270°

RotTR Writer Wasn't Sure How Lara Would Be Received; Explains Why She's Different from the Old Games

Rhianna Pratchett, Lead Writer on Tomb Raider & Rise of the Tomb Raider, wasn't quite sure how Lara Croft would be received in the sequel by fans.

She also addressed the common critique that Lara has a different attitude than in the old games.

Read Full Story >>
wccftech.com
KaiPow2687d ago

That vulnerability was what made the reboots so memorable.

monkeyDzoro2687d ago

Ugh... Lara now is a moaning machine who doesnt know if she likes the action or not. Inconsistent character.

ShinMaster2686d ago (Edited 2686d ago )

This. The moaning got annoying quick. The new games take themselves too seriously and feel forced.

Classic Lara knew what she wanted and was a thrill seeker of sorts. She had the right personality for the adventure.

Playing the more recent top-down Lara Croft games made me miss her character more.

joab7772687d ago

Uh, was hoping for more! It was Brie's vulnerability that quickly turned into a murder escapade lol! Great premise, was hoping it would be less mowing down enemies and more introspective!

rainslacker2687d ago (Edited 2687d ago )

No, just seemed forced. Flaws are there to make a character more interesting because it allows you to connect with them on an emotional level.

All Pratchett did was try to create empathy through pity. Nothing about the new Lara was compelling, interesting, unique, original, nor overly memorable. There was no character development, and the only dynamic aspect of her character was not built throughout the game, and came in cliched stages, which is the result of poor writing.

When the most memorable thing about her is how poor a character she is compared to the original, then the writer failed to make a good character.

-Foxtrot2687d ago

Horribly written anyway, I'm glad she's left

One minute

"I can't believe I've killed someone, I took a life, I can't believe this is happening to me"

*Upset - Cries - Screams*

The Second After

"I'm going to Rambo on these mother f******...I'll show no remorse"

*Slaughters wave after wave of enemies*

Imp0ssibl32687d ago

The writing is no highlight, that's true

Cybermario2687d ago

so true, that was pretty contradictory

-Foxtrot2687d ago

If they focused on what they said by making it a survival game then they could have done it where the kills (human kills) are slowly paced out throughout the game until you see her finally "snap" after the "You're a Croft" convo with Roth.

Each human kill would be a cutscene showing you how emotional it is with each one becoming easier and easier

THAT would have been good development but no no...they just wanted an Uncharted over the top action game.

morganfell2687d ago

@-Foxtrot,

The game could not find its identity. Is it a shooter? A survival title? One of exploration? What about the classic Tomb Raider puzzles? In its quest to be everything to everyone it wound up being little to anyone. Jack of all trades...master of none.

It isn't Uncharted. Of course neither is Uncharted 4 for that matter. Must we have so much drama in everything? And I wish TR would not try to be Uncharted. I miss the games with little shooting and lots of exploration, wonder, and crafty puzzles.

Bathyj2687d ago

Well it is a game, not fine literature. She cant be stopping and having a breakdown everytime she kills someone. What youre suggesting makes no sense from a gameplay point of view. It wouldnt work.

If youre saying the game should be less killing all together and more puzzle orientated like the old games thats a fair point but a different argument. As it stands its an action adventure game with a lot of killing, and I dont think realistic writing should get in the way of the gameplay. Gameplay above all else right?

-Foxtrot2687d ago (Edited 2687d ago )

No sense? How come.

She kills her first guy like she did. She's upset, there's a cutscene, she slowly gets over it...the game continues

HOWEVER

Instead of the game telling you to take these enemies out the goal would be to sneak past them and give you more survival options by using stealth to your advantage. Distractions, ease dropping, finding new paths...maybe you'll climb on the rooftops, maybe you'll climb the nearby trees or maybe you'll find a secret hatch which goes underneath them. Did it do that? Nope. Instead it forces her to become Rambo and slaughter these enemies right after it gives you that supposed emotional cutscene of Lara taking a human life for the first time. If you were spotted then she should have been killed because she would have been ganged up on.

The game should have been designed to stay away from that, to show how unwilling Lara was to take a human life unless she absolutely had to.

Later on in the game you could have had another moment like this to another enemy character where she struggles to get away from him and screams for him to stop. Lara would gain the upper hand and grab a gun but he keeps coming towards her thinking she won't pull the trigger. She's crying, she doesn't want to do it and she's continuously telling him to just walk away...then BANG, she does. Again a small cutscene showing her emotional struggle but this time she deals with it better then the first one.

This could happen maybe another few times where each cutscene would show Lara becoming more comfortable at taking a life until the "You're a Croft" scene with Roth where she finally snaps and realises that it's either her or them. That's where "Lara Croft" could have been born but no they didn't do this because of the shit story telling.

The game shouldn't have even focused on human enemies anyway, that's why to me it's not a good Tomb Raider game, the real challenges should have been the predators and traps across the Island. The humans should have been a very small tribe you deal with in a chapter or two.

It's not about it trying to be "fine literature" it's just giving the game believable bloody development. I mean Jesus Christ it's not hard.

Bathyj2687d ago

Look I hear what youre saying but what youre proposing is radically different from the game they wanted to make. You cant sneak your way through 3/4 of the game only killing a couple guys and then have a bloodbath at the end so the character is more believable. To be honest, that sounds boring, and I love stealth. If youre not going to kill until the end, why have the guns with upgrades and skill trees at all? Why even have killing at all?

I with you, I loved the old games and the best bit of the combat was killing animals to clear and area and then setting about solving the puzzle. The human combat was crap. Lock on aim, back flip back flip, side flip, shooting the whole time. It sucked.

We all know Tombraider is basically an Uncharted clone now. Its more open but thats what its gameplay is mimicking. Like I said if youre proposing that TR should go back to its exploration/puzzle roots then by all means, but thats a different argument. Your lambasting the writing but really its only a means to service the gameplay they wanted. They want guns, upgrades, kill kill kill. Your proposing all this senarios, that yes, might make a better story, more believable, but would it make a better game? You have to consider how the changes you want would effect the gameplay.

And to be honest while I love the old games I cant blame the direction they took the reboot. Because thats what it was. A Reboot. The series was dead. One more failed game and it would have been thrown on the scrap heap, maybe forever. So they looked at the most popular, well executed similar title and they took a lot of cues from it. And it was a success. People bought it cos they liked it. Hate the players not the game.

Silly gameAr2686d ago

Yeah, it sounded like the way Foxtrot wanted the game and Lara to be would have been pretty boring and slow paced. I probably wouldn't even finish a game like that.

ShinMaster2686d ago (Edited 2686d ago )

As someone else mentioned bellow. Far Cry 3 did it better. And it had a better balance in tone and didn't take itself too seriously, so it doesn't feel so inconsistent and contradictory.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2686d ago
lellkay2687d ago

There was an absolute moment of disconnect when Lara went from vulnerable to killer. I just wish they had smoothed the evolution of her character between them moments better. But saying that I really enjoyed the games and felt a connection to Lara in the reboots alot more than i did in the originals.

riibhu2687d ago

Far cry 3 did that too but it actually succeeded in making it look somewhat believable.

-Foxtrot2687d ago

Which is hilarious because Far Cry 3 wasn't taking its self as serious as Tomb Raider yet it did feel more believable

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 2686d ago
ccgr2687d ago

Haven't played the reboots yet, it's on my ever-growing bucket list

SCW19822687d ago

Play the first one, its a more focused intense and interesting experience. Skip the second, its a bloated horribly written mess with terrible pacing issues and laughable gun combat.

babadivad2687d ago

I'm playing the first one now. It's pretty great. So much so, I can't wait to play the second one. I am pleasantly surprised by how good it is.

rainslacker2687d ago

They're good games.

Wouldn't look to them for compelling story or characters, but the game play is pretty top notch.

Cybermario2687d ago (Edited 2687d ago )

see the bright side, the next Tomb Raider may have better writing

ninsigma2687d ago

Lara is a terrible character. In fact they all are in the reboots. Great games with terrible writing. Hoping for better narrative and characters now that she's gone.

Festano2687d ago

Well it's not like she was a great character to begin with. But I still love her, nostalgia magic

ninsigma2687d ago

I never played the originals so I don't really know what the original character is like. I'm just going off the reboots.