Tomb Raider: Legend

By Eurogamer staff Published 17 August, 2005

Hands-on with the PS2 version. She cleans up good.

Lara couldn't be much farther away from the Parisian night if she tried. Some of us may be in Leipzig, but Lara's in Africa. And, just as they said she would be, Lara is back to her old tricks - leaping from ledge to ledge, solving ancient puzzles and dancing through traps that would've claimed Indiana Jones many times over. She's not just clinging on any more; she's clinging on, hauling herself up, jumping and tumbling past circular blades and then using her new multi-purpose grapple hook to smoothly swing across a spike trap with a rope - all in one fluid motion. Those of you hoping for something closer to the Prince of Persia may yet be satisfied.

Of course, the Tomb Raider: Legend team have been very vocal about wanting to take Lara Croft back to her roots. Out of the random European city and back into the caves. Back to what she's good for. Their determination for the game to stand apart from recent versions is obvious from the name alone. None of this "Lara Croft Tomb Raider Angel of Darkness" pin the colon on the run-together-game-names nonsense - just simple and memorable. Today, we got our first chance to see just how far Toby Gard and Crystal Dynamics have lead Lara - and the only slight disappointment was that we did have to journey to a random European city to do so.

Having got to Leipzig without feeling stronger or killing any helpful professors en route, Eurogamer's Patrick Garratt was one of the first to take in the new-look Lara one-to-one, and phoned through his observations earlier this morning.

The demo focused on a level set deep in Africa. Running on PS2, the code at Leipzig apparently constitutes a quarter of one of eight huge levels that make up the game, which the team reckons will take 12-15 hours to finish. And "huge" is the operative word. Starting in a cave, Lara surveys the area and makes her way out through an entrance to be greeted by a gigantic waterfall - likely to be the one seen in the screenshots - and the sense of scale is said to be overpowering. Birds are flapping around, and Lara can be seen fiddling with an earpiece.

'Tomb Raider: Legend' Screenshot 1

At this point we were told about Lara's new body. Crystal Dynamics wanted to give her "the look of action and athleticism, and retain her beauty and sensuality, but without making her look creepy". (Good grief.) They've certainly achieved the former by the sound of it, with a slightly more muscle-bound heroine - almost cartoon-esque, but still very identifiably Lara. In terms of getting back to her roots, she can take the literal path if she likes and wallow in the mud - the dirt clinging to her until she next takes a dip in nearby water. After that her clothes will be sodden, and water will drip off - she may even wring out her hair during quiet moments. Beyond making her look like a more advanced, athletic Lara, the team has tried to give her a broader range of animations - and she won't always be wearing her trademark shorts, green top and backpack either.

Having caught our attention with a gigantic waterfall, Lara pulls a lever and opens a gate behind it. It won't be long before she's leaping and, of course, fighting. One of the other things Crystal Dynamics wanted to do with Legend was modernise the control scheme - and that's obvious in various areas, including the way the combat works in a manner that's unlike any of the previous Tomb Raiders. Combat is said to be 35-40 per cent of the whole game, and a lot of work has gone into it. A health bar and individual ammo stocks for your weapons spring up to remind you of the conditions as you fight. But instead of just giving you a gun and having you point, a new "combat lock mode" allows you to lock onto various enemies so that each is assigned a face button - in a manner not dissimilar to Sony's The Mark of Kri. Lara then uses her individual handguns to take shots at the enemy corresponding to the button you're hammering. As you dance back and forth trying to evade them, you can focus your attention without having to juggle the third mental ball of cycling through targets. A clever move.

'Tomb Raider: Legend' Screenshot 2

Clever moves will be a common theme, by the sound of it. Solving puzzles demonstrated that Lara not only solves problems in various ways, but is also hugely versatile in terms of getting around and, crucially, not dying pointlessly and easily.

One puzzle involved starting a water wheel, where one of the paddles was obstructed. She surveyed the scene with binoculars first (these will apparently have different uses, but you can guess which was the only one we saw), and then got to it. The first option was to use her magnetic grappling hook - and this tool will serve her very often in Legend, from what we could make out. In this case, she found a way to swing toward it, Indy Jones' whip-style, and kick the obstruction. Another option, it turned out, was simply to chuck a grenade to clear the paddle's path. Another still involved clambering up the opposite side of the room and taking advantage of a stationary gun emplacement. The possibilities sound inviting, even if the early example is quite mundane - the idea of finishing a platform-puzzle game, starting over and saying "right, I'm not going to use any of the means I did last time" doesn't just appeal to us, it practically has our pants off. But back to Lara...

With the water wheel now clear, Lara can grab hold of the paddle and use it to reach higher platforms. Not the first time, mind you. The first time, she screwed it up. And this helpfully illustrates the point about not dying needlessly. In past Tomb Raiders, missing a ledge could be fatal and cost you lots of progress. Heck, walking down a corridor without watching your feet left you impaled on spikes - missing a ledge was like being told you were dead, and the developer had gone round your parents' house and told them about the time you stole £10 from your Mum's wallet and used it to buy pornography. Not so in Legend. Hanging from the paddle, Lara swung but failed to catch the lip of the ledge and tumbled - only to spring athletically back toward the paddle and not just grab it but actually stand up on it too. Like many recent platform games, Lara won't just fall off ledges either - she'll turn around and grab them if she stumbles off; the idea being that you'd have to make the game think you really wanted to leap off if you were to fall.

'Tomb Raider: Legend' Screenshot 3

Having navigated this section, she started encountering traps. In the dark, her shoulder-mounted flashlight turns on automatically, and the red flares she can toss into deep pits add grim highlights to the darkened spikes at the bottom. With dynamic light and shadows, of course. Simple traps are like something out of Raiders of the Lost Ark - spears hurtling forth from every crack in the wall and Lara having to time her run to avoid them - while some of the latter traps and puzzles are said to involve water currents. And we can't imagine they mean she just gets her phone wet and swept a bit off course.

Overall, Tomb Raider: Legend is looking like it could be focused in the right areas, smoothly pieced together and actually capable of proving the doubters wrong. After the farce that was Angel of Darkness, this was always going to be a critical moment for Lara, and early impressions are hugely positive. They even seem to have the camera right - it's automatic, and "loads" of work has gone into it, but during our demo it never became an issue, and could always be tweaked with the right analogue stick. With so many good ideas flowing into it from various sources - not just the first Tomb Raider - the signs are very positive. Just as the developer has worked hard to hang on to ideas that work and scrap the things that don't, their latest incarnation of Lara is equipped to grab hold of anything in her environment - an environment that she seems more than adequately equipped to navigate quickly, fluidly and beautifully. Hey, we don't know about the sensuality part yet, but we still left disappointed we couldn't take her home with us.

Tomb Raider: Legend is due out on PS2, PSP and Xbox in Q2 of 2006.

Picture of Eurogamer.

About Eurogamer staff

Read more articles from Eurogamer by visiting the Eurogamer staff archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (93) Latest comment 7 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • tengu #1 7 years ago

    I liked the first three games to an extent, but this looks like yet more dross to me. No thank ye!

  • montywithnail #2 7 years ago

    Constructive comments there dg :)

    Sounds.....ok! Which might be faint praise but at least it's praise when you consider AoD was pap!

  • ave #3 7 years ago

    WHAT? No super realistic breast jiggling physics? No new "authentic bum movement simulator"(tm)?

    What has the series come to

  • dadrester #4 7 years ago

    sounds like they're doing the right thing and not trying to make MGS with lara in it, or whatever is the big action adventure game at the time. they're going to have a hard job convincing many though, and i'd say if they don't get it spot on it'll be the final nail in lara's coffin... best of luck to them, i'd like to play another good tomb raider game. (only one i liked was the first one)

  • Bezzy #5 7 years ago

    Not a fan of the series either, but since DOUG BLOODY CHURCH was the guy who convinced Toby Gard to get back on... well... by the association alone, I'm forced to give this a very good look.

    And, really, it sounds like the things that made me hate the series (that bloody inflexible, over animated movement) have been atleast somewhat remedied. And I liked prince of persia. Looking forward to it.
    Edited by 1 at 17/08/05 @ 14:24

  • absolutezero #6 7 years ago

    Just to be different I think it looks and sounds great.

    Crystal Dynamics have proved they can do huge puzzles that be rewarding with the first Soul Reaver game (less the next one and Defiance though). The game in motion looks fluid and pretty and if they get the controls correct then it could work very well.

    Hell it could even become what Prince of Persia 2 was meant to be. Without Godsmack aswell, Bonus!

  • lucky_jim #7 7 years ago

    I think this sounds quite promising. I was completely wowed when I played the Saturn original all those years ago, and like her or not, Lara's important for gaming as one of the industry's most prominent "public faces". Many casual gamers picking up their first console will be tempted to get a Tomb Raider game just because of familiarity, and if it's crap (which most TR's have been) then it'll discolour their view of gaming generally. Lets face it, if the first game you pick up seems to consider breast size more important than game mechanics, you're not gonna change your opinion about this being a hobby for teenage boys.

    I might not buy this myself, although I'm not ruling it out yet. However, I'm still hoping it's good, for all our sakes.

  • MoFo #8 7 years ago

    Huh? I liked the whole exploring random european cities thing. I thought it was a refreshing change to wandering around endless caverns.

  • zErOb_cOOl #9 7 years ago

    I've always liked TR. Its just the Indiana Jones-feel of the game for me. Love this s*!t.

    Shame I have GOW now, which pretty much satisfies my urges in this department....for now.

  • Feanor #10 7 years ago

    First one was superb. This looks very promising.

  • motslaps #11 7 years ago

    agreed, also a fan of the 1st... this is looking promising

  • rinoaMW #12 7 years ago

    can't wait for this, lara may have cheated on me in the past but this time she'll be good.

    the screens and videos i've seen for this look excellent.

  • Artemus #13 7 years ago

    Still afraid to speak to soon but hurrah. It's about time we had another decent TR.

  • deaner #14 7 years ago

    My girlfriend will be over the moon! She's been chomping at the bit for this ever since she saw the first screenshots.

    But then, she liked Angel of Darkness!

  • smelliot #15 7 years ago

    I think it's out on PC as well.

  • Riskbreaker #16 7 years ago

    'She's been chomping at the bit '

    You can read that totally the wrong way!

  • Aurifex. #17 7 years ago

    I loved the first 3 too, and spent a lot of time and money on getting US versions, still got em too. Ifits as good as the first 3 then i will probablly get it.

  • Blerk #18 7 years ago

    Most of it sounds quite promising, but I'm hating that combat mechanism already and I've not even had a go at it.

  • ecureuil #19 7 years ago

    All reports have said this is shaping up to be a good game. Why can't people give it a chance? If it turns out as good as it's looking so far, then it deserves a look in. How pathetic that people hate the game already just because it's Lara and called "Tomb Raider" This is the reason the Dreamcast failed - people assuming it was another Saturn. If it's good, give it a chance, it's clearly not going to be another Angel of Darkness.

  • absolutezero #20 7 years ago

    The face button combat idea can work remarkably well if they manage to pull it off correctly. In the Mark of Kri it works really well for the most part its only when theres alot of enemies on screen that things begin to get a bit scrappy.

    Its an interesting element to bring into a Tomb Raider game though, Plus itll make a refreshing change from the "target nearest enemy shoot until dead, target next enemy shoot until dead. Repeat" Imagine jumping all over room shooting individual guns at different enemies, sounds cool to me, sorta like Tomb Raider mixed with Gungrave.

  • UncleLou #21 7 years ago

    The screenshots all look great. The trailer, however, looks not so good. And I don't mean the technical quality of the graphics, but the environments/gameplay. The trailer is all dual-gun-wielding-skyscraper-motorbike action, while the shots all show lush adventure environments. Doesn't look like the same game at all.

  • Blerk #22 7 years ago

    I'm kinda hoping they did the same thing with the trailer as they do with movies - put all the 'action' bits in there to stop it from looking dull and attract as many punters as possible.

    They should do an anti-trailer featuring scenery and puzzles for the likes of us. :-)

  • sonmi451 #23 7 years ago

    i wanna see her firing off ping-pong balls, damnit!!!!

  • #24 7 years ago

    JESUS ! You ppl make me laugh! Im sorry but you all go on about "its the playability that matters blah blah f***ing blah" and here you are getting excited about a Tomb Raider game? Has a TR game EVER had decent playability ? (dont say yes,you'll only look stupid) TombRaider sells because teenage boys ( and sad pc oober geeks ) like to play with there party pickles while thinking of Lara, so cut the pretence ok boys its not like you're mums here now.

  • Gareth.de #25 7 years ago

    lol

  • ecureuil #26 7 years ago

    I thought the original Tomb Raider was a really good game. I loved the platforming sections, because they worked more like puzzles. Climbing up the sphinx level took ages and was really good fun. I gave up on Tomb Raider halfway through the third game, but I thought the first two had really atmospheric environments. I don't think many games have absorbed me in to the game world as much as the original Tomb Raider.

  • BremXJones #27 7 years ago

    "JESUS ! You ppl make me laugh! Im sorry but you all go on about "its the playability that matters blah blah f***ing blah" and here you are getting excited about a Tomb Raider game? Has a TR game EVER had decent playability ? (dont say yes,you'll only look stupid) TombRaider sells because teenage boys ( and sad pc oober geeks ) like to play with there party pickles while thinking of Lara, so cut the pretence ok boys its not like you're mums here now."

    I'd agree there's someone in this thread who looks stupid, but I don't actually think it's the people saying they liked Tomb Raider 1.

    KG

  • crashVoodoo #28 7 years ago

    Sure looking back on it i can see its faults, especially the control scheme which was a bit ass, but I loved TR1. None of the sequels did anything for me.

    It was an impulse buy at first upon seeing it on a tv GAME and a bit a slow starter but from level 5 (Saint Francis Folly) onwards its was just pure gaming bliss.

    Each to their own ... and this was mine.
    Edited by 1 at 17/08/05 @ 19:49

  • captain-future #29 7 years ago

    @deathgibbon
    The first one was shit, admit it! and had a lot of tits ;)

  • Scimarad #30 7 years ago

    "you'll only look stupid"

    I can't believe you had the nerve to post that considering the maturity (or lack of) in your post.

    TR1 was great, although it was all downhill from there. Hopefully this new one will capture the good parts of the original.

  • GitSomE_UK #31 7 years ago

    Dammit when are they going to drop Lara Croft, she's a knackered old bike who everyone's had a fiddle with and we are just plain bored of her.

  • Nikanoru #32 7 years ago

    JESUS ! You ppl make me laugh! Im sorry but you all go on about "its the playability that matters blah blah f***ing blah" and here you are getting excited about a Tomb Raider game? Has a TR game EVER had decent playability ? (dont say yes,you'll only look stupid) TombRaider sells because teenage boys ( and sad pc oober geeks ) like to play with there party pickles while thinking of Lara, so cut the pretence ok boys its not like you're mums here now.

    Oh you stupid fuck. That's DOAX volleyball you're talking about. Oh wait, that didn't sell. See my point?

    Lara's boobs don't even jiggle. Do you seriously think looking at the same ass for hours and hours on end is an incentive to finish the entire goddamn game?

    I'm going to make a wild guess and say you've never played a TR game for more than five minutes. Just get the fuck off my internet.

  • Nikanoru #33 7 years ago

    I hope they haven't changed to those godawful camera-relative controls. That would totally break all the athletic precision which is one of the greatest things about TR. Less risk is good. Just no fucking platformer controls, please.

    Also, I hope that earpiece that was mentioned doesn't mean you're now going to have some tard behind the computer in the office back home yellling in your ear all the time like in so many action games. That would ruin any sense of isolation and adventure.

  • Freek #34 7 years ago

    Looks good so far, lets hope it works out.

  • kangarootoo #35 7 years ago

    @Petay_Pan

    Man, that is funny. Do you know what irony is? This isn't one of those "laughing with you" moments by the way, just so you know.

  • BBIAJ #36 7 years ago

    "Lara's boobs don't even jiggle."

    There was ever-so-slight boob jigglage going down in Angel Of Darkness, when you had her up against the wall (Matron!), in the stealth postition (Nurse!), and then had her step away, they would swing gently closer together, and then bob a little...

  • MoFo #37 7 years ago

    @Nikanoru

    Well...if the earpiece was for some really hot sounding minx (maybe Lara's lesbian lover) softly purrring sweet nothing's in to Lara's ear as she guides her through the caverns, I could handle that.

    "Oooo Lara baby why don't you explore that dark moist crack ahead."

  • MoFo #38 7 years ago

    Peter you're a funny guy...funny in the same way you laugh at a dog chasing its tail. The original TR was a great enjoyable game for its time. It's easy to look back now and moan and say it was crap, but at the time of release it was something special.

    Peter, I doubt you can appreciate this as you were no doubt still in nappies when it came out. My guess is you are about 12. The original tomb raider came out nearly ten years ago. That makes you 2 when it came out. I rest my case.

  • Furbs #39 7 years ago

    Thanks MoFo, I suddenly feel VERY old :(

  • #40 7 years ago

    ive got plenty of games from over ten years ago that still play fine today for example SF2 ,why are you using the age of the software to excuse the fact it was,is & always will be crud ?
    Edited by 1 at 18/08/05 @ 11:28

  • Blerk #41 7 years ago

    Internet forum-poster in "I don't like it therefore it can't possibly be good" shocker!

    Film at 11!

  • #42 7 years ago

    *smiles* and STILL not one of you has the balls to tell me that tomb raider was a fantastically playable game? oh well carry on insulting me if it makes you feel better, and you're calling me childish ....hmmm ok

  • Bertie Verified Senior Staff Writer, Eurogamer.net #43 7 years ago

    Crud, hah: there's a word I haven't heard in a while, cheers!

    Tomb Raider's never done it for me before, we'll see with this latest outing if anything changes.

  • Furbs #44 7 years ago

    Petay - Tomb Raider was a great game. It kick started the previous generation, made a huge step in making gaming mainstream and acceptable, and some of its level designs were amazing for the time.

    There.

  • #45 7 years ago

    PMSL very nicely worded furbs...erm but no mention of PLAYABILITY there i see?

  • MoFo #46 7 years ago

    Peter, tomb raider was a fantastically playable game. There, are you happy now?

  • Whizzo #47 7 years ago

    The original Tomb Raider is quite simply a great game.

  • Furbs #48 7 years ago

    Umm, surely being "a great game" means it has great playability?
    Fair enough, since you are obviously a little slow...
    "Tomb Raider was a fantastically playable game".

  • #49 7 years ago

    awww mofo you're a real comedian, do you wear that red nose to school too?

  • MoFo #50 7 years ago

    Petay, please don't stop. You're making my morning so entertaining.

  • #51 7 years ago

    ok well im sorry but anyone who does not see the major flaws in the playability of the TR games is simply not worth a reply. i feel sorry for u honestly.

  • MoFo #52 7 years ago

    Please expand on these "major flaws"

  • Furbs #53 7 years ago

    ...whilst taking in to account it came out in the late 90's on hardware which is incomparable to todays...

  • #54 7 years ago

    expand? havent you played it ? ok ...slow/unresponsive,dodgy camera, i could go on but what i have just mentioned is enough in itself to make a game poor in my eyes.

    Edit: im not talking about graphics here furbs (although on the subject i think they were pretty poor even for their day)
    Edited by 1 at 18/08/05 @ 11:50

  • Gareth.de #55 7 years ago

    Indeed. This generation is hundreds of times the power of 2 generations ago.

    Saturn peak performance: 500,000 non-textured, non-shaded triangles per second.

    Slap some textures and lighting on there and that number freefalls.

  • Furbs #56 7 years ago

    Now name me three modern day third person games that have a perfect camera?

    I certainly had no probs with the controls. And yes I played it. To completion.

    Edit: Oh and hardware limitations can affect gameplay, not just graphics.
    Edited by 1 at 18/08/05 @ 11:53

  • Gareth.de #57 7 years ago

    Edit: Oh and hardware limitations can affect gameplay, not just graphics.

    Yes, but the leap in graphics and effects is much further than the leap in gameplay and controlls, is it not? Until games are controlled by the power of the mind and joypads are ditched, and 3rd and 1st person games are replaced by something altogether new, this will remain the case.

  • MoFo #58 7 years ago

    Exactly Furbs, I was about to say the same thing. No third person game can ever work in terms of camera control...example: The player is standing with their back against a wall, where do you position the camera? Behind the wall?

    I too completed TR without finding the camera control to be a "major flaw".

  • #59 7 years ago

    why are you constantly bringing this time element into it ? i havent once compared TR1 to a "modern" game in any way at all,my problem with it WAS NOT THE VISUALS , and who said anything about 3D games with "perfect" camera angels but if i must i could name many games without as much of a problem as TR , RE4,Mario64,Zelda...ect and ok you had "no probs with the controls" but you're not disagreeing with me about them being slow and unresponsive are you?

  • Gareth.de #60 7 years ago

    Petay, chill. TR1 was unresponsive yes, but it didn't make it a shit game. If you were running and you pressed jump, it would often take a full step cycle for the silly bitch to actually jump. The turning circle was also hideous. But compared with what was available at the time it was pretty kewl.

    That is until Core Design ditched the Saturn version of Tomb Raider 2 because of 'technical difficulties' with the system. When Lobotomy software successfully ported a pretty nifty version of Quake to the platform though, it just showed how incompetent Core were.
    Edited by 1 at 18/08/05 @ 12:05

  • Furbs #61 7 years ago

    Yup I am, they were fine for me. And I played the PS and PC version. No problems at all. So Mario 64 had no camera problems? Even though RE4 is better, I've still heard some people complain about it. When you are dealing with the often tight and confined spaces like TR, its almost impossible to get the camera angle right. See PoP for a perfect example. The reason I introduce the time aspect is because TR1 came out as one of the very first third person games (no doubt there were others, but this one was the most epic). Its hardly surprising it wasnt perfect. But if you think there was no playability there then tbh, you've lost me.

  • #62 7 years ago

    thats my problem here, you all duck and dive my points(edit:apart from gareth) ,try and twist things ... the world is bigger then this forum you know ,speak to "actual" gamers (not perverts and geeks) and you'll find that most will agree that TR was slow,unresponsive,jerky, crud camera ,allround nothing special TO ACTUALLY PLAY.
    Edited by 1 at 18/08/05 @ 12:07

  • Dr.Haggard #63 7 years ago

    expand? havent you played it ? ok ...slow/unresponsive,dodgy camera, i could go on but what i have just mentioned is enough in itself to make a game poor in my eyes.

    This is exactly what I expected you'd say, and as such you've missed the point entirely. I doubt anyone would argue that the controls or the camera were perfect, but people don't love TR1 for it's controls or camera, and neither of those things are bad enough to have a negative effect on the experience of playing it.

    You just don't 'get' it. That's fine, we don't all like the same things, but don't try and argue that it's a bad game, or worse claim that people only like it for the tits. That just makes you look like an idiot.

    *sigh*

  • MoFo #64 7 years ago

    I do disagree, "slow", perhaps but "Unresponsive". Errr that would mean they do nothing! And calling the control a "major flaw" would imply it made the game unplayable. If so how on earth could I have completed the game if the cam control was so bad. At worst I would call the cam control a minor gripe. If you really let such issues ruin your gaming experience then I feel sorry for you.

  • #65 7 years ago

    PMSL ok so haggz what youre saying is that the playability was poor but you liked it anyway...erm ok

  • MoFo #66 7 years ago

    "thats my problem here, you all duck and dive my points"

    That's a classic, we're not in the least. We're responding to everything you say. You're the one doing the ducking and diving.
    Edited by 1 at 18/08/05 @ 12:10

  • MoFo #67 7 years ago

    "ok so haggz what youre saying is that the playability was poor but you liked it anyway"

    Holy crap, you really are ignoring everything we're saying.

  • #68 7 years ago

    mofo you're last post confirmed to me that you are a complete imbecile i wont bother replying to you in future.
    Edited by 1 at 18/08/05 @ 12:12

  • MoFo #69 7 years ago

    Oh no! My world has become such a darker place now.
    Edited by 1 at 18/08/05 @ 12:12

  • Furbs #70 7 years ago

    Petay, are you judging TR against games nowadays? In which case, of course its shite, like 99.999998% of older games when looked upon nowadays (feck, Tomb Raider isnt ready to be called retro yet is it?!). But judged against anything similar back then, it had plenty of gameplay. Serious question, not making any judgements here, but how old were you when it came out?

  • #71 7 years ago

    Edit: furbs im old enough to have been playin games on the dragon32 sadly enough
    Edited by 1 at 18/08/05 @ 12:17

  • MoFo #72 7 years ago

    What's wrong with the closet? Means I'm safe from people like you....oh wait, unless you're in here with me? Oh feck!

  • MoFo #73 7 years ago

    Hey! You just changed your post. No fair!

  • #74 7 years ago

    And lets take a game from the same era like MGS1 now i cant say i had any problems with that ,responsive controls, well thought out camera angles (although still not perfect as none are) and to top it off sweet graphics ... now i had no probs playing that one for sure.

    Edit: lol im not changing my posts mofo my freindly clown friend ,its the EG staff deleting me as i go along lol theyve nothing better to do...why not make up some new speculative news stories about PS3 that tell us nothing and leave me alone EG)
    Edited by 1 at 18/08/05 @ 12:23

  • tengu #75 7 years ago

    Peter, if that was the case, it wouldn't say you edited your own post, would it?

  • Furbs #76 7 years ago

    Well I thought the MGS controls were shit personally, but accept I'm in a minority. Oh and the game came out 2 years after TR (1996 and 1998). Unskippable cut scenes, crap dialogue, shitty codec sections. Sure, great game, but not without problems, just like TR.

  • MoFo #77 7 years ago

    MGS1 uses fixed camera angles. Do you honestly think TR1 would've been better like that?

    GTA3 onwards used the same third person camera format as TR1 and suffers from the same issues because of it. Now are you also saying that GTA is a crap game with no "playability" because the camera sucks?

  • #78 7 years ago

    erm tengu maybe you've just woken up ,the times when i edit my own post i write "EDIT" just so you know.

  • Furbs #79 7 years ago

    To be fair to him Tengu, he's being modded. The comment where he suggests I'm a paedophile for instance. But honestly, he is a mature adult.

  • Dr.Haggard #80 7 years ago

    PMSL ok so haggz what youre saying is that the playability was poor but you liked it anyway...erm ok

    /resumes banging head against brick wall

    Um..nope, I said neither the controls nor the camera were perfect but that "neither of those things are bad enough to have a negative effect on the experience of playing it". The controls were a little slow and cumbersome and took some getting used to, and the camera was occasionally annoying, but no more or less than an awful lot of otherwise excellent third person games.

    You seem fixated on the word 'playability', and the reason people loved the game is entirely lost on you. Do we need to spell it out?

  • #81 7 years ago

    If the camera angels where the only problem then i could see what you're saying but (diving my points again) it was also the poor control system *wich non of you seriously deny* anyway this is getting dull aint it?

  • #82 7 years ago

    no haggs "TITS n ASS" get a life son

  • tengu #83 7 years ago

    "Edited 1 times. Most recently by Petay_Pan"?

    Weird that there's a moderator with the exact same name as you Peter, isn't it?

  • Furbs #84 7 years ago

    Umm, I've already said I had no problem with the controls. It was a limit of the game design that you had to know when to press the jump button since the game was essentially tile based (hence you had to press the jump one "tile" before the cliff edge). No different to the original PoP - or do you think thats crap too? Had no probs with the turning on the spot (is RE a crap game because of that too?), or instant 180 flip, or the inventory, or targetting enemies (was it the first console game with a lock on mode?).

    Can I just point out though, that for someone in their 30s or older, your spelling is horrendous. Not that I'm a spelling nazi (I make typos and grammar faux pas' all the time), I'd just expect better from a grown up. Course, if English isnt your native tongue, my apologies.
    Edited by 1 at 18/08/05 @ 12:36

  • Gareth.de #85 7 years ago

    Seriously, he does have a point. When running around, jumping, shooting, trying to backflip etc. it did feel like the game was struggling to keep up with what you were asking of it. Or Lara did... the point is, her reactions were very delayed and slow.

    This is compounded by games like Mario 64, where you run around and jump the very instant you actually press the jump button.

    If you can't see or 'feel' the difference between the two games then there's something wrong.

    I don't see why that has to cause all of this shit though. :S
    Edited by 1 at 18/08/05 @ 12:37

  • #86 7 years ago

    "controls were a little slow and cumbersome" , "camera anoying at time" ah yes doc surely the ingrediants of a great game. tell me what it is i dont get then ?

  • #87 7 years ago

    JESUS! thank u gareth! and i wasnt trying to cause all this greif i just said that i thought the playability was pretty lame and the whole forum started throwing insults ,i merely retorted.

  • Furbs #88 7 years ago

    Umm Petay, here's your first post in the thread...
    "JESUS ! You ppl make me laugh! Im sorry but you all go on about "its the playability that matters blah blah f***ing blah" and here you are getting excited about a Tomb Raider game? Has a TR game EVER had decent playability ? (dont say yes,you'll only look stupid) TombRaider sells because teenage boys ( and sad pc oober geeks ) like to play with there party pickles while thinking of Lara, so cut the pretence ok boys its not like you're mums here now."

    But you were the one insulted first?

    Might I also suggest, as per your troll comment in the FIFA/PES thread the other day, that posting a negative comment about a game you have no interest or care about is symptomatic of someone who at best has too much time on their hands?
    Edited by 1 at 18/08/05 @ 12:43

  • #89 7 years ago

    fair enough furbs but its some of you ppls attitude towards games that gets my goat, its true sooo many times have i heard "playablity's all that matters ect" from alot of the folks here and then i see alot of the same nicks getting all excited about a game with well known playability "issues" to put it nicely. and although no one denies these issues according to doc haggard im the one missing something here?

  • Gareth.de #90 7 years ago

    Petay, this website is full of fanboys. You can come here and make a valid point about anything really, and there will always be some fucker that will disagree with you until the cows come home simply because he/she wanks over the material you're talking about.

    I have experienced this with Smelly and Teeth, when I pointed out that Nintendo's market share was falling. This is an objective fact, yet did they accept it as such? No, they went on and on and on about Nintendo's appeal to gamers, their style of games, the handhelds etc. Basically ducking, diving and jumping over every valid point I made to try and defend their pride and joy to the death.

    This is the fanboy.

    I'm not saying that this is what's happened here, cos to be honest it really doesn't look like a fanboy discussion, but you have to be aware of it. People like Smelly and Teeth are all over this site like flies on shit.

    I wish it would be possible for people to just look at everything ojectively and say "Yes, they are losing market share and will be in trouble at this rate if they carry on, but I love them anyway and enjoy their games" or maybe you will feel that in this case it would be "Yes, Tomb Raider was sluggish compared to many other games I can think of, but I enjoyed the game anyway".

    Takes all sorts mate. Don't get too worked up over it.

  • Furbs #91 7 years ago

    Whutevah.

  • Dr.Haggard #92 7 years ago

    get a life son

    Considering I'm undoubtedly your senior I find that a pretty hilarious remark. Maybe when you stop resorting to personal insults we can have a proper discussion.

    As Mofo said every one of your points has been responded to. Why you keep insisting that we're 'ducking and diving' your arguments is quite bizarre.

    Games with cumbersome or arguably unresponsive controls can still be worth playing, and in the case of TR1 the controls and the camera aren't even a problem when you get used to them. Not all games are about skill and quick relexes, and in the case of TR1 it's the atmosphere and immersive game world that for me makes it very much a classic.

    Fair enough sometimes it could be frustrating when you screwed up a jump, or had to struggle to solve a puzzle even when you knew exactly what you needed to do, all because of the delay in transition between animations or the camera, or got killed because of the slow turning circle, but it never bothered me much.

    I was hooked on the atmosphere and the sense of isolation - for me games are all about losing yourself in a game world, not necessarily about 'playing' and 'beating' them. I can forgive imperfect controls or other merely mechanical shortcomings if a game has managed to suck me in.

  • #93 7 years ago

    "games with combersome controls can still be worth playing" how many times do i have to re-type the same thing before you get it? my only point through all this has been to say that tomb raiders control system/camera angels were flawed and on that all seem to agree. (if you like playing games like that its youre problem) good luck to u. me personaly i dont want games that are just "worth playing"
    Edited by 1 at 18/08/05 @ 13:09

  • tengu #94 7 years ago

    Oh my, who spilled all this stupid in this thread?

  • dq8 #95 7 years ago

    Well... I'm a homo so there's no way I could have played TR1 for the girl... and I still thought it was a very good game. What you have to understand is that TR1 was released around the same time as Mario 64 and was therefore using a control scheme which was different than Mario's camera perspective based controls. The PS1 also didn't have an analog stick at the time (remember?), so there's no way it could have controls as smooth. TR1 had great "playability," an amazing amount of moves and great atmosphere for its time.

  • Dr.Haggard #96 7 years ago

    how many times do i have to re-type the same thing before you get it? my only point through all this has been to say that tomb raiders control system/camera angels were flawed and on that all seem to agree

    Yes we all agree that Tomb Raider's controls were flawed, but that wasn't your only point. This whole argument started because you implied it was a "crud" game for that reason - a point we've all been arguing and which I think you hopefully accept is completely unfounded - and because you chose to open the little debate with...

    JESUS ! You ppl make me laugh! [...] Has a TR game EVER had decent playability? (dont say yes,you'll only look stupid) [...] TombRaider sells because teenage boys ( and sad pc oober geeks ) like to play with there party pickles while thinking of Lara

    You might well have a valid point to make about the so called flawed 'playability' of the game, but that's not really the best way to make it is it? Unless of course you want to rattle some cages and start an argument, which I suspect was your intention. Now you've chilled out you don't even seem like the same person who made that initial post, so what was it all about?

    Yes, games with cumbersome controls can still be worth playing. I don't see how anyone could argue with that but I guess we all want different things from our games.

    TR1 is an excellent, immersive experience; dripping with atmosphere and chock full of good level design and puzzles, and for me it only loses a few hypothetical review score points because of slow animation transitions and occasionally frustrating controls.

    It's all about the experience, the chilling sense of isolation and exploration and the solving of puzzles. It's not about quick reflexes or the fast, responsive control of your avatar, and it's certainly not about tits for crying out loud.

  • Gareth.de #97 7 years ago

    To be fair though, if she was that slow and unresponsive in the movies she'd have died pretty quickly. ;)
    Edited by 1 at 18/08/05 @ 13:37

  • Teeth #98 7 years ago

    Dude! Seriously, I'm not a fanboy, get over it :) You really took my responses in that thread the wrong way, you know.

  • Gareth.de #99 7 years ago

    Hmmm... ok... let's forget about it then ;)

  • Teeth #100 7 years ago

    Cool. I hope we can :)

  • Gareth.de #101 7 years ago

    Forget about what? :p

  • MoFo #102 7 years ago

    Well you know, going back to what this thread is about, I just watched the two TR: Legend trailers and I must admit I'm a lot more excited by what these guys are doing than when I just looked at the screenshots.

  • Dr_Actually #103 7 years ago

    "The player is standing with their back against a wall, where do you position the camera? Behind the wall?
    "

    You put it on top of the character's head, looking outwards. It's hardly rocket science.

  • Furbs #104 7 years ago

    And if you need to do a running jump from that position? Having the camera switch as you begin your run up is just as bad. And if you keep the camera there, its horrible. See the second half of Half Life 1 to see what platform jumping in first person is like.
    So its never going to be perfect.

  • MoFo #105 7 years ago

    Dr_Actually, if the camera is pointing down at you then how is the player supposed to see what is infront of them? What if there are enemies nearby? You won't be able to see them. What if the ceiling is low, the camera will be pushed right down severly limiting your view of the surroundings. I agree it's not rocket science but your suggested solution doesn't hold much weight.

  • Gareth.de #106 7 years ago

    If I was standing against the wall and wanted to look out in front of me for whatever jump/ravine I had to navigate, I'd always press Y and get the camera into 1st person mode. Use that to point her in the right direction, then make the bitch run and let go of first person mode. Doesn't always work as well as you'd hope, but better than the 'Run and guess' method.

  • #107 7 years ago

    well ok when all is said and done i personally beleive that in an action/adventure game the controls of the main character are paramount no matter how atmospheric/nice or any other "qualities" people see in TR,visually it wasnt exactly cutting edge either and no soundtrack to speak of...apart from the butler farting (how atmospheric),i personally didnt like anything else about tomb raider either but thats a different matter. anyway each to his own i spose.

  • Riskbreaker #108 7 years ago

    'visually it wasnt exactly cutting edge either and no soundtrack to speak of...'

    He really doesn't know when to leave it alone, does he?

  • #109 7 years ago

    oh and doc haggard my initial post was aimed only at the hypocrites among us, if you dont beleive you are one of them then you should pay it no heed.

  • #110 7 years ago

    oh riskbreaker if you'd like me to humour you then ok "tombraider was the most impressive game ever with no flaws at all it had the most cutting edge graphics and ost the likes of witch beethoven would have wished to create" ...now shall i pat you on the head and throw you a cookie too ? or are you happy now?

  • tengu #111 7 years ago

    Idiot.

  • #112 7 years ago

    Oooh you cut me deep ...prick

  • tengu #113 7 years ago

    :)

  • Riskbreaker #114 7 years ago

    'now shall i pat you on the head and throw you a cookie too ? or are you happy now? '

    Enough of this totty, and back to the subject of the article.

    I'm pleased to hear that it that it sounds like they're trying to recapture some of the aspects that everybody (Except petay pan) liked about the original whilst also trying to address the inherent shortfalls of TR.

    I do worry that it will turn out to be too combat focussed with all this 'button assignment targeting' - it all sounds a bit too gimmicky for my liking.........

    Hope they learnt from the errors of the 'warrior within'!

    Edit: changed 'expect' to 'except' my spelling is terrible.
    Edited by 1 at 18/08/05 @ 17:02

  • smelly #115 7 years ago

    1st one was ace.. Now that tony is back on it, i have high hopes!

    I want cube version! :-)

  • Nikanoru #116 7 years ago

    Hahahaha oh Petey, if only you could see what a complete ass you've made of yourself over the course of this thread. Dumbshit.


    Oh and Tomb Raiders controls were absolutely perfect for the job.

    No soundtrack to speak of? No atmosphere? Jesus holy fucking Christ on a crutch man. Seems like you're continueing the argument just to stick to your first post, which you now realise was completely retarded, because you don't want to look as if you changed your viewpoint. And this makes it very tiring talking to you at all. Hey guess what, sticking with your first post only makes you look like more of a retard than when you hadn't.

    I quit.

  • MoFo #117 7 years ago

    ok last post in this thread cos it's pub time...

    Petay, you say "controls of the main character are paramount no matter how atmospheric/nice or any other "qualities""

    So in effect you're saying you'd be happy to play a game that's got bugger all scenery or visuals so long as the camera control is spot on. I suggest you go play Pong.

  • smelly #118 7 years ago

    look, you're all wrong. im right. This game is gonna be ace.

    nuf said.

  • el_pollo_diablo #119 7 years ago

    I've not touched TR since the second one, which I thought was pretty good.

    If this is up to scratch, as EG suggest it may well be, I think I might give it a go.

  • savant #120 7 years ago

    "led", not "lead". For goodness sakes!

  • #121 7 years ago

    Riskbreaker = Prick Nikanoru = Complete Prick ...learn to read kids

  • darkphoenix #122 7 years ago

    Best in the series so far = "Tomb Raider : The Last Revelation"

    First one was awesome too.
    Second was ok.

    The others were complete shit.

  • Nikanoru #123 7 years ago

    Learn to read?

    Petey, seriously, how old are you?

    If you actually were thirty-something, that would be unbelievably sad.

  • Furbs #124 7 years ago

    Old enought to have played on the dragon32 apparently :p

    /bets 20p that come mid Sept we wont see any posts from Petay between 9am and 3.30

  • Nikanoru #125 7 years ago

    If I put him on ignore I won't see any posts from him ever! Hey, sounds like a plan. I said I'd quit, so I will, reading and responding to them is wasted time anyway.

  • Riskbreaker #126 7 years ago

    'Riskbreaker = Prick Nikanoru = Complete Prick ...learn to read kids'

    /looks at Petay pan with pity.

    /shakes head solemnly with disbelief




  • 20193 #127 7 years ago

    www.tombraidercentr al.net is a great quality Tomb Raider site keeping you up to date with all the latest news :D

  • tengu #128 7 years ago

    Yes, Gareth, if you say so.