• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Tomb raider versus New raider

Prefer the older TR with the graphic style of the new ones, let's get real a second, the new ones are boring as hell, I know some people loved them but they're terrible, Lara is a weak character, the story is incredibly meh, characters are pretty bad and the game is overall too damn serious...

I played TRR just after Uncharted 2 ( Played it for the first time with NDC ), I couldn't play it more than 5 hours ( until I escaped from the Russian base ) what a boring game.
 
The originals hold up perfectly fine in all areas except combat. I played them fairly recently. Luckily, TR1 and half the levels of TR2 barely have any combat. Its just platforming goodness. Way slower and more deliberate than Crash or Mario. Tons of traps and a real sense of isolation.

The new one isn't half bad either. Its fun for what it is. But its not even close to the same kind of experience. Huge point of differentiation is how much more automated the platforming is. The only thing that felt satisfying was grabbing onto walls with the pickaxe. Climbing ledges, traversing ropes, and jumping gaps had no sense of weight and didn't require anything of the player. In old games it feels like Lara is a normal human who can jump ridiculously well. In new game it feels like Lara is a superhuman who can crawl everywhere like a fast spider.
 
You clearly haven't played Tomb Raider 2 then.
Also, it's Lara not Laura, but that's an easy mistake to make because she's only been around for what, a mere 20 years on the forefront of the most iconic video game characters.

And hopefully that's as far as discussion will go in this thread because any interesting discourse would be an absolute waste in light of the silly OP.

Is Lara Croft your waifu, or what?
 
You clearly haven't played Tomb Raider 2 then.
Also, it's Lara not Laura, but that's an easy mistake to make because she's only been around for what, a mere 20 years on the forefront of the most iconic video game characters.

And hopefully that's as far as discussion will go in this thread because any interesting discourse would be an absolute waste in light of the silly OP.

new tomb raider is pretty bad

Gave it words out of the developers mouth which was a lot nicer than I should have been. Don't think most players will worry about the spelling of her name though. Anyways, people like all sorts of games. the thread is for those who like either or, I am not special. I am a person just like every other poster and have an opinion just like they all do. The topic stands on it's own and it's good feed back for the devs if they even care.
 
Quite the contrary i think it's those who were children or young teenage kids when they first played OG Tomb Raider and didn't have the skills and patience that the games required who say the "controls were shit".

um no. I was a youngin when tomb raider 1 first came out, and played that, 2 and 3...

I beat all 3 of them. I loved those games back then, and when I think back on them, I'm very fond of the memories...however...

i can acknowledge that, the controls in those games were shit when compared to today's standards, and replaying those games now, I remember how they were shit.

Shit controls back then didn't matter, cause other games weren't masterfully controlled to compare it to. But now that we have more updated schemes, you get a grasp on the factr that yea, tank controls suck.
 
I really liked the gameplay of the old games but new Lara destroys old Lara on every level for me. As someone else said, I like that new Lara feels like an actual person and not a caricature.
 
OP, your OP is bad. You did not try honestly to get a good discussion going.

Usually these threads result in the same war between the, "Laura Croft is better now, the old games are archaic lol," crowd and the, "AAA gaming is utter trash," crowd over the same topics.

I have made my position on the controls pretty clear in the past. They are an intricate part of the game and environmental design, which is 100% designed to accommodate digital, grid-based movement that gives players impeccable precision. The controls are so precise and so repeatable that it is entirely possible to complete the game blindfolded. Others don't agree. Whatever, it's not an interesting conversation anymore.

I like both. Obviously I like the classic games better. While New Tomb Raider is a pretty expertly crafted 2015ish action adventure, with beautiful locations, exciting setpieces, tons of character drama, and all that good stuff. The games absolutely could not be easier. They could be completed by three-toed monkeys; the best content in the game is optional and hidden. The thing I like most about Old Tomb Raider is that it gave you the sense of accomplishment modern Souls players claim to like so much. When you climbed to the apex of a level, or when you finally figured out a puzzle after hours of trying everything, you just felt so good. The new games don't approach that feeling in any real capacity. There's no sense of wonder or amazement at anything other than feats of graphical splendor, and boy is there a lot of that. Completing side missions and finding X of Y cache of coins is not the same. The games are almost in different genres.

I think players of the new games interested in what the old games were like without all of the old baggage should check out Tomb Raider Anniversary. It's a brilliant game. It's a faithful remake that forges a path out on its own and eliminates any tedium, if you felt that, of the originals while preserving that adventuring spirit.

On a side note, I've sort of heard that hardcore players have used modding tools to create an endless set of expansion levels for fans to play. However, that's not really what I want-- I want a complete game with a narrative arc, a ramping difficulty, and I think I'm just not hardcore enough to do what some of these megafans can. Some new mechanics would also be interesting as well. And yes, the combat really could be improved.

I'm surprised that as all of these classic kickstarters have done so well-- indicating CLEARLY that AAA gaming is just not serving all gamers-- nobody from Core has shown up saying they want to do CAVERN SPELUNKER.

(And yes I know it's not Laura. I actually like Tomb Raider.)
 
Disagree. The original game were built with limitations on both the control scheme and level design. Back when came developers tried to actually test their audience rather than pander to them. Challenge was the an intrinsic part of the experience and not some bullshit "optional" content which CD are vehemently proud of.

If it wasn't for CORE's meddling that affected their creativity and support during the PS2 era we would no doubt see a modern incarnation today and not just another "over the shoulder +[select genre] that permeates the industry as of late.

The limitations you describe may have been down to the tech limitations of the time

I think you are selling the reboot a bit short there, sure its derivative as hell, but follows a natural progression of what has come before
 
I think they know how to make awesome puzzles, but they are afraid that their users will not get them or be frustrated by the challenge will simply be distracted by one of the 200 games released that day across consoles, PC, and mobile platforms. Costs have risen and they opt for more and more accessibility to cater to more and more people with the same exact product and hold their interests. You have your exceptions like Dark Souls and the likes, but they are certainly not the norm.

Developers for AAAA games are aiming for such a large target audience that alienating even a part of them because you are actually requiring them to master the game rules over time/challenge themselves is not allowed (sometimes you need to spend a lot of energy to have a great payoff, but this is not something you can easily sell your customers if they expect instant and constant gratification).

It's a sad situation.
 
I was blown away by some levels in the old games, especially Tomb Raider 2.

It was the first 3d exploration game that feels like you are on some globetrotting adventure. I finished the game in one week, playing like 12 hours a day. It was one of the most amazing gaming experiences of all times.

I played a few levels of the new Tomb Raider and it just didn't feel as epic as the old games, even tough the technology has advanced after all these years, exactly that exploration element had gone backwards. To be honest the levels weren't that bad, but it gave me a severe sense of disgust anyway.
 
While the kill count is, obviously, exaggerated, the image communicates the problem faithfully: the ludo-narrative dissonance between the character and concept of the game, and the reality that is the player aiming, firing and killing dozens of guys without problem, as if it was the easiest thing in the world.

Eh, don't see this hate when male characters do it.
 
Ignoring the general dumbness of the OP there isn't really a "new and old" Tomb Raider, because there's at least four distinct periods I can think of, that conveniently work out as three trilogies and the reboot games.

TR 1-3 had a light focus on story beyond an excuse to go on a globe-trotting adventure, as well as the slowly expanding mansion. TR4-AOD tried to add a lot more backstory to Lara and other characters, and generally tried to experiment a little more with things like setpieces. Legend-Underworld had a big story focus and a major mechanics change from the earlier games that carried through them all. Then there's the reboot which is again heavily story focused and changes the mechanics a lot.

Of those TR1-3 is easily my choice; three excellent, genre-defining games, even if they do have their issues (TR3 in particular). The later periods are all over the place (TR4 is the only good game in the second one and even that falls off a cliff in the last third), or/and let down by trying to capture those three games while not really understanding them (Legend-Underworld namely). Honestly if Rise is on par with the reboot or better then that will probably end up as my second favourite era, but it's not like they've had much competition since the first three.

You clearly haven't played Tomb Raider 2 then

Even in the most genocidal playthrough possible Lara kills half the humans she does in the reboot in TR2 (even if the overall bodycount is higher due to non-human enemies), and many of those will be missed by most players the first time.
 
New ones. The old ones started to get stale and the audience obviously didnt care about them anymore. the reboot sold the most for a reason. people want something different.

there are still a few people who want the same thing, but most people want their franchises to evolve. just look at how bad Halo 5 did compared to earlier entries.

i am glad we have the latest tomb raider. its fun, fast and has pretty decent puzzles. it could be more adventurish, but its not bad for what its trying to be.
 
While I enjoyed the earlier games and wish there was more exploring in the new ones (waiting on pc for RotTR) I would have to say that overall I think I like the experience of the new ones more. Again just wish there was more puzzle solving jumps and what not. Though man those games would have been so much easier back in the day if it wasn't for the shit controls. Though I did like walking slowly to an edge and then taking the right amount of steps backwards just so you could hit the jump button at the last moment possible and not fall of an edge.
 
People act like the original game was what we had before the reboot. As if that was "Tomb Raider", while in truth the series was on a big decline. If you prefer "old" Tomb Raider then that includes Underworld and Angel of Darkness.

You can have that, I'll take the reboot and sequel any day.
 
The limitations you describe may have been down to the tech limitations of the time

I think you are selling the reboot a bit short there, sure its derivative as hell, but follows a natural progression of what has come before


They absolutely were designed with tech limitations in mind-- there was no analog stick on the controller or on a keyboard. But that's why they work so well. Everything in Tomb Raider is designed along a grid. Every action you can take as the player is reliable and consistent. All directions can be translated into grid-based moves.

Modern Tomb Raider absolutely does not come as an extension of Old Tomb Raider. The games have almost nothing in common. It's even a stretch to say new Tomb Raider is an extension of the newest Old Tomb Raider in Underworld. The games are, frankly, derivative of most other TPS games with some neat innovations of their own. They work very well and are good games. Just in the Tomb Raider lineage, I think, though, they do not follow.

People act like the original game was what we had before the reboot. As if that was "Tomb Raider", while in truth the series was on a big decline. If you prefer "old" Tomb Raider then that includes Underworld and Angel of Darkness.

You can have that, I'll take the reboot and sequel any day.

Underworld has an 8/10 on Metacritic. It's not a bad game. It's a pretty good game, actually. It's not perfect, but it's a pretty big improvement on Legend and features some really big open spaces for platforming and a healthy variety of puzzle solving.

Angel of Darkness was 10 years old at the time of the release of the reboot. It was Core pushed to the absolute wall by Eidos and is not a fair comparison. If Core was given the budget and time that CD was given, there would be a different conversation. You skipped two games between Angel of Darkness and Underworld, one of which was good and the other of which was excellent.
 
People act like the original game was what we had before the reboot. As if that was "Tomb Raider", while in truth the series was on a big decline. If you prefer "old" Tomb Raider then that includes Underworld and Angel of Darkness.

You can have that, I'll take the reboot and sequel any day.
You speak of this decline and mention Underworld but you do realise that Underworld and Angel of Darkness are from two different era of Tomb Raider don't you? The series received a soft reboot after Angel of Darkness with Tomb Raider: Legends..which was made by Crystal Dynamics which Underworld was the sequel to. While the games until Angel of Darkness were made by Core with the "classic" TR design.

Angel of Darkness had a troubled development and it translated into the game in terms of poor quality (while the game itself was ambitious and could have been nice) but the games before that were well received. There was no "decline" to speak of, it was just one game and then no release for a few years followed by a well received soft reboot by a new developer, a well received remake of first game and a rather well liked sequel.


Do you also realise the Underworld sold well (with a lower budget than the reboot) and Tomb Raider 2013 only did marginally better than Underworld in terms of sales...until it was rereleased as definitive edition. You also do realise that if sales were the only merit to determine decline then that would mean Rise of Tomb Raider is when the reboot starts to decline considering how poor it did.
 
played and really like the first three, not even interested in the reboot and after. too cinematic and streamlined
 
New ones. The old ones started to get stale and the audience obviously didnt care about them anymore. the reboot sold the most for a reason. people want something different.

there are still a few people who want the same thing, but most people want their franchises to evolve. just look at how bad Halo 5 did compared to earlier entries.

i am glad we have the latest tomb raider. its fun, fast and has pretty decent puzzles. it could be more adventurish, but its not bad for what its trying to be.

I guess people cared about the new one even less, considering its sequel is the worst selling game in the series
Gc6nPpT.gif
 
Eh, don't see this hate when male characters do it.

Can you give an example? I don't remember a game which tried to make you feel vulnerable, hurt and frightened as much as the first hours of TR2013. Not that it's a problem, the problem is trying to do it... and also trying to be a AAA third person shooter with sick gorey takedowns.


It's like trying to combine Amnesia Dark Descent with Gears of War. If a part of the game is about unknowable forces, a character escaping of the forces of evil, and fearing your own shadow, you can't mix it up with a third person shooter with chainsaws and gore.

In any case it's more a curious flaw than anything, there are several other areas where the game could be better and are more important.
 
Original TR (the very first game, not the sequels) has something magical about it.

I liked the reboot (and I really wanted to get ROTTR but late 2016 for the PS4 version ? Can't see myself caring by then but who knows) but it's just a different game.

I would really like a proper TR1 remake.
 
Why are people bunching up pre 2013 Tomb Raider made by Crystal Dynamics into the same group as the classic Core Design made Tomb Raiders? They are both different.

Old Tomb Raider is not Legends/Anniversary/Underworld. We've had 3 different eras of Tomb Raider so far.
 
Original TR (the very first game, not the sequels) has something magical about it.

I liked the reboot (and I really wanted to get ROTTR but late 2016 for the PS4 version ? Can't see myself caring by then but who knows) but it's just a different game.

I would really like a proper TR1 remake.

That's anniversary!
 
Haven't played Rise yet but generally I much prefer the older games. Apart from AoD, obviously. Tombs, traps, music and sense of scale and isolation in the old games was brilliant. I much preferred the atmosphere those things created than what was offered in TR9. I've said before that I thought TR9 was a great action game but a bad Tomb Raider. Looking forward to seeing what they've improved in Rise, but those old games will always be quite special to me.
 
Why are people bunching up pre 2013 Tomb Raider made by Crystal Dynamics into the same group as the classic Core Design made Tomb Raiders? They are both different.

Old Tomb Raider is not Legends/Anniversary/Underworld. We've had 3 different eras of Tomb Raider so far.

Why are people acting like we've had reboots before the 2013 game? Reboot is something I've never once seen mentioned until the 2013 title simply named "Tomb Raider", that featured a new look and direction for the franchise.
 
You know, I hated the original Tomb Raiders at the time - even then I found them clunky and difficult to control, and not much fun. But as I've got older and tried them again, I've learned to love them - I think they're really great fun these days (played through 1-5 a while ago). So definitely them.

Tbh, I also prefer the 4-player spinoffs to the mainline Tomb Raider games. They were really enjoyable with a couple of friends.
 
OP, your OP is bad. You did not try honestly to get a good discussion going.

Usually these threads result in the same war between the, "Laura Croft is better now, the old games are archaic lol," crowd and the, "AAA gaming is utter trash," crowd over the same topics.

I have made my position on the controls pretty clear in the past. They are an intricate part of the game and environmental design, which is 100% designed to accommodate digital, grid-based movement that gives players impeccable precision. The controls are so precise and so repeatable that it is entirely possible to complete the game blindfolded. Others don't agree. Whatever, it's not an interesting conversation anymore.

I like both. Obviously I like the classic games better. While New Tomb Raider is a pretty expertly crafted 2015ish action adventure, with beautiful locations, exciting setpieces, tons of character drama, and all that good stuff. The games absolutely could not be easier. They could be completed by three-toed monkeys; the best content in the game is optional and hidden. The thing I like most about Old Tomb Raider is that it gave you the sense of accomplishment modern Souls players claim to like so much. When you climbed to the apex of a level, or when you finally figured out a puzzle after hours of trying everything, you just felt so good. The new games don't approach that feeling in any real capacity. There's no sense of wonder or amazement at anything other than feats of graphical splendor, and boy is there a lot of that. Completing side missions and finding X of Y cache of coins is not the same. The games are almost in different genres.

I think players of the new games interested in what the old games were like without all of the old baggage should check out Tomb Raider Anniversary. It's a brilliant game. It's a faithful remake that forges a path out on its own and eliminates any tedium, if you felt that, of the originals while preserving that adventuring spirit.

On a side note, I've sort of heard that hardcore players have used modding tools to create an endless set of expansion levels for fans to play. However, that's not really what I want-- I want a complete game with a narrative arc, a ramping difficulty, and I think I'm just not hardcore enough to do what some of these megafans can. Some new mechanics would also be interesting as well. And yes, the combat really could be improved.

I'm surprised that as all of these classic kickstarters have done so well-- indicating CLEARLY that AAA gaming is just not serving all gamers-- nobody from Core has shown up saying they want to do CAVERN SPELUNKER.

(And yes I know it's not Laura. I actually like Tomb Raider.)


Couldn't agree more.

And I still can't stop playing new TR.
 
Also, what the hell people, it's fucking Lara, not Laura. Why is it so common for people to change her name? I've never seen it happen so often with another popular character.

Please, it happens all the time with Super Maurio.
 
How does anniversary hold up Kev?

Highly recommended.

If tomb raider 1 is like a stiff drink-- surprising, difficult to swallow, but refreshing-- tomb raider anniversary is like something sweet and smooth. Goes down easy, gives you some of that same feeling, but you can still talk to your friends without slurring your words!
 
Eh, don't see this hate when male characters do it.

It's not really the fact that she kills a bunch of people. I mean in TR2 -TR5 Lara does kill a fair amount of people but she was known for being this awesome explorer, not a mass murderer. In the reboot, it seems that killing all these people was the developer's way of making her look badass. Let's not even start with lara's reaction to her first kill and then her devil may care attitude when killing a bunch more moments after. It's poor writing that i'm surprised that some are even praising.
 
Why are people acting like we've had reboots before the 2013 game? Reboot is something I've never once seen mentioned until the 2013 title simply named "Tomb Raider", that featured a new look and direction for the franchise.

Because the franchise was rebooted with Legend, which gave Lara a new backstory and the game has entirely new mechanics.
 
Highly recommended.

If tomb raider 1 is like a stiff drink-- surprising, difficult to swallow, but refreshing-- tomb raider anniversary is like something sweet and smooth. Goes down easy, gives you some of that same feeling, but you can still talk to your friends without slurring your words!

I just finished the new Tomb Raider and immediately started playing anniversary. What a difference and breath of fresh air. I haven't played it since it came out, so it feels awesome and new to me.

Oh, and my kill count at the end of Rise of the Tomb Raider was 849 according to my gamer score.
 
No. Is it not? because TR2013 sure as heck was and every review I've read has bemoaned rise's shallowness.

If you don't walk around killing stuff and moving linearly from glowing line/object/marker to the next I'd be more interested. But you are the first to suggest otherwise to me?

You know you dont have to use the glowing objects/waypoints, right? Just dont activate that effect if you dont like it. Its there for people who do.
 
I like Legend, Anniversary and Underworld the most. I'm not a fan of the original games anymore, I used to be. I enjoyed Tomb Raider Reboot but I'm yet to play Rise.

Anniversary is the best.
 
Highly recommended.

If tomb raider 1 is like a stiff drink-- surprising, difficult to swallow, but refreshing-- tomb raider anniversary is like something sweet and smooth. Goes down easy, gives you some of that same feeling, but you can still talk to your friends without slurring your words!

Ha my kind of drink.
Perfect
 
Top Bottom