I see. Honestly, I dislike the combat of 2013 and Rise so much that just stripping it out is enough to me. It's a reason why I don't hold TR2 as highly as others, that game also had too much combat coming from TR1.
What's next for Tomb Raider? Who will develop it & which direction will it go?
- Thread starter Samiya
- Start date
I see. Honestly, I dislike the combat of 2013 and Rise so much that just stripping it out is enough to me. It's a reason why I don't hold TR2 as highly as others, that game also had too much combat coming from TR1.
Yeah, like that. Less a remake, more of a reimagining. Tank controls also are not gonna fly anymore.
Classic Lara. Dual pistols, old outfit, sexy, cool, acrobatic, skilled and confident Lara
Overhaul the combat system
Exploration, puzzles and platforming should be a big focus
Platforming should be challenging. Precice jumps, areas you can climb or jump to should stand out naturally and make sense, no handholding, no auto climbing shit
Lara travelling around to world to different locations but if they have to stick to one location then they have to design an interesting location with much bigger emphasis on the few Metroidvania aspects the reboot trilogy had
And its not like CD doesn't understand what makes TR. The start of Thailand in Underworld on the boat is fantastic
Overhaul the combat system
Exploration, puzzles and platforming should be a big focus
Platforming should be challenging. Precice jumps, areas you can climb or jump to should stand out naturally and make sense, no handholding, no auto climbing shit
Lara travelling around to world to different locations but if they have to stick to one location then they have to design an interesting location with much bigger emphasis on the few Metroidvania aspects the reboot trilogy had
And its not like CD doesn't understand what makes TR. The start of Thailand in Underworld on the boat is fantastic
Last edited:
The big hurdle that the franchise needs to leap at this point is the justification of tomb raiding. "They belong in a museum" is a trash argument from the genre's biggest icon and if you want your Tomb Raider game to lose the edge you also can't have Lara be a thief of cultures. And perhaps she shouldn't be a rich white person either.
Needs to be much lighter. She needs to be competent. I would prefer no crazy over the top violence and a better relationship with the cast of characters she engages with. She has pushed everyone away the entire series and I think the devs believe that makes her strong, but it comes across as weak and childish
How does Shadow compare to the previous two games? I played the demo and it seemed....ok I suppose, but it's still riddled with Rambo Lara knifing faceless mercenaries in the head which I've never felt fit terribly well with Tomb Raider. The demo environment and the exploring seemed a little better though?
I think Eidos Montreal will take care of supporting Avengers post-launch, so it's possible that the franchise will go back to Crystal Dynamics afterwards. Crystal is Square Enix's flaship Western studio, so I doubt they will keep them stuck with post-launch support.
I don't expect to hear anything about Tomb Raider for another 2-3 years, though, because it's very likely that coming off of Avengers, Crystal Dynamics will have a different perspective about what kind of gameplay they want for Tomb Raider.
I don't expect to hear anything about Tomb Raider for another 2-3 years, though, because it's very likely that coming off of Avengers, Crystal Dynamics will have a different perspective about what kind of gameplay they want for Tomb Raider.
It has far less of the Rambo stuff than previous titles, despite what the first hour of the game may suggest. It still has combat-intensive segments but they are fewer and further between, and exploration was definitely a bigger focus this time around. The game has some problems with pacing, but it's still pretty fun. Not the best of the trilogy, but well worth your time if you enjoyed the other two.
Shadow was just poorly designed. I understand the people who dislike violence and combat in their TR games, but that was a well liked feature in the first two reboot games, even if overused. A lot of the improvements to Shadow from Rise were in the stealth/combat departament, yet we get very little combat. Not to mention that progression system, and collecting resources, are still tied to combat/weapons.
It also it needs to be said, forcing Lara to only use tribal outfits and restrict her to a bow is one of the flimsiest attempts that Enix has ever done to make her look (and be) less of a cultural pillager. It hurts replay value and straight up holds back a large chunk of the few combat encounters.
Just like whenever Lara is having a "am I the asshole?" moment, Jonah (or some other throwaway side character) always has to be there to console her and reassure her that she is on the right. At this point, I think it's obvious that the writers don't know what to do with the character, and the designers don't know how to balance exploration, platforming, and combat.
It also it needs to be said, forcing Lara to only use tribal outfits and restrict her to a bow is one of the flimsiest attempts that Enix has ever done to make her look (and be) less of a cultural pillager. It hurts replay value and straight up holds back a large chunk of the few combat encounters.
Just like whenever Lara is having a "am I the asshole?" moment, Jonah (or some other throwaway side character) always has to be there to console her and reassure her that she is on the right. At this point, I think it's obvious that the writers don't know what to do with the character, and the designers don't know how to balance exploration, platforming, and combat.
The answer is very, very simple. I've said it before and I'll say it again.
Tomb Raider: Dagger of Xian
Tomb Raider: Dagger of Xian
I'm playing through Shadow of the TR right now and it's such an unimaginative slog. It deserved to bomb as a wake up call for Square.
I would like a time jump. Give Laura her cocky attitude back from the original TR games. Give her the twin pistols. Make her someone who is bad ass and inspiring and campy.
I'd like to see them take TR less seriously. Granted I only played the first one to completion and a few hours of Rise but it all felt so monologue-y and needlessly gritty that every time Lara started talking about the depravity of man, the thirst for power, or something super "heavy", my eyes would just glaze over. That and the side characters were so damn forgettable.
Oh and double pistols.
Oh and double pistols.
Maybe people should just give up on the franchise.
It's had two reboots already, I imagine if it continues it will get a third one. I don't think that is a good sign if a franchise constantly has to reboot itself, it would suggest that it keeps losing interest and has to "refresh" to create that interest. It reminds me of the Terminator films and the multiple trilogy reboots it has.
It's had two reboots already, I imagine if it continues it will get a third one. I don't think that is a good sign if a franchise constantly has to reboot itself, it would suggest that it keeps losing interest and has to "refresh" to create that interest. It reminds me of the Terminator films and the multiple trilogy reboots it has.
I just hope the next game doesn't take itself too seriously. I want a return to the charismatic Lara of old (minus the sexualisation). Just make her more confident and witty, focus on the exploration and puzzles, and move away from the Uncharted formula. I love Uncharted but that's not what I want from a Tomb Raider game.
Revert back to the tone and focus of the first Tomb Raider and ditch what the reboot trilogy did completely. So less combat, less gore, less gritty seriousness, more adventure, more exploration and more platforming that isn't automated but actually poses a real threat and requires thought to get through.
Hell, even Lara's design back then was better. She was iconic looking compared to now, where she's just looks so... ordinary.
Hell, even Lara's design back then was better. She was iconic looking compared to now, where she's just looks so... ordinary.
Take the strengths of Shadow without the weaknesses.
+ Bow and stealth combat
+ Massive focus on exploration and tombs, with plenty of optional tombs and hidden collectibles in tight environments
- Don't try and make it an RPG, the side quests and hubs were so boring
- Come to think of it, focus as little on story as possible
-Don't go too apeshit on the amount of collectibles, TR2013 was the right amount, Rise was far too many
+ Bow and stealth combat
+ Massive focus on exploration and tombs, with plenty of optional tombs and hidden collectibles in tight environments
- Don't try and make it an RPG, the side quests and hubs were so boring
- Come to think of it, focus as little on story as possible
-Don't go too apeshit on the amount of collectibles, TR2013 was the right amount, Rise was far too many
There's no need for a full reboot, just retool the gameplay to make a better compromise to the old games and have better writting that doesn't take itself as serious. You can keep everything else.
It's not like Classic Lara would fly in 2020.
Thanks. I enjoyed 2013 reboot, didn't like Rise as it expanded on everything I didn't enjoy from Reboot. I'll check it out when it's super cheap.
At this stage, the Anniversary remake remains the best 'recent' tomb raider.
I'm hoping it drops the realistic gore and goes back to its platform puzzling roots .. would be a hit in my family then I think
To expand on my Tomb Raider 2 Remake post.
Let me tell you what is really needed with that, whether it's a Tomb Raider 2 Remake or not. A back to basics approach to gameplay and level design. None of this open world metroidvania shit with collectibles everywhere. Return to a linear level to level structure. That's first and foremost.
What is the purpose of exploration in a Tomb Raider game? In the Core Design games, it was to figure out the level. You go through the level, sometimes in a linear fashion, sometimes with options of where to go. You pull switches, you find key items, you move blocks and you navigate various challenges to figure out how to progress the level. Exploration is a requirement. That's how you progress the game. Through discovery.
What is the purpose of exploration in a Crystal Dynamics Tomb Raider game? To optionally go off the main path, find a shit load of optional collectibles and get more XP. It's modern gaming 101.
It's time to get away from modern gaming 101. It's not even about NO MORE COMBAT MORE PUZZLES!11!! that a lot of people spout.
Shadow did that. But the exploration was still simply there for loot, XP and not integral to the main path as such. Shadow is the least combat heavy Tomb Raider game ever, and I mean ever. Truthfully, that's not what we needed and the balance was all off. There's nothing wrong with combat being in a TR game.
I talk about a Tomb Raider 2 Remake and guess what? That would mean a game with a lot of focus on combat. But despite being such a combat heavy game, Tomb Raider 2 had fantastic level design, and figuring out the levela through exploration was the core of gameplay and puzzle design. You don't sacrifice that just because you have combat. Combat works together with it to keep the whole experience engaging. And with modern combat mechanics, a Tomb Raider 2 Remake would be more fun in the combat department than it was back then.
No skill trees, no loot outside of key items, health packs, ammo, and the very very rare secret found only through finding the most hidden areas of the game. Classic inventory needs to return in full.
Now, purely mechanics. I think we need to be a bit bold with this in regards to platforming. Bring back the grab button. If you aint using a grab button, you aint grabbing a ledge. Bring back the engagement to platforming and get rid of all automation. There may be some pushback to this, but I believe the best way to set the platforming apart would be to go back to a fully manual approach again. Trust the player.
Let me tell you what is really needed with that, whether it's a Tomb Raider 2 Remake or not. A back to basics approach to gameplay and level design. None of this open world metroidvania shit with collectibles everywhere. Return to a linear level to level structure. That's first and foremost.
What is the purpose of exploration in a Tomb Raider game? In the Core Design games, it was to figure out the level. You go through the level, sometimes in a linear fashion, sometimes with options of where to go. You pull switches, you find key items, you move blocks and you navigate various challenges to figure out how to progress the level. Exploration is a requirement. That's how you progress the game. Through discovery.
What is the purpose of exploration in a Crystal Dynamics Tomb Raider game? To optionally go off the main path, find a shit load of optional collectibles and get more XP. It's modern gaming 101.
It's time to get away from modern gaming 101. It's not even about NO MORE COMBAT MORE PUZZLES!11!! that a lot of people spout.
Shadow did that. But the exploration was still simply there for loot, XP and not integral to the main path as such. Shadow is the least combat heavy Tomb Raider game ever, and I mean ever. Truthfully, that's not what we needed and the balance was all off. There's nothing wrong with combat being in a TR game.
I talk about a Tomb Raider 2 Remake and guess what? That would mean a game with a lot of focus on combat. But despite being such a combat heavy game, Tomb Raider 2 had fantastic level design, and figuring out the levela through exploration was the core of gameplay and puzzle design. You don't sacrifice that just because you have combat. Combat works together with it to keep the whole experience engaging. And with modern combat mechanics, a Tomb Raider 2 Remake would be more fun in the combat department than it was back then.
No skill trees, no loot outside of key items, health packs, ammo, and the very very rare secret found only through finding the most hidden areas of the game. Classic inventory needs to return in full.
Now, purely mechanics. I think we need to be a bit bold with this in regards to platforming. Bring back the grab button. If you aint using a grab button, you aint grabbing a ledge. Bring back the engagement to platforming and get rid of all automation. There may be some pushback to this, but I believe the best way to set the platforming apart would be to go back to a fully manual approach again. Trust the player.
I personally loved the reboot trilogy. I thought it was perfect for modern day tomb raider. I didn't miss the goofiness or fun loving Lara at all. I loved the original on my....Sega Saturn.. and then I played the sequels on PS1, but I much preferred the new direction, so I'm hoping they stick with it.
I always found it so odd that Legend and the 2013 trilogy completely got rid of the inventory system, key items and whatnot. I always felt like that it such an important part of what makes Tomb Raider Tomb Raider.
Blame the marketing that focused so much on the combat, shooting, and killing, and it being the final game in a trilogy that heavily focused on combat, shooting, and killing.
The last three Tomb Raider games made the series relevant again, and I'd imagine we'll see a similar Tomb Raider for next gen consoles. There's still a desire for those 3rd person set-piece adventures that really highlight the graphics of a console/generation, and I'd expect they'll follow the same formula.
The negative opinions about Tomb Raider, in this community, generally seem to stem from the series being a "3rd party Uncharted," which rubs brand fanboys the wrong way. I was a huge fan of early TRs, back in the 90s Tomb Raider might have been my favorite videogame franchise at the time, and then I really fell off as the quality seemed to dip and the games didn't keep up with changes to the industry. I really liked Tomb Raider 2013, thought it was flawed, but I thought it was a good reintroduction of the series. Never beat Shadow or Rise of the Tomb Raider, but I liked both for what they tried to do... And can genuinely say I liked Rise and Shadow more than Uncharted 3 + 4, although they're heavily derivative of the UC series (I don't think the highs of the TR reboot are to the level of the highs of UC, but I think the midpoints of both series are fairly even).
The negative opinions about Tomb Raider, in this community, generally seem to stem from the series being a "3rd party Uncharted," which rubs brand fanboys the wrong way. I was a huge fan of early TRs, back in the 90s Tomb Raider might have been my favorite videogame franchise at the time, and then I really fell off as the quality seemed to dip and the games didn't keep up with changes to the industry. I really liked Tomb Raider 2013, thought it was flawed, but I thought it was a good reintroduction of the series. Never beat Shadow or Rise of the Tomb Raider, but I liked both for what they tried to do... And can genuinely say I liked Rise and Shadow more than Uncharted 3 + 4, although they're heavily derivative of the UC series (I don't think the highs of the TR reboot are to the level of the highs of UC, but I think the midpoints of both series are fairly even).
Blame the marketing that focused so much on the combat, shooting, and killing, and it being the final game in a trilogy that heavily focused on combat, shooting, and killing.
No, I'll still blame the ignorant poster's who haven't played the game.
I have played the game.
... There's still a massive amount of shooting, combat, and glory killing. There was less, but... not THAT much less.
And there's a reason Polygon did a pretty extensive article criticizing Lara's copious and gruesome death animations in the game.
I'm not a prude (I play Mortal Kombat and I'll be buying The Last of Us Part 2), but even SotTR was more graphic and gruesome than I want a Lara Croft game to be. I don't come to the series for that.
I have played the game.
... There's still a massive amount of shooting, combat, and glory killing. There was less, but... not THAT much less.
And there's a reason Polygon did a pretty extensive article criticizing Lara's copious and gruesome death animations in the game.
I'm not a prude (I play Mortal Kombat and I'll be buying The Last of Us Part 2), but even SotTR was more graphic and gruesome than I want a Lara Croft game to be. I don't come to the series for that.
How exactly does a link talking about the animation of kills have anything to do with the amount of combat in the game? The game was literally 30% platforming + exploration, 30% puzzles, and 40% combat. The number of tombs in the game was magnitudes upon magnitudes more than both the remake + rise combined. And that is BEFORE the extra tombs the DLC added.
It literally has the least amount of combat in any Tomb Raider game.I have played the game.
... There's still a massive amount of shooting, combat, and glory killing. There was less, but... not THAT much less.
And there's a reason Polygon did a pretty extensive article criticizing Lara's copious and gruesome death animations in the game.
I'm not a prude (I play Mortal Kombat and I'll be buying The Last of Us Part 2), but even SotTR was more graphic and gruesome than I want a Lara Croft game to be. I don't come to the series for that.
You're missing the point, I believe.
That 40% of the game that's combat? That's still a big chunk of the game. And the violence of that combat - and the failure to survive it - is a point of contention for myself and others who have grown resentful of the "torture porn" nature of the experience.
I'm not saying Shadow didn't have more tombs. It did. I said it had less combat as well.
But it was still more violent confrontations than I wanted and the game's gruesome aspects and horror trappings were still more than I cared for, and not what I want in a Tomb Raider game. The marketing for the game barely showed off the tombs and put a huge emphasis on the gore and kills. It's not what I wanted.
Simple as that.
You're missing the point, I believe.
That 40% of the game that's combat? That's still a big chunk of the game. And the violence of that combat - and the failure to survive it - is a point of contention for myself and others who have grown resentful of the "torture porn" nature of the experience.
I'm not saying Shadow didn't have more tombs. It did. I said it had less combat as well.
But it was still more violent confrontations than I wanted and the game's gruesome aspects and horror trappings were still more than I cared for, and not what I want in a Tomb Raider game. The marketing for the game barely showed off the tombs and put a huge emphasis on the gore and kills. It's not what I wanted.
Simple as that.
Except the entire discussion was about the focus on non-combat which Shadow centered on. This was the first post:
To which this was the reply:
To which you replied to counter that statement
Blame the marketing that focused so much on the combat, shooting, and killing, and it being the final game in a trilogy that heavily focused on combat, shooting, and killing.
If your intention was to talk about the animations of the kills then there was never a need to quote the above at all.
Two things:
1) They STILL need to focus more on exploration, platforming, and puzzles. This statement is still true, even with Shadow in play.
and
2) You asked why nobody played Shadow, and I mentioned that despite it having more tombs the MARKETING still focused on the combat and violence instead, hence why some people were still turned off from picking it up.
Something like the first three. Super slow paced and all exploration, with battles that are rare and intense
"Marketing focused on combat and violence"
Square Enix released a trailer COMPLETELY focused on the puzzles:
I think he mean regular commercials and ads. That video is for people actually following the game
You know why the hell not and get whoever designed the Pitioss dungeon in FFXV on board
Last edited:
They absolutely do not need to focus more on exploration, platforming and puzzle solving than Shadow. One of Shadow's biggest problems is how little combat there is and how that hurts the pacing.
We don't need more platforming, exploration and puzzle solving. We just need it to be done differently. We need more combat than what we got. Even the original Tomb Raider, probably the least combat focused TR before Shadow, had combat in every single level and it was needed to keep the game engaging between the slow moments.
STILL missing the point. The existence of something doesn't mean the exclusion of the other. Like, "Mass Effect focused on Male Shepard in marketing" is true, just as much as "they had a trailer with Female Shepard though!" is also true. The second statement does not invalidate the first statement.
The FOCUS of the brunt of their marketing clearly wasn't on puzzle solving. This is the stuff I was seeing in commercials, ads, debut trailers, and first-look magazines.
Yes. Thank you.
And we're getting off-track. I STILL think Shadow of the Tomb Raider was a step in the RIGHT DIRECTION, but it was coming off of two of the most violent and miserable games in the series that reveled in breaking and blooding Lara up, and the debut trailers focused almost entirely on her as a death-dealing Rambo stringing mercs up like the Predator. That was clearly what Square Enix thought would get the most attention, focus, and enthusiasm from gamers, which is why they led with that.
And that's not what I want. Again, reiterating what I said earlier, I want a Lara game that's enjoyable for most people. One that emphasizes fun and adventure that takes its inspiration from classics like Romancing the Stone or Indiana Jones, not The Descent or Rambo.
I actually think the "Lara Coft" spin-off games are the right vibe to go with, if they ever got a proper budget to be full-fledged 3D adventure games like their bigger-budget kin.
That's because the exploration and puzzle-solving elements weren't THAT great to begin with. Better design would fix that problem. There are brilliant games out there that are nothing but puzzle-solving, exploration, and platforming that are paced well.
The combat in the original Tomb Raider games was barely acceptable and almost there because it was expected to be. It was simplistic for a reason; because it wasn't the focus of the game. It's the same as a Zelda game - is there combat in games like Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask? Is their combat in Mario games? Of course there is. Mario is encountering enemies to fight every few seconds. But that's not what the games are about.
A better designed game makes combat a seamless part of the exploration and adventure, not a shoot-em-up setpiece that exists only to break up boring level traversal.
Last edited:
So are we going to pretend the old ps1 games don't exist in this discussion or...?
