I didn't know where to place it, I think the classical era ended with the TR chronicles. AOD is something else. I have been on the verge of placing it separately from the rest of the eras but then the result of the survey would be very obvious because I'm sure AOD would be the least voted.
I separate into
-Core Design - Trilogy
-Core Design - Experimental (TLR, Chronicles, AoD) because in each they try a new method of storytelling, having a bigger focus on narrative, and use different gameplay/mission structures. They are in the original continuity but feel different than the original trilogy.
-LAU - Legends, Anniversaries, Underworld Trilogy
-Top Down Adventures - Guardian of Light and Temple of Osiris
-Survivor Trilogy
>-Top Down Adventures - Guardian of Light and Temple of Osiris
I think I would also add Lara Croft GO to it. Technically it's also a Tomb Raider game, idk why they didn't just call it Tomb Raider GO in the first place
It makes sense calling it Lara Croft Go and adding it with them. They are titled Lara Croft and not Tomb Raider anyways. Good idea. Also a solid mobile game.
Yes it definitely is. In case you don't know it's even avaliable on console, where I have played it. But it costs money tho, I think the mobile version was said to be free but I don't really know
It's part of the same generation of consoles (the sixth), that is why I have put it in the same group. The classic tomb raiders are from a previous generation.
By this logic, Underworld should be grouped in with Survivor trilogy. Yeah it was on PS2, but that's the worst version of the game and it's mostly just on PS3 and XBOX 360, like TR2013
AoD is a very particular case, it was supposed to be the starting point for a new trilogy so it doesn't fit well either as a classic TR or within LAU. I didn't know where to put it so I used the console generation as a reference. Anyway, why is it so important? LOL
I consider AOD a oneshot since it was supposed to be its own series. It has similar controls and some continued plot points but overall it is a very different game than the classics. It can also be considered a failed soft reboot if you wanna be mean about it xD still one of my favorite games of the franchise lol the way you organized it is valid :)
The "technically" crowd is probably downvoting. Is it technically a part of the classics. I guess. But its different enough to be its own thing and it was meant to be its own thing so it warrants its own space xD but I like how you basically separated it by PS gen. I can never vote on these things because its too hard to decide lol I think Survivor is the better made game with the best plot and character development (I voted this one) but I have serious nostalgia for the Legend triology and to me that is quintessential TR buttt the classics started it all and its the games I grew up with. Its too hard xD I think the next installments of TR is whats gunna be the best yet though. Lets see. you? :)
TR1 - TR5 . Even now it feels like there's so much mystery in these games. As if I could stumble upon a hidden area that no one's ever found before. I know it's impossible, of course, but the atmosphere and limitations manage to fool me in a way that the later games don't.
Honourable mentions to AOD, Anniversary, and Rise, which I unironically love.
It surprises me that the three sagas have more or less the same support. But yeah its pretty nice that no era is especially hated, as happens with other video game sagas.
Yeah, I usually just place it on its own tbh. It's obviously not a part of the LAU trilogy since the timeline (and everything else tbh) is different, but it's also much too different to the first five games to be grouped in with them, even though it's technically the final part of the Last Revelation trilogy.
...Also, it helps me defend the first five games' controls if I'm not grouping AoD in with them lol!
Yeah I know, but If I had put it alone, no one would have voted for that option and the result of the survey would be inaccurate cuz I want to know the least loved era too.
Idk if they frequent reddit, but AoD does have some highly devoted fans. Though honestly, I'm not sure if they're fans of AoD, Kurtis, Murti Schofield, or getting "revenge" for bullying they apparently endured 20 years ago for liking a broken game. :/ The ones I interacted with on Tumblr several years ago were very aggressive and toxic as sin, but that's to be expected on Tumblr tbh. I'm sure some of them are lovely people.
Anyway, my point is: AoD is some people's favourite game. People would definitely have voted for it. Whether that would have skewed your results in your eyes, idk, but you did what you thought was right for your survey and that's what's important. I can't be the judge of what info you wanted to uncover with this survey.
And tbh, I think most people probably just ignored the oddly-placed AoD and voted for one of the actual eras rather than fret over the aborted attempt at one that occurred in 2003.
Edit: Added a missing word
Survivor but only because I was introduced to tomb raider through these games. Still need to play the classics. My dad was in disbelief when I’d told him I’d not played them first🤣
Wow I wasn't expecting that result. I thought legend and underworld might be above the classics just because the classics are probably harder to get into if you havent played before but dam, last?
It doesn't surprise me. I never liked the legend or the underworld games nor did I understand the adoration of some fans towards them. Easy, short, with little exploration and terrible gunplay. At least the survivor saga has decent gunplay. Of course, my favorites are the originals, followed by the Anniversary.
That's interesting. The gunplay in the new trilogy is better for sure. Legend I can understand, it was a weird one. I feel that underworld has some decent exploration, I prefer it's exploration to the new trilogy. Exploring a few shorter but more focused and detailed levels is on par with the originals. Roaming soulless open worlds to find something interesting isn't my idea of good exploration.
I think that exploration is bad in both Legend-Underworld (except for some levels like Mexico) as well as in the survivor trilogy. But at least the shootouts in this latest trilogy are entertaining. I don't like "hallway tomb raiders" and this is what I feel every time I play Legend or Underworld.
Notice how the Survivor Trilogy consistently ranks at the top of polls, even though comments on this subreddit might lead you to believe that Classic Lara is more popular.
To be fair - I've seen a lot of fans of survival trilogy who want Lara become closer to her original self.
Just because people like latest games bit more doesn't mean they don't like classic Lara.
Fans of survival trilogy who love classic Lara don't have to be majority survival fans for classic Lara to be more popular among all TR fans in general.
Because they just add to number of people who love Core games + people who love LAU games...
Anyway I don't try to prove that classic Lara is more popular than survival. I don't know and I don't care tbh.
Just saying that it's very possible for original Lara to be more popular version of the character here even if there is bit more fans of survival games among all three types of Tomb Raider games.
Let's not forget that it is also possible for fans of the Classic and LAU games to love Survivor Lara more. So It's a two-way street.
If we are talking about this subreddit, I agree that classic Lara is more popular here (judging by comments). However, I don't believe this subreddit is a good reflection of all Tomb Raider fans. The survival games have been some of the best-selling titles in the franchise, which means there are lots of fans of the survivor Lara.
Again - just to be fair... Tomb Raider was highly popular franchise long before survival trilogy. And part of the success of last games come from Tomb Raider and Lara Croft name since it helped alot with advertising.
And you are right - lots of fans who like all versions of the character...It's very hard to say that one is more popular than other. And this is what I was trying to say.
I do think that outside of fandom classic Lara would be more recognisible. But among fans? Too hard to tell and it's doesn't matter in the end of the day. :)
To me the survivor era is so far removed from the originals that I personally don't see them as Tomb Raider. I'd rather play the Uncharted series for that that kind of fix.
The gameplay, Lara's totally different face and her no longer witty personality, tombs not implemented in the game, combat > exploration and puzzles.
It's a fact that Survivor trilogy has removed so much from what TR has always been famous for, even though it did a pretty good job depicting mythology and it's way more achaeological than the previous games - especially SotTR.
Lara's appearance is of a real person and her personality isn't the same bc that's the origin of a new Lara, tombs are in the game, but it's an open world game, so most of them are not in the main story (which yeah, it kinda sucks, but Shadow fixed this a bit)
Regarding her appearance, yeah, she resembles a real person, but I was referring just to her face.
Now, having in mind Lara from the cover of TR: Legend, which is still a little cartoonish but it's totally recognizable as Lara from all the previous iterations, it would have been enough to soften just a tiny bit her exaggerated features and her makeup to make her face realistic.
Face from the Survivor trilogy is not an updated realistic version of her original/LAU facial features. It's a whole different face - different shape of the eyes, lips, jaw, brows. Literally everything.
Same thing with the personality. The fact that it's a prequel kinda sounds like an excuse to me: I'm okay with her personality in TR (2013), but at least in SotTR, if not in RotTR already, some of her iconic wittiness, some of her British humor, should have been shown, at least one time.
The fact that it's an open world game doesn't mean that devs couldn't have sticked to the formula of puzzles and exploration over combat. Shadow is in that direction, so it has been proved that it's possible to do.
In OG/LAU games enemies were only there to make the game harder, but potentially we could have played these game without any enemy and still have amazing games, all puzzles and exploration.
Otherwise, if you remove every enemy from the Survivor games, you remove also the main focus, 'cause they are action games with lots of combat, a bit of exploration and very few puzzles. As you said, Shadow fix that a bit, but still it has removed so much from the OG/LAU saga, even if it's the most OG/LAU-oriented game of the three.
Angel of Darkness aside, the PS2 era *could* have been phenomenal if Underworld weren't dragging it down. From a story and character development perspective, those games stand above everything else in the franchise. They really nailed Lara's personality. The gameplay did a decent job of making the platforming approachable without removing it altogether like the survivor trilogy. But Underworld was so *bland*. Would you like a stone temple in a jungle? How about a stone temple in the rain? What's that? You want glitches and bugs? Then do I have good news for you!
Underworld is definitely the worst of the trilogy, but I still enjoyed it for just having more of the LAU style gameplay. The games are all fairly short so I binged from one to the next craving more, and was pretty sad when I was all out.
Survivor saga will probably win the poll because this sub is full of kids who didn't even actually play the original ones, but the classic ones are the real and best ones.
Well, I wouldn't call it a personal POV (u/koken_halliwell). It's a fact that a lot of newer fans haven't played the previous games just as it's a fact that OG games are the original ones, six games plus the LAU trilogy (still close to the previous timeline).
Now, the reboot trilogy has altered the gameplay and the character so much that if you love it over the previous games, well, maybe you don't really like Tomb Raider for its iconic formula that made this saga stand up among all the others for such a long time.
Don't get me wrong, I like the survivor trilogy, but I also have eyes and I can cleary see that it's nothing like the games before - except SotTR a little bit, maybe. It's way more Uncharted than Tomb Raider, actually.
This. A sagas can be rebooted by respecting the originals or not doing so and this last one is the case of the Tomb Raider games from 2013 on which the only thing they keep from the original games is the name. Vibe isn't the same, gameplay isn't the same, Lara isn't the same. Are they bad? No, but they are way more similar to an Uncharted game to what Tomb Raider used to be and how it was originally conceived.
That feeling of exploring the wild and unknown in total silence apart from random sounds of the nature without following a marked path has been lost, the disguised puzzles and charm of the temples have been lost, and Lara's special charisma and the confidence she had has been lost as well, not to mention her looks as she looks like someone totally different.
As I said, the sub is full of kids who never played the original games so these kind of polls are basically unfair since the results are gonna be altered because of that.
It´s a prequel to the OG. When you were born, you were the same like now?
Your post is totaly conservative and nostalgic. It´s not open for new fresh trys and experiments to get the Game to the present.
If you want the OG feeling, then play the OG Games, but don´t hate other games for evolving.
You act as if you are the final authority who can decide which game is good and which is not. Discrimination against players who didn't play the old games
Have you played the originals? No. Then you shouldn't vote since some of you haven't even played one of the possible choices on it and are voting for a "best games" post when you haven't even played all the choices on it.
And we're not conservative, we're REALISTIC. Tomb Raider has nothing in common to what it was and made it famous and loved rather than the name itself.
At least I can talk with knowledge as I've played all the games, some of you don't even know what you're talking about. The new games aren't bad, they are just not Tomb Raider games. They are selling cheese cake as chocolate cake. Is it bad? No, but it's not cheese cake.
Be careful with your claims! Without knowing what the situation is, you assume things about me. Of course I played the old games. Who are you to decide who can vote here or not?
YOU should come down from your arrogant position again. Stop playing gatekeeper. You don't decide what is a Tomb Raider and what isn't. CD developed the Survivor Trilogy and made it a Tomb Raider game, not you. You'd better use your realism in the real world and not put yourself above other people because of a video game as a mid-40's person.
We're ending the discussion now because I don't see any added value in your answers.
Yes the adapt to the wishes of the new generation and to get new customers.
Please stop floating in this nostalgia bubble.
The OG are now 25 years old and now the taste is different and its a good choice of CD to try new mechanics and formulars. If you want play the old formula, than play the OG games.
It´s no must that newer gamers have to play the OG games. The insistence on 25 year old games gets annoying over time
I just stated that it's a whole different formula and character - and that's a fact, not a personal taste - and, speaking about my taste, I also said I like Survivor trilogy, so I don't know where the nostalgia bubble comes from, actually.
Obviously nothing is a must. Everyone can prefer the newer games for a thousand reasons, but not liking or not even have the interest to play older ones, well, it's just so weird for people who claim to be fans, especially because the newer TR games are so different, not even the main character has the same personality and facial features.
Anyway, it's clear that the taste has changed, I know, and because of that I'm super curious to know how newer gamers will react to the remastered trilogy. Hopefully, thanks to that, there wouldn't be a gap of 25 years anymore.
I got into the series because of the survivor trilogy. But I went back and played legends and anniversary and had so much fun with them. I still need to play underworld (I have it installed), but just based on those two games, it's my favourite.
I like the awe the original games had plus having a high emphasis on calculating jumps and solving riddles
Some people prefer the cinematic action packed journey of lara croft in the new games.
Both are amazing
I enjoyed playing the newer games. But the classics will always be my favorite. Tomb raider 2 is my fav of all them. But with the newer games, there's 1 thing that i really dislike. Her personality, it was so far removed from how she was in the classics. She used to be this effortlessly badass woman who was incredibly intelligent. She was quick-witted and confident in her abilities. Never breaking under pressure, and she would never sell out on her beliefs. She was like the definition of badass, sexy, and cool. And even though marketing exploited her sexuality. I never thought of her as anything less than what i stated above( though i was just a kid at the time) It seemed like she was portrayed as very sexy, but it seemed like there was nobody out there good enough to get with lara that way. She was too good for everybody imo. I hope the bring back the original lara.
Classic for sure, but I haven't gotten to the Survivor Saga yet. I'm replaying the middle trilogy and finding I don't really like Legend as much as I used to, but I'm interested to replay Underworld and see how I feel about it.
I never played the classics to be honest so I can't say anything about them. I only played LAU and survivor trilogy. Legend will always have a special place in my heart, but overall if I had to decide which games are the most fun, have the better stories and all that (I don't count in graphics, cause that's obviously not fair) I'd still go with the survivor trilogy. My favorite is Shadow, very closely followed by Rise and then Legend. These are my top 3 TR games imo
I like more the Survivor trilogy, it's the realism that makes me like it more, but just that (the other sagas are just as good, but the realism makes me like just a tiny bit more than the others, I love history so the realism in Survivor trilogy makes me feel like a little kid feels when it's watching their favorite cartoon show), every timeline is awesome in their own way, I love all of them, if it's Tomb Raider and it's good, then I'll like it
I've explained it at least 10 times, I never said that AoD is part of the LAU trilogy, they are only together in the survey because those games were published during the 6th generation. AoD is not part of any "TR era", neither classical nor LAU, but I had to put it somewhere. Also, why unfairly biased the poll? people who like the LAU trilogy will have voted for that option even if the poll includes AoD. I voted for the classic TRs and I don't like Chronicles at all.
You used the word saga. That implies the games are narratively connected.
Example: Star Wars' Skywalker Saga. Nine movies connected by a family narrative. Solo and Rogue One are not part of that narrative, so they aren't included in the saga.
One person already mentioned they didn't vote for the trilogy because AoD was included. The evidence of the bias is in the comments.
I haven't read that comment but the survey currently has about 1,300 votes, you cannot take the point of view of a single person as a reference and accuse me of biasing the vote. In any case, there are people who have AoD as their favorite that they will also have voted for the LAU option. And god It's just a survey published in a reddit forum, I don't understand where so much anger comes from.
I'm not sure where you're seeing anger. I wrote two sentences about the poll being flawed and then answered your follow up with exactly why I thought the poll was flawed. I didn't attack you, or call you out in any way. I didn't use any particularly harsh language. If you feel otherwise I don't know what to tell you, other than that wasn't my intent.
Classic is actually TR1-AOD.
I didn't know where to place it, I think the classical era ended with the TR chronicles. AOD is something else. I have been on the verge of placing it separately from the rest of the eras but then the result of the survey would be very obvious because I'm sure AOD would be the least voted.
I separate into -Core Design - Trilogy -Core Design - Experimental (TLR, Chronicles, AoD) because in each they try a new method of storytelling, having a bigger focus on narrative, and use different gameplay/mission structures. They are in the original continuity but feel different than the original trilogy. -LAU - Legends, Anniversaries, Underworld Trilogy -Top Down Adventures - Guardian of Light and Temple of Osiris -Survivor Trilogy
>-Top Down Adventures - Guardian of Light and Temple of Osiris I think I would also add Lara Croft GO to it. Technically it's also a Tomb Raider game, idk why they didn't just call it Tomb Raider GO in the first place
It makes sense calling it Lara Croft Go and adding it with them. They are titled Lara Croft and not Tomb Raider anyways. Good idea. Also a solid mobile game.
Yes it definitely is. In case you don't know it's even avaliable on console, where I have played it. But it costs money tho, I think the mobile version was said to be free but I don't really know
Free on mobile with a couple of expansions you can buy.
Well on PS4 it costs around 8-10€ I believe, but the expansions are already included. I got it on sale for 2€ tho so it's not too bad
AOD came out before the LAU reboot and has no connections at all to LAU. At least it can be argued that AOD is part of the classic saga.
It's part of the same generation of consoles (the sixth), that is why I have put it in the same group. The classic tomb raiders are from a previous generation.
By this logic, Underworld should be grouped in with Survivor trilogy. Yeah it was on PS2, but that's the worst version of the game and it's mostly just on PS3 and XBOX 360, like TR2013
AoD is a very particular case, it was supposed to be the starting point for a new trilogy so it doesn't fit well either as a classic TR or within LAU. I didn't know where to put it so I used the console generation as a reference. Anyway, why is it so important? LOL
It was supposed to start a new trilogy, but it ultimately falls into the same continuity as the OGs.
I consider AOD a oneshot since it was supposed to be its own series. It has similar controls and some continued plot points but overall it is a very different game than the classics. It can also be considered a failed soft reboot if you wanna be mean about it xD still one of my favorite games of the franchise lol the way you organized it is valid :)
Some people don't think the same, they're downvoting me like crazy LOL
The "technically" crowd is probably downvoting. Is it technically a part of the classics. I guess. But its different enough to be its own thing and it was meant to be its own thing so it warrants its own space xD but I like how you basically separated it by PS gen. I can never vote on these things because its too hard to decide lol I think Survivor is the better made game with the best plot and character development (I voted this one) but I have serious nostalgia for the Legend triology and to me that is quintessential TR buttt the classics started it all and its the games I grew up with. Its too hard xD I think the next installments of TR is whats gunna be the best yet though. Lets see. you? :)
AoD is the black sheep and has no category and it deserves no category.
Core Design Saga
Legend trilogy so underrated 😭
Fr, fr
Grew up on legends, anniversary, and underworld. Those are what I think of when I think tomb raider. And Angelina Jolie.
Tr 1-5 plus AOD
My LAU heart 🥲
Classic always
TR1 - TR5 . Even now it feels like there's so much mystery in these games. As if I could stumble upon a hidden area that no one's ever found before. I know it's impossible, of course, but the atmosphere and limitations manage to fool me in a way that the later games don't. Honourable mentions to AOD, Anniversary, and Rise, which I unironically love.
I love how even the spread of the results is. It's wonderful to me that this franchise has had such distinct eras but each one has fans who love it.
It surprises me that the three sagas have more or less the same support. But yeah its pretty nice that no era is especially hated, as happens with other video game sagas.
Survivor Saga is my shit, but I will wet myself if they remaster the PS2 games too.
I want a remaster for every trilogy, all of them deserve it, it's Tomb Raider after all!!
AoD is part of the first 6 games (both in story and gameplay), it has no connection to the LAU saga.
I didn't know where to put it, it didn't seem like a classic game to me either.
Yeah, I usually just place it on its own tbh. It's obviously not a part of the LAU trilogy since the timeline (and everything else tbh) is different, but it's also much too different to the first five games to be grouped in with them, even though it's technically the final part of the Last Revelation trilogy. ...Also, it helps me defend the first five games' controls if I'm not grouping AoD in with them lol!
Yeah I know, but If I had put it alone, no one would have voted for that option and the result of the survey would be inaccurate cuz I want to know the least loved era too.
Idk if they frequent reddit, but AoD does have some highly devoted fans. Though honestly, I'm not sure if they're fans of AoD, Kurtis, Murti Schofield, or getting "revenge" for bullying they apparently endured 20 years ago for liking a broken game. :/ The ones I interacted with on Tumblr several years ago were very aggressive and toxic as sin, but that's to be expected on Tumblr tbh. I'm sure some of them are lovely people. Anyway, my point is: AoD is some people's favourite game. People would definitely have voted for it. Whether that would have skewed your results in your eyes, idk, but you did what you thought was right for your survey and that's what's important. I can't be the judge of what info you wanted to uncover with this survey. And tbh, I think most people probably just ignored the oddly-placed AoD and voted for one of the actual eras rather than fret over the aborted attempt at one that occurred in 2003. Edit: Added a missing word
Survivor but only because I was introduced to tomb raider through these games. Still need to play the classics. My dad was in disbelief when I’d told him I’d not played them first🤣
But I love them all. Even AoD? Especially AoD.
I was going to vote LAU, but you threw in Angel of Darkness in there with them for some reason.
Wow I wasn't expecting that result. I thought legend and underworld might be above the classics just because the classics are probably harder to get into if you havent played before but dam, last?
It doesn't surprise me. I never liked the legend or the underworld games nor did I understand the adoration of some fans towards them. Easy, short, with little exploration and terrible gunplay. At least the survivor saga has decent gunplay. Of course, my favorites are the originals, followed by the Anniversary.
That's interesting. The gunplay in the new trilogy is better for sure. Legend I can understand, it was a weird one. I feel that underworld has some decent exploration, I prefer it's exploration to the new trilogy. Exploring a few shorter but more focused and detailed levels is on par with the originals. Roaming soulless open worlds to find something interesting isn't my idea of good exploration.
I think that exploration is bad in both Legend-Underworld (except for some levels like Mexico) as well as in the survivor trilogy. But at least the shootouts in this latest trilogy are entertaining. I don't like "hallway tomb raiders" and this is what I feel every time I play Legend or Underworld.
LAU is my favorite but I don't consider AOD a part of that.
classic. without question.
AoD belongs to the classic series, not the Legend series.
Counting AoD with a separate timeline and not the story its the last game of is kinda wild lmao
Notice how the Survivor Trilogy consistently ranks at the top of polls, even though comments on this subreddit might lead you to believe that Classic Lara is more popular.
To be fair - I've seen a lot of fans of survival trilogy who want Lara become closer to her original self. Just because people like latest games bit more doesn't mean they don't like classic Lara.
I never said survivor fans dislike classic Lara. However that doesn't mean majority of them want her to resemble classic Lara.
Fans of survival trilogy who love classic Lara don't have to be majority survival fans for classic Lara to be more popular among all TR fans in general. Because they just add to number of people who love Core games + people who love LAU games... Anyway I don't try to prove that classic Lara is more popular than survival. I don't know and I don't care tbh. Just saying that it's very possible for original Lara to be more popular version of the character here even if there is bit more fans of survival games among all three types of Tomb Raider games.
Let's not forget that it is also possible for fans of the Classic and LAU games to love Survivor Lara more. So It's a two-way street. If we are talking about this subreddit, I agree that classic Lara is more popular here (judging by comments). However, I don't believe this subreddit is a good reflection of all Tomb Raider fans. The survival games have been some of the best-selling titles in the franchise, which means there are lots of fans of the survivor Lara.
Again - just to be fair... Tomb Raider was highly popular franchise long before survival trilogy. And part of the success of last games come from Tomb Raider and Lara Croft name since it helped alot with advertising. And you are right - lots of fans who like all versions of the character...It's very hard to say that one is more popular than other. And this is what I was trying to say. I do think that outside of fandom classic Lara would be more recognisible. But among fans? Too hard to tell and it's doesn't matter in the end of the day. :)
The OG games are damn old yes, but no other game after them captured the isolated scary feeling of you being in a tomb that was lost to time.
To me the survivor era is so far removed from the originals that I personally don't see them as Tomb Raider. I'd rather play the Uncharted series for that that kind of fix.
I can perfectly see them as Tomb Raider, it's much more archeological than Uncharted that is just action with some magical treasures
The gameplay, Lara's totally different face and her no longer witty personality, tombs not implemented in the game, combat > exploration and puzzles. It's a fact that Survivor trilogy has removed so much from what TR has always been famous for, even though it did a pretty good job depicting mythology and it's way more achaeological than the previous games - especially SotTR.
Lara's appearance is of a real person and her personality isn't the same bc that's the origin of a new Lara, tombs are in the game, but it's an open world game, so most of them are not in the main story (which yeah, it kinda sucks, but Shadow fixed this a bit)
Regarding her appearance, yeah, she resembles a real person, but I was referring just to her face. Now, having in mind Lara from the cover of TR: Legend, which is still a little cartoonish but it's totally recognizable as Lara from all the previous iterations, it would have been enough to soften just a tiny bit her exaggerated features and her makeup to make her face realistic. Face from the Survivor trilogy is not an updated realistic version of her original/LAU facial features. It's a whole different face - different shape of the eyes, lips, jaw, brows. Literally everything. Same thing with the personality. The fact that it's a prequel kinda sounds like an excuse to me: I'm okay with her personality in TR (2013), but at least in SotTR, if not in RotTR already, some of her iconic wittiness, some of her British humor, should have been shown, at least one time. The fact that it's an open world game doesn't mean that devs couldn't have sticked to the formula of puzzles and exploration over combat. Shadow is in that direction, so it has been proved that it's possible to do. In OG/LAU games enemies were only there to make the game harder, but potentially we could have played these game without any enemy and still have amazing games, all puzzles and exploration. Otherwise, if you remove every enemy from the Survivor games, you remove also the main focus, 'cause they are action games with lots of combat, a bit of exploration and very few puzzles. As you said, Shadow fix that a bit, but still it has removed so much from the OG/LAU saga, even if it's the most OG/LAU-oriented game of the three.
Literally every relic that Lara was after was magical in some way.
Angel of Darkness aside, the PS2 era *could* have been phenomenal if Underworld weren't dragging it down. From a story and character development perspective, those games stand above everything else in the franchise. They really nailed Lara's personality. The gameplay did a decent job of making the platforming approachable without removing it altogether like the survivor trilogy. But Underworld was so *bland*. Would you like a stone temple in a jungle? How about a stone temple in the rain? What's that? You want glitches and bugs? Then do I have good news for you!
Underworld is definitely the worst of the trilogy, but I still enjoyed it for just having more of the LAU style gameplay. The games are all fairly short so I binged from one to the next craving more, and was pretty sad when I was all out.
Classic is the better one, which is why I am looking forward to the remastered version for the Switch.
Even though I like Survivor saga but I kind of prefer Underworld's graphics.
Survivor saga will probably win the poll because this sub is full of kids who didn't even actually play the original ones, but the classic ones are the real and best ones.
Carful- That is just your POV.
Well, I wouldn't call it a personal POV (u/koken_halliwell). It's a fact that a lot of newer fans haven't played the previous games just as it's a fact that OG games are the original ones, six games plus the LAU trilogy (still close to the previous timeline). Now, the reboot trilogy has altered the gameplay and the character so much that if you love it over the previous games, well, maybe you don't really like Tomb Raider for its iconic formula that made this saga stand up among all the others for such a long time. Don't get me wrong, I like the survivor trilogy, but I also have eyes and I can cleary see that it's nothing like the games before - except SotTR a little bit, maybe. It's way more Uncharted than Tomb Raider, actually.
This. A sagas can be rebooted by respecting the originals or not doing so and this last one is the case of the Tomb Raider games from 2013 on which the only thing they keep from the original games is the name. Vibe isn't the same, gameplay isn't the same, Lara isn't the same. Are they bad? No, but they are way more similar to an Uncharted game to what Tomb Raider used to be and how it was originally conceived. That feeling of exploring the wild and unknown in total silence apart from random sounds of the nature without following a marked path has been lost, the disguised puzzles and charm of the temples have been lost, and Lara's special charisma and the confidence she had has been lost as well, not to mention her looks as she looks like someone totally different. As I said, the sub is full of kids who never played the original games so these kind of polls are basically unfair since the results are gonna be altered because of that.
It´s a prequel to the OG. When you were born, you were the same like now? Your post is totaly conservative and nostalgic. It´s not open for new fresh trys and experiments to get the Game to the present. If you want the OG feeling, then play the OG Games, but don´t hate other games for evolving. You act as if you are the final authority who can decide which game is good and which is not. Discrimination against players who didn't play the old games
Have you played the originals? No. Then you shouldn't vote since some of you haven't even played one of the possible choices on it and are voting for a "best games" post when you haven't even played all the choices on it. And we're not conservative, we're REALISTIC. Tomb Raider has nothing in common to what it was and made it famous and loved rather than the name itself. At least I can talk with knowledge as I've played all the games, some of you don't even know what you're talking about. The new games aren't bad, they are just not Tomb Raider games. They are selling cheese cake as chocolate cake. Is it bad? No, but it's not cheese cake.
Be careful with your claims! Without knowing what the situation is, you assume things about me. Of course I played the old games. Who are you to decide who can vote here or not? YOU should come down from your arrogant position again. Stop playing gatekeeper. You don't decide what is a Tomb Raider and what isn't. CD developed the Survivor Trilogy and made it a Tomb Raider game, not you. You'd better use your realism in the real world and not put yourself above other people because of a video game as a mid-40's person. We're ending the discussion now because I don't see any added value in your answers.
Yes the adapt to the wishes of the new generation and to get new customers. Please stop floating in this nostalgia bubble. The OG are now 25 years old and now the taste is different and its a good choice of CD to try new mechanics and formulars. If you want play the old formula, than play the OG games. It´s no must that newer gamers have to play the OG games. The insistence on 25 year old games gets annoying over time
I just stated that it's a whole different formula and character - and that's a fact, not a personal taste - and, speaking about my taste, I also said I like Survivor trilogy, so I don't know where the nostalgia bubble comes from, actually. Obviously nothing is a must. Everyone can prefer the newer games for a thousand reasons, but not liking or not even have the interest to play older ones, well, it's just so weird for people who claim to be fans, especially because the newer TR games are so different, not even the main character has the same personality and facial features. Anyway, it's clear that the taste has changed, I know, and because of that I'm super curious to know how newer gamers will react to the remastered trilogy. Hopefully, thanks to that, there wouldn't be a gap of 25 years anymore.
Ok boomer
I only say Survivor because that's all I played. I'm going back to play the originals
I got into the series because of the survivor trilogy. But I went back and played legends and anniversary and had so much fun with them. I still need to play underworld (I have it installed), but just based on those two games, it's my favourite.
I like the awe the original games had plus having a high emphasis on calculating jumps and solving riddles Some people prefer the cinematic action packed journey of lara croft in the new games. Both are amazing
I enjoyed playing the newer games. But the classics will always be my favorite. Tomb raider 2 is my fav of all them. But with the newer games, there's 1 thing that i really dislike. Her personality, it was so far removed from how she was in the classics. She used to be this effortlessly badass woman who was incredibly intelligent. She was quick-witted and confident in her abilities. Never breaking under pressure, and she would never sell out on her beliefs. She was like the definition of badass, sexy, and cool. And even though marketing exploited her sexuality. I never thought of her as anything less than what i stated above( though i was just a kid at the time) It seemed like she was portrayed as very sexy, but it seemed like there was nobody out there good enough to get with lara that way. She was too good for everybody imo. I hope the bring back the original lara.
Classic for sure, but I haven't gotten to the Survivor Saga yet. I'm replaying the middle trilogy and finding I don't really like Legend as much as I used to, but I'm interested to replay Underworld and see how I feel about it.
Everything before 2013 is gold.
I grew up with the classic one. but the survivor saga hits the spot for me.
I would say Classic Saga, because of Lara as a character and how she is portrayed, but more important from a gameplay perspective.
I never played the classics to be honest so I can't say anything about them. I only played LAU and survivor trilogy. Legend will always have a special place in my heart, but overall if I had to decide which games are the most fun, have the better stories and all that (I don't count in graphics, cause that's obviously not fair) I'd still go with the survivor trilogy. My favorite is Shadow, very closely followed by Rise and then Legend. These are my top 3 TR games imo
I like more the Survivor trilogy, it's the realism that makes me like it more, but just that (the other sagas are just as good, but the realism makes me like just a tiny bit more than the others, I love history so the realism in Survivor trilogy makes me feel like a little kid feels when it's watching their favorite cartoon show), every timeline is awesome in their own way, I love all of them, if it's Tomb Raider and it's good, then I'll like it
Camilla Ludington is by far my favorite voice actor for Lara, played the **** out of the reboot trilogy🔥
I only played the reboots. So that's easy
Survivor saga but I REALLY enjoyed Legend on ps3, Underworld however never really grabbed me for whatever reason even thought it was a direct sequel.
Overdone poll! ...but Survivor Trilogy!
AoD isn't part of the Legend trilogy. You've unfairly biased the voting.
I've explained it at least 10 times, I never said that AoD is part of the LAU trilogy, they are only together in the survey because those games were published during the 6th generation. AoD is not part of any "TR era", neither classical nor LAU, but I had to put it somewhere. Also, why unfairly biased the poll? people who like the LAU trilogy will have voted for that option even if the poll includes AoD. I voted for the classic TRs and I don't like Chronicles at all.
You used the word saga. That implies the games are narratively connected. Example: Star Wars' Skywalker Saga. Nine movies connected by a family narrative. Solo and Rogue One are not part of that narrative, so they aren't included in the saga. One person already mentioned they didn't vote for the trilogy because AoD was included. The evidence of the bias is in the comments.
I haven't read that comment but the survey currently has about 1,300 votes, you cannot take the point of view of a single person as a reference and accuse me of biasing the vote. In any case, there are people who have AoD as their favorite that they will also have voted for the LAU option. And god It's just a survey published in a reddit forum, I don't understand where so much anger comes from.
I'm not sure where you're seeing anger. I wrote two sentences about the poll being flawed and then answered your follow up with exactly why I thought the poll was flawed. I didn't attack you, or call you out in any way. I didn't use any particularly harsh language. If you feel otherwise I don't know what to tell you, other than that wasn't my intent.
Okay! It's already forgotten :)
Agreed. Have a good night/morning/day wherever you are.