Top
380°
2.0

Shadow of the Tomb Raider Review | Quarter to Three

Tom Chick - "Tomb Raider was personal because it was personal. But now it’s come full circle to yet another vapid videogame character muddling through bad writing, rote familiar gameplay, and fewer features than the last time. Wake me when the next reboot is here."

Read Full Story >>
quartertothree.com
The story is too old to be commented.
NecrumOddBoy97d ago ShowReplies(2)
kenpachi97d ago ShowReplies(1)
97d ago
AK9197d ago

You know I'm gonna actually have to agree with this one the game and the entire 3rd gen series has felt like a shoddy uncharted clone.

81BX97d ago

Some would say uncharted 3 was a shoddy uncharted clone

doggo8497d ago

Uncharted 3 Would be game of the generation on xbox.

paintedgamer198497d ago (Edited 97d ago )

Lol i guess some would say that, but some would also say Uncharted 3 is better than the best Tomb Raider EVER.

Doggo84:

He gets it!

Donnie8197d ago

I'd say the same about part 4.

81BX96d ago (Edited 96d ago )

@paintedgamer
I would agree with them, my point is it's really a matter of taste.
@donnie
I see a lot of people give uncharted 4 a thumbs down. I just cant find myself to give any of the uncharteds a bad wrap. Not even golden abyss. I thought other than the level where you play as drake in his teens (where they break into the house looking for their mom's book), the game is excellent.

Ratchet7596d ago

Change "some" by "no one" and you re
All good to go

CarlDechance96d ago

"I see a lot of Xbox fans give uncharted 4 a thumbs down."

Fixed

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 96d ago
UltraNova97d ago

What? You actually agree with a 2/10 score for SotTR? The game was ok. Its worked for what it was and its nowhere near as bad as this review its trying to make it look like.

Teflon0296d ago

I hope it's not really a 2 out of 10 I literally just bought it on sale for PC. I'll be pissed if I wasted that money (I wouldn't refund unless I know for sure it's trash so it's damn near impossible for me to gauge within the limits of the refund lol)

97d ago Replies(1)
King_Noctis97d ago

Uncharted clone? Smh. Even if so, it deserves nowhere near a 2. A 2 should be reserved for a freaking broken game full of bugs and crashes, which this game clearly is not.

CarlDechance96d ago

Agree. There has been no indication that the game is horrible, much less horribly broken. This is a click bait review. Period.

badz14996d ago

"A 2 should be reserved for a freaking broken game full of bugs and crashes..."

But but but...Fallout got all the 9s!

Gaming4Life198196d ago

Wow. This game is not an uncharted clone and this game is no where near as bad as this site claims. Haters gonna hate though.

Dizzy1152396d ago

This plays nothing like Uncharted. There's actual real exploration in TR.

rainslacker96d ago

I have criticisms of the new take on the series myself. I'm not going to get into them here. I wouldn't call them my favorite games, nor have I particularly looked forward to them since the first one. I know I"ll play them one day, including this one.

Now, I haven't played this one, but not by any stretch of the imagination do I think this game would come in at a 2. I'd reserve a score like that for a seriously broken game, and I know that this game isn't seriously broken. Maybe some of the oddities I've heard about it....like a progression system with no real combat, and bad AI at times, but the game play itself has been fairly solid throughout the series. The story is lacking, and I don't care for the new direction of Lara, but ultimately, the game on a technical level is pretty good.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 96d ago
Switch4One97d ago

Quick question...anyone else find it murky that EVERY article from Quarter to Three is submitted by Coolbeans who also happens to be a moderator on N4G?

Is Tom Chick Coolbeans? And shouldn't there be some sort of disclosure if a mod is funneling views to his other site via N4G whilst also generating clicks for N4G with outlandish reviews such as these?

I fully expect my comment to be marked as spam and my account to be banned for saying this but I'd like to add a disclosure that I'm just speculating here.

georgenancy97d ago (Edited 97d ago )

ikr but you're probably gonna get banned

97d ago
97d ago Replies(1)
bigmalky97d ago Show
NecrumOddBoy97d ago ShowReplies(3)
coolbeans97d ago (Edited 97d ago )

-So...I guess I obligated to chime in on this. The answer: I'm not Tom Chick, nor am I a part of Qt3 in any other capacity than as a user/lurker. And to bring even further disclosure on this: I've yet to contribute any written material outside of the user-designated section on any gaming website (N4G and vgchartz is where I frequent). The only times I've made a site-specific equivalent of a 'paid review' was on here for Night of the Rabbit and Sword of the Stars: The Pit years ago, which you can find in my blog section. I say 'paid review' like that b/c I received a free code.

Qt3 is just a site I visit from time to time and I submit their posted game reviews, which no one else bothers to. You can note the disparities in assessments & scores between our reviews for 7th gen ND games as some examples.

-"I fully expect my comment to be marked as spam and my account to be banned for saying this but I'd like to add a disclosure that I'm just speculating here."

No need to catastrophize the situation like this. I'll credit it as being a special circumstance that's tangentially connected to the topic at hand; having said that, I'm not going to look forward to coming back from work seeing this comment strand detracting from it either. To be clear: your account is not banned over this innocuous speculation and I believe I've disclosed enough info to quell it.

81BX96d ago (Edited 96d ago )

Suspect. I'll have my people look into this. Not during lunch hours though

MasterCornholio96d ago

Alot of people don't like submitting reviews from QT3 for obvious reasons. But if the site is so bad then N4G would have banned it along time ago despite some of their reviews being overly critical to some games.

CarlDechance96d ago

You obviously have a relationship with q23 as you have been posting their crap since they first began back in 2015.

https://www.quartertothree....

That's just over a month after their first review.

"I believe I've disclosed enough info to quell it. "

lol....seriously?

coolbeans96d ago (Edited 96d ago )

Well...went over as well as I could expect.

@81BX

Alright then? I feel like there's teasing going on here but I can't say for sure. :P

@CarlDehance

"You obviously have a relationship with q23 as you have been posting their crap since they first began back in 2015."

1.) You're wrong on the timeline of when Qt3 started, by about SEVEN years. https://www.quartertothree....

I certainly don't remember his name until well after signing up as a member on here.

2.) Being one of the early viewers of someone's site doesn't mean I have some 'connection' with them. Gaming enthusiast's circles tend to bring up all kinds of initially-obscure people that later become popular. I can recall a few sub-1000 subscriber YT gaming channels that've gone on to be popular for example. Doesn't mean I have a relationship.

"lol....seriously?"

Umm...yeah, seriously. My "gaming resume" in respect to credentials has been quite boring. I've turned down any offers to write freelance for other obscure sites in the past. Like, the vast majority of all blogging, reviewing, commenting (across all media) has been centered around vgchartz (main site and forums), N4G and other HAVAMedia-owned sites, and N4G forums since I became a member here ('09). Considering the idea of making a YT channel and/or blogspot in the future, but that's something I'm iffy about.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 96d ago
Liqu1d96d ago Show
Baza96d ago Show
rainslacker96d ago (Edited 96d ago )

I don't think Tom Chick is coolbeans. Coolbeans write's reviews for 4G, and his writing style is better, and he can at least make salient points in his review. There are times when I feel he gets off track, and maybe too opinionated on things that don't have much to do with the game in those reviews, but never would I see him rate a game like TR as a two, as he is very capable of recognizing when games do things right on a technical level.

As far as if he's funneling clicks to a site, I couldn't say. I don't pay attention, but I know he used to be a frequent contributor to the site before he became a mod, and I don't think he backed off because of becoming a mod.

CarlDechance96d ago (Edited 96d ago )

There is obviously a relationship there. He is the only one posting the content and he is the first to defend the site when people call it out. Just check the history.

rainslacker96d ago

Eh, I never paid attention to his comments on the site itself, so I couldn't make that judgement.

I've known coolbeans on this site for a long time. Long before he was a mod. He was always pretty fair in his comments, and made really good comments, which he doesn't do as much anymore.

Its worth noting that some sites only have one person posting their content, and beans justifies all sort of content on this site because it doesn't break the rules.

I really don't want to sound like I'm defending him here, because I really haven't paid attention to him on this matter. But I think maybe some more evidence is warranted before calling him out.

That being said, I still hold firm that he isn't Tom Chick. The writing style is just too different.

coolbeans95d ago (Edited 95d ago )

I appreciate the compliment and insight of my reviews. And, while I understand you're not actively trying to defend me without knowing all the details, I also appreciate it. In respect to CarlDechance's "first to defend the site" accusation, I'd say he's correct in personifying it in that way (though the logic to saying that equals a "relationship" is tenuous at best). It's easier for people to fathom a conspiracy of me secretly being a reviewer they vehemently dislike instead of me simply being some joe who respects his work and shares it on my go-to platform.

Ironically enough, the vast majority of my defense put up for him is something I wanted to point out in your comment:

"... but never would I see him rate a game like TR as a two, as he is very capable of recognizing when games do things right on a technical level."

Well, that's not really what he's going for though. Technical proficiency doesn't influence his hate it/love it scale and I don't think it should. *insert deeper explanation here*

^That right there is what you're going to find in the majority of my defensive comments of Qt3. And I briefly mentioned why in one of my past blogs: https://n4g.com/user/blogpo...

Having said all that, I genuinely forgot some important things from my first two comments that I want to relay to you, publicly, so I don't get accused of hiding anything. It'll be open for anyone wanting to come back through and you'll personally know the fullest extent of...whatever "relationship" I have with the guy (outside of me posting link to all his reviews on N4G). So here's an addendum to my previous comment:

-I follow him and several other game reviewers on twitter
-I can specifically remember two instances of publicly discussing something with him via twitter:
+recommending Oxenfree to him when he asked what to play over a weekend or night (can't remember which)
+a brief conversation regarding Hell or High Water (movie)

There you go. Exclusive access to everything I can ever recall between me and him.

rainslacker95d ago

Whether he was going for, it's a review with a score attached. Since technical proficiency is very important to the quality of a game, it seems that it should make up a rather significant portion of the score, because anything else beyond that tends to be very subjective.

Yay or Nay type reviews are fine, if someone wants to make assessments in such a black and white way, but leave the score out of it. There is nothing saying that reviews have to have scores, and not attaching a score, means someone actually does have to read it to know how the reviewer felt about it. When people see a score like this, they just make the assessment that the reviewer is being unfair, and the content of the review itself is usually not even considered.

coolbeans92d ago

Well...I can follow that line of logic to a point. I guess the thing that gets me is trying to meet someone halfway; in this case, Qt3's template is just "Hey! I focus on rating games like one would on Netflix's scoring system. Just like technically-sound movies are capable of being hated so too can that apply to games." When you walk into those reviews understanding that, the 1/5 or 2/5 complaints just don't register with me anymore.

I know that doesn't cover what could be the full extent of our discussion on this (or your points in most recent comment). I just wanted to give a brief acknowledgment of your response. B/c my main focus is on the suspicion of being Tom Chick, or personally knowing him which this has evolved to; then again, now I'm dealing with another accusation of having ANOTHER alt on here which I can't defend since I've spent all my comments there already. I guess this is going to be a theme on here for me. -__-

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 92d ago
+ Show (8) more repliesLast reply 92d ago
Show all comments (88)
The story is too old to be commented.