About the game
- Tomb Raider: Underworld
- PC, X360, PS3
- Published by Eidos Interactive
- Developed by Eidos Interactive
- French release: Available
Top stories
About
- Copyright 2007-2009 Gamersyde SARL
Log in
Express links
- 12 online players on course in F1 2010?
- More infos about Halo Reach Multiplayer
- Guerilla can do better
- What is Mikami preparing ?
- Gears of War 3 expected for April 2011 ?
- GDC: Sony PlayStation Move motion controller
- GDC - The Move game: Slider
- GDC - Deus Ex: Human Revolution
- GDC: Infamous' Open World Trickery
- Tron - The come back with a trailer
- Rock Band 3 on for a holiday
- The first Bioshock 2 DLC set for March 11th
- Portal 2 officially announced, also for Mac ?
- Eidos announces "Lara Croft and the Guardian of Light"
- MotoGP 09/10 demo out on March 4th
Popular games
All comments
:/
It remains to be seen whether it works well in the game, of course.
That kind of secondary sequence in games are almost always terrible, but on the idea stage the thought of catching up to a train and jumping on top of it with your bike.. there's no reason that shouldn't work in this context. I think the reason it doesn't is because when things like it is being included it's too apologetic, too "oh hey pardon me I'm just gonna be doing my spazzy thing here for a bit and you'll be able to randomly stumble past it eventually. Again I'm terribly sorry for the inconvenience!".
If they can sit down with an element like that and make it worthwhile, ie not give up on it because it wasn't executed well before, that can totally make it worth it in the end. At least for me.
You.. liked the bikes in Legend? I didn't think that portion of the game added anything but frustration to the experience. Hell, it might as well have been a playable cutscene. There was no particular challenge, and the bike handled like crap. The mandatory vehicle chase level in these types of games should go. Sure, if they're well implemented and fun, I've got no problem with a little extra variety.... but that doesn't seem like it's often the case at all.
When they decide to extend those crappy sequences ( and yes, I agree they weren't fun and added nothing to the overall game) to the +1 hour of gameplay, only then we should start calling names.
Hell, I still don't undestand what was the problem with the car parts in Gears 1.
It could be hard on Insane and just a monotonus bit of the game, but it was so short and gave a diferent kind of gameplay from the 3rd person shooting, I welcomed it.
With those sections being so brief you have no time to figure out exactly how to play them. It's the equivalent of something throwing a ball at you going REACT FAST!!! and you take it to the face and cry like a baby. It's not that you wouldn't normally be able to catch a ball, you just have no realistic way of preparing.
This is of course a fault of the game, and any game should ease you into whatever gameplay mechanics are at hand. Not necessarily going full on tutorial on you, but establishing mechanics in a cunning way so that when they appear you have a realistic shot at doing what the game tasks you with.
As soon as you started figuring out how things worked, the bike bits got a little less frustrating bit by bit, but that shouldn't be an excercise in dying until you get it right.
To be honest I though the vehicle bit in Gears was more irritating because you totally got how to drive the thing and everything, but even then, you couldn't really tell what you did wrong when you died. At least not so with the TRL vehicle sections.
Crystal Dynamics have really given the series a shot in the arm.
Off Topic
..it took a bunch of tries before developers got 3D platforming right..
Not seen anything to convince me to get this,it looks ok but I can't see it rating well apart from a nostalgic view point
Off Topic
Mario 64