TheAmazingAtheist Is Not a Fan of Tomb Raider (Old)

This post is intended as a response to the video above, but I'll supply the original tweet that has garnered so much controversy (for whatever reason) here:

 

TJ, on his Twitter, has since revealed that he has only played the newest incarnations of the franchise and none of the originals by Core Design. So he couldn't be considered a fan and doesn't appear to do so himself anyway. However, that's not really important here, it just goes to prove my point that he's not a fan of these games. If he were, he'd be such because of the gameplay and, you know, the actual game design, and not because of the simple visual design of the main character. And really, given that you play from a third-person perspective in all of these games, you don't usually get a look at her breasts anyway unless some camera angles permit it, so the size of her tits is mostly portrayed in marketing materials. And that latter point is really important to understand, given that that's how Lara Croft became considered such a sexy character at all.

I do think that TJ is missing the point of contention many people have/have had with the above tweet, and that's the following: he's basically body-shaming Alicia Vikander, the lead actress in the starring role of Lara Croft, which is based on her current incarnation of the character. And why's he doing that? Because her breasts aren't big enough to match the promotional and marketing materials that have, through the 22 years of the franchise, through thick & thin, made her into (among other things) a sex icon in the videogame lexicon.

However, as a fan of the franchise (especially the Core Design era), I didn't much care for the big boobs aspect of Lara Croft. In fact, aside from her being a bad-ass, stone-cold (with a few exceptions) killer out to add to her collection of artefacts and treasures, and wealth, of course, I didn't pay attention to anything else about her. She was rather flat personality-wise and had undergone no character development in each game. The few exceptions, of course, being the odd gasp or disgust at the antagonists & their devious plans. The development of her character was left to the current era. No, I was a fan not because of what the marketing was trying to do, but because of how the games played. You know, the reason why we play games? If you play a game so that you can look at it, either because it has nigh photo-realistic graphics (Crysis was hailed for this aspect for years) or, in this case, because a character, no matter how few pixels could be derived from her polygons and textures, has big tits, then you're just not a fan. 

I liked the adventure, the puzzle-solving, the trial-and-error, and the thrill of success that was derived from the games. I liked that they were distinct in this regard: they were designed with a deliberate, and stand-out (but not always for the right reasons) grid-based movement system. The gameplay and the movements you made in order to complete the games were designed entirely around this system of tiles. If you mastered how it worked, you mastered most of the game itself. And that works in helping you enjoy the game even more. Because I still know plenty of people who can hardly even play, let alone enjoy, the games for how they are designed.

The main reason for her being considered a sex-icon of gaming is due mostly to the marketing around the franchise. Yes, her in-game model did have (progressively with each instalment) bigger and bigger tits, but it still wasn't central to the games, even to the character. And considering you said this:

You're just wrong. And what do I have to back that up? Why, an interview with the very creator of the franchise itself, Toby Gard (who left Core Design around the release of Tomb Raider II), in which he states the following:

It was never the intention to create some kind of 'page 3' girl to star in Tomb Raider. The idea was to create a female character who was a heroine, you know, cool, collected, in control, that sort of thing. The problem with those other games is that the female characters are actually there for purely exploitative purposes. I know you could argue that Lara with her comic book style over-the top figure is exploitative, but I don't agree. I think it's ridiculous to say that portraying stylised people is degrading. You can represent an over the top hero figure by augmenting characteristics like a jutting jaw, wide shoulders, thin waist etc. and that is not degrading to men. It may well be a stereotype, but it seems to me that people are overanalysing this whole thing. It's pretty simple, if women in a game are only there to be the equivalent of quiz show floozies then they are being portrayed in a sexist way. When it comes to Galleon there are all sorts of women in the Galleon world, just as there are all sorts of men.

 You could argue that Toby Gards' words support yours when he argues about how people were 'overanalysing' the portrayal of her figure, but it's his opening statement that shows he never intended Lara Croft to be so overly sexual in design in the first place. He wanted her to be bad-ass, stone-cold, unflapping in her drive to achieve wealth & fame. And to save the world while doing it, because other people want those same artefacts that she chases, but for nefarious purposes (destroying the world in some way) instead of simply putting them on display for fame & fortune. She's a cold-ass bitch who'll kill you without shedding a tear if you get in her way, but if you intend to use those same artefacts to rule or destroy the earth, she won't stand for that either.

As he explained later in the interview, he left Core Design (in part) because of his creative control over the franchise, which he co-created, by the way, was being taken from him. What did Core and, by extension Eidos Interactive, want for the creative department for the franchise? Why, to fixate on her sex appeal, because they felt it was an ace way to garner more and more money. And indeed, it was. But the co-creator did not agree with it, so it was one of the reasons for his departure.

So you trying to justify your crappy views by ignorantly stating that she was designed to be sexually appealing falls flat on its face, because of the very words of one of the minds behind the creation of the franchise as a whole.

Source: Gamasutra - Interview with Toby Gard (Oct. 23, 1998)

Then you said:

 

You are partially wrong with the above statement, and I am being generous here. The notion that Angelina Jolie's tits were as unrealistically large as they were in the videogames (and most prolifically, the marketing material) was debunked. How did they get her tits to appear so large? Why, have you not heard of the myriad ways women make their tits look bigger than they actually are? Wire bras, for instance, raise the breasts because ordinarily, gravity makes them seem smaller due to what is commonly derided as "sagging." According to some sources, like this one, in particular, the studio used "...padding to bring her from her normal 36C to a 36D. (The videogame Lara is estimated to wear a 36DD bra.)" Oh, and those C's and D's mean something, too. It makes all the difference from breasts appearing to "sag" to them appearing to be protrusile & firm.

So the studio had to use trickery (no CGI, thankfully) in order to make Jolie's portrayal seem closer to the videogame character, as she was being portrayed in the then current spate of Tomb Raider titles. Which, by the way, was only attributed to the progressively-increased polygon count and not necessarily to those same breasts somehow getting bigger and bigger in proportion. They just appeared more realistic with each new release. This, as mentioned before, was one of the issues Toby Gard disagreed with and left the same studio over. Even Angelina Jolie, who portrayed Lara in the first run of adaptations, wasn't as "buxom" as Lara Croft, even though the studios played up the character's sex appeal as much as they possibly could. And by the way, the sex appeal might've worked for you, but it didn't for me; indeed, the tits were cartoonish and ridiculous, distracting from what was far more interesting than a couple of tweaked breasts succumbing to the laws of physics before my very eyes (some would call this "boob physics").

You may argue that her big breasts defined her as a character, but going by the statements made by her co-creator, and by what I found to be more important to each game personally, I wholeheartedly disagree. And I definitely disagree with your body-shaming an actress for her (less sexually-appealing) portrayal of Lara Croft, who was only made sexually appealing because of marketing in the first god damned place. If she wasn't intentionally created just to be treated as a sex goddess, then I agree with her creator and not with people like you, who lack self-reflection and cannot concede that perhaps they're off the mark on this subject. 

I do agree that you got far too much exposure for this because, in the end, this was really another case of you trolling for attention. I already knew that about you, and I have for years, but the media clearly didn't. So that's the only reason I can forgive them at all for granting you this much-undeserved attention because you took part in body-shaming an actress for not matching the marketing that has surrounded her character for so many years. That same marketing that saw the character's co-creator resign from working with the character  Funny, now I know that marketing works more easily on you than it does on me, it appears that it is you who isn't fully capable of thinking for themselves. Amirite?

Tomb Raider Review (PS3, PS4, Xbox 360, Xbox One, PC, Mac, 2013, Crystal Dynamics/Square Enix/Eidos Interactive/Feral Interactive)

Look at that headline. Oh and spoilers are ahead.

And forget about it, because survival is hardly the point of the game at all. You know what it really is? It's to get off the island with a sordid history with your guns blazing. If you have to route hundreds of desperate lunatics loaded for bear on the way to your escape, then so be it. Oh and, since Lara is conveniently an archaeology student, you'll find some artifacts in your journey. But that's really not the point of this entry in the series.

Not at all.

Already we're off to a great start with this review. And it's not to foreshadow a negative one, really, it is just a means of venting some of my frustrations with this game. I've been a fan of this series since the first game, and short of the Crystal Dynamics titles (which left fans divided), I've played them all. They certainly did suffer from sequelitis given that each title was released year after year, but you always got an all-new story and a whole slew of new challenges to come with them. Yes, they didn't all have tombs, and arguably the best entry in the series, the third game, didn't even have any, but if you're going to include tombs then at least make them worth your while. Also, the point of the old games wasn't to kill everything in sight over and over again, it was to explore obscure areas to obtain an artifact of great power. 

The essence of the series is virtually gone in this title. How so, you may ask?

There are tombs, sure, but they were most likely an afterthought. Each one follows the same exact formula: go through a brief walk wherein you can't draw any weapons (for whatever reason, given that nothing happens each time) and you hold a source of light, come across some kind of chamber with a puzzle (I previously used the plural, which is inaccurate), then solve the puzzle to access a chest full of...XP. I'm not kidding, all you get is XP when you beat these admittedly piss-easy 'tombs'. With almost no exception are there are pitfalls or traps to overcome in this game's tombs, so what the fuck is the point of including them at all when you just get some experience points out of them and nothing actually interesting, like artifacts?

Oh and, if you're a glutton for the saturated shooter market, then you'll love this title. In spite of the mysterious traits of the island, where you apparently cannot leave due to some magical forces, you're too busy gunning down hundreds of boring mooks through almost the entire game. They are nutty, desperate, and are effectively a small army. This game was compared quite often to Far Cry 3, and given some of the features shared between the two games, it's kind of apt. On another front, you'll think that this was a Michael Bay production, because explosions occur often inexplicably as if there are barrels of petroleum everywhere. Oh and there's a lot of blood; a hell of a lot. Even a god damn creek consists of seemingly none other than blood. And Lara swims through it.

And spills it a lot, too.

Lots of detractors of the series would complain about the old Lara's ridiculous chest proportions, calling it a sexist portrayal of women (they'd be about half-right). Where are those some detractors in regard to this game, where she becomes a gung-ho mass slaughterer with mood swings? First she was an oversexed but cold anti-hero, and now she's a blood knight on a killing spree. Poor Lara will never be a proper role model at this rate.

So another thing I'd like to complain about is the nature of the game world. It seems open world, and it kind of is in some regards. One way is that it allows you to travel from one save spot to another upon their discovery. Also, each major location has a number of collectibles and minor sub-quests to endure, requiring very little thought to complete. However, that's really where this aspect ends and where the sheer linearity, deceptively hidden from the casual player at that, becomes obvious. You're only allowed to explore so much before you're rendered unable to go where you feel like. This game relies on context-sensitive controls, such as Lara hoisting herself onto the top of ledges and grabbing onto the sides of cliffs to climb them. You can only do those actions, among others, wherever the developers wanted you to go. Because if you could go where you wanted to then the game's flaws would start to become readily apparent to you. That's what I assume, anyway.

I must say, though, that this game is fucking gorgeous. It may not possess the most striking level of detail seen in gaming, even for its release year, but it's definitely well designed. The single best looking aspect of the game is Lara herself, who looks so human that I thought I was dreaming. The sheer amount of work that went into her design, from her skin to the way dirt & blood smears her person, and then how the lighting and shadows bring out the best and the worst in her, is absolutely impressive. You won't leave all that impressed by anything else but when you're near the coastal areas of the island, you'll see some spectacular, yet chaotic vistas that are appropriate given the theme of the game.

In spite of my knocking of the excessive action sequences, they are not without a strength or two. If you dig this kind of non-stop action then this game won't disappoint. And it can get a little tense at times, which is always welcome. However, there's just not much depth to any of them because you don't have to worry about much in the face of battle. In the old games, you had non-regenerating health and had limited means of healing; here, you have much less health but it regenerates quickly if you hide, like almost all action games seem to do these days. 

Let's develop on that last bit there. One thing this game is missing from the old titles is an inventory system; it is non-existent here. Gone are the days of managing your limited resources, and cherishing each pickup that you'd find in the Tomb Raider games of yore. Here, you pick up so much ammo so often, and are given new weapons so easily that you really don't come to care much about any of them. They're simply a way of quickly neutralizing all the bad guys you face constantly. You can also use your ice pick to brutally kill foes from a short range. Oh and as mentioned above, don't worry about health kits, because if you're hurt then all you need to do is hide for a moment or two to heal. As a consequence of the lack of inventory, there are no meaningful secrets to discover, no hidden rewards for actually exploring the environment.

If anything else, the battles become tedious because there's no depth to beating them except for making sure she doesn't die. If you can aim your gun and pull the trigger, then that's really all there is to it. Sure, the old games weren't much better than this, but you had to account for your vulnerabilities as well. When you're close to death, the game grays out, so it's hard to die at all. Enemies are not strategically placed, and don't poise a challenge, but rather act as props to shoot at. They do take cover, and may have various abilities/equipment that will add variety to each encounter, but the old games had this too, in spades. 

Lara does control well, though. She's also well animated, given that there is motion capture at work. But she responds to your actions accordingly and with fluidity, which is a good touch.

In the games of old, Lara often keeled over and died; it was uncommon for her death to play out differently, unless she of course landed on spikes. In this game, however, her deaths are cruel and gruesome. She's even subjected to a near-fatal beatdown by two of the nutbars you have to kill in the game, and much earlier she's threatened with rape. At the get-go, Lara gets impaled and set on fire. Fail to match the on-screen prompts right and she'll get crushed beneath tonnes of rock, impaled on re-bar, get impaled through the head, and many other things. She endures multiple injuries throughout the course of the plot. This game is brutal as far as violence goes, because you can put your enemies through hell too, including jabbing an axe into your enemies' jugulars. It's a wonder none of the detractors towards the second and third Tomb Raider games were screaming bloody murder in regards to this one.

There are a lot of set pieces to go through in this game, so you'll have to come to live with it. Most of the time these set pieces are playable, to an extent, but where the old games would leave it completely up to you to overcome the challenges, this game just sends buttons prompts your way that are more trial & error based than skill-based. Also, reports from players of earlier versions of the PC port cited the inability to correctly complete some or all quick-time events, due to a few bugs. They're also highly numerous, often in excess, and it's a common criticism that must be emphasized. If you can't stand QTEs, then you're going to be annoyed to all hell when you play through this game.

After playing through the game completely the first time, I noticed a few game design choices that I would like to call 'condescending'. The aforementioned QTEs, which comes in such a quantity as to feed Africa were it a food source, are one of those things. Another condescending game design comes in the form of the Survival Instinct feature, that which can be abused as needed by the player. It highlights all interactive objects/items/terrain in your immediate vicinity, and even shows pillars of light for far away places of interest such as checkpoints. As indicated, it can be used ad nauseum; there is no limit as to how long or how often you can use it. So if you just want to plow through a "puzzle" section, of which there are few that are worth critical thought, just press the button to execute the Survival Instinct ability and have your hand held.

Another condescending game design is in how little the game expects you to master. Want to traverse a narrow length of wood requiring intense focus and balancing? Just jump at it and Lara clings to it, never at risk of falling off unless a cutscene demands it. Want to even try exploring your surroundings beyond the small hub sections? The game will outright refuse to acknowledge what you're doing as you plummet to your death. Want to learn on your own how to perform, and thus improve, the abilities you learn over the course of the game? Well fuck you, says Crystal Dynamics, because we're going to tell you how to do everything new and leave nothing to the imagination.

So let's get down to the story: Lara and a group of friends are on an expedition near Japan, and they get shipwrecked near an island. It becomes immediately apparent that previous ships have met the same fate, so something does seem off. Lara is separated from her group and has to find them whilst avoiding a number of pitfalls. As she gets further into the island, it is clear that a bunch of crazies inhabit the island. Soon after meeting up with the gang, they set out to escape from the island. Yet some force is preventing their exodus, and they have to deal with the army of crazy assholes with guns and all that.

That's pretty much the gist of the story. A rescue plane gets struck by lightning and crashes; there's ritual sacrifice to appease some spirit; an army of undead samurai sets their sights on Lara, and other crap. It's not terrible but it doesn't do anything remotely intriguing with its premise. In actuality, it is an excuse to kill more and more bad guys. After all, the focus of the game is not on the adventure & hunting of artifacts, but of trying to get off of the island and shooting everything in your way.

There's nothing wrong with innovation, of taking an old formula further than ever before. But this game took steps backward, and not forward. Somehow Crystal Dynamics took a series that had an identity of its own into territory that renders it generic & trite. Fantastic visuals and sometimes thrilling action sequences can't save this game from earning much of my displeasure. It may be somewhat unfair to compare it so heavily to previous entries in the franchise, but how could you fault me for doing so when I consider it one of my favorite game series of all time? 

The Rundown:

Positives 

+ Some of the best visuals you'll experience out of 2013

+ It is very story-driven, so if you're into that, then this will deliver.

+ To expand on the above, Lara Croft looks stunningly real. The detail on her is borderline crazy.

+ Has a few legitimately thrilling action sequences.

+ There is a tiny bit of exploration to do, so it's not a straight-up linear game.

+ Lara gets a lot of focus, and has a bit of character development too, which was admittedly in short supply in older games.

+ It does have tombs, but...

Negatives

- Why have tombs when you won't do anything exciting or challenging with them? It's pretty much pointless. Solve a simple puzzle, avoid no traps or pitfalls, and open up a chest at the end that rewards experience points. Rinse & repeat. Screw that shit.

- Way too many QTEs for my liking, and they're too finicky, so they often end up killing the player character because of somewhat shoddy programming.

- The story is kind of dull. Doesn't help that it takes a big backseat to the actual gameplay.

- No inventory or any kind of item management.

- Sometimes resembles a Michael Bay flick with the constant explosions.

- No survival gameplay to speak of, despite the "a survivor is born" tagline.

- Takes several steps backward and ends up being a generic third-person shooter with light adventure elements thrown in.

- Has one of the most condescending game mechanics ever programmed in the history of gaming: the survival instinct function, which highlights everything important in the game world. Say bye to actual exploration and/or honing of skills.

- None of the characters you deal with are intriguing and besides, this game is not about them, but about Lara. So why should we care?

- The undead samurai enemies you fight near the end are far easier to defeat than one would hope, so their eventual appearance in-game loses all menace.

- It's so violent and cynical yet I wonder why we, as gamers, are supposed to take all of it so seriously in spite of the series being heavily inspired by the Indiana Jones franchise.

C