Yeah, right now the library isn´t the greatest but that´s the norm, being just 3.5 months old.I remember getting a PS2 at launch, quickly getting bored with the launch games and waiting till March for the first great game, which was Onimusha.Now the same repeats itself, with Infamous arriving this month.

But there´s also the PS Store to check out, don´t know if you´re into survival horror but the PS4 looks like it´ll become, home console wise, the system for this kind of game.There´s Outlast, then in April there´s Daylight, later in the year The Evil Within and Alien Isolation, early next year Soma, from the creators of Amnesia.

Great game. My first PS4 game. I got it on day one for 360, too. Most people that play it really like it.

I hope the sequel is open world. Doesn't have to be a huge world like Skyrim--one digital square mile is probably plenty--but the corridor really, REALLY irritated me in this one.

Also, I really would like to see a better distinction between human and supernatural enemies. Human enemies don't have much health, flee when they might die, and in survival situations will probably be stingy with their ammo. Supernatural enemies can take as much damage as you want and have no survival instincts whatsoever.

And yet fighting them played out EXACTLY THE SAME.

Tomb Raider was a bit too much of an action game for it's own good. The level design and enemy count was ridiculous, and while there were a ton of really good set-pieces in the gameplay, without some gameplay between them it just became too much. Just a couple of minutes to cool down exploring an open map would change everything. For example, forcing Lara to catch or collect dinner in order to level up would have changed the game so much for the better because the quiet and slow moment prepares the player for another climax.

In Naughty Dog we trust. Say thank you Tomb Raider.

well deserved id say. My gf really liked playing it. Did all the side stuff too.

They probably had an average selling price of $40...  That's only $240,000,000...

The cost to build the game was probably around $100,000,000...  Then, borrowing costs, administrative costs, sales, marketing, support, running servers, patches, platform ports, etc...

$240,000,000 doesn't go that far...

Investors looking for ROI's as multipliers... 2x, 3x, 10x, 20x....

Best case scenario they are probably only making .25x...  Why would I put my investment money there?  When I can go and invest in other industries and get 2x, 5x, and 10x the return and not have to front so much.  Gamers don't realize this is about money...  If a solid game like this can only make investors .25x more than their investment they have no incentive to stick in this industry. 

There is no incentive in this industry for a AAA game to be innovative.  Innovation costs more money and there is very little guaranttee that investors will see the money back.  I have a lot of investments.  I don't touch the games industry (even though I love playing games) because as an investor there is no money in it for me.

Don't even start!  Uncharted borrowed from Tomb Raider as much as Tomb Raider borrowed from Uncharted!  Play Tomb Raider Legend (From 2006) and then play Uncharted (2007).  The button layouts, climbing, etc. are identical.  The only thing different was the cover system.  Give credit where it's due!!

I actually DON'T think the sequal should be an open world. Having more of a linear game allows for a more complex and better story to be told imo, the game gets more focused. I think they should keep the format that they have going with "smaller" areas (that's still pretty big at times) that's open for exploration. Not everything has to be open world nowadays.

Perhaps Nathan Drake should say thank you to Lara Croft first...

Well, that was kind of my point; this game shouldn't have cost that much. Very very few games should cost that much. We get innovation when developers has to work around problems