's already been done, which means... you're double-wrong.

Edit: well, double-wrong makes no sense, but neither do you.

 

[cackhyena]

I don't think you know what retcon, reboot, or archetype means... and it's not like this hasn't been done before, weren't the PS2 games essentially rebooting the series? So it's already been done, which means... you're double-wrong.

Edit: well, double-wrong makes no sense, but neither do you.

Thanks for the smile you just put on my face with this post.

 

[StuBurns]

I don't think you know what retcon, reboot, or archetype means... and it's not like this hasn't been done before, weren't the PS2 games essentially rebooting the series? So it's already been done, which means... you're double-wrong.

Edit: well, double-wrong makes no sense, but neither do you.

I do know what retcon means. It means retroactive continuity. I know what an archetype is too. I also know 'reboot' is a cheap way of saying we're going to do something new while playing off the success of an existing IP because it's cheaper to market, and that is my issue with it.

They could have created a new female protagonist, they decided not to, because not doing it is easier.

 

[cackhyena]

Stu doesn't get that old Lara was kinda on life support. Stu doesn't get that taking what was once a decent franchise and re molding it makes sense economically compared to a new IP. Stu doesn't get a lot of things.

 

[Satch]

They could have created a new female protagonist, they decided not to, because not doing it is easier.

They could do that with any long standing series! Has that ever tainted your experience when playing a Mario game?

It makes sense, from a business standpoint, to do what they're doing with Lara. They're trying to keep it afloat. Using her name will get the game to sell.

As long as they're expanding on old core design elements of the old game to build something better in the long run, I really don't see what the problem is.

 

[Stallion Free]

The new game is built around two of the core elements that all Tomb Raider games have been which is platforming and puzzling. The new IP argument would make more sense if either of those two core elements was different or not present.

 

[StuBurns]

They could do that with any long standing series! Has that ever tainted your experience when playing a Mario game?

It makes sense, from a business standpoint, to do what they're doing with Lara. They're trying to keep it afloat. Using her name will get the game to sell.

As long as they're expanding on old core design elements of the old game to build something better in the long run, I really don't see what the problem is.

So because other games do it I shouldn't care is basically the argument? Okay. I don't really agree that's valid, but I also really don't care that much. It was a throw comment meant to show an aspect of the game that I find displeasing, not the focus of the thread thereafter. Forgot it.

 

[Hot Coldman]

this thread just got stuuuuuuuuuuuuupid

I like the sound of new Lara. Everything Legend and onwards was cool, but I'm interested if they wanna do something different. As soon as they started making Metroid comparisons I was on board.

 

[Interfectum]

These retcons are lame and are really tainting the game for me already.

The massive amount of shitty Tomb Raider games have already tainted the series as a whole.

Throwing that junk out with a complete reboot actually makes me more interested in the game.

 

[Ponti]

Dutch mag Gameplay did a bit on TR too, scans on TRF as usual. Nothing new pic or info wise. It's been in so many mags that at this point everything that needs to be said / shown already has been, unless EDGE has something new (apparently they have exclusive screens).

I've seen that cover pic somewhere before.

 

[NotTheGuyYouKill]

I do know what retcon means. It means retroactive continuity. I know what an archetype is too. I also know 'reboot' is a cheap way of saying we're going to do something new while playing off the success of an existing IP because it's cheaper to market, and that is my issue with it.

They could have created a new female protagonist, they decided not to, because not doing it is easier.

Knowing what the shortened version of a couple of words does not mean you know the actual definition of the word... like I can say that ASAP means "As soon as possible" when it really means "get it done now or you're fired"

If you're problem is the fact that they are rebooting it, fine, you know to each their own, but at least describe your complaints using the right words cause otherwise you sound like you have no idea what the hell you're talking about and are just bullshitting for the sake of it.

By your logic, they should not have rebooted Batman with the Nolan films and kept letting Schumaker ejaculate in Batman's face (this is an awful metaphor).

Besides, there's nothing narratively wrong with a reboot. There has been a serious decline in TR games over the years. Restarting it fresh, with a new perspective, new ideas, this is a good thing. No reason to let a long-standing series die an ignoble death. Rage rage against the dying of the light and all that jazz.

 

[jbttwin]

Don't play the game if you don't like what you hear.

The way you're putting it, they should have given Daniel Craig's character a different name in Casino Royale. Or Christian Bale isn't Bruce Wayne in batman begins.

 

[daffy]

I guess when you hear reboot and see a new protagonist you assume that everything will stay the same in some sort of continuum that has been clearly abandoned.

Funny how that works huh guys?!?

 

[StuBurns]

Knowing what the shortened version of a couple of words does not mean you know the actual definition of the word... like I can say that ASAP means "As soon as possible" when it really means "get it done now or you're fired"

If you're problem is the fact that they are rebooting it, fine, you know to each their own, but at least describe your complaints using the right words cause otherwise you sound like you have no idea what the hell you're talking about and are just bullshitting for the sake of it.

By your logic, they should not have rebooted Batman with the Nolan films and kept letting Schumaker ejaculate in Batman's face (this is an awful metaphor).

Besides, there's nothing narratively wrong with a reboot. There has been a serious decline in TR games over the years. Restarting it fresh, with a new perspective, new ideas, this is a good thing. No reason to let a long-standing series die an ignoble death. Rage rage against the dying of the light and all that jazz.

You don't know the difference between you're and your, you have no place to tell me what retcon means, or any other English term.

 

[Suairyu]

It should be pointed out that this marks the second story reboot. Legend already provided the first. In fact, the Lara of Legend/Anniversary/Underworld had a different background and temperament to the Lara of pre-Legend.

 

[Stallion Free]

It should be pointed out that this marks the second story reboot. Legend already provided the first. In fact, the Lara of Legend/Anniversary/Underworld had a different background and temperament to the Lara of pre-Legend.

So why did they reuse Lara for those games? Such bullshit.

 

[Suairyu]

So why did they reuse Lara for those games? Such bullshit.

Also Legend was the most non-Tomb Raider mainline game in the series to date, yet it's what revitalised the series. It took the impression and ideas that made the original games so appealing all those years ago but reinterpreted them into a streamlined, speed-run experience. My first ever 1000/1000 Gamerscore game.

Guardian Of Light also did similar. Despite being nothing like a Tomb Raider game, it still felt like a Tomb Raider game.

Just like how this new character has a new background but will almost certainly feel like the Lara we know and love.

 

[Ponti]

It should be pointed out that this marks the second story reboot. Legend already provided the first. In fact, the Lara of Legend/Anniversary/Underworld had a different background and temperament to the Lara of pre-Legend.

I'm going to get all controversial and say I preferred post-Legend Lara.

/shrug

 

[NotTheGuyYouKill]

You don't know the difference between you're and your, you have no place to tell me what retcon means, or any other English term.

Nooooooooooooo

The gun's in my mouth.

Spoiler

I'm at work typing in between work, give me a break... can't immediately proof-read

But I think my point stands regardless of my shitty confusion between your and you're.

 

[StuBurns]

Nooooooooooooo

The gun's in my mouth.

Spoiler

I'm at work typing in between work, give me a break.

So you can rant at me because you disagree with my use of retcon, but you are faultless because you're at work? Hypocrite.

 

[NotTheGuyYouKill]

So you can rant at me because you disagree with my use of retcon, but you are faultless because you're at work? Hypocrite.

I made a common typo, you don't even understand the meaning of the word. There is a difference, but fine, I'm a hypocrite, but you're still wrong. And that time, I am pretty sure I did use it correctly, so happy?

 

[Suairyu]

So you can rant at me because you disagree with my use of retcon, but you are faultless because you're at work? Hypocrite.

You're really grasping at straws now.

 

[Suairyu]

I'm going to get all controversial and say I preferred post-Legend Lara.

/shrug

The character? Most certainly. Well... it's complicated. Hated Lara in Anniversary. What a dumb prig of a bitch. Underworld was a bit more warmed up. I honestly think as a pure encapsulation of Lara, Legend was perfect. Flirty, funny, highly intelligent and able to present strength without needing to resort to emotional stone walling. Basically, acted like a believable woman in an unbelievable story.

edit - was really expecting someone else to fill the gap there. Apologies for the double post!

 

[StuBurns]

I made a common typo, you don't even understand the meaning of the word. There is a difference, but fine, I'm a hypocrite, but you're still wrong. And that time, I am pretty sure I did use it correctly, so happy?

I do understand the meaning of the word.

The real disagreement is if you accept this reboot crap as anything other than a cheap excuse, I do not, therefore, retcon. If you disagree, if everyone else in the world disagrees, fine, but that doesn't change my opinion at all.

I will take back the creatively bankrupt comment though, that isn't fair. From what I've been told this game was basically a completely new IP they were working on that was retrofitted into the next Tomb Raider game, if that's the case they did try to go all out with bringing something new. Regardless I don't imagine this decision came from the creative department given it's inherent influence on the marketing.

 

[Ponti]

I honestly think as a pure encapsulation of Lara, Legend was perfect. Flirty, funny, highly intelligent and able to present strength without needing to resort to emotional stone walling. Basically, acted like a believable woman in an unbelievable story.

Absolutely, one of the reasons why Legend is one of my favourite TR's.