Tomb Raider: 10th Anniversary Edition

[James]

Cool, a price thread hiding in a Tomb Raider thread. No itemizing here, though, because I didn't keep track. Most of my games are Live Arcade anyway.

And I want Tomb Raider 10th on 360, using the TR:Legend engine. I really can't think of any reason why they couldn't do it.

James

[mollipen]

I heard this was axed for the PSP - shame, its one of the few games that would map naturally to the PSP control.

What supposedly happened was video of a version of this game put together by Core was leaked on the internet, and then it was found out the game was supposedly axed. About a week later, Eidos announces that Crystal Dynamics is doing the game.

It sounds like Eidos had both Core and CD working on their own verison of the game, and then picked which one they wanted to go further with. So, the Core version killed, but was never full alive in the first place.

[Shadow Not Shade]

Context is really important with my enjoyment of graphics. The levels are extraordinarily small and linear, so if Lara could actually reach that detailed slab of ruin/cardboard to the left. I also always found it was the ugliest thing that I noticed because it's so uneven. Sure, the bricks look nice in their brick-y way, but look at that smeared flat rock mess above and all around it. Everything looks smooth, like clay. It's just ugly to me. And what I really see in that screen is the crappy icicle grabbing gameplay.

Looks like somebody's trying too hard.

Also, I'm all for a remake of the original TR. It was the only one that ever really grabbed me. Fighting off wild bears > omg consipracies kill the armed soldiers!11

[Salsashark]

Core did well with what they could do in TR1. I think its limitations work well for it, like the veil of darkness shrowding everything. Mystery. I'll take TR1 in its original PS gore over a photoshopped model version with Legend gameplay (I saw they slipped some of that crap in).

I thought Legends was a pretty good-looking game, but I kinda agree with this. It's no secret that the better technology gets the harder it is to make a game look great, and the further back you go the more you're forced to use your imagination.

Sure, you can look at a jagged, pixelly mess of a screenshot and say it looks like shit, but in a really weird way it can seem more "realistic" than a high-res version with a billion more polygons. I totally know what he's talking about with the smoothed-over landscapes and lack of atmosphere.

[Glass Joe]

What supposedly happened was video of a version of this game put together by Core was leaked on the internet, and then it was found out the game was supposedly axed. About a week later, Eidos announces that Crystal Dynamics is doing the game.

It sounds like Eidos had both Core and CD working on their own verison of the game, and then picked which one they wanted to go further with. So, the Core version killed, but was never full alive in the first place.

Well that sucks. I'm not saying that CD can't do part 1 justice, but that video is exactly what I've been dreaming about with a remake of part 1.

[Punky Skunk]

and the further back you go the more you're forced to use your imagination.

Glad someone agrees. I think Tomb Raider is comparable to old NES games where every space couldn't be filled with detail. I'm sure anyone who's played Metroid, Simon's Quest, etc. in the 80s/early 90s feels the void adds to the atmosphere of the game. But might not for TR. Same sort of thing though. TR1 is more abstract/video game-y.

[Rumpy]

I'm sure anyone who's played Metroid, Simon's Quest, etc. in the 80s/early 90s feels the void adds to the atmosphere of the game. But might not for TR. Same sort of thing though. TR1 is more abstract/video game-y.

I saw that as "nothing being there". An empty void.

[Punky Skunk]

You were born as a 25 year old with that avatar, weren't you. Yes, it is an empty void.

[Rumpy]

You were born as a 25 year old with that avatar, weren't you. Yes, it is an empty void.

What? I'm just not seeing how the lack of detail back in the day really added or took away from anything. If there was nothing there, there was nothing there. Can't say I ever really thought about it when I was playing those games. I'm not like "all of that black space in metroid really makes me feel alone! What a stark contrast between this and RC Pro AM!" Doesn't really matter to me.

[MechDeus]

Glad someone agrees. I think Tomb Raider is comparable to old NES games where every space couldn't be filled with detail. I'm sure anyone who's played Metroid, Simon's Quest, etc. in the 80s/early 90s feels the void adds to the atmosphere of the game. But might not for TR. Same sort of thing though. TR1 is more abstract/video game-y.

It's not that I disagree, it's that the effect was caused by older games where they had often reached the technical limits and were forced to be creative often doesn't apply to many early 3D games. TR1 was part of the initial growing genre of 3D and it shows. I can look at a sprite that was as good as a system could put out and be fine with that, just as I can look at a model done on the PS that either pushed its limits or had great visual style and respect it.

Look at FFIX through an emulator, it's really fucking amazing what Square was doing on that system. TR1, on the other hand, was a early execution concept that was amazing when it was released but looks like utter shit from any angle these days. It had no style in terms of its look (it was basically blocks with triangles attached in an attempt to look as realistic as they could pull off) and thus doesn't hold up. The surrounding gameplay and level design, however, works, especially the latter which the later games abandoned and suffered greatly for. So to now have something with graphics that are once again up to par + the level design that made people care about the game in the first place = awesomeness.

But feel free to stick with your PS1 version. It's there for you to play and no one's twisting your arm to buy an updated copy.