Metareview - Tomb Raider: Legend
by Alan Rose 
{ Apr 12th 2006 at 12:55PM }
Since
Tomb Raider II, Lara Croft's adventures have been on a steady decline, almost to the point where reruns of
Relic Hunter were a better use of time. The last entry was so weak, many thought Lara had raided her last tomb. This
actually turned out to be the case at long-time developer Core Design. Enter Crystal Dynamics. Now it's time to forget about Angel of Darkness, the umpteenth Lara Croft model, the Guinness Book induction, and all the hype that has surrounded the rebirth of one of gaming's most famous franchises. Tomb Raider Legend is finally here, Lara is as irresistible as ever, and the game just might be worth the $40-60 you're about to shell out for it.
- IGN (82/100) on all
versions: "Crystal D's fresh approach, erudite design and execution, and its focus on good controls, smart
puzzles, and competent combat, do the trick. They've resurrected an icon and a legacy from its tumultuous past by
making the best and most definitive Tomb Raider yet."
- TeamXbox (80/100) on the
Xbox 360 version: "Lara looks mighty fine. Even on a non-HD television, the increased clarity of the bump mapping
and lighting effects add to the entire Tomb Raider feel."
- 1UP (80/100) on all console
versions: "Where Legend truly excels is in
its sense of pacing. Gun battles are used as a sort of punctuation, bookends to the exploration and puzzle-solving at
the core of the game. Legend's designers
have an excellent sense of how a game should flow, and the result is an adventure that never becomes dull and rarely
feels forced."
- GameSpot (78/100) on all console versions: "Legend looks great on each of the consoles, with convincingly dark and decrepit environments and plenty of detail and lighting effects. The controls are a lot more fluid and responsive than they have been in previous Tomb Raider games, which makes Lara movements feel much more natural than before."
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
funkonaut @ Apr 12th 2006 1:34PM
Yawn...
copa @ Apr 12th 2006 1:52PM
"the game is worth the $40-60 you're about to shell out for it."
The reviews don't look all that hot to me.
I tried the XBox 360 demo, and gave up after 5 minutes. The controls and camera felt like I was playing the original PS One version of the game. (that's not a compliment)
Tucker @ Apr 12th 2006 1:55PM
Copa, exactly on both points. Those reviews are far from stellar. In fact, accounting for review score inflation, those are C- scores at best.
I never played any of the Tomb Raider sequels, but I have some fond memories of the first. When I played this my first thought was "wow, it's like the same thing with better graphics!" Then I played more and realized just how far controls and cameras have come over the years... I won't be picking this up.
Justin @ Apr 12th 2006 1:57PM
To # 2 comment. If you think the controls and camera are anything even remotely like the old ones then you must just really have a problem in general with games. Its NOTHING like the old one, not at all.
tomb_boy @ Apr 12th 2006 1:57PM
I think it looks pretty cool and the reviews are, for the most part, favorable (can you read, Copa?). But I wonder if it's the bad reviews of Angel of Darkness that make this one look better, or if the new game really is all that. I'm anxious to see for myself.
Jon @ Apr 12th 2006 2:20PM
I'm about half-way through it right now, and it's exactly as you'd expect an A-list title to be. Very slick visuals and controls, nice pacing, with decent puzzles. It's nothing groundbreaking, but at least it's fun.
I've not played a single Tomb Raider game until now (demos excepted), but it feels like this one was a good place to start.
obi_gumbi @ Apr 12th 2006 2:28PM
Umm, how do you come up with a C-, Tucker? The Metareview scores for the PC, PS2, Xbox, and 360 versions are 84, 82, 82, and 81. Did you get too many C-'s in school or something? ;)
Sorry for my bad english @ Apr 12th 2006 2:57PM
my ex-girlfriend drooling on that game already.
ymmv @ Apr 12th 2006 3:46PM
I really liked the demo so I bought the game today. I'm glad I got it, it brings back a lot of good memories from playing the original Tomb Raider on the PSX. The 360 version itself looks pretty decent even though the graphics are on the low end of the next gen experience.
The in-game cinematics are a different matter. Those look decidedly PS2 like. Awkward animation, dreary textures, simple polygon models, empty 3D stages. This is what I expect from a PS1 game, not from a Xbox 360 next gen HD game.
Despite that, the game itself is fun to play and that's what counts.
epobirs @ Apr 12th 2006 4:30PM
So, pretty good but not great.
Worth waiting for a blowout sale or Platinum Hits version if you aren't a wealthy xbox360 owner more interested in new games than squeezing the most value from a purchase.
Jon @ Apr 12th 2006 4:30PM
Well, I just finished it - more than half-way through then, I guess ;)
A very fun game, and on the PC at least, there is no difference between the cutscenes and the game in terms of textures or models... and the animation looked great to me - I can almost taste the money that's gone into this one.
Recommended to everyone, *especially* those who are avoiding it because the controls might be dodgy (they are superlative).
stagl @ Apr 12th 2006 4:35PM
just got it for PC and i enjoy it. controls were a little strange, but i'm used to it after about 1 hour of play. load times are phenominal...usually seconds for a new level, none throughout (they use some pretty slick tricks to get no load times i think)
Jon @ Apr 12th 2006 4:39PM
Yeah - the PC load times are incredible. You don't even get time to read the introductory paragraph half the time! Half Life 2, take note ;)
Sloopydrew @ Apr 12th 2006 6:10PM
The game took me 7 hours to beat. Considering it's full of puzzles, that's actually about 3 hours of gameplay and 4 hours of puzzle-solving. I'm fine with puzzles, but there's no excuse for the game to be as short as it is. Overall, it's a huge disappointment. Lara Croft is dead. Wait for the bargain bins and you'll be able to pick off her corpse for around ten dollars.
Tucker @ Apr 13th 2006 11:51AM
Maybe you missed where I said "accounting for review score inflation"
obi_gumbi @ Apr 13th 2006 12:59PM
And how exactly do you scientifically compute "review score inflation"? More specifically, how do you go from metascores of B's (84) and B-'s (82) all the way down to a C- (70-73)?
If reviewers think a game is worth a 70, they will give it a 70. Did you get stood up by Lara, Tucker?