Rise of the Tomb Raider [XO, XOX, X360, PS4, P4Pro]

[iroboto]

Overall sales of TR didn't become good until the remaster from what I understand. I bought TR from Steam sale, so I wasn't ready to buy in at full price. As for the counter arguments about ROTR, you guys have good points, however if the game is really good like "do not skip" quality, then it's bound to get its share. I agree at the cost of a lower price point but it will still appeal even to those who are stubborn. It's true that it could get killed by the used game strategy, but that can be side stepped by a lower entry offer digitally, or just a completely remastered game, or likely - if the game is the jewel of the series, there won't be enough used copies to go around when demand for the game is high. Only the truly angry can hold out; I'm unsure as to the number of individuals that is but we'll know in 2016 when it releases for PS4.

Users get an opportunity to at least determine a year in advance if the product is worth buying (which is why sales could be lower if the product is not good - as there is no hype leading to additional sales).

 

[chris1515]

Were PC sales of TR any good?

Very good 3,25 millions steam key.

 

[DieH@rd]

Fresh steamspy database stats

 

[AlNom]

I like Splinter Cell.


Wet pants.

 

[DieH@rd]

http://i.imgur.com/FSOZjZc.jpg

 

[AlNom]

Hopefully there's more than one bear in the game or at least other dangerous animals.

 

[BadTB25]

Hopefully there's more than one bear in the game or at least other dangerous animals.

Maybe a Lion....too soon?

 

[AlNom]

Maybe a Lion....too soon?

:X

Stealth your way past the big ol' lion, only to have the mercenaries shoot it.

And then you kill the mercenaries, of course.

 

[Billy Idol]

Yeah, game looks great.

 

[ArcticCircle]

Looks very good, but bit too much killing still. I'll take a leap of faith in here and assume that Lara could have snuck past 'em in demo video. Other then that... yeah, there's strong Splinter Cell / Assassin's Creed vibe going on and I like that. Thus I also expect a lot of random hate towards the game

 

[ZeroEx]

I find it funny how people comment a lot about the violence.
Is it because the Main character is a girl? or just not what you'd expect Lara Croft to do?

Tbh, I like the fact the game gives you so many options to tackle a situation, there's never really a MUST DO THIS situation from what I can tell.

 

[bgroovy]

It's probably mostly because Tomb Raider use to be about exploration and puzzle solving more than combat and now it's an over the top murder simulator without even the excuse of being stranded on an island trying to survive.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

It's probably mostly because Tomb Raider use to be about exploration and puzzle solving more than combat and now it's an over the top murder simulator without even the excuse of being stranded on an island trying to survive.

If you replay the original there were a fair few animals, only some of few you could avoid. The bats attacked within seconds of the Tomb Raider starting and a few minutes later if you mistimed a jump you'd have to face a bear and two minutes later there were a bunch of wolves which you could jump/flip around and avoid killing but which I suspect many just filled full a lead.

Tomb Raider 2 was packed with people you had little alternative but kill. It's possible to have mix combat and isolated exploration - even Uncharted manages this. I think they've trying to give people a bit of everything but the balance of combat/exploration is going to appeal to some and some others off.

 

[RenegadeRocks]

Too gory and ruthless to be Tomb Raider ! It felt off in this game,doesn't seem to fit in the theme.... too much of ruthless killing by the girl who is not a stone cold psycho killer, according to the devs, and is just trying to survive or whatever the excuse is and IQ is bad.....the previous one had real good IQ.

 

[Ike Turner]

Too gory and ruthless to be Tomb Raider ! It felt off in this game,doesn't seem to fit in the theme.... too much of ruthless killing by the girl who is not a stone cold psycho killer, according to the devs, and is just trying to survive or whatever the excuse is and IQ is bad.....the previous one had real good IQ.

IQ is good. Just download the Direct Feed footage here:

http://www.tombraiderchronicles.com/rise-of-the-tomb-raider/game-trailers-01.html

 

[Phil]

It's probably mostly because Tomb Raider use to be about exploration and puzzle solving more than combat and now it's an over the top murder simulator without even the excuse of being stranded on an island trying to survive.

This. Yes, DSoup is right - TR2 had lots of killing. But I've always felt that the core experience that made Tomb Raider such a great game was the emphasis on its exploration, going to remote locations of the world together with the mystical element. I still think TR1 was an unparalleled experience. To be exploring the caves of the Himalayas, then later Egypt or ruins of other mystical places was simply breathtaking. Yes, the game started with Lara ruthlessly killing wolves, bats and later apes (that were more dangerous because they were more intelligent) and bigger animals/predators but it was a beautiful build up. Starting small, the foes got bigger and more dangerous until the climax when you first tackled the one-off mercenaries, then later the whole mystical beings. What a game that was.

TR2 IMO worked as well, because despite the killing, it didn't fall short on exploration - Venice was beautifully modeled and due to you infiltrating some mafias house, it was clear you were going to end up with a bunch of human enemies.

This [the new TR] however, looks to be again some remote island location. It would have been really great if they had gone for the first Tomb Raider experience: Fighting wildlife, then perhaps climaxing in perhaps human enemies. Wildlife can be just as fun to fight against, because they have predator skills. But today's "shooters" just seem to be too popular and people seem to like to fire on opponents that fire back. :S

And no, I like Uncharted - for what it is. It's not a Tomb Raider, even if they share a very similar Indiana Jones like adventuring. IMO however, I definitely prefer Tomb Raider (1) over the Uncharted type of setting, but both work as different games. I don't want Tomb Raider to become Uncharted or some other shooter. As good as the last Tomb Raider was - the shooting and the opponents were its greatest weak points. It's a pitty to see that they seem to be building exactly on those weak points again IMO.

More exploration.
More remote locations.
More wildlife (dangerous and friendly)
More puzzles.
Less shooting.

That would be the perfect Tomb Raider game. I'd even take an automatic shooting mechanic like the original games had it, because the skill of shooting was never the core element of the game. Platforming, exploration, puzzles and survival was.

 

[Sigfried1977]

Exactly. Despite copious amounts of bloodshet in TR2, this was still a game where the environment was the main antagonist (and if you were to count all the Mafia thugs in the Venice level, you'd probably arrive at a number less than half of the average enemy wave the new game regularly throws at the player). The problem with the new TR isn't just that the constant barrage of violence has reached a level of gratuitousness rivaling the latest Rambo movie, it's that there's really not a whole lot else to it. In the old games, the simple act of scaling up or down a tall structure was appropriately tricky and dangerous, in the new game it means pushing up on the analog stick. It looks cool, but it's all empty spectacle.

 

[Sigfried1977]

And don't get me wrong. I'm still gonna play it and I'll most likey enjoy it too. I just think there have been plenty of big games by now which proved that the Ubisoft-box-ticking way of game design is in fact not the only way to make your money back. Heck, I'd argue in TR's case it was probably detrimental. Took the game years on multiple platforms, including a proper remaster, to sell the kinds of numbers SE was hoping for, and now they're doing it all over again?

 

[Clukos]

And it's not only that, in this and the reboot i think they take the story a bit too seriously for the games good. Lara is constantly struggling, moaning, being hurt and dragging along, having to cope with injuries and whatnot. Previous Tomb Raider games were a bit more lighthearted and mostly about exploring cool environments and less about Lara finding her true self when put through difficulties™. While i will still enjoy playing this i would prefer more focus on exploration of environments/platforming and tombs with clever traps and mechanisms and tone down the shooting a bit. Uncharted can get away with big shootouts because it's lighthearted and over the top similar to Indiana Jones, Tomb Raider reboot is way too serious to play like that.

 

[Phil]

Just to add a point I just thought about...

As soon as you design your game to feature some kind of human enemies, you are quickly progressing to a point where you need some form of shooting mechanics, preferably the 3rd person shooter-mechanis like Gears of War or Uncharted feature. The skillset of aiming and shooting becomes a core element of the game.

What I really liked about the old games (and I admittedly am a big fan of TR1 & TR2) is that this mechanic was missing. When the focus of your game is the exploration, the puzzles, even the platforming, the enemies simply take on a role of survival or obstacle. Far too many games today feature the shooting of other humans opponents. I would really like to see a game continue what perhaps the very first TR game was a pioneer of; Featuring many different wildlife that each have their unique traits. In a modern game, they could build up on that, for example; by including various types of animals that, like i.e. wolves that hunt together. Make some form of collective A.I. Heck, for the fun of realism, you could even make them non-hostile up until you actually get too close to them, or their cubs. For the most part, design your game that you actually can avoid them, but then have a few set-pieces where for instance you need to close in on them to reach some missing piece or something.

If you add enough different animal types, you could actually create a game with very challenging gameplay (and situations of conflict) without reducing yourself to simply "point, shoot & kill" style gameplay. Fighting wildlife, I'd actually give Lara some skillsets that include various type of CQC (close quarter combat) that would be required for quick opponents such as animals - but keep the 3rd person-shooting-mechanics for bigger/slower opponents (crocodiles?) or those few mercenaries that show up.

My general problem with human enemies is that there is not a big different between an ordinary unimportant mercenary and perhaps a "boss" at a later stage. Both are humans, both have guns that in realistic sense can kill you with one bullet. How do you create gameplay variation with the same basic enemy type? You put them into a group, so that you have to kill them all etc, change the vegetation to create your challenge, but then you've already gone half way in creating a shooter. The great thing about wildlife is that you can add lots of different types of animals each with their unique characters/skillset. Some are slow/powerful, some are fast/weak. Some hunt in packs. Some require more than a few shots due to their body armor. Easy way to create bosses, challenging aspects while keeping variety high and the gameplay fun.

Not saying they should get rid of human opponents, but it would be more fun (IMO) and definately more Tomb Raider like to reduce them to a few stand out moments (but make them bosses!).