I've spent the last couple of weeks dipping back into the Tomb Raider series and having, overall, a pretty good time. Next week's newsletter might be a bit of a shorter affair because I am going to be doing some writing about that game that isn't out yet that everyone pays me to write about and that'll be taking up most of my time (so be ready for that, I'll no doubt be tweeting it out when it drops) but I'll be sure to have something ready for you lot for Friday at 6PM, as always.

On The Raider.

I don't get people who "can't do" tank controls. First of all, they're built around the extremely simplistic logic that forward is forward, no matter what. Get your head around that and you're golden. Secondly, and most importantly, they give an entire time period of a specific genre a flavour, a feel that makes them stand out against a lot of modern games, that have a controls that are very homogenised and make a lot of titles feel the same, regardless of genre. When I play a game, be it a retro title or the latest, greatest AAA title, I approach the controls for that game in a bubble at first, to see if they feel good and fit the challenges that the game is going to throw at you. From there, I can get a good read on whether or not the controls are 'good' or not.

I replayed the first Tomb Raider game over the past week or so and really enjoyed it but the impression I get from most people is that handling Lara Croft in her debut outing is very stiff, clunky and makes the game 'unplayable'. They are stiff. She does move in a way that can be best described as clunky but if anything, they're a big part of the reason I enjoyed my time with it, as opposed to being the main thing that put me off.

It's all about the approach, as I said above. I approached Tomb Raider on its own terms, as a game released in 1996, pre-Mario 64 and the growth of full analog control in 3D games. The developers were working with these technological restrictions too and, as such, don't ever throw anything at you that would be impossible with the control scheme. If you think about it in modern terms or compare it to modern games, you're going to constantly find yourself wondering why you can't do certain things. If you take my approach, you'll find yourself being impressed by the things you CAN do and the way that the game slowly increases the challenge as you master Lara's moveset. Her 'stiff' movement becomes measured and precise and the clunkiness gives way to reveal a quite elegant system of grid-based level design and some very specific jump distances and rules that govern what you can and can't get away with.

The level design in Tomb Raider is absolutely brilliant - if it wasn't for Lara Croft being front and centre and kickstarting an entire console generation of weird 3D renders of barely dressed lasses, the levels would be the star of the show. The game is split up into four locales, each providing the theme for a set of levels - the Peruvian jungle, hidden temples in Greece and Egypt and the horrific, alien Atlantean ruins. They all have their own unique look and feel (and we'll get onto Atlantis in a minute!) so although you're ostensibly doing the same thing level to level, there's enough unique about each area to freshen things up as you move through them. Most levels follow a similar structure in that there's one major puzzle that will need completing, usually by exploring and finding smaller puzzles that open allow access to new areas and slowly but surely gets you closer to a solution of the level's 'main' puzzle, which usually opens the exit.

It's a simplistic structure that allows for a lot of variety within the puzzles and exploration. St Francis' Folly in Greece has you taking on a series of challenges themed around Ancient Greek myths. The Cistern is a complex, vertical platform puzzle that requires you to shift the water level to allow access to different areas. The Obelisk of Khamoon tasks you with finding four separate items that can be used to open up the exit, testing not only your platforming skills but your ability to take stock of your surroundings and find hidden passages and fully explore each area. There's the odd scrap with the local wildlife thrown in because, as we all know, every game requires you to shoot something or drive a car and, unfortunately, the combat is let down by an unreliable auto-aim, a camera that struggles with faster movements and a moveset that is geared towards methodical, slow-paced platforming rather than dodging a mountain lion that's trying to bite your tits off. However, it's just simplistic enough to not be a total dealbreaker. Probably play the PC version or use save states if you're playing the console version on an emulator. Playing this on PS1 or Saturn and having to use the limited save crystals ups the difficulty massively and makes those cheap deaths you'll take in combat feel a lot more frustrating than they really need to be.

The end of the game is set in the ruins of Atlantis and are one of the weirdest left turns in all of gaming. You go from some fairly stereotypical tombs, temples and caves and into a version of Atlantis that shares more DNA with the Hell levels in classic DOOM than anything else. The walls are made of flesh and held together with bones and sinew, framing the pulsating, meaty textures. All of the Atlantean mutant enemies are red raw skinless freaks, their bloody muscle tissue exposed. It's a surprisingly horrific setting for the final stretch of Lara's first outing and is a real curveball for the final act, diving headfirst into an unexpected hour or so of body horror. Personally, I didn't like these levels as much as the more traditional settings that came before it in regards to structure and quality of puzzles, platforming and combat (projectile firing enemies are the drizzling shits, but more on them later) but the setting is a wonderfully grim way to conclude things.

After finishing Tomb Raider, I moved onto Tomb Raider: Anniversary - the second game in the PS2's reboot of the series and a remake of the original game in the new engine with the new moveset and controls. I should stress that it is far from a bad game but it's a game that very much has the controls of the time period, a kind of pre-Uncharted action platformer, with refined combat and much slicker movement and platforming. It left me cold and I bounced off it after a couple of hours. It felt like a million other games and although it was cool to see areas from the original game and Lara rendered in wonderful PS2 generation visuals, in the hand it could've been any game. It feels like it could be any PS2/PS3 action platformer, just wearing Lara's short shorts.

Levels have been fleshed out into larger areas, with no one specific level from the original game being present but instead each level has multiple 'bits' from a few levels dotted around it. They're much bigger but there's never a fear of the unknown, getting lost or stumped by a puzzle because although by no means a linear experience, there's significantly more in the way of modern level design (which I must stress, isn't bad level design!) and signposting of the way you should go through the way the environment is structured. That subtle, invisible guiding hand that no doubt requires an absolute genius designer to implement only to be dismissed by some fat lad in a weekly newsletter he puts out to a hundred or so people as 'not as interesting' as some of the convoluted structures and near hidden passages you need to find just in order to continue down the critical path in a game that was released in 1996. The modernisation doesn't end there - the terrifying majesty of the T-Rex encounter has been reduced to an introductory cutscene and then a gimmick boss fight in an arena, where you goad it into running into some spikes on the walls and then finish it off with a quick time event sequence, as was the style of the time. Again, certainly not a bad boss fight, just utterly unmemorable and lacking in any of the character of the original. Vibeless, basically.

The weirdest part was how unsatisfying I found everything. The original games are full of really punchy sounds and animations that work in harmony with each other and the stiff but measured controls to give those titles their unique feel. Everything from the repetitive, thick BLAT BLAT BLAT of Lara's twin pistols to the horrifying crunch and subsequent folding up like pretzel that happens when you take a leap off a platform that is slightly too high for Lara to survive the fall from has a real sense of impact and when you round off these edges, you may have what is categorically a 'better' game in regards to modern control standards, but it doesn't feel like Tomb Raider in the way the original game does.

Jumping from that into Tomb Raider II, I had a much, much more enjoyable time - but it isn't without its flaws. Although the puzzles and ideas within the levels are probably better overall, the tweaks to Lara's moveset make everything fit together in a much more natural way and the visual upgrade, although subtle, is definitely an improvement, there's a focus on more 'modern' locations and they're packed with human enemies. The switch to a much more action-focused game full of human enemies - especially those that have firearms - means that almost every encounter is a bit of a chore. Enemies use hitscanning to decide whether or not they've shot you and Lara's moveset just isn't agile enough to allow you to move in a way to avoid shots in a consistent manner so you feel like you're always taking cheap damage, which is never fun. The middle part of the game is also quite divisive - you go from an offshore oil rig (a fairly uninspiring level) into a series of half-underwater missions that take you in and around the wreck of the Maria Dora - a massive, Titanic-esque ship. It's divisive in the same way the Water Temple in Ocarina of Time gets such polarising responses whenever you bring it up, because early 3D movement in water just isn't that intuitive and the added lack of visibility and, you know, the obvious possibility of drowning adds a huge amount of stress into the proceedings. Personally, I loved this series of levels - they have an amazing atmosphere and are full of smart puzzles that take into consideration the damage and position of the shipwreck on the seabed. The parts where you have to briefly swim outside of the ship and can see back into the areas where you have passed through via the portholes and windows is thrilling. These levels feel a bit like an action game version of those PS1 diving games - Konami's Diver's Dream and Namco's Treasures of the Deep. The final third is just undeniably fantastic, returning to the titular tombs to raid and definitely better than anything found in the original game but it's a bit of a shame you've got to wait until the final few levels to really get into something that feels like an evolution of the ideas found in the first game, rather than something that is going in a bit of a different direction, especially at the start.

Although the series does pivot back to more 'tomb' based maps as a priority (1999's Last Revelation manages to marry the large scale areas and overlapping puzzles and platforming sections with a less action, more exploration based structure and, for my money, is the pick of the bunch) it is a shame that in the two reboots they still haven't been able to just commit to the idea of exploring ancient tombs as the main focus. There's always nods to it, or small sections or individual puzzle areas in later games but the world is screaming out for a Tomb Raider game that is literally just raiding tombs and nothing else. Maybe a fourth reboot is the one?

THANKS FOR READING.

Please consider chucking a couple of dollars at my Patreon page if you like this or any of the other things I do.

patreon.com/andihero