By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Digital Foundry Face-Off: Tomb Raider

Tomb Raider: the Digital Foundry verdict

Overall, Tomb Raider comes across as another successful additional to the franchise, rebuilt around exciting set-pieces and polished gun play that flows far more smoothly than in past titles. However, the heavy focus on story and character development limits the amount of freedom the player has to explore the wonderfully detailed environments scattered throughout the game, with complex puzzles and exploration taking a back seat to segments of stress-free climbing and a heavy focus on combat. This change in direction allows the player to better connect with Lara and the horrific events that occur throughout her bleak adventure, although it means the experience is often far removed from what constitutes a Tomb Raider game, instead borrowing heavily from Naughty Dog's Uncharted series. That said, the inclusion of extra tombs to discover and explore - complete with more complex singular puzzles - clearly shows that some core Tomb Raider DNA exists in this cinematic reboot, even if the developers have chosen not to integrate these segments into the main story.

The game's biggest success is the close connection between Lara and the player, achieved by combining the personal struggle of the character with big action scenes, which are then broken up with moments of solitary exposition in the wilderness as we see Lara quickly transform from a vulnerable young woman into something approaching the confident adventurer we have come to expect. On the PC this connection is enhanced by the use of more advanced technology - Lara is rendered in a more natural, human-like manner and while TressFX has some fundamental flaws, when it works properly, that effect is heightened still further. Meanwhile the improvements made to the visuals in other areas help to create a more refined looking game, one that is a clear step above the console releases - especially if your PC can pull off a sustained 1080p60 or better.

The console versions of Tomb Raider are still thoroughly recommended though. Despite some performance issues on both systems when the action is situated in more complex environments, the game manages to stick closely to the desired 30FPS update with only momentary lapses that impact the quality of the gameplay. While the 360 offers up slightly more consistent overall performance, for the most part the difference between the two games isn't significant, and it's also fair to say that the PS3 holds the advantage with regards to image quality and the general refinement of the overall presentation. This is a game where much of the experience is built around the spectacle and in that respect, PS3 offers an advantage of its 360 sibling. Aside from various instances where performance is visibly lower, the gameplay is otherwise just as enjoyable on Sony's system, and the sharper visuals better suit the overall feel of the game, highlighting the richness of the environments without as many unwanted side-effects. In that respect the PS3 version gets our recommendation as the preferred choice of the two console releases.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-tomb-raider-face-off



Around the Network

Four more days until payday, and I will be getting this on Steam. The PS3 version looks pretty impressive too. Usually with multi plats it's the other way around.. Not by much though..



I watched the console comparison in HD and I can't tell a difference. I looked back and forth over and over again and they look identical to me.

BTW. Why is the contrast or gamma always set different in these comparisons? It always makes one version apear less detailed when they are really the same. If they took the two minutes it takes to properly set up the gamma in these kinds of vids people wouldn't have the initial reaction that taints their view and instead they could more easily look at the real differences, if any are significant.



PS3 version looks sharper, but a bit more jaggies



kain_kusanagi said:
I watched the console comparison in HD and I can't tell a difference. I looked back and forth over and over again and they look identical to me.

BTW. Why is the contrast or gamma always set different in these comparisons? It always makes one version apear less detailed when they are really the same. If they took the two minutes it takes to properly set up the gamma in these kinds of vids people wouldn't have the initial reaction that taints their view and instead they could more easily look at the real differences, if any are significant.
360 have a bug with the gamma correction never fixed because that not make all that difference and you can try fix that changing your HDTV gamma configuration.

Around the Network
ethomaz said:
kain_kusanagi said:
I watched the console comparison in HD and I can't tell a difference. I looked back and forth over and over again and they look identical to me.

BTW. Why is the contrast or gamma always set different in these comparisons? It always makes one version apear less detailed when they are really the same. If they took the two minutes it takes to properly set up the gamma in these kinds of vids people wouldn't have the initial reaction that taints their view and instead they could more easily look at the real differences, if any are significant.
360 have a bug with the gamma correction never fixed because that not make all that difference and you can try fix that changing your HDTV gamma configuration.


Nah, it's the PS3 version in the video that looks too bright, not the 360 version looking too dark. The game is suposed to be darker than light. When the game loads up you can adjust the contrast. Who ever made this video made the 360 one darker and the PS3 one lighter. It makes the 360 version look more alive and the PS3 version look flat. All they had to do was adjust them so they would have the same contrast. They games look exactly the same and the only real difference is how the contrast was set.