| HoloDust said: Funny you gave that comparison, I usualy use it to show how it's possible to change franchise quite a bit, and still retain quite a lot of original feel... As a big fan of original Fallout games, I was more than worried when Bethesda took that IP...it was more than obvious they would make ES with guns. Still, Fallout 3 and NV retained lot of original Fallout feel, and although not as half as good or atmospheric as Fallout 1/2, I still have no problems calling them legitimate Fallout games for modern day gamers. Opposed to that, this new TR not only has myriad of its own problems as standalone game, like so many reviewers pointed out in their reviews (and do look beyond scores, they are often much higher than what reviews actually sound like - $quare €nix at work there, I suppose), but it completely fails as TR game - instead of exploration, intricate puzzles, platforming and combat that served more as acrobatic show than actual combat, we got game with all those elements painfuly dumbed down, except for combat which become primary focus, thus completely changing DNA of TR. In additon to that, old TR had bad ass Lara, one that was tomb raiding since she was teenager, and was trained in such affairs - as opposed to this whimpy in presentatonn, yet super-soldier/psycho-killer in actual action Laura - no it's not typo, I really think this one should be called Laura, cause she was created for "modern" audience in mind and has nothing to do with Lara, just like this TR has nothing to do with original franchise. |
Well all I can say is tht people can still reach different conclusions looking at exactly the same things. Anyways you seem pretty intent on presenting your point of view of what makes a good game as the correct one --- and you are well within your rights on doing so, but keep in mind people might harbor the same feelings about the games or other kind of media you prefer.
