Tomb Raider Underworld: General Discussion

    I agree, this is what I said on the matter in another thread.


    Skinny Jeans wrote:


    And finally, I think the whole concept of AoD was an abomination to the name Tomb Raider. Lara wrapped up in a murder mistery? Come on, even my sister could come up with a more interesting plot. I believe its all about escapism. If you want to see a CSI then walk into a modern city, but that isn't loosing yourself. When playing TR1 & 2 in particular, I really felt I was in another world or civilisation, untouched by the society that is wrecking our planet with murders and terrorism etc, it was almost like a dream. Yeah yeah I know thats a cheesey cliché but thats how I felt.




    I think most games manufacturers have lost sight of what is important. Instead of concentrating on a solid plot, they've fallen victim to the rush to out do eachother in terms of visuals and making graphics unbelievably realistic.


    When I think back, the most memorable games in my opinion were those released in the infancy of 3D gaming. The gaming industry had to manipulate our imaginations with a great story to compensate for the graphics. Hence the reason why the original TRs and other games are more distinct that the current ones. Not that I'm saying I don't like Lara or TR any less, we just need that 'magic' back.

    Skinny Jeans wrote:

    I think most games manufacturers have lost sight of what is important. Instead of concentrating on a solid plot, they've fallen victim to the rush to out do each other in terms of visuals and making graphics unbelievably realistic.

    You are a 100% right. Graphics do not compensate for game-play neither do they make a game memorable. I'd rather say,' man, now that was a great game' ! And not ' well, it looked good ', you get what I'm saying ?!
    And I totally agree with you concerning the older games. ( TR1 TR2 ) They were the epitome of the Tombraider franchise. The games were longer and therefore kept me entertained for quite some time. TR4 ( my fave ) took me months to finish. Now that's what I call a good game and worth every penny spent on. :awe So I say, keep the graphics at a reasonable rate and work instead on a proper ( longer ) plot with good puzzles and we will have to complain no more. :thumbsup

    What kinda wonders me, it looks like for Underworld they used the same Graphic engine. Okay, Lara has some more moves and animations, but basically, if you look at the Level Designer from FarCry 2, almost every talented designer can make great Levels with the Editor within a couple of hours or less.


    Now imagine a Team of professional level designers and you have a new TR game ready in a month.


    Using a existing Graphic engine, add some new animations and new levels and you have a new game.


    I have a suspiscion that this game is just a fast production to make money.

    Which is just what I've been saying. Why did they have to increase the specs when the previous engine would have been sufficient ? :think:
    And I do agree with you concerning the level editors. A good designer can whip up a level in no time. But a good level doesn't make a good game.
    For a good game you must have a good story. :thumbs: If the story sucks, no pretty looking level can save the game. :thumbsdown:
    Btw, TRU wasn't a fast production, since it took about a year to complete. Why it took so long though, is any-ones guess .

    They've been spending their time trying to push the grapical boundaries of games to out-do other companies -haven't I already said this?

    I've just read an article in the PC Mag ' PC Powerplay ' very interesting indeed. It's a review over 2 pages, a bit too long to recap but you can read the article on line. WWW. PCPOWERPLAY. com.au . Sorry, I don't know how to insert links to websites. :oops:

    Thanks for sharing, questy, :thumbsup . Over at another forum, people were talking about how Lara's ponytail needs to be more realistic and her hair needs more color, and complained about her lack of outfits. I'm willing to bet you all know what I said in my response to that thread - that this is Tomb Raider, not Dress Up Lara.

    Funny how some people start picking on little or even totally irrelevant things, like pony-tails or the colour of hair.
    If that is all they can comment on or find ' wrong ' about the game, then TR Underworld must be in fact
    The Perfect Game !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
     :thumbsup :thumbs: :applaud :chin

    Well, I wouldn't say perfect. I mean, put it this way; my opinion is that if I weren't such a fan of the series or if I had too high of hopes for games like most people, I would say the game was abysmal. My honest opinion - as a game, I'd give it a 6.5/10; for a Tomb Raider game, 8/10. I think what they did to the game, building an engine from scratch and all that was a bit rubbish. I mean, the engine from Legend was perfect. All they had to do was build up on it and Underworld wouldn't have been riddled with bugs like it was. It seemed like a next generation version of Angel of Darkness.


    I'm just hoping the next game is better. I'm still waiting for the Beneath the Ashes downloadable content. News on it should be here on Tuesday, so here's to hoping it's coming soon.

    I dont see why everyone is comparing Underworld to Angel of Darkness. AoD had WAY more bugs than Underworld...Plus, AoD was a terrible game, Underworld is actually fantastic, I'm very pleased with it. I don't see it as anywhere near AoD...Seriously, it's not that bad haha.

    t.A.T.u.Raider wrote:

    I dont see why everyone is comparing Underworld to Angel of Darkness. AoD had WAY more bugs than Underworld...Plus, AoD was a terrible game, Underworld is actually fantastic, I'm very pleased with it. I don't see it as anywhere near AoD...Seriously, it's not that bad haha.

    In my opinion, and the shared opinion of others, Underworld isn't all that epic as they made it sound. Yeah, it was good, but I don't think it was the best. I didn't think the Angel of Darkness storyline was bad, but the game itself was terrible in the opinion of others (even though I liked it) but almost everyone refers to it as the black sheep in the Tomb Raider series, so using that as a point of reference, people compare it to Underworld because of the bugs it was filled with, lacking of features in gameplay and options, and it's basically rubbish compared to Legend. If you kept Legend and replaced the storyline, outfits, weapons, locations, and characters with Underworld's, it would be what, perfect? That's how a lot of people feel.


    Thus the opinion of a lot of people being; Underworld was garbage. Not to mention it's being compared to games such as Gears of War, Call of Duty: World at War, and all that, which is incredibly unfair since it's a completely different genre. Thus being why thirty employees were fired from Crystal Dynamics by Eidos; sales were terrible because of the "better" games out there. Well, who's fault is that? The company's for putting it down as a Christmas holiday release where a lot of other companies tend to do the same but come out with a game that more people will want to play over Tomb Raider. It's always been that way. Some people can't appreciate a good game or series for what it's worth.


    My opinion: Underworld was a good game. Not the best Tomb Raider game, but not the worst.

    I agree with what you're saying cat and t a t u. Tr U is not the best of the series. My fave is still Tr 4. With legend 2nd and Tr U 3rd.
    Then again, I really do love all of them.
    But I absolutely hate it when people starting to compare the Tr dames to FPS's. The games could not be more different. Therefore, making that comparison is just utter non-sense. :stupid

    Agreed. It's like factually comparing apples to oranges; a completely different fruit - it can't be done. Another reason to be misanthropic, :-x . People just have no clue or common sense nowadays, it's ridiculous.

    I'd drink to that logic; not that I can since I'm under the legal drinking age by a couple of years, [hehe] .

    It's 21 as far as I know, but let's stay on topic ;-)


    Catracoth wrote:

    Well, who's fault is that? The company's for putting it down as a Christmas holiday release where a lot of other companies tend to do the same but come out with a game that more people will want to play over Tomb Raider. It's always been that way.


    Completely agreeing with you there. They make up so much weird reasons for the game being a failure, but the solution's really simple apart from people choosing other games over TR - they just shouldn't rush to bring it out until Christmas and thus pressure the developers. It's a good game, but there's just so much that feels rushed to me.

    Twenty-one indeed, ;-) .


    The problem being is that Tomb Raider will never be the top selling game of the month, year, whatever, because people prefer games like Fallout 3, Call of Duty, Grand Theft Auto, sports games, etcetera opposed to Tomb Raider. It's always been that way, and I'm afraid it always will be. What Eidos and Crystal Dynamics needs to realize is the above fact and that they shouldn't make Tomb Raider suitable to compete with those games; it's improper and inappropriate - Tomb Raider is on a completely different playing field (again with the apples to oranges comparison) than the above games. Insane action (with no apparent storyline in some cases) over casual adventure (with a brilliant storyline in some cases) I'm afraid.


    Now here's a question thrown out to anyone who would like to give their opinionated answer; is it just me, or are the fans of Tomb Raider and fans of games that admittedly are brilliant (but the common gamer today [who's high on the above games] can't seem to appreciate them because he is weak or feeble-minded) the logical and smart gamers of the world?


    In other words, are we the Tomb Raider fans the smarter gamers because we can appreciate a good game for what it's worth? I believe so entirely. Unfortunately, some game companies don't see it that way. It isn't about pleasing their gamers, it's about money. If they aren't making money, they couldn't care less if they're butchering a game. If you ask me, if Eidos and Crystal Dynamics want to make a top selling game like those games listed above, they should start fresh on a new franchise or game and make it suitable to compete with those games. They shouldn't take the brilliance that they have that is Tomb Raider and try to convert it. They should leave it alone and start new with something else.


    That way, everyone's happy.

    You have a point there, Cat - I have never met as intelligent people anywhere as on TR fores (although also these fores are not always entirely free of noobs, of course).
    Eidos is so greedy these days. They just can't be satisfied with the acceptable sales of TR games - they want them to be as high as the sales of all the brain-free games. That won't work, because TR is more intelligent than many other games and intelligent people are less numerous than stupid people - and so they probably are trying to do a balancing act, trying to keep the old fans and to reach the mainstream brain-free audience at the same time. That, obviously, isn't going to work too well in the long run. They'll have to decide: Do they want to keep us, the (so far) loyal old fan community, or do they want to take the risk of trying to gain a foothold in the mainstream audience? They will have to decide soon, because I doubt that I'll bother buying TR10 onward if TR9 turns out to be just as short as and to have as lowbrow puzzles as TRU, and I guess that I'm not the only one.

    Masterofdesaster wrote:

    They will have to decide soon, because I doubt that I'll bother buying TR10 onward if TR9 turns out to be just as short as and to have as lowbrow puzzles as TRU, and I guess that I'm not the only one.

    I totally agree with you. :thumbsup
    What's the point buying a game, when you can finish it in a week-end. Comparison :$ 70.00 to buy , $ 10 to hire for 3 days.
    I admit, it looks pretty. But for me, pretty is not enough. How about replayability ?! I played TR1 three times over and TR4 twice. And still it took me longer to finish it the second time over then it took me to finish TRU first up. So, let me put it out there again.
    What's the @*&%* point