Tomb Raider: Anniversary (Wii)

Predicting the death of a console that at present you can't buy due to over-demand (or under-supply - you decide) seems insane. But I think you are right. I LOVED the Wii when we got it, played it non stop for months. Then stopped. Since the initial flush of excitement, it seems like nothing so much as a interesting toy. Good games could change this - but at present, what we are getting is ports with Wii features tacked on, and tacked on none too well.

Clearly, Nintendo can't control third party developers - and as a result they are going to have to support the console with software that properly exploits it. So no good versions of big franchises... and the Wii becomes irrelevant.

Seems more and more like the Wii is headed toward filling the niche previously inhabited by cheap knockoffs. Which might not be a that bad of a thing, people make lots of money selling cheap knockoffs. Children of lesser means or cheap relatives get a real console, priced closer to what those of an older generation might be willing to spring for a 'toy'.

I said it was a gadget when it was announced, subject to being proved wrong...the apparent insatiable demand for the console actually had me thinking that it might actually be for real...but then, there was an insatiable demand for Tickle Me Elmo too...

Would it be so wrong for Nintendo to embrace the Wii as a toy? If it looks like a duck, sounds like a duck, smells like a duck, and is making money hand over fist...make like Scrooge McDuck and swim in a vault full of gold coins. Sure some *snickers* "innovation-seeking hardcore gamers" *cough Ninty fanboys* might have an identity crisis what with their console of choice being labelled as a toy...but they're already on the hook...will they abandon Link and Mario over it? Likely not.

Perhaps the eventually vast install base of the Wii will induce third-party devs to properly integrate the Wii's unique features into their upcoming titles.

Games consoles ARE toys. There, I said it...they're all toys. Expensive toys. The Wii is just more toylike than most...the fact that the Wii is comparably reasonably priced tends to leave it out of the high-priced home electonics set that the other two consoles are part of.

I was never entranced by Lara...and it seems like Uncharted has raised the game to the point where Lara is old news.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm gonna go play with my toys.

That would be the best outcome. When it's used well, the Wii is a great console. When it's used poorly, it's painfully last gen, low(er) def and the Wii features are annoying. You can see clearly why companies are doing what they are doing, they are taping into a huge userbase with limited investment. But the short-termism might bite them back.


Whoa, I wouldn't got that far. Drakes is good (but far too small/short), and the secondDrake game might be a winner. But right now, I'm expecting any PS3/360 version of Tomb Raider to kick Drakes' ass.

I guess I'm just a bit of a pessimist...I'd suspect any future versions of the venerable franchise would trade more on the existing goodwill and nostalgia, than actual gameplay, I'd need to be proved wrong. One of the other reviews I got of Uncharted apologized for comparing it to Tomb Raider by saying that it was orders of magnituide better...this from a self-admitted platformer addict. So I'm giving it high credit, despite not having gotten my own grubby paws on it.

Also, the Wii's place as the 'other console' might dilute some of the pressure devs might otherwise feel to use the Wii properly, and leave it entrenched in the gaming ghetto.

But that statement doesn't even bear cursory examination, does it? Especially from a man of your intelligence. Orders of magnitude better - it's just hyperbole.

While Drake's is, admittedly, better on the level of the control mechanism and environments, it is so short that overall it is a much worse value game for your money than recent Tomb Raiders. The puzzling aspect of it is inadequate.

On the other hand, after the risible Angel of Darkness, Eidos turned Tomb Raider around, and recent version have developed the series to the point where it is reasonable to expect that the next gen version will be comparable with Drakes from an control method and environment point of view, but (if past versions are anything to go on) will be far longer, span more locations (Drakes takes place, basically in one jungle/castle level) and have better puzzle elements.

But that statement doesn't even bear cursory examination, does it? Especially from a man of your intelligence. Orders of magnitude better - it's just hyperbole.

While Drake's is, admittedly, better on the level of the control mechanism and environments, it is so short that overall it is a much worse value game for your money than recent Tomb Raiders. The puzzling aspect of it is inadequate.

On the other hand, after the risible Angel of Darkness, Eidos turned Tomb Raider around, and recent version have developed the series to the point where it is reasonable to expect that the next gen version will be comparable with Drakes from an control method and environment point of view, but (if past versions are anything to go on) will be far longer, span more locations (Drakes takes place, basically in one jungle/castle level) and have better puzzle elements.

Agreed.

Uncharted is probably a really good rental. I wasn't really thinking in terms of value...as I knew Uncharted was short, and if it was a 360 title it would be a rental for me. Guess even I might be overvaluing Uncharted, based on the dearth of decent PS3 titles.

I'm not a big puzzle fan...I guess I did too many logic problems as a child...I was something of an addict...the more combative orient of Uncharted appeals to me. Muh Huh Hah Hah Hah, I'm a gun-toting American, lemme shoot 'em all, let the FSM assign me the Dark Side Points later...

...ahhh Dark Side Points...Renegade is such a weak sister...bring on the strippers and beer volcanoes.

I cant begin to find enough sarcasm or irony to devalue this statement.

Tomb Raider 1 had about 15 levels each of which takes from 15-45 min to complete. this is when you know the levels backwards. on your first playthrough it is not uncommon to spend upwards of an hour or two on some of thease levels. Tomb Raider IV had about 40 levels, each as big as the TR1 levels, although some functioned in unison to become gigantic multi-level levels. The amout of playtime present in the old games with the classic controlls (which i miss terribly) was huge. the games lasted over a month usually, sometimes a couple!

Tomb Raider Legend and Anniversary are short games.

Tomb Raider Legent has 5 levels, most of which can be compleated in under 10 min. on my first play through i finished the game in 3 hours. that is not good enough for a game of this type.

Tomb Raider Anniversary had less work to do. the level design was already there. still they only re-made most of the levels (leaving out the cistern, my favourite) and each of thease was watered down and abriviated to being much much shorter than their counterparts in the first game. Sure it was longer than Legend but they did their best to correct that. as well as this they destroyed the story with some terrible writing and cutscenes. that and they put in those bloodt real action cutscenes that everyone has to include by law in their "i want to be generic" game releases. the camera was pathetic as was the enemy AI and the engine was riddled with bugs.

Since throughout 3d platforming history the latest Tomb Raider release has been the benchmark on which all other games of the genre are judged then Uncharted wins on all fronts. The graphics are far superior, the gameplay is much more honed and responsive, the gunplay is inovative and fun, there is no bullet time or button bashing sequances (bullet time in tomb raider, WTF?) and most people report a first play through taking 8-12 hours, which is almost 3 times the length of Tomb Raider Legend at least.

Yes Uncharted is short, but so are all the other games of the genre which is a sin given how long the classic 'Raider games were

Hah, looks like Nintendo is considering pulling much of its television advertising, saying that this is the "responsible thing to do", considering they can't meet demand. Why spend money to advertise something you can't keep in stock, eh.

1) Tomb Raider: Legend has eight levels with five boss battles in them.
2) Only one of the time trial times is under 10 minutes and that's the last boss battle.
3) The total of the time trial times is over two and a quarter hours.

If you were under 45 minutes off the total of the time trial times on your first play through you must have been play testing the game for Crystal Dynamics before hand.

?

The cistern was still in there, it just wasn't given its own "level" - it featured as part of a larger level but remained faithful to the original in terms of scale and puzzle

I'm slightly annoyed about this, I specifically avoided buying the PS2 or Xbox360 versions, I held out for the Wii version as I thought it would be more interactive, only to find it has a lower score, and it seems most of the mini games have been tacked on, plus it's
been released six or so months after the PS2 version, which is a bit of a kick in the teeth.

Having said that i'll probably get this since i've waited so long for it, and I absolutely loved the original so I wouldn't mind playing the remake despite some flaws, plus TR:Legend on DS wasn't bad, so hopefully this will be somewhat similar.

Its just stupid to end a review with a comment like that. Predicting the future of a console in a game review is nothing but fanboyism syndrom.

Wow, that's a blow. Being called stupid by someone who can neither punctuate "it's" nor spell "syndrome".

But I think it's time for a forum Godwin's Law.

Instead of Hitler/Nazis. the object of the law should be the word "fanboy". Indeed this is a new SPOnG forum rule, if you say fanboy, for you zer conversation ist over.

Seriously though, I'm thinking the Final Solution for anonymous posters would be preferable to some draconian junk like that, especially preciptated by some trivial dimwit. Ship them off to other websites in boxcars...or just eliminate them entirely :) No one who cannot trace their pure SPOnG membership back at least a picosecond should be allowed to post.

Especially given that your theat appears fairly hollow, EXCEPT to bonafide SPOnG members...