Tomb Raider: Underworld

[ThunderPeel2001]

Toblix there are a couple Class As in there.

Crikey. I remember by in my Sony Playstation tester days that a Class A meant "you can't release this game" (unless you were EA )

[twmac]

All the big companies have a 'known shippable' (or words to that effect) tag on issues reported these days.

To be fair if the bug wasn't encountered by Microsoft during submission then Eidos got lucky.

[DanJW]

It's a feature.

[Cigol]

Does anyone remember Charlie Brookers prank phone calls to various games companies in PC Zone? One included calling up EIDOS about Tomb Raider 2 ("green about the gills", "you have a touch of mystique about you")... although his call to Activision was good as well

[toblix]

Aaanyway, just finished this, and I'm somewhat disappointed with it.

The graphics are great. Everything looks really nice and thoroughly done. There's no blurry textures or shit like that. I thought the characters looked good to, and didn't find them as plasticy as others have.

The main puzzles are awesome. They're well thought out, varied and always have some surprising element. Even if it looks like you'll have to do the same thing twice, the second time some element has changed, keeping if fresh, yo.

The main areas are beautiful. These huge areas with statues and rocks and poles and moss and shit everywhere, they're spectacular.

The end game is not drawn out and ridiculous. The last level has the feeling of a climactic boss battle, but there aren't any (deliberately) very hard fights or anything like that. I like my end game smooth, and it's awesome that more games avoid the soul crushing end bosses.

When the platforming works, which is 90% of the time, it's awesome. There's plenty of jumping and shimmying and grabbing and climbing, and they always mix it up too keep it fresh, yo.

Motorcycle

There are so many fucking bugs in this game it's ridiculous, and they're all related to platforming. Lara gets stuck on the most ridiculous of places, she misses obvious jumps, suddenly leaps off into a chasm for no reason when a ledge is right there, and the rope stuff is wonky as hell.

Combat is boring and stupid. There's not a lot of it, thankfully, but they should just drop it all. Mostly you're killing tigers or monsters, and they could've just as well skipped these sequences and replaced them with some more jumping.

The achievements (and I guess trophies) are lame.

Also,

(((((((

))))))):tdown:NO MANSION LEVEL!!!:tdown:((((((()))))))

[brkl]

I think they're trying to make killing tigers cool again.

[ysbreker]

There is one mansion level. The one where it blows up, remember?

[toblix]

That's not a mansion level, that's a level that happens to be a mansion.

[Chris]

I agree the combat is stupid. I'm now also playing Assassin's Creed and the combat is more involved but still stupid and not fun. I don't understand why designers feel the need to fill this kind of game with combat.

[n0wak]

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/technology/article5485017.ece

[toblix]

I heard that, and I'm loving it. Surely, if they reboot Lara Croft, they won't have to do anything with the games.

[twmac]

Sorry, I have images of the games industry interpreting 'woman friendly' as 'bollocks that sells on the Wii'.

I can't help but imagine the following titles:

'Getting into tiger-kicking shape with Lara!'

'My tarantulaz featuring the Croft mansion play pen'

'Raiding Rabbids: The mini-game Tomb of hell'

[DanJW]

Yeah it's odd how devs that try to appeal to the female market more never try to do so by being more intelligent and grown-up*...

* maybe because they think grown-up means "M Rating"

[Chris]

Yeah it's odd how devs that try to appeal to the female market more never try to do so by being more intelligent and grown-up*...

* maybe because they think grown-up means "M Rating"

Well, to be fair, they don't try to appeal to the male market that way either.

[DanJW]

Well, to be fair, they don't try to appeal to the male market that way either.

The male market isn't known for being those things (even though there is a sizeable chunk that would appreciate it).

Supposedly the female market is turned off by the immaturity in games, but no-one has made a serious effort to improve it for that reason.

[Nachimir]

Some of the comments at the Guardian are hilarious and piercing when it comes to publishers:

-Instead of killing tigers you have to dress them up in beany hats and necklaces. If they dig your style they wont attack. If you style enough animals correctly you unlock a fashion show.

- Sometimes Lara will refuse to unlock doors or lift items because she is having emotional issues with her bf. To prevent this Lara can use her in game mobile to chat inanely to her girlfriends raising her stats.

Medipacks are replaced by heat magazines and hot chocolate.

- Lara’s quest involves hunting a rare bangle that Grazia named their hot pick of spring 2009.

- Lara will refuse to walk anywhere, instead she can ring her ingame bf to pick her up and drive her through the temples.

- Extreme humidity will result in Lara’s hair going frizzy. If players cannot find hair straightners within a set time limit, Lara will throw a hissy fit and refuse to continue the mission

As another commenter there points out, physical traits notwithstanding, as a clever young lady traveling the world alone solving puzzles, Lara always was a fairly approachable character for women.

[Nappi]

I thought she was supposed to get naked.

(There was a headline "Lara Croft will reveal everything in the next game", without a question mark or anything, on a rubbish website of a Finnish tv channel. I don't think they usually report anything gaming related but.. you know.. tits.)

[Chris]

The male market isn't known for being those things (even though there is a sizeable chunk that would appreciate it).

Supposedly the female market is turned off by the immaturity in games, but no-one has made a serious effort to improve it for that reason.

I don't think that's fair at all. Look at all the culture that's marketed directly to females in modern culture: it's just as retarded as the stuff that's marketed directly to males, it's just less violent and poop-jokey and more romantic, or more focused on celebrities or not being fat or whatever. Stuff that rides on being "intelligent" at the fore does not tend to be heavily gender-split, because the market for intelligent stuff is small enough as it is.

[DanJW]

I don't think that's fair at all. Look at all the culture that's marketed directly to females in modern culture: it's just as retarded as the stuff that's marketed directly to males, it's just less violent and poop-jokey and more romantic, or more focused on celebrities or not being fat or whatever. Stuff that rides on being "intelligent" at the fore does not tend to be heavily gender-split, because the market for intelligent stuff is small enough as it is.

You're right, of course. But the immaturity of games is still cited as a put-off for women. Maybe it's just a case of the general widespread low-grade misandry (eg 'anything male dominated is immature and stupid').

But that's another topic altogether.

[Cigol]

Girls just wanna have fun!

[syntheticgerbil]

I think if there seriously is a problem with Lara Croft appealing to women and not selling at full potential, which I don't buy, then it probably would most likely have to do with what she's represented in the past.

She's been marketed completely different before Crystal Dynamics took over, and there's also that shitty movie with Angelina Jolie.

People just don't forget the kind of sleaze she had been tending towards in the past with her old polygon inflated form complete with big ugly lips and tits to match. And then Nukem was covering her tits on a magazine cover. Game mechanics and class aside from the last two or three games, this is her past.

But I really just think there are probably still tons of women playing Tomb Raider games, and that the decrease in sales is probably unrelated to her marketability towards women. I don't know what to say, I haven't played Underworld, nor have I heard many bad things about it. I think most women I've talked to seem to have a thing for Indiana Jones, so who wouldn't want to do that type of stuff in a game, even without former knowledge of the old Lara Croft?

[Erkki]

I bought this with Prince of Persia after the episode that talked about both of them.

I've played only a little bit, but my first impression is that this game is utter crap compared to PoP. I really don't understand what people see in it. The combat is boring, the platforming is ruined by awkward camera. The controls are somewhat ok, though. Sound is really weak.

I really do not see at motherfucking all how this even compares to the excellent platforming in Prince of Persia (which had a few minor issues, but the overall polish was miles above).

ok, so i get to my first puzzle, the game suggests I open a PDA and it tells me "I need to find axles in other places with glowing Jellyfish". WTF how the hell is she supposed to know that she needs to look for axles near Jellyfish? I just don't get this game.

I may keep playing though, maybe it gets better.

[MonkeyWrench]

I completed this a few days ago and I enjoyed it much more to PoP. Don't get me wrong, PoP was good fun for the most part, but there was just far too much hand-holding and auto pilot gameplay. What I've liked about the TR games (well the first one before Core ruined it and the last couple by Crystal Dynamics) is that you enter an area and have to survey your surroundings as it's not always clear what you have to do (unless you use the hints). That's the kind of mental challenge that was missing from PoP's latest interation, your path was always clearly defined. Sands of Time had this nailed so I'm confused as to why Ubisoft got it so confused this time.

I agree Underworld isn't perfect; the combat isn't great (they have a long way to go to match Drake's antics) and the camera is dire at times, but I do believe Underworld was a decent step in the right direction for the TR series.

[Chris]

I completed this a few days ago and I enjoyed it much more to PoP. Don't get me wrong, PoP was good fun for the most part, but there was just far too much hand-holding and auto pilot gameplay. What I've liked about the TR games (well the first one before Core ruined it and the last couple by Crystal Dynamics) is that you enter an area and have to survey your surroundings as it's not always clear what you have to do (unless you use the hints). That's the kind of mental challenge that was missing from PoP's latest interation, your path was always clearly defined. Sands of Time had this nailed so I'm confused as to why Ubisoft got it so confused this time.

I agree Underworld isn't perfect; the combat isn't great (they have a long way to go to match Drake's antics) and the camera is dire at times, but I do believe Underworld was a decent step in the right direction for the TR series.

I didn't find POP much fun at all, and I played all the way through Underworld, so yeah I agree.