Tomb Raider

"What the fuck is this? This isn't Tomb Raider, Tomb Raider is meant to be about some bird with big tits running and jumping and shooting stuff."

Joke impression of how a stereotypical 14 year old internet hardman FPS player might respond to this, or a literal word-for-word dictation of what my fiancee said after playing it for about 25 minutes? You be the judge. (It was definitely my fiancee.)

Before playing it, I was a little conflicted on whether or not Tomb Raider actually needed this reboot; I grew up with this series, with Tomb Raider II being one of the first games I ever really loved, but unlike a lot of others, I feel like it did a decent job of growing up with me. Sure, the Lara Croft found on any of the PS3-era games, Tomb Raider: Underworld in particular, wasn't exactly the most three-dimensional character in the world, but she was at least relatable, strong, and - although this says more about gaming as a whole than it does about Tomb Raider's development - almost unique in the way that she was displayed as an attractive women with zero interest in men. This is not a game series that was stuck in the past with more value as a relic than as an ongoing concern, so a reboot felt slightly awkward and unnecessary.

That thought dissipated entirely within about an hour of playing it, as you get a handle on what the developers are doing with Lara Croft as a character. What's far more important and impressive, though, is what they're doing with the game overall.

Lara first, then. Tomb Raider is an origin story set a few years before the first game in the series, where Lara was presented as a highly improbable combination of gymnastic athleticism, gravitationally hilarious features, abnormal intellect, and lots and lots and lots of money. Oh, and she was unflappable in the way she stood up to terrorists and armies and dinosaurs and whatever the hell else the first two games through at her. Back in the '90s I don't know if anybody particularly questioned how silly it was, because it was just generally accepted that it was a game and if suspension of disbelief was a problem you should maybe find another hobby - it was a masturbatory fantasy, but hell, what action game (or movie, or TV show, or book....) wasn't? But standards have changed over the 15 years that have passed between Lara's debut and this reboot, with a whole raft of action characters introduced that have set the bar as high as it's ever been - and it would be remiss not to mention Uncharted's Nathan Drake as the biggest of the bunch. More on him later.

What the makers of this game needed to do, then, was bring Lara in the line with the realism we've come to expect from modern games, without creating a complete alternate timeline where the older games in the series become unbelievable. A prequel, then, was inevitable - you don't become perfect without overcoming some hurdles to get there, and those hurdles are crucial to fleshing out Lara's story. So at the start of Tomb Raider, Lara is bookish, slightly socially awkward, no longer gravitationally hilarious, excitable when it comes to archaeology (it's easy to forget sometimes that this is actually meant to be her profession), and totally alien to any kind of adversity. And very rich, of course, but this was the one part of her backstory that was always rock-solid. Within the first two hours of the game, we see her first struggles with survival, as her team crashes onto a mysterious island and she ends up separated from the group, kicked around so much you genuinely feel sorry for her, and forced to learn how to stay alive before she can try to save her friends. The game blazes through this too quickly, in all honesty - she goes from apologizing to the first deer she kills for food to indiscriminately mowing down natives faster than you can Google the spelling of 'cognitive dissonance' - but it's forgivable because it's a necessary step towards the game itself, which is brilliant in a way that's not even relevant to Lara's characterization.

Back to Nathan Drake, then. There was a general assumption before this reboot appeared on the market that Tomb Raider and Uncharted would become locked in a chicken/egg scenario, partly because Uncharted was so obviously inspired by Tomb Raider (and, in a lot of ways, beat it at its own game), and partly because the trailers for Tomb Raider looked like Uncharted. My fear, and I'm sure this was true of a lot of people, was that the 2013 version of Lara Croft would aim itself squarely at retaking its crown from Uncharted and fail, potentially doing even more damage to the franchise and the character than Tomb Raider: The Angel of Darkness did. What it actually does, though, is far more ambitious and spectacular - it aims itself squarely at basically every major action game of the past 5 years.

That's what really makes Tomb Raider such a spectacle; it plays out like a snapshot of the genre for this console generation, a grab-bag of everything good about the games that came before it. You could make a strong argument that this actually has less to do with any earlier Tomb Raider games than it does, say, Far Cry 3. Its setting certainly recalls Far Cry very strongly - both are on mysterious islands populated with nutcases and need you to rescue your kidnapped friends - but plenty of other elements recall and even improve upon plenty of other games, with the animal hunting section giving emotional heft to a simple gameplay mechanic borrowed from Red Dead Redemption and (to a lesser extent) Metal Gear Solid [メタルギアソリッド], the climbing and traversing of the environment being an gritty expansion upon similar sections in Uncharted, the greater exploration afforded to you by weapon and tool upgrades instantly recalling Batman: Arkham Asylum, and the quotes from novels found throughout the game feeling like a nod to Deus Ex. The only thing I can't trace to a specific action game is the QTEs that dominate the first hour - Heavy Rain [HEAVY RAIN 心の軋むとき] is the obvious comparison, but you certainly wouldn't call that an action game.

The temptation is to call it a rip-off - and sure, you certainly wouldn't give Tomb Raider any medals for originality - but it brings to mind one of my favourite quotes about art I've ever heard, one I've always known as being attributed to Sammy Davis Jr., but that the internet tells me has been said by damn near every famous person ever. It's the one about how if you copy one person you're a rip-off, but if you copy everyone, you're just doing your research. And that, honestly, is what it feels like the developers of this game have done; they've looked around, taken stock of everything that's going on in modern action games, and resolved to make the ultimate example of one. Being ambitious, optimistic, and insane enough to even attempt that while working under the guise of an established franchise is impressive enough, given that the cost of failure would have been so much higher here than on just about any comparable game. Achieving it is incredible. Yet achieve it they did. Posterity may later cast the 2013 Tomb Raider as a period piece, as primarily a useful example of contemporary trends, but for now it's a spectacular success, a game that manages to take on all pretenders to the throne and beat them, to likely add an extra decade or more to its heroine's lifespan, and to become undoubtedly the finest game in a series that's hardly lacking in great moments. It's a shame it came out in the same year as The Last of Us, Beyond: Two Souls, and Rocksmith 2014, really - had it been released a year earlier then it would have been the console game of the year.

Well, this is different for a tomb raider game, granted there is tomb raiding that takes place; however, this feels more like a survival horror game for the most part given how much stealth there is here compared to earlier entries. There's also a higher emphasis on story given how this reboot places us where Lara is becoming the hero she was during the ps1 era with in depth character development that was largely absent from those games.

I'm personally indifferent on the story, not because it's only the white men who die as that's actually a clever subversion of how it's normally minorities who due in these stories and yet the survivors are either women or a poc (or both in one case) rather I felt that this team she was a part of was rather abrasive towards her until the very end when she saves everyone from the villains, making Lara seem much less badass here than in her previous incarnations for saving them. I also don’t like how many elements here found their way into the abysmal 2018 film, although that's not necessarily the games fault as this came out five years prior to that cinematic disaster. Also, as much fun as I had with this game, I'd probably enjoy it more where it called resident evil as I can't stress enough how much this reminds me of re4 in particular. That game is one of my favourites of all time so it's not a big deal breaker for me by any means, but a little originality is appreciated all the same.

So, what do I like about this game them? Lots actually, admittedly they come from Resident Evil 4, you can read my review on that game for more information on what I love about these games, but to summarise, we have a good combat system, tons of secrets to explore and a likable protagonist that serves as our hero with a good move set to showcase their expansive skillset in universe. If you're OK with the tomb raider franchise dabbling with re mechanics, you won't be disappointed with this entry.

System: Steam Deck
Rating: 82/100
Playtime: ~8 1/2 Hours

A game that I wanted to play since it originally released, and have had it sitting in my Steam library for years I finally played after getting a Steam Deck.

The main positive here is just how fun the game was to play through. While the action sequences never reached the height of some of Uncharted's, there were plenty of sequences throughout and I had fun with all of them. I also don't believe the gunplay would've been revolutionary, but it wasn't frustrating, and I enjoyed that as well.
The graphics were shocking to me for the period this came out, but I'm sure playing on the smaller screen on the Deck helped with that. Speaking of the deck, the settings I played on usually stayed between 50-60 frames, but there was one town area that made it chug around 30, with frame drops.

The biggest thing holding the game back from being even better was the story. The story all along was fine, but nothing too interesting, mainly just a way to make the action make sense. There was a huge missed opportunity with the relationship between Croft and Roth. This could've been built for at least the full game, if not going into the sequels. Most of the crew that ended up on the island didn't end up being fleshed out, and that made the finale hit less than it should've. Overall the game was fun, but it could've and should've been more if the story and characters were fleshed out like it could've been.

Passable as a dumb action game, but misguided in every other aspect, and even the things it does well Uncharted does many times better.

Some incomprehensible writing choices for an *adventure* game. The message it screams at you at every turn is all you will get if you dare to go on a quest is pain, misery, and death. Where Uncharted offers genuine thrills and humanism, Tomb Raider has nothing but relentless bleakness, torture porn, and the worst edgy grimdark drivel.

Where the writing isn't outright shitty, it's so boring and standard you kind of start to pine for the grimdark edginess. I can't remember a game where i was less interested in the central conflict, lore, any of the characters, collectibles, or anything adorning the gameplay loop.

The treatment of Lara is fucking abhorent, I'm frankly shocked that two women participated in writing this piece of shit. The sleaziest slasher directors have more respect for their female characters. From the very first scene this game is all about torturing Lara as much as possible, stripping her of all powers, and making her crawl through the dirt in a supposed empowerment narrative. What a scam.

The gameplay would possibly be something I could mildly praise, if it wasn't constantly interrupted by an endless barrage of quick time events, scripted scenes, cutscenes, tutorials etc. The game never gets any rhythm going, doesn't let you explore, fully enjoy any scene or set piece or present you with anything more substantial than bite-sized challenges.

All you get to do in Tomb Raider is sit through a deeply misogynistic, desaturated, miserable mid-00s style 'thriller' while occasionally pushing a button or two, and engaging in all the worst AAA games of that period had to offer - from throwaway tacked on 'RPG' mechanics to stale cover shooter gunplay.

They didn't just make some aesthetic choices, they literally went the opposite direction, after 17 years of sleek undramatic action we get this over the top fuckfest. In the first minute Lara is already beaten up, everything is life and death here, everything explodes, everyone dies. She gets wounded every chance she gets. The official tale is that a naive girl learns to survive, a character who was Indiana Batman with boobs is now a damsel in distress who becomes her own hero. Empowering by disempowering, that's the level of absurdity we're dealing with here. This franchise went from being a platformer with some shooting to a full-on shooter with some jumping. She acts all innocent then... there she goes on a murderous rampage! Good old Tomb Raider, navigating rivers of blood, mountains of corpses and walls of fire.

She's got an arsenal at her disposal, a trusty climbing axe and magical arrows, magical rope, magical healing... She's now a mix between the guy from Far Cry (any guy) and that girl from Deadpool who's just lucky. Her character model is fine, I won't say anything about her ass, but her face looks weird. It seems deliberate, I don't get it. Anyway, it is what it is, it's a valuable IP and they put the work and the money, it's triple A alright.

The gameplay has been put down for abusing QTE's, one-button action... As a shooter, it is often undistinguishable from a graphic adventure, more so in the first couple of hours. That isn't necessarily bad, but it's extremely scripted. This heavy linearity breaks immersion, as the structure becomes blatant, and it disallows the player to try anything. Exploration has been relegated to side missions, traversal has been heavily streamlined. I'm all for linear narrative but when the player does barely count it becomes kind of insulting. Platforming isn't rewarding when it's this assisted. But at the same time, it's high tech mindless fun than anyone can enjoy.

I had more trouble with the story. For such a restrictive narrative game it barely hits the mark. Few moments achieve the intended dramatic effect, the plot is full of clichés and BS moments that simply can't be taken seriously. The writing is dead serious but the characters are cartoonish, and there is plenty of graphic violence and gore, who was this game made for? It might be made well enough for all this flaws to feel acceptable but I felt a constant disconnection to what was happening.

Now, even in this new awful format the franchise is still trailblazing. It predated The Last of Us by a couple of months and paved the way for a reboot like God of War. It'd be unfair to say it copies Uncharted, not only cause that game ripped off Tomb Raider in the first place, but also since this reboot moves away from it.

It's a weird game, sometimes it seems unsure of what personality is Lara even supposed to have. They really went out of their way to make her look terrible and hurt everywhere. The result wasn't either relatable or admirable, I found the character dull, humourless. The game is at its best when it stops trying to come up with something new every minute and stops overindulging in ridiculous setpieces. Then it becomes a brutal shooter. Not that it has anything to do with Tomb Raider, though.

Crystal Dynamics already made a reboot of sorts with their Legend trilogy, but now have decided to come up with a completely new direction. The game starts out with Lara and a science crew on a ship, as they travel to Yamatai in "Dragon’s Triangle" off the coast of Japan. A mysterious storm destroys the boat and Lara and team are stranded on this island. I thought this iteration of Lara wasn't supposed to be sexualised but the team is on a boat, with men wearing thick coats, and Lara is there with a low-cut tank top with the camera sometimes peering down her top.

Lara is captured by a cult and the first thing you will need to do is escape. The cult seems to want to find a woman to offer Himiko the Sun Queen to end the supernatural storms that prevent people from leaving the island. The mystery of the island makes me think it was influenced by Lost, although I only saw the first 2 seasons of that show.

It feels more like a horror game at the start, (then a few moments across the game), with the night-time setting, rain, and the grim cult caverns, which are littered with carcasses and human bones. Walking on piles of skulls is pretty grim.

The game seems to want to show a more realistic side to the characters (although still has the mythology like in previous games). So the game shows more emotion, mental struggles from Lara’s current experiences: scared, cold, forced to kill etc. However, she seems to soon get over this and I'm not sure the game really makes her character arc convincing at all. She does tell herself "You can do this" during several scenarios at the start, then later either deals with these situations without remark, or goes charging into dangerous situations with aggressive statements. She has definitely gained more confidence, but is it done in a convincing way?

The fact that she should have broken her back (and other bones) several times throughout the game, and should be dead by various injuries in constant falls and bullet wounds means that it isn't really setting out to be more realistic at all. It is darker thematically: it's more gritty from the very beginning; with darker colour tones graphically, then Lara gets kidnaped and tied up, and ends up impaling herself, rips it out, then goes trudging through dirty water.

The game seems confused in style. It wants to be more realistic and gritty, but then the over the top action and Lara's immunity to fall damage in cutscenes makes it a very gamey/action film in tone. At certain points of the story, Lara will be injured and needs to find a medpacks. If you get injured in combat, you just regenerate your health. There's no health bar, but it's like those Call of Duty games where the screen begins to go dark but restores if you keep out of fire for a few seconds. Taking lots of bullets here seems more jarring, even though the old games had this.

The action set-pieces do get progressively ridiculous, with Lara riding rapids, climbing massive communication towers, parachuting through a dense forest, escaping burning buildings, collapsing bridges, sliding and falling from great heights, time and time again. Sometimes the game makes use of Quick Time Events for these, and other times it relies on platforming. Just like previous games, there's some brutal death-sequences if you fail these action sequences. It is often very predictable that something is going to collapse. As Lara is thrown around, you will be hearing numerous grunts, pants and screams.

Early on, Lara is hungry and needs to find a source of food. She finds a bow and arrows, then goes after some deer. The hunting/survival mechanic seems like it's going to be a big part of the game, and even one of the skill trees is called "hunter", but this mechanic is pretty much forgotten about instantly. For a large part of the game, I didn't see any animals, and only when you return to the woodland area did I see the wolves and deer again. The only animals I can recall were the boar and crabs by the sea, and there was an area with a few chickens.

The salvaging idea is something that happens throughout, and is influenced by the recent trend in gaming. So you will be looting soldiers' bodies, crates, and other objects which gives you salvage and a bit of XP. You choose perks at campsites which act as quick travel and save points. There are many upgrades that increase damage, accuracy, reload speed, and alternative fire.

At first, the amount of upgrades you have access to are pretty limited, and I wondered if the upgrade mechanic was meaningful. Your initial bow has 2 upgrades so I thought I had maximised within a couple of hours. However, at certain story points the bow is replaced (your upgrades transfer) and more options become available. New weapons are also found across the game at story points; pistol, shotgun, rifle, which can also be upgraded too.

Sometimes the combat is based on close-range stealth kills, ranged stealth with your bow, or cover based shooting like Gears of War which can end up with long firefights.

Lara automatically moves into stealth mode, so sometimes it gives away the fact that there are upcoming enemies, because I saw her react before I saw or heard any nearby person. You can sneak behind enemies and strangle them, or take them down from afar with the bow. If enemies see a fallen enemy, see you, or hear you, then they, and nearby enemies will actively engage you. You can't just hide to make them return to a default state like many stealth games. Combat is often about popping in and out of cover, and that's how most enemies will engage you. Some are more melee focussed and will try and flank you. Many have Molotov cocktails to force you to move to another location, or burn. Many forms of cover can also be destroyed by gunfire or burned, which also forces you to change position.

Lara is efficient with the bow or guns, but the way she dodges is a "scramble" which is a less elegant form of fleeing, almost on all fours, and great for moving between cover. There's no acrobatic flip like in the previous games. Some upgrades allow you to counter after scrambling, like throwing dirt to stun, or following up with a close attack with the axe or gun.

It's always beneficial to look out for the classic exploding barrels which can quickly dispatch groups of enemies. Otherwise try and go for a trusty headshot. You can incapacitate enemies by shooting them in the legs, which allows you to perform brutal finishers if you are close to them.

At the end of the game, you are up against a large, armoured foe which you think is going to be an epic boss battle but it largely plays out like some of the other fights against armoured foes so is a bit disappointing.

It's a large island, and although it's kind of portrayed like an open-world with fast travel points. Unless you want to 100% the game, there is no need to fast travel, and the game can be played in a very linear fashion. There's loads of crates to find, then more unique relics, "GPS caches", and diary entries. Artefacts you find shows off Lara's knowledge of archeology/history. There is a Survival Instinct ability that highlights map markers, objectives, and when you unlock the skill, you can see items through walls.

There are hidden tombs too which is where you find the majority of puzzles (although there is 1 per tomb) and get rewarded with more generous XP. The puzzles mainly rely on physics, so you might be weighing down a ramp/elevator, or spinning structures. When you enter them, there is usually a winding path in the dark for some reason, then a single puzzle room to get to a chest. There are no enemies in the tombs.

There's lots of climbing around which is like the usual Prince of Persia style stuff such as shimmying, jumping off poles etc.

Throughout the game, Lara will acquire gadgets (torches, lighter, ropes, rock climbing axe, shotgun, and grenade launcher) that will be useful to access new areas or previous areas that can't be reached before. I like how these gadgets make Lara's life easier: e.g. initially you are taking an unlit torch to a heat source to light it, but then later, you are igniting at will.

When you find the rope, Lara can fire it with her bow. At first, you can only fire it at other roped objects (don't ask me how that works, it just does), then later on, you can fire it at craggy rocks. This then gives you a way of navigating chasms.

The direction was probably a response to the action-packed Uncharted. The original games influenced Uncharted, and now this franchise is then taking influence from there. Since it's probably too far away from the previous games in the series, why didn't they just make a new IP? I know publishers always want to capitalise on branding, but did this really need to use the Tomb Raider name? couldn't it just be its own franchise?

Even though I’ve criticised the tone of the game, it might just be a difference in how I thought the game was going to be and how it actually is. It doesn’t need to be realistic, and it doesn’t need the hunting/survival mechanics that it seemed to hint at at the start. If you expect it to be an over-the-top action game, then it definitely excels in that. It does really well at mixing up the gameplay, so is definitely well-paced. It does feel like you are experiencing an interactive film because it is action-packed, but does have slower moments to allow you to appreciate the visual design.