Here we see a little further into my mind and my thoughts on why violence needs to get toned down in some video games. Just trust me, you'll like it.
Tomb Raider I, II, III Remastered is available now on PC, Nintendo Switch, PlayStation 4 and 5, Xbox One, and Xbox Series X/S. Lara Croft is back in a classic remaster of the original PlayStation 1 hit title. Is the remaster any good though?
We've gone on many adventures with Lara Croft. With another reboot in the making, Wealth of Geeks felt it was a good time to go down the nostalgia rabbit hole and remember the best of those tomb-raiding thrills.
I do agree that Tomb Raider Angel of Darkness was the worse one 😂 I remember playing some of it and I took it back. That game was just awful in every way. I bought it used at gamestop and glad they had that 7 day return policy for used games 😂
Simple. He's been hating on the Tomb Raider reboots for years. I can't imagine seeing them at the top of a best TR game list let alone being on the list in general sitting well with him because of it.
Zeek
“Hating”
No no, just pointing out how TR mutated into a generic action adventure game losing the appeal of what it once was when it was more about puzzles and platforming over going Rambo, slaughtering waves of enemies
But hey, continue being a dick and speaking about me like I’m not going to see the comment.
Foxtrot, I'm curious if you have played the most recent games. Sure the 2013 reboot was hugely focused on combat, but each follow up became less and less about combat to the point where outside of a few large scale story missions I don't even remember combat being a part of shadow of the tomb raider. Shadow was so puzzle focused it actually was a bit much for me and I love the TR puzzles.
I still feel like Rise was the best of the series and I was a huge fan of the originals. To me it struck the perfect balance of exploration, platforming, puzzles, and combat. Not saying your opinion is wrong I'm just curious what you think they should have done different. Games do need to evolve somewhat to stay relevant. Would you prefer small linear jumping platform levels like the original?
I think Shadow wasn't even develop by crystal dynamics. I thought it was the worse in the new trilogy
That's right. Shadow was developed by Eidos Montreal who who went and made Marvels Guardians of the Galaxy next. (Great game)
Meanwhile after Rise of the Tomb Raider, Crystal Dynamics made Marvels Avengers. (bad game)
For me, Legend should be alot higher (along with the other two ). Shadow, I enjoyed it, but has too much has fluff, as modern games tend to do. Playing the remastered series, and apart from the controls, is very good.
I really enjoyed the first 2 games, Legend and the first of the reboots and the rest I didn’t get into so I never finished.
Completely subjective list. I really liked Underworld, I preferred Lara's design. That said I loved the horror/uncharted feel of the reboot. I think all the TR games have strengths and weaknesses. None are objectively better in every way.
Like the film or television industry, the world of gaming has seen its fair share of reboots over the years. While some of these video game reboots have had
I don't remember people complaining so much about the first Bioshock being violent. And damn, it was. Violence is part of the Bioshock universe, it's actually one of the main themes developped in the games. It's part of Rapture as much as it's part of Columbia, as if it was a character itself. Actually, the violence is more relevant in Bioshock than in any other game.
Read the article before you comment, please. He makes some good points. Too much violence CAN get in the way of the plot sometimes. An example in my opinion would be Infamous 2, when playing Evil Cole. **Spoilers for those who haven't played it yet** When you first go into Flood Town, after beating the Behemoth, Laroche talks to you about the suffering the citizens had to go through after the hurricane. When people lost their homes and loved ones and Laroche telling you he lost his wife. Then Cole makes an extremely awkward comment after that:
"First the Flood, then Bertrand's Militia, and now these ice freaks. It's about time these people caught a break."
Words cannot even begin to describe how much WAT I felt after that line. A few minutes ago he was a merciless homicidal maniac, killing innocent citizens in the street, sucking the life out of them via Bio Leech, creating hundreds of windows and widowers, and now he suddenly feels sorry for them? Another example was during the ending, when you had to kill Zeke. Zeke didn't have any problems with you murdering innocent people until AFTER the game. When he realizes he's about to die suddenly it's a problem. Cole was just out of character during these moments, even back in Infamous 1, he didn't really feel like a evil guy until the story called for it. I'm saying I don't want violence in my games. I'm just saying: If they're gonna kill senselessly, let the consequences of their actions be pulled into the plot as well. Not just when it's convenient.
There is no violence in games, do people not see movies any more?
If you watch the Walking Dead, your probably saying to yourself there is not enough violence in video games.
Violence is in the eye of the beholder.
In my eyes Mario is violent: He's a dangerous sociopath who kills the local populace, destroys the infrastructure, and monopolizes the gold reserves, all to save one girl.