Tomb Raider: Anniversary!? Come on... [Archive]

TheWatcher

11-23-2006, 02:19 PM

Well I just discovered Eidos will be releasing this yet-another TR installment next year. This not only on the heels of Legend, but a remake of the first TR game! How long have some of us here been asking for a remake of BO1 or SR1, and been told no by Eidos and CD? To add insult to injury, we can't even get a commitment for the next LoK installment. Anybody else noticed that our forum has also been moved into the 'Classic game' section?

I've always held out staunch hope that we wouldn't be abandoned, but I really do think the nails are going in the coffin now. Thanks for throwing one of the most loyal fanbases in the industry out on its ear fellas! :mad: ****

blincoln

11-23-2006, 04:51 PM

If someone told you they'd give you either $500 or $2000, your choice, with no catches, which one would you pick?

TheWatcher

11-23-2006, 05:10 PM

Yes yes, it's all about the profit. I think I'm more sick of hearing that than Raziel was of hearing he was destined to be the savior of Nosgoth.

OK, here's a thought. Let's say some movie studio picks up LoK's story script and actually writes an ending to it where Kain restores the pillars, explains the return of Vorador, etc, etc. Then would CD be willing to make the game following that storyline? I think it's high time Eidos started pushing the series hard in Hollywood. It's what seemed to really breathe life into TR (Kain pun intended).

blincoln

11-23-2006, 07:41 PM

Eidos is a publicly-owned company. They have to make the games that will bring in the most money. Their execs are as responsible to the shareholders as I am to my management at my job.

Anyway, I'm not going to argue that they could have done a better job of marketing the previous games. I doubt a film is the right thing to do with the Kain series, though. It would require an enormous budget to do right, and doing it wrong would hurt the chances of a future game. Specifically I am thinking that very few people are dying to play BloodRayne 3 after Uwe Boll's debacle.

A film works well for something like TR, because it fits into a mold that people are familiar with and enjoy - it's basically Indiana Jones with Angelina Jolie. It would certainly be possible to make a Kain film like that - for example, make it a prequel to Blood Omen where Kain is still a human (so there's a huge savings from not having to use makeup/CG for the main characters), and do a Pitch Black-style antihero action/horror movie. I doubt it would lead to another game like we're familiar with, though.

fneh

11-24-2006, 02:13 PM

Let's face it; Skinless vampires do not have the appeal of a big chested woman with hotpants.

No matter how much money is poured into LOK, the majority of the public will have no interest in playing the series. Tomb raider appeals to pretty much anyone, and even if the game was a steaming pile of mongoose droppings it would outsell any lok title unless the lok title was truely groundbreaking (and that would include being a launch title for a console with little competition like the PS3, but that ship has sailed now)

LOK is a failed franchise that struggled along for 5 games. Not one of you can honestly say that Eidos gave up on the series because it wasn't making enough money.

LOK was killed by its own stupid "to be continued in 3 years" you got at the end of every game. Only the BO lok games were complete. If the raziel games were all complete games instead of installments in a never ending series of plot twists/holes perhaps the series would have a future. As it is, any future of the series has to work around the mess of a story that is in place and anyone working on the game would be essentially finishing something someone else started.

(yes, i know most of you will argue that LOK is the greatest story ever told and I'm in for a flaming here for bashing your beloved game, but the only reason i make these comments is because I actually care about what happens in the first place rather than sheepishly taking any scraps that are tossed to me)

Dr Kain

11-24-2006, 11:16 PM

I would love a remake of Blood Omen. Soul Reaver is already perfect enough, but having it ported to the PS2 would be great.

TheWatcher

11-26-2006, 08:21 AM

If the series is truly dead, now's the time. Hollywood would be a fool to pass on this story. I don't want to turn this into another movie thread, but vampire movies seem to always meet with good success. Underworld (two movies), Blade (a trilogy, FGS), Interview with a Vampire, The Lost Boys (OK, I'm stretching with that one), John Carpenter's Vampires (Still a fave), Queen of the ****ed, From Dusk 'till Dawn, and on and on. Unless they let Uwe Boll get his hands on it, the LoK movie(s) would be surefire.

For Pete's sake, they made a movie of Doom - baddies invade, shoot 'em. I don't have to tell any of you LoK has a plot as rich as LOTR and the action of Blade. How is this not a good idea? OK, I'm off my movie soapbox now. Sorry you all had to see that.

Erving JeansBgone

11-26-2006, 09:41 AM

fneh

11-26-2006, 05:28 PM

i'm sorry but saying the story of LOK is on par with LOTR is lunacy.....

I honestly do believe a LOK movie could work if it was basically a movie of the first game. But it would need a MEGA budget and a very talented director to pull it off. Let's face it, no matter how good a lok movie would be, a lot of fans will hate it. And no matter how BAD it is, a lot of fans will love it. It would need to be directed as a totally unique piece and not be grouped with the countinuity of the games in order to give the director the creativity to make it a good film and not a video game adaptation from hades (no pun intended).

of course i'd like to make clear, that i pray i NEVER have to hear a LOK movie is being made because i know there isnt a chance in all of the underworld that i'll be any good

WraithStar

11-27-2006, 08:04 AM

OK, here's a thought. Let's say some movie studio picks up LoK's story script and actually writes an ending to it where Kain restores the pillars, explains the return of Vorador, etc, etc. Then would CD be willing to make the game following that storyline? I think it's high time Eidos started pushing the series hard in Hollywood. It's what seemed to really breathe life into TR (Kain pun intended).

Actually, I think the movies killed the TR series. The movies sucked horribly, and then TR6 (which did have legitimate problems, partially because it was rushed to be out in time for the second movie) was blamed for the second movie's failures and Eidos started badmouthing TR6 before it was even in stores :(

LOK is a failed franchise that struggled along for 5 games. Not one of you can honestly say that Eidos gave up on the series because it wasn't making enough money.

LOK was killed by its own stupid "to be continued in 3 years" you got at the end of every game. Only the BO lok games were complete. If the raziel games were all complete games instead of installments in a never ending series of plot twists/holes perhaps the series would have a future. As it is, any future of the series has to work around the mess of a story that is in place and anyone working on the game would be essentially finishing something someone else started.

Exactly, perfectly, 100% true. And now Crystal is doing the same thing with TR (I just played Legend and it feels like fragments of LoK in a new skin, complete with a blatantly "to be continued" type ending:()

Dr Kain

11-27-2006, 09:14 AM

NO, no one is allowed to turn Blood Omen into a movie but me. First off, I would make BO in two 3 hour movies, that way, I could flesh out both the story and teh action and not rush it. THe first one could probably be on everything through Malek, with the second covering Nemesis, William the Just, and verything else. Also, I would have Simon Templeman play as Kain, since he is both actor and voice actor. Then I would have the second movie use the Kain chooses to rule the world ending, but the DVD's disc menu would ask what fate do you choose and show the cards from the game, which will determine which ending you get in the movie itselfs, theatrical or "sacrificial." As for music, Kurt would obviously have to be the one to do the score.

And fneh, you are wrong, Defiance never left off TBC, it was a conclusion to the Raziel story. Besides, unlike MOST video games that are trilogies, the LoK ones were actually finished. Xenosaga was supposed to be 6 games, got knocked down to 3. Shenmue was supposed to be 16 chapters spanning over 8 games and then they said it would only be a trilogy, and then it got canned. I think Prince of Persia is the only series that was planned for 3 games, and had all 3 games.

WraithStar

11-27-2006, 03:21 PM

And fneh, you are wrong, Defiance never left off TBC, it was a conclusion to the Raziel story. Besides, unlike MOST video games that are trilogies, the LoK ones were actually finished.

I very strongly disagree with that. The ending of Defiance was very sloppy and left a lot of big questions hanging. Important things, such as Vorador's ressurrection, were cut from Defiance for some reason or another (probably time constraints) so I'd hardly call it finished. Even if you think that Defiance had a satisfying ending, I really doubt that someone completely new to the series would have a clue about what's going on in the game. In that sense, Defiance is entirely dependent upon the two SR games so it can't stand alone. A lot of gamers either can't find older games or don't want to play them, so for each new game in the series to require full knowledge of all of the previous games is suicide for the franchise, and giving each game a very open ending that doesn't answer many questions will leave a lot of gamers dissatisfied. Both Blood Omen games were good in that sense--they were each self-contained but part of a larger story arc so that each game was satisfying in and of itself, and even more satisfying if you played all of the games. The SR games (and arguably Defiance) were very bad in that sense because SR1 ended literally with "to be continued" while SR2 was dreadfully short, left at a cliffhanger, and felt like half a game. All of the story stuff from Defiance should have been in SR2, and then Defiance should have finished the main story arc and been self-contained. Having one "to be continued" is annoying but forgivable if it's followed up upon. Stretching a story out over five games (and 7 years) and still not having a conclusion is what killed the series.

TheWatcher

11-27-2006, 07:22 PM

Stretching a story out over five games (and 7 years) and still not having a conclusion is what killed the series.
I very much agree with that statement. I think everyone involved is tired of it and all of us out here are tired of waiting.

I also tend to agree that what keeps new people from picking up the series is the vast backstory it's necessary to understand to appreciate it. That's where a movie would work wonders. Folks could sit through one (or several) 90-minute to two-hour movies that go from BO1 through Defiance and *poof*, be as caught up on the story as we all are (ending the movies the way Defiance did would be crappy, but would it be any worse than the way Silent Hill ended?). Then everyone who's seen the movie(s) wouldn't feel so intimidated getting into the series and may actually enjoy it.

Edge of the Coin

11-28-2006, 05:19 PM

I am a newcomer to this forum, but not to the series. As I am exceedingly bored, I figured I would post my opinion to basically the entire thread.

As to the actual topic of this thread. Like all other LoK fans, I feel extremely left out in the cold by Eidos' obvious favoritism of Tomb Raider, when LoK was always, in my opinion, a much more interesting game with a lot more potential than Tomb Raider (yes, Indiana Jones with Angelina Jolie... I'd much rather watch Harrison Ford being humorous and entertaining than Angelina Jolie punch a shark in the nose and ride it to the surface of the ocean... *spasm*)

I agree that it is the long periods of time that fans are obliged to wait have made interest in the Legacy of Kain series plummet. Legacy of Kain has been underfunded, underpromoted, and underapreciated, the series has and always had great potential, but the long intervals of time that span between each new release is frustrating to say the least.

LoK is in fact one of very few games that actually has an engaging plot, (probably the actual reason that LoK doesn't do well, instead of focusing on mindless combat sequences, LoK's focus has always been story) and for that reason, I belive, the cliffhangers and acceptable. But only if they are satisfied in a timely manner (admittedly, such an alotment of time is always exceeded, much to the annoyance of its fans).

Everyone recognizes the gaping holes in the story, but it is not a mess. It simply begs to be concluded, and this is a favor that Eidos could do the fans of this series, even if it is not the most profitable route for them to go. After all, a company has a responsibility to its loyal customers as well as its investors, does it not?

A film? Everyone talks about a film, because everyone wants their favorite story translated to the big screen. I for one think that LoK would make a very entertaining set of films. If it were done correctly, I belive it would not only be very appealing to the fans, but to the general public, simply because it is unique, and people would be curious about it, especially if the entire thing were done in 3D animation, which would be cheaper to do than integrating live action with digital effects which would, in my opinion be a mistake based simply on the nature of the characters and environments they would be in, they would all have to be digital anyway. Also, 3D animated movies always seem to generate a kind of buzz on their own. Hence, more exposure and higher success. I don't think that a LoK movie series would be a mistake at all. IF it were handled correctly.

fneh

02-17-2007, 05:32 AM

just to bring this back on topic, I think the remake of the first tomb raider is gonna be amazing. The first tomb raider was truely ground breaking and will forever be one of my fav games. Updating it is too good to be true for me. I'm hoping there's a PS3 version too seeing as it seems xbox isn't getting it (honestly, if this game was on 360 i'd go out and buy a 360 this week. As it is i'm gonna save my money)

Cryonaut

02-18-2007, 09:32 PM

I very strongly disagree with that. The ending of Defiance was very sloppy and left a lot of big questions hanging. Important things, such as Vorador's ressurrection, were cut from Defiance for some reason or another (probably time constraints) so I'd hardly call it finished. Even if you think that Defiance had a satisfying ending, I really doubt that someone completely new to the series would have a clue about what's going on in the game. In that sense, Defiance is entirely dependent upon the two SR games so it can't stand alone. A lot of gamers either can't find older games or don't want to play them, so for each new game in the series to require full knowledge of all of the previous games is suicide for the franchise, and giving each game a very open ending that doesn't answer many questions will leave a lot of gamers dissatisfied. Both Blood Omen games were good in that sense--they were each self-contained but part of a larger story arc so that each game was satisfying in and of itself, and even more satisfying if you played all of the games. The SR games (and arguably Defiance) were very bad in that sense because SR1 ended literally with "to be continued" while SR2 was dreadfully short, left at a cliffhanger, and felt like half a game. All of the story stuff from Defiance should have been in SR2, and then Defiance should have finished the main story arc and been self-contained. Having one "to be continued" is annoying but forgivable if it's followed up upon. Stretching a story out over five games (and 7 years) and still not having a conclusion is what killed the series.

Mostly agreed. Although I personally enjoy the plot progression and cliffhangers, I can see how univiting that is for newcomers to the series who have no idea where the series was beforehand or where it is going in the future as well as people who want some closure (even I'm growing a little impatient.) The shows Lost and 24 come to mind for me. Although both are wildly popular shows, the constant introduction of plot twists and cliffhangers and unanswered questions drove me away from those shows after a few episodes (I jumped on the wagon midway through and found myself lost - pun intended.)

One point I would disagree with you on is the effectiveness of SR1 as a standalone game. I think that SR1 has a very straight forward and self contained plot line compared to the more convoluted and open ended plots of SR2 or even Defaince. It's basically The Crow with vampires. The only thing that detracts from it is the ending. Now, if they capitalized on this cliffhanger right away and had some closure in SR2, then it would be better.

fneh

02-19-2007, 09:56 AM

If you think soul reaver is the crow with vampires i think you're missing the single biggest theme about the crow...

Cryonaut

02-19-2007, 07:23 PM

If you think soul reaver is the crow with vampires i think you're missing the single biggest theme about the crow...

Enlighten me. Both movies are about a person that gets killed and resurrected and sent on a mission of revenge where he kills all members involved in his murder one by one.

BigKevSexyMan

02-19-2007, 09:17 PM

Well, that's a pretty common theme. We see it all over the place. Plus, SR1 was a lot deeper than just getting resurrected and killing off one by one the people who did it. Are you forgetting about the whole former Sarafan being turned into a vampire and the ending that you previously mentioned? Sure, it's not as deep as SR2, but it's definitely deeper than the Crow.

Cryonaut

02-20-2007, 12:59 PM

I think you guys need to re-familiarize yourselves with the terms plot and basic. Basic, think about that means. I never said that they were spitting images of each other, I said the plots share many basic elements. I'm not looking for an elaborate film synopsis or theme interpretation here I was just pointing out a similarity to emphasize that SR1 had a straight-forward plot. I love how you guys neglect the main point of my post to nitpick a trivial comment I didn't even really make. Think we can move on now or do we need to drag symbolism and cinematography into the mix too?

BigKevSexyMan

02-20-2007, 01:49 PM

do we need to drag symbolism and cinematography into the mix too?

Yes, yes we do. Those things are the essence of ANY story.

Cryonaut

02-20-2007, 10:27 PM

Yes, yes we do. Those things are the essence of ANY story.

But that isn't the topic of this thread now is it? If you guys want to go on your little tirade over a discussion I never intended to partake in, make your own thread about it. But you won't find me in it because arguing over trivial details like these is a silly venture.

fneh

02-21-2007, 10:17 AM

Enlighten me. Both movies are about a person that gets killed and resurrected and sent on a mission of revenge where he kills all members involved in his murder one by one.

The main theme of the crow was love. Even if it was a revenge story.

The main theme of Soul Reaver was vengence.

I understand where you're coming from but Eric came back from the dead because he couldn't rest from what he saw happen to the woman he loved. His revenge was for her. Raziel was "resurrected" w/o a choice ("i would choose oblivion over this existence") and decided to go after the guy responible.

It'd be easier to compare kill bill and SR

Cryonaut

02-21-2007, 12:10 PM

It'd be easier to compare kill bill and SR

You're right, that one's a better comparison (although, in the words of Miracle Max, she wasn't all dead, only mostly dead.)

exmachinad

05-06-2007, 11:58 AM

The cliffhanger endings is what made me hook up to Soul reaver series, then to LoK as a whole. So, I don't think it was a bad decision, it added curiosity about the next chapter. Otherwise, we would have games with dumb self contained plots that leads nowhere in the big story of Nosgoth. See BO2, it's storyline and the game itself, IMO, is a big waste of time, and adds nothing interesting to LoK story.

Soul Reaver 1 and 2 shuld have been just one game, and then Defiance to kinda close the story. Yes, I do think Defiance has an ending, despite it being an open ending. It left some things not explained at all, and if u ask me, it is the beauty of a world so complex as Nosgoth. It makes the people think in the ending about some points, while the major plot is resolved (or kind of :) ).

I do think that LoK is comparable to Lord of The Rings. Sure, LOTR has much more characters, backstory and such (for it is formed by 3 books), but for a series of videogames, LoK gets as close as it can gets.

About SR1 plot, I found it terrible boring. I mean, Raziel is ressurected, OK. The he wanders in Nosgoth, killing his former brethren, pursuing Kain, and having some simple, dispensable dialogue w/ them that adds nothing at all to the story, becasue, maybe, there is NO plot at all, just Raziel killing vampires. The only 2 interesting parts, IMO, are when Kain brokes the Soul Reaver as it strikes Raziel and the very last speech from Kain, in the Chronoplast, because it is very well written :).
Oh, Raziel was a Sarafan ? It only really matters and get significance in SR2, when Raz kills his former self and the other Sarafan. Ariel appears ? No point for her to be in SR1, she had no importance in the story. (she would, of course, if the plot hasn't changed and Raz needed to kill her to get the Spirit Reaver).

Only when Raziel crossed he portal and met Moebius, is that my hopes got up. "Ah, so finally there will be something intersting to be told". But then it ended, oh well.

Anyway, SR2 had a great storyline, just as Defiance has.

So, what I' telling is I do like the way the story is told throughout the LoK games, with its cliffhangers and points unexplained. That's is what makes LoK what it is, a true compelling tale about Nosgoth and, if it killed the series comercially, so be it, but I'm glad that the series doesn't turned into a Tomb Raider clone, w/ each new chapter adding nothing new to the history of world of the game.

Tomb Raider, for example, is all about Lara shooting bad ppl and exploring tombs. LoK is about a true story, thick plot and convincing characters each w/ his own motivation. Sad if LoK is finished, but I'm glad w/ the games we got.

Turaziel

05-07-2007, 05:17 PM

Let's face it; Skinless vampires do not have the appeal of a big chested woman with hotpants.

Says you :rasp:

I had a feeling that depending on the success of TRA, a BO remake was possible. Obviously it was just a fools hope, but still...

WraithStar

05-15-2007, 10:32 AM

Says you :rasp:

I had a feeling that depending on the success of TRA, a BO remake was possible. Obviously it was just a fools hope, but still...

I think TRA is different from a BO1 remake because CD didn't do TR1 themselves, so TRA is new to them. I would much rather have LoK6 which would tie up the main story arc instead of a BO1 remake (although I'd take both if they made them :D)

Anoobish

05-17-2007, 06:51 AM

Crystal Dynamics didn't make Blood Omen either, you know. Silicon Knights did ;)

(Or is there something I'm missing here?)

fneh

06-01-2007, 03:53 PM

Says you :rasp:

I had a feeling that depending on the success of TRA, a BO remake was possible. Obviously it was just a fools hope, but still...

SAYS THE SALES...

tho back on topic, who's got TRA? Any more LOK goodies on it?

The DarkOne

06-02-2007, 01:39 AM

No LoK news again this year, Tomb Raider 9 was announced and is being developed for 2008 by CD

WraithStar

06-03-2007, 05:09 PM

Crystal Dynamics didn't make Blood Omen either, you know. Silicon Knights did ;)

(Or is there something I'm missing here?)

I don't know. All I know is that Crystal had something to do with BO1, and nothing to do with TR1.

gehntheberserker

06-04-2007, 08:43 AM

You must understand that TRA is not just a coicidence.It is a way to prove that the TR spirit is not dead.It's a more easy way to put the series back on track where things like exploration,isolation,atmosphere,secret areas and non-human enemies reign supreme.

After TR1 you rarely saw any of that.And that's why it is still the best in the series since 1996 for a lot of people (myself included).TRA brought back all that really mattered in TR.

I loved playing TRA more than any TR game besides TR1.It's an awesome game.

In a way, and believing that CD is still passionate bout LoK, I think this LoK-pause is good for them and for the franchise.

Let them be sucessful with TR games and let them explore new gameplay paradigms so that when they do come back (here's hoping) to LoK we might get something really special.