Metareview -- Tomb Raider: Underworld (Multi)

by Randy Nelson { Nov 19th 2008 at 7:30PM }

The reviews are in, and it looks like Ms. Croft has avoided jumping the shark – although she does shoot one in Tomb Raider: Underworld. Still, the game fared slightly worse than Tomb Raider: Legend at the hands of some of the very same media outlets. (Maybe they were experiencing a mild "Tomb Raider's back, and it doesn't suck anymore!" high back then?)

IGN (75/100): "Only the upcoming downloadable content and achievement points make the 360 version stand out just ahead of the PS3 copy."
1UP (B): "Underworld is an incredibly abrupt experience, so much so that it makes me question whether content was removed from the complete game to be made available later as the previously announced downloadable content. Six levels in (seven if you count the prologue), the game just...ends. Sure, the last level is a cool showpiece, but it lacks any sense of built-up narrative and even a final boss – simply a closing cut-scene that wraps up most of the loose ends all too handily."
Eurogamer (70/100): "At its worst, Tomb Raider: Underworld is everything that's wrong with videogames – clichéd, predictable, frustrating, inconsistent, repetitive and derivative. Legend was supposed to be the game that marked the series' return to form, and it achieved that. Underworld is better than Legend; meatier, more challenging, more atmospheric and with less silly nonsense like quick-time events. But Underworld was supposed to be the first real next-gen Tomb Raider game, and it isn't ... At its best, however, Tomb Raider: Underworld is everything that's great about videogames. It's beautiful, exciting, challenging, rewarding and absorbing. Many of the locations are stunning, and so's Lara."
GamePro (70/100): "Overall, Underworld is a decent enough effort. It has slick controls, interesting puzzles and a story that's actually pretty interesting. However, it never fully compensates for a lack of compelling action and overall polish."

Tags: js-twitter, metareview, tomb-raider, tomb-raider-underworld

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)

Premature ejaculation man @ Nov 19th 2008 7:53PM

How can "incredibly abrupt experience" which felt as though content "was removed from the complete game to be made available later as the previously announced downloadable content" earn a 'B'?

JerJer @ Nov 19th 2008 8:27PM

haha. hahahaha.

i'm sure you'd be happy if your "incredibly abrut experience" translated into a B! hah!

Premature ejaculation man @ Nov 19th 2008 8:34PM

Haha. I usually get and F

;_;

J.Goodwin @ Nov 19th 2008 8:40PM

You play TR: Legend? It was also an incredibly abrupt experience. It had time trials and collectathon aspects to give it replayability though, if you like that sort of thing (which I do).

ryan @ Nov 19th 2008 10:11PM

Yeah, but in this game's case the collectathon aspect is completely useless.

JoeTheBlow @ Nov 20th 2008 4:53AM

That CHILLING comment has sealed this games fate for me, one to miss.
Thanks a fucking bunch, Microsoft, you twats.

DMeisterJ @ Nov 19th 2008 7:54PM

Looks like a 'meh' experience all around.

Exactly what I felt after beating the demo. If this really is that short, it's obvious to capitalize on the upcoming exclusive DLC for the 360.

Real Gambler @ Nov 20th 2008 7:07AM

Definitively SOOOOO obvious. They really pulled out some stuff so they can sell it back to 360 owners. And sure enough, IGN gave it .2 pts more because you can BUY stuff that should have been there originally anyway. This DLC stuff has to stop.

Dang, you read these so you can see why a game is good, and first comment is ""Only the upcoming downloadable content make the 360 version stand out just ahead of the PS3 copy."

I'm not reading this to see if you have to pay for content, I'm reading this to see if the game is good or not. Geez, do we have to buy every games in little chunks now?

cxm @ Nov 20th 2008 10:41AM

Yeah, obvious to people who have zero idea how the business actually works. The whole "pulled content to sell it as DLC thing" was nothing more than interweb generated drama, and it's sad that a professional reviewer would try to perpetuate it.

jaysins @ Nov 19th 2008 7:55PM

That's a shame. I played the demo on pc and 360 and really enjoyed it. I was hoping it was just the tip of the iceberg but it doesn't seem so. While I was hoping to be persuaded to buy it for pc I think I'll end up renting it.

ManekiNeko @ Nov 19th 2008 7:58PM

"Tomb Raider's back, and it doesn't suck anymore!"

Or any less!

Cutty @ Nov 19th 2008 8:02PM

Edge, a particularly harsh magazine, gave this an 8.

philmcphail @ Nov 19th 2008 8:27PM

Well on the other hand, GamerPro, which is known for giving games ridiculously high scores, gave this game a 7. How 'bout that?

ryan @ Nov 19th 2008 10:03PM

Edge also gave:
6 for Resistance 2
7 for Fallout 3
7 for Banjo
5 for Mirror's Edge
6 for Call of Duty: World at War
7 for Valkyria Chronicles
7 for Guitar Hero
7 for Animal Crossing
6 for Silent Hill
5 for Socom
3 for Need for Speed
5 for 007

Lavat @ Nov 20th 2008 11:42AM

Aye you, yea You Cutty. Where does that avatar come from.

I am a machineee @ Nov 19th 2008 8:05PM

Fuck IGN's biased bullshit. They have finally run short of excuses for always putting the 360 .2 points higher, so now they are giving it the advantage for DLC that isn't even included in this package?? Eat a dick!

Hyams @ Nov 19th 2008 8:20PM

They gave the PS3 version of Mirror's Edge a 0.1 higher score for slightly better visuals.

Snowblind @ Nov 19th 2008 8:22PM

In this case I think it's fair to give the 360 a better score due to the DLC. With things like Fallout and GTA it's irrelevant, we don't know what it is and we don't know when it's coming.

But with TR we know there's two full episodes coming quite soon, that add a significant amount of new content to the game.

Maybe it's unfair to consider that in the review, but it certainly affected my choice of which platform to buy it on.

Stew @ Nov 20th 2008 2:58AM

"Only the upcoming downloadable content and achievement points make the 360 version stand out just ahead of the PS3 copy."

PS3 owners woudn't buy this anyway. This is just "Inferior Uncharted for 360 cheapskates".

The sooner game studios dump the 360 and concentrate on the superior PS3 hardware, the sooner they start delivering decent games worthy of the next-gen title. Until then they continue to release multi-platform compromises.

Snowblind @ Nov 20th 2008 7:27AM

The game plays nothing like Uncharted. (which also recieved some pretty bad reviews from critics, its at 89% on metacritic). Uncharted was pretty much all about the combat sequences, while Tomb Raider is all puzzles and problem solving.

Also, considering this is "inferior hardware" I think it's strange that this game actually looks BETTER than Uncharted.

Besides, why do the graphics matter? If the game plays well, that's all that's really important. You Playstation fanboys didn't care about graphics last gen with the PS2, when it was heavily outclassed by the Xbox, why is such a big deal now, when the PS3 is ever slightly so much powerful?

Miguel @ Nov 20th 2008 11:28AM

what are you smoking snowblind?

A score of 89 for Uncharted is bad? How the hell is that bad? And you've gotta be kidding that Tomb Raider looks better than Uncharted. I played the Tomb Raider demo back to back with a session of Uncharted and Uncharted definitely looks better. Better 3d models, shadows, and lighting.

I actually used to like Tomb Raider, especially the first 3, when the games had good puzzles and pretty good combat, but my impression from the demo and now the reviews is that the puzzles are way too easy and the combat/camera/bugs absolutely suck. Uncharted is not quite Tomb Raider but its a damn good game and a close enough substitute.

Titanium_Orchid @ Nov 19th 2008 8:13PM

I didn't think it was possible for you to good japanese porn

Hyams @ Nov 19th 2008 8:27PM

This comment is actually even *more* epic now that the origional spam message has been deleted.

philmcphail @ Nov 19th 2008 8:23PM

You are on a roll! You should of left the comment for Premature Ejaculation Man though.

philmcphail @ Nov 19th 2008 8:29PM

wow, he's already banned under 5 mins? that should be a new record!

colinbell @ Nov 19th 2008 8:28PM

I dont know, the game is still a different experience, definitely a buy for me. I mean, the closest equivalent Uncharted got 89 on Metacritic but was close to a 100 in my book, and I suspect this is much better than the 80 or so it will end up with.

Levi @ Nov 19th 2008 8:50PM

LOL did anybody read Eurogamer's snippet? It's everything that's wrong with videogames, and everything that's great about videogames at the same time! Great! I love it!!

Orionsaint @ Nov 19th 2008 9:34PM

I just started playing it, but I'm enjoying it so far. The graphics are the best yest for a TR game, as you can see in the link,

http://flickr.com/photos/orionfotos/3045051610/

ryan @ Nov 19th 2008 10:10PM

lol, I remember you now from previous pics you posted.

yes, it is a very nice TV. :D

lol.

Orionsaint @ Nov 20th 2008 12:07AM

Yep that's me, thanks.

Back to the game though. I'm getting the feeling that this game is gonna be real short. ugh! There's no real unlockable costumes either, except at the start of levels. You get to decide shorts or long pants, meh.

ryan @ Nov 20th 2008 12:30AM

Yeah, I heard it's like 8-10. 6 if you know where to go already. Not any real replay value either. Darn.

Wiinterfang @ Nov 19th 2008 9:50PM

Oh **************************!!!!!! is this game got those crappy score, then what can I speck from Sonic Unleashed :(, why does the games I'm keeping an eye into ends getting bad reviews. ( Except Dead Space but that game is too short)

Titanium_Orchid @ Nov 19th 2008 10:03PM

you have teh curse!

Wiinterfang @ Nov 19th 2008 10:10PM

Why thy I have to endure the curse of thy bad Reviews!!! why must I roam the land fearing this pain!!!!.

( it's so hard being a Sonic fan nowadays T_T).

cxm @ Nov 20th 2008 10:50AM

If you read through them, the reviews aren't really "bad". They're just kinda "meh". The game got dinged on the score simply because the game didn't bring anything really new to the table and doesn't stand out when compared to other offerings this Christmas season.

That's why the obsession with review scores really needs to be eliminated...people are so caught up with a number that's fairly arbitrary and is affected by so many other factors other than whether a game was good or not (what other games were released at around the same time, the preconceptions of the reviewer, uneven expectations by the review staff/fans, ignorance of the reviewer about the game [I've actually read a review where the reviewer came into a game thinking it was supposed to be one type of game when everyone and their cat knew that it was supposed to be another, so the score, naturally, was low], etc.).

Not to say that some of the things they complain about are wrong, but I wouldn't put too much stock in the number itself. Read the reviews and see what the reviewers thought were big deals and see if they are deal-breakers for you....THEN decide.

t_m @ Nov 20th 2008 4:54AM

After all the hype about resurecting the franchise, i found Legend to be pretty average. I played it free on gametap, and i still got bored half way through and never finished it.

I loved TR1 and TR2 back in the day, but now (even after the "revival" it just feels strained and repetitive. They need to get in better writers and better puzzle designers.

Prince of Persia took it's crown back with SoT, and i don't think any TR so far has come close to taking it back.

Deeznuts420 @ Nov 20th 2008 8:32AM

i have the pc version and while the camera is wonky at times, the game is enjoyable

Professor Lario @ Nov 20th 2008 10:13AM

Seems to be more of the same with a few of the Uncharted play mechanics glued on...

cxm @ Nov 20th 2008 10:53AM

*facepalm*

How you could say that and think you sound intelligent is beyond me....

Deeznuts420 @ Nov 20th 2008 11:06AM

do you not see his gigantic hat? only a brain of immense proportions can be under there.

Professor Lario @ Nov 20th 2008 11:15AM

@cxm

Fortunately I am not trying to sound intelligent, just posting my opinion. After playing through the TR:U demo it seemed more of the same except for a few similar mechanics that I encountered on my play through of Uncharted.

cxm @ Nov 20th 2008 11:00AM

Anyway, it does seem like they dropped the ball with this iteration. The game isn't really "bad" per se, though it does have several major weaknesses (combat and camera being the most glaring). It just seems like the designers didn't have a handle on what they were trying to accomplish with the game and spent more time obsessing about useless little polish (like the dirt on Lara and the brushing away plants thing) and not enough time on the actual gameplay...which isn't bad, don't get me wrong; it's just more of the same thing that we've seen from the two previous games with even less polish.

Overall, I think it's worth a play and definitely deserves higher scores than it's getting, but it definitely doesn't stand out considering its competition.

And if I hear any more comparisons to Uncharted...to think 'professional' reviewers are doing it too is just beyond sad.

darkeyez @ Nov 20th 2008 11:37AM

A friend of mine mentioned that there's A LOT of glitches in the game and the gameplay is crappy overall. He's a diehard Tomb Raider fan though, so I take his comments pretty seriously. However, there's never been any mention of the glitches or gameplay drawbacks in any of the reviews I read. Has anyone had that experience?

phobic99 @ Nov 20th 2008 12:48PM

I'm about halfway through the game and I haven't suffered from too many glitches. The only gripes I have so far are the controls, the wonky camera, and sometimes Lara gets stuck on objects and I can't move her at all. I'm enjoying the game more than I thought I would for the moment.