Does anyone miss the old style Tomb Raider?

oh yesss baby love me some melons

Damn. Did I really say that 2 years ago?!

Well,,,I guess my statement still stands :P

The old ones are still the genuine ones. They still have magical atmosphere to them, whenever I play through them on PS1.

I prefer the original 90s gameplay style from the old games.

Having played and beat the second trilogy (legend/anniversary/underworld) leaves just no taste or desire to experience them again as it's an autoguided/autoshot/autogrip way to go with no sense of danger whatsoever you can feel while moving around. Enviroment is nicer but also simplified as it looks conveniently designed to go straight trough without figuring out directions or anything worth puzzling around too much.

The newest tomb raider games are even worse: despite putting tremendous dramatic emphasis they feel something like 60% of the time interactive cutscenes which I couldn't care less while I'm supposed to play a game. I don't mind some story but having some catch button presses while I'm watching a movie just makes me feel like an idiot.

I understand Original Lara feels klunky compared to modern standards to move with but that was just what made the game fun and challenging... you really feel one mistep can make you die in a second and that's the premise most of the platformers are based on.

In addition to that, figuring out what to do in the map is the puzzle you're supposed to beat in order to get any sense of acheivement otherwise missing in following installments.

don't get me wrong Im fine with making new things different but so far the newer games may look nice but just aren't fun or challenging anymore.

They should, (just saying) be using the same game engine to make both an easy and whiny version for kids like ones that came out, while developing in the same time a more kickass version (with a kickass lara again) for kickass gamers.

nopexssx

nice titties

@reduc_ab_:

I miss the old atmosphere, level design, acrobatics, twin pistols, and costumes but not the gameplay itself. Old Lara was so much more powerful, and a pro who could overcome anything. I feel like I'm playing as someone post-retirement with new Lara.

Old thread, but HELL NO! Tank controls in a 3D action adventure platformer is terrible, and makes me not ever WANT to play it (I've experienced similar controls with Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone on PC and Blood Omen 2). I didn't get into Tomb Raider until Legend on GameCube and I was thankful Anniversary was a modern remake of the original.

I'll take tank controls in Onimusha 1/2, Resident Evil 1-3, ans Fear Effect. But not TR classic or any other games of it's ilk (points to Blood Omen 2 and Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone PC).

Funny how you whiny kids hate tank controls while they weren't hard to learn.

In platformers like TR sometimes the camera is between her and the wall which makes jumping annoying with 3d controls(Due to camera movement you get a unsteady camera which makes your movements non precise) while in tank controls you easily just press forward for making that jump.

I am very nostalgic when it comes to games and i keep replaying escpecially the old titles in my collection from around 2000 frequently with great pleasure. But that's exactly why they should remain in their respective time.

The old Tomb Raider-Series is a very good example. The classic Tomb Raider 2 is my favorite Tomb Raider. Most of the old-style TRs are okay too (except for the chronicles maybe), but we really had enough of those back in the day. Even the first reboot-trilogy (Legend, Anniversary, Underworld) was at it's core so close and similar to the originals (apart from graphics and controls), that they felt already outdated at the time of initial release. The second reboot however in 2013 is my second favorite TR after II, because it was a very different and modern take on the formula but still somehow retained that familiar Tomb Raider feeling. TR 2013 pulled Lara to the modern times and made clear that she should never go back to her "clunky days", because there would be nothing else but disappointment and boredom. Tomb Raider II was the pinnacle of the series and after that TR basically turned into an archetype of mediocrity and repetition up until the 2013 reboot. It was basically the "Call of Duty" of the early 2000s.

So basically: No, we don't need to go back to classic TR at all. Just go to your game-collection shelf, pull out the good old DRM-free copies of TR 1 - 4, blow off the dust and play those again. After that, your longing for classic TR should be satisfied for another 3 or 4 years :)

there could be a little more exploration/tomb raiding in the new ones, but hell no, I don't really miss the old Tomb Raiders. The reboots, well...they're more like grand re-envisionings which is what I want from established franchises that are redone.

No.

I never understood the hype around the games on the PS1/2, even considering the time period, they had pretty bad controls, although dual wielding pistols was fun.

I'm not a huge fan of the reboot either but it was fun to play and had some really cool moments but just like uncharted, it held the gamers hand way too much.

I grew up with the classics, so yes, I do miss the old Tomb Raider games and it's unique feel. On the other hand, I do like the reboot.

Wow, this an old topic. But I've actually gone back and played the first 6 TR games since, and what I found was I liked the sequential gymnastics and absolute consistency in the controls (a running jump is a running jump, it doesn't change length depending on cinematic requirements: you land exactly where you aimed).

I would like to see more of that actual platforming (not this 'snap into place' veneer of platforming) make a come back. It's perfectly possible to d o that in 3D these days without clunky controls -- and then combine that with the puzzle-oriented gameplay of the older games.

Yes, they are far superior games. I finished 2 last year and it ended up being one my favorite games.

The old games are essentially dungeons. Far slower paced where each move into a new area can present instant death. The controls (contrary to what people claim) are actually fine. Every jump is safe if you scout or use manual camera and many of the leaps of faith are specifically designed to create tension.

Anyways, key differences

- The old games either had no, or very limited checkpoints, making your action relevant, with the risk/rewards greater. The newer games (Underworld onward) placed checkpoints every 30 seconds or so area to area, removing all tension from the game. Environments instantly changed from intimidating to inconsequential, ruining one of the main appeals of the game.

- The original games had savaging and resource management. An entire suit of weapons with limited supply, and health packs encouraging exploration into dangerous areas. Tomb Raider: Legend onward essentially removed this, allowing only 2+ weapon pickups that dropped like flies from the many humanoid characters.

- The level design become simplified. The original games (specifically 2) had huge labyrinths that demeaned the players attention to progress, similar to key hunting on a Doom map. To remove "frustation", i.e. thinking, the levels became simple A to B paths with puzzles placed in a trite designers hand fashion.

- The original games had set pieces that required 100% player input. The newer games, especially the reboot create fake tension through barely controllable cinematic sequences that are about as engaging as waiting for toast to pop.

- The original (1/2) games barely had any story-telling. Lara Croft was more an avatar for the player to imprint themselves on. The more story-telling they added, the worse it got. Tomb Raider reboot essentially removed the idea of a vague confident Bond/Jones hybrid and firmly turned the character into a whiny uni student who squeals alot. Even before that, around Angel Of Darkness the story telling became progressively obnoxious with a library of "oh gives a shit" side characters.

- The originals climbing required player input, multiple buttons used including a "hold" button. It's now very automated and she can't even fall off a ledge automatically.

- Someone thought (and still thinks) QTE's are a great idea

- Someone thought (and still thinks) cinematic walking is a great idea

etc...

Basically, Tomb Raider 2 is awesome.

Yes, I do miss the classic Tomb Raider games. That said, I'm also unsure if that style of game really has a place, or an audience, in modern gaming. That said the only way to know for sure, is to try it.

The early Tomb Raider games? Not quite, but the first Crystal Dynamics trilogy? That was great and I wish it went back to that instead what we get now.

^^

Nope. They belong in another era. Comparing the reboots to the classics just make me cringe in how shamelessly tacky they really were.

Yes, I enjoy the old-school stone cold Lara. TR3 is my fav I liked how difficult it was to pass, how alone you feel, the clunky graphics and cut scenes. The reboots are cool and were needed suppose but I prefer the nostalgia of the old ones. I really liked AOD as well, despite what others may think of it.

Another thread coming back from the dead.

People must be really bored

I do miss the zen of tomb raiding. In the old games the platforming was pure experience, without any silly extras like crafting or survival skills added to it.

Yeah, in the good old days there was just Lara and the fiendish platforming puzzles, with few enemies added here and there. It was simple formula, but it worked.

The new TR games are just Far Cry clones.

I miss the old Tomb Raider as well tbh. I don't really have a problem with the newer games, but I grew up with the classics, so it's no surprise that I prefer them and their so called "tank controls". But if you like the newer games or all TR games, then more power to you.

Feel free to gawk at my epic signature of Dr. Willard suplexing Tony the Loon (both from TR3)

Yes she wore shorts!!!