So, Lara Croft and the Guardian of Light eh...?
polycounter lvl 18
So you drop the name of one of the most recognised titles in history, make it downloadable only, and say "its nothing like any other Tomb Raider game before".
Yeah, I call fail already... I mean, what the FUCK Crystal Dynamic? Is it REALLY so hard to see that all you have to do, is take Uncharted, replace Drake with Lara, and BOOM, instant hit? No... Instead, you will likely make this a total pile of shite just like the last few and instead continue to hire some of the worst character modelers in the history of "next gen".
Oh and btw, J. R. R. Tolkien called, he left you a message. He said "See you in court".
But yeah good luck with it...
Replies
It sounds promising to me actually! Also, the last tomb raider had some pretty high quality character art if you ask me! So calling them 'WORST CHARACTER MODELERS IN THE HISTORY OF NEXT GEN' is a pretty bold statement, especially on a forum like this. I'd love to see you do better, but since they are the WORST even a fucking stickman would be better right?
You don't have to excell at something to know something else is bad. So the whole "i'd like to see you do better" thing is childish, at best. You may call it artistic style, but I call it last gen modelling on next gen systems myself. I mean, this kind of stuff passed for Timesplitters... On the PS2:
You can't for a second argue that if they put time and quality into it the same as the Uncharted series, or any current gen game really, that it wouldn't come off great. But thats just it... Past Tomb Raider games have been "all about the buck" and not about the end result. The last few games have been designed in a way to allow porting to the PS2/PSP/Wii with little effort or change in artistic style, which is why they came off looking, to be frank, appaling. Underworlds levels were at times amazingly well done, but the production values in the character models and the voice acting was B movie laughable at best. Even Lara, easily the most well done model in the game, was very "odd" looking.
That said the reboot reaked artwork had her looking much, much, much better, more down to earth and more realistic... I just get the feeling they scraped that now for a simple "lets make money" game everybody seems to be making these days...
we will know more in 5 days
though I wonder, what's more recognizable? 'Tomb Raider' or 'Lara Croft' ?
I would probably agree that both together are most recognizable, but remember that the movies were called Tomb Raider if I remember correctly.
Also, if they really want to hit the sweet spot, the box art will be DD-sized jugs.
I hope there will be PC version of new game.
That is because its not the LATEST tomb raider game, this is a screenshot of tomb raider anniversary, a remake that was released in 2007 on.... guess what.... THE PS2!!!
So... you are calling this THE WORST?:
go play mw2 that as nice last gen characters..
3 Hours later
ups its over..
then go tha hell whit last gen games. and bring back gameplay...
Finding shots of Underworld is a bit tricky, as hardly any shots exist online of the gameplay for some odd reason. But the character models are hardly what I would detailed enough to compete. Lets face it, everybody WILL compare this to Uncharted, because thats the new standard of gaming in this style. I'll finda pic, even if I have to take shoddy screen caps off my 360 copy of Underworld, lol.
EDIT:
As I said before, "aside from Lara". The Lara model isn't bad, aside from a general lack of texture detail and a horrid face, but thats a style I dislike. I can't stand those over hte top cartoony faces on realistic bodies. Its also not fair to say that the Lara model in Underworld is any where near the detail the other enemies have. Find me a pic of one of the Underworld random enemies that looks anywhere near as detailed and I'll admit defeat.
I think thats more to do with the dev than the graphical quality don't you? Mass Effect 2 was stunning and lasted 30-40 odd hours. Uncharted 2, in the same genre, lasted twice as long as Underworld, but had roughly the same dev time.
So if each model is 100mb and you have to cut down expenses and have only 1dvd.
whats the result nice graphical quality bad gameplay. im talking in general of course rules are made to be broken ^^
Only PS3/XBOX/PC version were done by CD. AFAIK PS2 and Wii versions were done by other developer from scratch (I can't remember who did them), and I don't think it was bad.
EDIT: Buzz Monkey Software did PS2 and Wii ports.
So maybe thats why I liked the revealed pics of what everybody thought was this new title. They just seemed more grounded compared the old modelling ways. You can't really say that this style DOESNT work for Tomb Raider:
and budget or manpower?
And I have to say, for the Wii/PS2, the models were spot on, in fact VERY highly detailed for those specific platforms and impressive. But see my post above about style.
hahaha
QFT
I'll wait and see what the game is before damning it
I don't know, haven't seen Wii or PS2 versions. I liked Underworld style very much, I guess it's just a personal preferences. I don't think Underworld's characters look that bad:
http://laracroft.pl/tr8/gal_rnd.htm
I like them, especially Natla.
I can't say. But with a team of 10 and a team of 2, it doesn't always mean the team of 10 will produce better art quicker, does it? Theres people on here that make models far better and far quicker than most studios do, in fact.
All I have to go on is a single pic of CD: http://www.crystald.com/files/images/studio-pic.jpg so its hardly a small studio. Budget wise, who knows...
http://www.pig-brain.com/gallery.htm
If I'm not mistaken, those are for the Wii/PS2 versions, which were built from the ground up for those platforms, which I've already said for the specific hardware it was aimed at look great.
he is right, considering it only took me a minute to improve that model in photoshop!
Did you see this yet: http://pig-brain.com/gallery.htm ?
EDIT: daaamn too late :P
tee hee
not necessarily, but it makes a huge difference if you have the budget for the best people you could get for the job or not
+1 for both
As for Lara, the models built fine but the facial features and cartoon pixlie looks just don't do it for me.
Instead of trolling, you could have read the thread and found out as much for yourself.
There's no question that that's a very well executed model but there are a quite a few things that irk me about the character design. The redesign of a redesign of a redesign (with probably a couple more in there) up from a model that had, what? 250 polys... has resulted in a character which is just kind of weird looking now.
All that said though, it isn't that big a concern. As long as there's some more pretty environments to climb around I'll be down with whatever Square run with, even if Lara's knees still look funny.
Haha, I was thinking the same thing..
Not really.
STFU, and go make art. who gives a shit if laras boobs are not the right size?
this :poly142:
Accccccccctualy IMO the boob side has improved a great deal over the years, simply because they look more realistic now for a woman that does so much jumping about. The concept of the new Lara looks fantastic in this regard.
But I have to agree with all the twunts saying "How can you judge so early". I guess the original point was that its gone all downloadable and thus cheaply done, but focussed more on what I thought was wrong with the modelling.
but isnt the lara model that makes the game if they can make the boobs better and keep the saga quality then its fine having nicier boobs other than that just keep the First Tomb Raider Lara ^^ wasnt that bad anyway
But those were made and designed around the format in a sense. Tomb Raiders always been a different type of game, and I don't really think a graphically downgraded (maybe) game with shorter, fewer levels that are seperate (more than likely) will work. IMO, of course.
Maybe graphically downgraded? Maybe shorter, fewer, separate levels? Maybe you should settle down until you actually know if there's something here for you to complain about. I know you picked the name odium because you like to hate on everything, but at least wait for a screenshot before you let the verbal diarrhea get the better of you.
When it comes to Lara, I'll never forget the T-Rex from level 4. I screamed so loud my parents thought I was being murdered.
ps: to tell the truth I prefer the big blocky ps2 boobies :poly136:
Yup, Underworld was pretty gorgeous. Also all the characters, especially Lara, looked awesome.
It wasn't a world beater by any means, and I haven't finished it.
BTW, Jon (Pig-Brain) worked on the Wii version which was a completely separate standalone version to the 360/PS3.
I agree that it's not close to being at the level of Uncharted. Maybe CD is going to either address that or find a way to distinguish themselves from that.
(Working closely with the Squeenix Cinematics team would be a huge step in the right direction).
From what I've heard on the grapevine, CD were given a pretty pathetic budget to work with and did the best they could. There are people here who work(ed) there, right? Surely someone had first hand experience.
I quite enjoyed the successful reboot that was Legends (note: first Tomb Raider I had played) so it was disappointing to see them follow it up with a remake and then a bug-ridden mess. I dunno what this is going to be, but if it's nothing like Underworld that is a good sign in my books. Hopefully Squenix has more money to toss at it, as well.
That is where I am at.
I have not played a Lara Croft game on anything but the PS1, so I may have played 1, & 2...maybe 3?
I like how Lara Croft from the 2nd Tomb Raider is so fun looking. It's like "Yea, i like to party."