This is for those who play/played games (on a console or PC). I have been involved in the gaming industry for a long time. I have tested them, reviewed them and been in contact with original game creators since 1989. No matter who we applaud for whatever game started what, there is no denying a basic fact. When Sony released the first PlayStation the world of gaming changed forever.
This console came in the beginning with a minimum amount of games; however gaming changed forever one year after the PlayStation was released when a game named Tomb Raider was released. This game was in no uncertain terms the pinnacle of gaming in many ways. It was puzzling, Action, exploring and extremely exciting. It had 4 area’s comprising of 18 levels. It was a massive game filled with so many things that replaying was essential. The game that followed was even bigger and more challenging. I reckon it took no less than 3 weeks to get through either game. I was mesmerised. It was there for a shock that I got through this new game for almost 90% in just two days.
The new Tomb Raider is served like an expensive meal. Nice plate, exquisite display of eatable items, but a nice plate does not necessarily leave you filled and in this case it leaves you hungry soon after dinner. The game is rocky in several places. It is repetitive; at times it has the same shock effect again and again and at times too cinematographic where you must push a button at the exact time.
So, what are the good parts?
Yes, they had so much to work with. Enough so, that I am very concerned on how this was messed up to that extent. The premise that it is on ONE island was pretty brilliant, the idea of a Tomb Raider zero is pretty decent and one thing MUST be stated at the very beginning is that the graphics are UNREAL! That is the one part that is beyond exceptional. The graphics show utter perfection. Especially when you get to a level called coastal base, you have no idea what you are in for. The graphical part of the game is without a doubt utterly perfect. To give you a little more, this is from the same house that brought Deus Ex. A game that brought several times the satisfaction this game brings. Square Enix is a house that has a high quality established name, so what went wrong? WHY is this game so mediocre in my mind?
Let us take a look at the first level. It is decent and a good introduction to this game. It gives the person a way to control and move through the introduction. In the end of this short run we will have seen how easy the game is controlled and that is what any good introduction does. From there we stop at our first camp. The camps are important and it is a good way to progress and safe a game. All that is fine. Next we get to get the bow and do a little hunting. Soon thereafter you will get a first feel on how good the game might be. You as a gamer will quickly become hungry for more. After a day, when you see your progress you realise that overall this game could have been a lot more, and it is without a doubt way too small. The indication that ‘downloaded’ tombs are coming might not even be a consolation, especially if those tombs cost extra (unknown at this time whether it will cost). I do not know whether the failing is due to timing, due to marketing or just a lack of creativity. The art and graphics are so amazing that the third option is not likely the case.
Levels are overall not that bad and the hidden tombs are nice. The change that the entire game plays on One Island gives the game a good feel, and soon the story will narrate into a supernatural field that is well known and a source of fame for the Tomb Raider series. So, the elements of a great Tomb Raider game are definitely there. However, some levels could have been a lot larger, making the game a lot more and especially longer challenging. I reckon that this is one of the two great flaws in this game. The game does have many decent sides, again, it tends to get repetitive when Lara is dumped in the deep end, suddenly surrounded by overwhelming forces and then the fight starts again. I can understand that approach to happen once or twice, but it happens too often, I would state that this is a big No in my book. This repetition becomes tedious after a while. This is odd way to go, because the approach with stealth kills with a bow is actually a very nice twist for the player. In addition we soon have an idea who is two-timing us, so the average gamer will not get too much of a surprise.
What was good is in some levels there is a running need to jump, climb and skip in a cinematographic approach. This is not bad, but it again happens too often and then it is all about timing the button correctly, or to shoot the right obstacles. 2-3 might be nice, but it happens slightly too often with too many cut scenes.
What could have been done better? Larger playing levels are a definite! 2 of them, like the Coastal area and the climb to the monastery are sizeable area’s to see. However, getting through the levels is at times slightly too fast. If we look at places like the Research Station, we see a place that was way too small. Even additional puzzles in all areas would have been a good thing. Additional levels and depths as well as puzzles to get through the hidden tombs would have given this game additional weight; those additions would have dramatically driven the score of the game. In one weekend I got up to the final temple, and most areas were 100% completed.
I am a decent gamer, but not a great one. I am certain several gamers could have done the same game 1-2 hours quicker on the highest setting, which again is shown in my low score. The hidden tombs are a fun idea; however, for the most each one has one small puzzle and not a challenging one at that. Only the fishery tomb is slightly challenging at first. But all levels do show utter perfection in its graphical and artistic environment. That makes it all so upsetting.
I would rate this game a 7.5 out of 10. With a little more effort it could have been an easy 9.4 out of 10. Which begs the question, why the failing effort? Tomb Raider, of all games should be better than this in my mind. The second question is how the critics came to a score so high, way higher then it currently deserves.
Important that this review is based on the single player ONLY! This game has an additional multi-player option which was not tested.
Lawrence van Rijn - Law Lord to be 