goddamn, this game is great
the tank controls are clunky, the jump isnt always responsive when it should, and HOLY SHIT GIVE ME TIME TO PREPARE TO FIGHT THIS FUCKING BEAR, but its everything I could ever want out of an indiana jones-like game
Kinda wish the camera worked better too
It looks amazing for its time, too
>>2790753
The classic (1 - 4) Tomb Raiders have their own special charm, Anon, and it ain't seeing polytits that could put a fuckin' eye out. I'm glad you've discovered them. After you're through with Last Revelation, you could try giving Chronicles a spin, but due to the rushed nature of the game you won't be any the poorer skipping it.
BTW: Stella's Tomb Raider guides are best Tomb Raider guides.
>>2790753
>its everything I could ever want out of an indiana jones-like game
Have you played indiana jones and the infernal machine?
It's pretty much tomb raider but with indiana jones.
>>2790753
>the jump isnt always responsive when it should
Fuck off the jump is total garbage. If any game came out with controls as bad as PS1 Tomb Raider today it'd get universally panned as a 1/5 game like THPS5 (which controls better than Tomb Raider)
>>2791063
that's why you played it on pc
>>2791064
It's still incredibly unresponsive, PC versions can't fix everything.
Imagine if Mario had actually difficult platforming and your jump was on a random 0.1-1 second delay and it'd be like playing 2D Tomb Raider
Bad controls are not a product of their time, they're the product of incompetent developers. I'm tired of people giving games like TR a pass
![floating1[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/snXu8Tc.jpg "floating1[1].jpg")
wind noises
>>2791068
>random
Yeah you're fucking stupid. Laura jumps immediately from standing still and her jump animation takes about .2 seconds to get her off the ground. If you're running, she takes two steps then jumps - which is exactly the length of one "square" of terrain.
I've read this the other day and it was really great. Everything you'd expect from a Tomb Raider comic with some really nice settings.
I wonder if the other Lara Croft and Tomb Raider comics are any good, but I'll be sure to check them out.
Tomb Raider 1 is definitely the best for me at least in the 'adventure' feel.
Controls are fine, this video explains them well.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MgBZkyd3HRo
>>2791087
I'd love to play an anniversary version of TR2
>>2790753
>not playing the dos version
I liked the first one the most. In TR2 your enemies where mostly human and the ancient ruins where gone. I guess the dev wanted to try something new
>>2791250
It's just easier to scoop them up and emulate them on the PSX. In the case of 1, you even get extra music.
>>2791242
Cool. Now I want to see a video on how to do running ledgeless jumps.
>>2791260
Take two steps back, while running forward hold the jump button. If you can't take two steps back you can't do a running jump.
It's a gorgeous game still, very strong sense of style. A style that really set a standard for the rest of the PSX lineup.
>>2790753
Play it on the PS2 where you can use its texture-smoothener that smoothens the edges enough to make it look nicer but not over-smoothens to where everything looks too blocky
Also use the d-pad instead of the stick. It makes it a lot easier to control.
>its everything I could ever want out of an indiana jones-like game
Ironically when they made Indy games for PS1 they ripped off the TR games.
>>2790814
TR was the first game to make full use of a full 3-D environment and full 3-D avatars; that makes it a bit revolutionary for its time.
And I still love replaying them. The huge vast areas were ridiculously creative for the time, and still pose a challenge.
>>2791364
I thought she was almost naked in the nail of the thumb.;_;
>>2791365
No, but to see her naked you need to make a series of precise steps and then jump in the swimming pool. She'll come out all wet and take out her clothes.I know you tried
>>2791364
>TR was the first game to make full use of a full 3-D environment and full 3-D avatars; that makes it a bit revolutionary for its time.
>>2791087
that part was soooo fucking creepy.
>>2791365
There's a few nude mods out there.
Have fun.
>>2791376
>>2791380
Post pics please
This was once considered "girl-power" and empowering because a strong woman who don't need no man is out shooting up shit, going on adventures, and finding treasure while having curves and being physically fit as opposed to a rail-thin Barbie.
Now feminists hate her for having too much boobage and being too hot for the average SJW who thinks female heroes should be ugly flat-chested fat lesbians.
How shit has changed.
>>2791395
in other words
>Around fun, NEVER RELAX!!
>>2791376
Yeah, no.
>>2791186
oh my god you mean she actually needs to move like a real human instead of suddenly jumping into the air from the middle of a run while both feet were already off the ground
insanity
TR controls great. It's aged, of course, but with the game being so predictable on its grid level layout it's very easy to pull out insane moves that will never randomly fail.
>>2791382
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ISf4ZlUsfmw
94 so you still win :P
>>2791274
How to do two running jumps in a row? Like dodging the flamethrower at the beginning of the veneza level in TR2. I'm guessing you hold X as soon as she lands from the first jump.
>>2791412
Exactly. Once you're used to the grid system the gaming engine uses, it's easier than shit to control her.
>>2791250
OP here, that is DOS. Im wondering if theres a way to do fullscreen screencaps instead of 640x640
>>2791406
Even if Mario 64 wasn't the first, it's ludicrous to say Tomb Raider was, since it was released a few months after Mario 64.
>>2791250
Not playing the glide version.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5GMesT4WKzI
>>2791448
Being first to the market is now quite meaningless for games that were released in such a narrow time period. I consider these titles to be from the same exact era and that's about it.
>>2791063
The game is set up for grid-based movement. Look at any Tomb Raider map and you will see that it's made up of a massive grid of varying angles and altitudes.
It's set up so that if you run forward, it doesn't matter when you press jump, as there is a minimum amount of time that must pass before Lara is capable of jumping. Otherwise you would have to perfectly time multiple jumps throughout the entire series.
>>2790753
I couldn't agree more. Tomb Raider is one of my all time favorite games. I think it's the best in the series as well, the progression and every bit is just great.
I love the original, but the remake is also well worth playing. Also, not retro but by far the next best in the series is Underworld which is an incredible game.
>>2791467
Interesting, that paradigm actually does improve things a lot.
>>2791467
Also, this guy is right. If you pay attention to how things are lined up and how many blocks you will have to jump up, down, etc every jump is 100% predictable. Tomb Raider 1 especially is much more of a puzzle game than it is an action game. So long as you have decent timing, it's all just about figuring out what you're supposed to do. Execution is never the hard part.
>>2791395
meant to reply to this guy
>>2791472
Not really, just jump a lot and remember that Lara keeps shooting a dead target until you release the button.
Combat in Tomb Raider 1 is extremely easy compared to the later games where enemies have much more HP and there are many, many more human enemies. With guns.
There are only two enemy types capable of flight in TR1, one of them is bats who die in 1-2 bullets, another is an endgame enemy. Likewise, only the last few levels have enemies that are able to perform ranged attacks.
Biggest tip I can give you though? Stick to the pistols until you really can't do it. They're more than enough to put down anything that moves.
I don't have a problem with the controls, the original game wasn't supposed to overtly action oriented. Kind of an extension of classic Prince of Persia in 3D.
>>2791259
fuck the music. psx version scks. its laggy, slow and unresponsive.
pc version is smooth 60fps and fast , very responsive.
>>2791443
if you play on pc then why does your resolution suck so much? it looks like psx lol
>>2791454
yes that's what i'm talking about. I also play the glide version, but it still runs in dosbox.
>>2791443 you need nglide to make it run correctly in full screen in higher resolution. I had the problem as well, only 640x480 worked out of the box with the included plugins (assuming you have the gog version as well)
here is a photograph from my game. somehow i can't take a screenshot, its just blank sorry.
the ultimate version is of course the pc version with the superior soundtrack from psx patched, but that is kind of hard to get nowadays.
>>2791483
This is exactly it. Nobody calls the controls in a cinematic platformer "unresponsive" unless they quite literally do not realize how the game is designed.
Tomb Raider is a 3D cinematic platformer.
>>2791489
>pc version is smooth 60fps
Calling bullshit, I recall TR1 being locked to a fairly low framerate
>>2791489
>somehow i can't take a screenshot, its just blank sorry
fraps works with games running off nglide
Aw yiss, we jurassic park now
>>2791489
dunno, maybe because its unpatched?
>>2791479
Nothing you say can change these guys minds. don't waste your timeare you in london?
>>2791482
>They're more than enough to put down anything that moves.
Alright, I'll give them the good old Revolver Ocelot.
Some of the best level design I've ever seen was in the original TR games, TR2 in particular. Really imaginative. It depressed me that it turned into a cover shooter with some lobotomised 'puzzling' thrown in.
>>2791561
My favorite levels are in Last Revelation in terms of aesthetics and design.
>>2791482
Use the shotgun.
It is very satisfying to drop apes, dinos and crocodiles in one shot.
found a TR PC release with this shit included;
gulikoza's DOSBox CVS build 0.72 (14.09.2008)
Tomb Raider 1 CD image (auto-mounted)
Tomb Raider (with Voodoo Rush upgrade) (pre-installed)
Tomb Raider Unfinished Business addon (for 3DFX only) (pre-installed)
Is this the best way to play it?
>>2791239
I have all 5 volumes of the tomb raider comics they made into tankobon form, and they are a fun read, though it has various levels of continuity due to different writing teams coming in every few story arcs around issue 20 of 50 total.
>>2791564
Who is that "person" next to Anita? Is he/she/xir/dur/hurr supposed to be some sort of indie game designer?
>>2791479
>Feminists hate her because nearly every female character in a video game is like her: a male fantasy. She's sort of a sexual caricature
But that's stupid. It's the same for male characters. You don't often see an ugly male action star. People just like their main character to be attractive. It's reasonable since you spend so long staring at them. What's sexist about it?
>>2791754
>expecting feminists to have reasonable logic and have the same standards for men and women
You poor thing.
TR1 is absolutely fantastic. One of the all time greatest PS1 games (although these days you should play the PC version)
TR2 has waaaay too many gun enemies but when its good its even better than the first game.
TR3 is when the difficulty and tedium just ramps way the fuck up so you better prepare your anus (or just skip it desu)
Never played 4 or 5.
>>2791803
If you're not good at videogames then yes I agree.
>implying this wasn't the best level in classic TR
The demo was playing on the computers when my family went christmas shopping at Sears and it was open on the Venice level. It blew my young mind. It seemed like video games could suddenly completely mimic real 3d life and the graphics looked HD to my eyes.
>>2791726
Harkness Test gone wrong?
>>2791871
More like protection
>>2791242
Why does he sound like Kermit the Frog?
So where can I get working copies of the originals?
>>2790753
can you use the xbox 360 controller on the steam/gog versions of the old tr games?
>>2791932
Your local mom and pop classic video games store.
>>2790753
>HOLY SHIT GIVE ME TIME TO PREPARE TO FIGHT THIS FUCKING BEAR
>>2791649
Too bad the game doesn’t give you anywhere near enough ammo for it.
>>2791454
Watching this, I forgot how ambient the game was. It's amazing.
>>2791242
>see this in related videos
>it's the perfect representation of people that complain about TR controls
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UDdsf_k57kw
1) don't learn how to play the game
2) complain that the game doesn't do whatever you're thinking
>>2790753
Tomb Raider is a slow and methodical cave explorer game, not a super Mario happy happy jump and run game.
The controls are just fine.
>>2792568
Go to the left mummy and press action button
>>2792607
And then?
>>2792624
you will reveal secret nude raider
>>2792624
Receive gold
>>2792625
Holy fuck thats an awesome secret. Thanks man.
>>2790814
I really liked Chronicles, and I had't gotten around to beat any of the first levels of any TR at the time.
These games honestly have some of the best atmosphere out of any games ever made. Where did that sense of loneliness and surprises hiding around every corner go?
The only recent games that had good atmosphere is Dark Souls 1, and maybe Minecraft at certain points.
>>2791054
While we're on the subject, there's also Duke Nukem: Time to Kill, which is TR with Duke Nukem. I remember it being really good, and fixing some of the clunky aspects of TR.
>>2791063
What are you guys talking about? The jumping is perfectly responsive. You just have to get used to how it works.
Square = Jumps straight up and slightly forwards
Square + direction BEFORE AIRBORNE = Jump in any direction (shorter reach than running jump)
Running + Square = Long jump forwards. Here's the crucial thing to remember: LARA HAS TO RUN EXACTLY ONE BLOCK BEFORE EXECUTING A LONG JUMP. So learn to step back to the other end of a block if starting from standing still. Also learn to press the jump button before the last step Lara can take before falling off.
Come on, guys. I figured this out when I was 10. Kids were brainwashed by Mario 64, unable to do anything but criticize a game's controls instead of their own incompetence.
As of recent there is an entirely new way to play the first game under windows and with hardware acceleration without using dosbox. Though it requires a more recent card with OpenGL 3.3 support, while the dosbox+nglide method only needs Directx 9. For instructions check the site.
https://github.com/ata4/glrage
>>2792107
That's just painful to watch. Are people that stupid? All it takes is a 5 minutes stroll in the practice area to get a general idea of how controls work.
>>2792107
Hahahaha
Yfw all he has to do is two sideways jumps from the spot :/
>>2792767
No fuck you and your mother, asspipe.
>>2792724
No faggot I'm a man, a he. If you are an it that's fine fuck you cuz you're an object. Me I'm a man I'm gonna go play video games fuck women and perhaps eat a dead animal or two. You can go die in a fire, twice.
>>2792274
Don't care what you classify it as, you don't like that we fought in shit hole countries then go live there instead. I'm happy here faggot.
>>2792185
Lol
>>2791374
That won't work unless you positioned her EXACLY north, stupid.
TR1 was fucking dope. Never could get into 2 or 3 for some reason.
Also, I'm probably the only one one on earth to like Angel of Darkness. Despite the numerous bugs, I loved it. Great soundtrack also.
>>2791454
>>2792568
Does this Glide stuff work on any other TR besides the first one? I've only ever seen it applied to the first one, yet the second one on out have more polys (but not a lot more but at least the Lara model is refined) and slightly better textures
>>2792741
Back to /mlp/ with you, faggot
>>2790814
Stella's site is THE supreme site for TR. I've been visiting it for years.
>>2793112
AOD truely had shit controls. It would have been better if they just transplanted the controls from the PS1 games.
Plus they took all the shit that sucked the hardest in the PS1 TR's and made them even more irriating like the timed gates.
It was pure rage.
>>2791395
Because the ugly landwhales felt threatened and want her to be an unremarkable, weak and pathetic like they are.
>>2793161
The original Lara was compared to Barbie and other bone-thin girl's characters of the era.
By comparison, Lara looked healthy and athletic, and that was considered to be a positive for the depiction of women.
Now thanks to the brest envy of the flat-chested and general "find-fault-with-everything SJW bullshit, that same positive image has since turned into a negative.
It's ridiculous. I see no sexism in Lara at all. To the contrary I like her intelligence, arsenal of weapons, and willingness to explore.
>>2793197
She has breasts. That's sexist.
>>2793119
The other games use Directx, so you don't need a glide wrapper.
>>2792568
amazeballs.
>>2791256
first one definitely had better levels
second one was more fun for me, though
didn't care for any of the others
>>2791489
>laggy, slow and unresponsive.
nigger what
>>2791561
After playing Anniversary I realized some of that is due to better graphics. Thing is, while the old TR 1 style graphics look blocky on the surface, they are perfect for the explorative puzzling that these games do. Actual paths you can take, decoys, and plain decoration, they all use the exact same visuals, that blocky setup. The player needs to look, judge, and decide on their own path through the blocky maze. In the end that path will likely be what the devs intended, but the perception is different, a feeling of conquering the environment.
Fast forward to Anniversary, and the situation is very different. Due to the model complexity, it becomes virtually impossible to account for all potential paths. On top of that, the complexity of the environment would make it really difficult to actually find a path, even the correct one. So what the game did instead is introducing visual cues. There are ledges, rings, bars and so on. They all have just one purpose, to show where Lara could move, to distinguish it from decoration. For the player the challenge becomes not finding a path, but following it, by timing the actions. I don't mind that in the context of Anniversary, because for me it meant I could see the original TR 1 from a different direction, where acrobatics matter more than exploration.
But for TR in general, it's a step backwards, and there's very little a dev could do about it.
>>2791794
TR 1 is to me the essence of Tomb Raider. Slow paced, quiet exploration, with the occasional acrobatics interuption, and few enemies that scare you shitless, because you always feel ill prepared.
TR 2 was a generic action game. It's like the devs forgot what made TR 1 work. The endless amount of enemies and cities and common places, it doesn't work for Lara, it's just a noisy action flick. Mind you, the quality of the environments in TR 2 is top notch, indeed probably better than TR 1. The subjects of the environments, and the endless stream of enemies though, killed the game for me. That was no Tomb Raider. So much so, that I didn't even bother with any successor until I touched Anniversary, because I had hopes it would revisit the explorative style (and to some degree, it did)
>>2793119
>I've only ever seen it applied to the first one
You do not "apply" the "glide stuff". Glide's an API, like DirectX or OpenGL. It was specifically made for and only supported by 3Dfx accelerator cards. In order to play these games now, especially on computers without 3Dfx cards, a glide wrapper is used. Very simplified, it pretends to be a 3Dfx card/driver. Any call made to glide is intercepted by the glide wrapper, translated into a call (or sequence of calls) in OpenGL or Direct3D. Since your card supports these, it shows up just fine.
Long story short, you can use a glide wrapper on any program written for the glide api. While >>2793202 mentions that the sequels used DirectX, it's occasionally worth it to check if a game supported DirectX AND glide. The simple reason is, in the early days Glide was vastly superior, and the versions of games written for glide often had much more features. SubCulture is a perfect example of the glide version looking brilliant, and the DirectX version looking like a turd.
>>2792710
>I figured this out when I was 10.
She tells you all this in the gym
>>2793408
>The endless amount of enemies and cities
Three levels set in Venice ghettos
>>2792686
>laura
"I'm not misbehaving, I have autism. Please notify the Gestapo."
>>2793429
and a monastry, and some camp in the snow (bad memory). Most of the time you're in places where people live, or work, instead of exploring the unknown, long lost and forgotten
>>2793421
Doesn't matter, people still don't get it.
Besides, I didn't speak English very well when I was 10.
>>2793435
Did you forget the four levels devoted to exploring a massive cruise liner that sank to the bottom of the ocean?
>>2793458
Did you miss the "most" in my statement?
>>2793408
I really dislike the areas in TR2. The first game was all explorations of ancient ruins and puzzles which I loved. 2 Starts off decent with the China levels but then Venice felt completely out of place for me, and the rig although it is technically like a tomb just didn't do it for me. Also, way too many human opponents and much too much combat in general.
>>2793602
The sunken ship is classic and one of the very best TR levels. Oil rig a shit.
My favorite all time classic Tomb Raider level was that Floating Islands one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WRJhUVDLLZ0
>>2793626
The oil rig is OK. It's not the best level but it has its moments in terms of exploring.
Of course it's somehow bigger on the inside than on the outside, using a little "Doctor Who" physics.
>>2793631
>Of course it's somehow bigger on the inside than on the outside
Got a proof of this? TR tends to have geometrically consistent levels due to the engine
>>2793635
You can see it in the outside shots where the rig just doesn't look that big, yet when you're inside it's massive and has to be broken up over 3 - 4 levels.
>>2793626
The design of it is fine, it just wasn't thematically what I wanted from Tomb Raider. No game other than Underworld lived up to the original (and remake) at all in my opinion.
>>2793656
That's what I meant when I said earlier
>the quality of the environments in TR 2 is top notch
>The subjects of the environments (...) killed the game for me
Even Venice, the monastry have beautiful designs. And of course the huge ship, is absolutely fantastic in terms of layout, puzzling and movement. Easily as good as TR 1, if not a bit better. Their subject though, with the exception of the ship, is "wrong" for Tomb Raider. The ship works, because, even though it's a human artifact, it has that lost and forgotten appeal, and the perspective and delivery, was pure genius. The opera, the channels, the monastry, the oil rig though, these aren't locations for Lara and it doesn't feel right to play them. That the devs used the opportunity to inject a lot of enemies only made things worse at that point.
>>2793681
Yup, sorry about that! Easy to get lost.
Heh, I've been replaying the Tomb raider games lately.
Well, from TR3: The Lost Artifact on, because I never finished that one. I'm at TR5 right now which is just weird.
I remember it not being released to much hype and fanfare. The levels are very simplistic and much shorter than in 4. I do like the framing narrative of friends of Lara's telling stories of her that you can play.
The game is still rather on the weak side, but for some reason, it has the most FMV sequences of all of the games I'd say.
It's not bad though if you consider it the add-on to 4 rather than its own game.
I actually 2 is the best of the original series. At least when it comes to look. They really improved from one there, it fells like this what TR1 was supposed to look like.
Unfortunately, while more weapons usually equals more fun, they added too many ranged enemies in form of thugs with guns. Which wouldn't be bad if the classic series' combat wasn't such ass.
I think one of the biggest problems in 2 and 3 was that some levels just didn't really give you any sort of more detailed context on what exactly you are trying to achieve.
Like, in the Venice levels, you were supposed to seek out Bartoli for... information on the dagger? Why he is looking for it? Lara didn't even try opening the door at the end of the first level, so why pull back now because of a mafioso cultist?
So, you start in Venice and look for his hideout. Okay, that's fine. Then you reach the hideout, and leave it by blowing up part of the building to go over the roof to access the Opera House, with no explanation given.
Fucking what?
How did Lara know she had to go there?
How did Lara know she had to take this particular way?
It feels as if a cutscene is missing where she interrogates some thugs about Bartoli's wherabouts.
>>2793732
>At least when it comes to look
Non contest.
>more weapons usually equals more fun
Big mistake. Tomb Raider is not a guns game, and TR 2 tried to turn it into one.
>if the classic series' combat wasn't such ass.
Classic combat is "ass" because Lara is not a combatant. It's a last resort, that she rarely uses. That's at least the vibe she gave off in TR 1. TR 2 and its successors pissed all over that though. Anniversary emphasized it, making clear how Lara even hates to wound someone, and feels really bad about killing someone. Note how most enemies in TR 1 aren't human either, and for good reason.
>Fucking what?
Lazy story telling. "Wouldn't it be cool if we <gimmick>? Stu, write up some bullshit so Lara can do <gimmick> at some point
>>2793740
>Non contest.
Was meant to be "no contest". TR 2 is definitely the peak in terms of visuals, and it would probably be neat if TR 1 would have been "remade" with the skills the level designers showed in TR 2. Chances would also be though, the suits from management would have gutted the story of TR 1 and added more thugs for more "action", so I'm quite happy with what we have.
>>2793740
>Lara is a non combatant
I think the opening scene in TR1 shows that she is. That she didn't face more human enemies was just because it wouldn't really make sense to populate these ancient areas with humans.
Which still doesn't explain all those gorillas and lions.
But hoo boy, at least TR1 and 2 made more sense than the mess that was the London section in 3.
>>2793743
>I think the opening scene in TR1 shows that she is.
The opening scene shows that she knows how to use her guns and will use them to defend. Virtually all her encounters in TR 1 are defensive. Animals are used because of their predatory "instinct" giving a justification for their attacks, and a motivation for Lara's lethal defense, as you supposedly can't reason with an aggressive animal. All the human enemies are shown as cunning, and Lara shoots to disable, not to kill; that's especially made clear in the first cut scene at the waterfall, forgot the name of the dude.
In TR 2 on the other hand, Lara uses her guns offensively, shooting her way into defended areas.
>because it wouldn't really make sense to populate these ancient areas with humans.
She encounters Pierre repeatedly, down to the sanctuary. It's safe to say, if Pierre made it that far, henchmen could as well. Human enemies simply would go against what Lara was portraying in TR 1. They existed in TR 1 to drive the story line and raise the stakes, not to be cannon fodder.
>>2793752
Hm, that makes sense.
To be honest, I don't have much nostalgia for TR1. I started with 3 and then played 2, but 1 I only played on the PS around the time TR5 was already out.
>>2793742
What do you think of the full remake we did get? I quite liked it. An earlier redo in the TR2 engine would have been cool, but if it was between that or Anniversary I'm glad with what we got.
>>2793795
Not him, but i liked how all the locations Lara visits had been essentially made into giant levels with the original start and ending points turned into checkpoints.
And how they were made to make a bit more sense. Khamoon in TR1 was eerie because you were in a cave that was yet brightly lit, in TRA, it was under a bright day sky. Or the Greece section, which sadly was cut down.
But most interesting was the commentary, as it shed some light on the weirder aspects of TR1.
I also think I like the more story focused Lara of the Legend trilogy more than the generic action girl in the classic series that had just gotten a bit sociopathic it felt.
>>2791938
well can you?
>>2791938
http://steamcommunity.com/app/224960/discussions/0/828937979321610311/
>>2793824
ah good ol' dos box
>>2791068
You will understand the jumping delay once you actually see that Lara can only jump when she has a foot touching the ground.
It's very clear when the last possible step before falling down is. They were anything but incompetent.
>>2791467
This guy gets it. Once you notice the grid structure, you realize the controls are designed for precision. For instance, if you walk up to a ledge, tap back once to jump back, and then hold up and then hold jump, you are guaranteed to jump right at the edge, attaining the maximum possible distance. The only time the jump controls are awkward is when you have to jump at an angle.
>>2793881
I thought that platforming can be difficult when you can't quite tell when a slope will be too steep to stand on.
>>2793898
Yeah, that too. It feels like the devs made some of the later levels harder by forcing you into situations where their grid design failed, like slopes and angled jumps. I don't think it was the best decision because those things are what make the game feel flawed.
>>2791479
>sexual caricature
Do you even know what that means? Are you just totally hung up on her looks or something?
It's funny, because the people who go "b-but she's just a sexual caricature!" are the ones who ONLY see how she looks, and don't understand the gameplay.
Me? I play the game, and couldn't care less what she looks like. Also, there's the fact that a TON of male gamers now (and then) don't like the idea of playing as a female character, and will drop games solely because of this. So who exactly are you bitching about? The guys NOT hung up on looks that play the games because they like them? That's really smart of you, anon.
Sure, you've got the pervs, but that's the exception, not the rule.
Seriously though, go fuck yourself you little twat.
>>2790753
I like the game a lot, but it seems to get worse in later levels. Like they used all their good ideas within the first half of the game, then everything after that is just the "B" and "C" ideas.
Still, one of, if not THE best action adventure game of it's era.
Personally, I prefer the PSX version, but I know that /v/tard, false flag /vr/ gamers will rant and rave about frame rate and other nonsense, so I'll keep that to myself (for the most part)
In any event, no matter what platform it's played on, it's a great game that you should play at least once in your life, if you want to call yourself a gamer of any kind. In fact, the only version I've played that I'm NOT too crazy about is the Saturn version. But the hardware limitations are to blame for that.
>>2793898
That's what the careful walking is for.
>>2793881
Actually if you climb up a ledge, quick-roll and run forwards you can get the exact same result since the roll-back distance is exactly the same as the back step.
>>2794058
Not really useful when you are jumping TO the slope over a gap.
>>2793795
I mentioned TRA in one of my earlier posts, actually. I like the game quite a bit, but it's not without its problems. First of all, I loved how TRA managed to recapture the attitude of TR 1 Lara, that explores, more than she fights. That alone makes the game stand out a bit in a sea of action games. I also think TRA managed to beautifully reinterpret the original locations.
However, as I said earlier, the improved visuals also forced the devs to lay down more obvious paths for the player to travel, and it shifted gameplay quite a bit. TR 1 was a lot about observation, and judging the terrain. TRA has a much stronger focus on acrobatic sequences. I don't consider either approach bad, it seems more like different interpretations of the original concept, and I quite like it, but if you wanted to feel like TR 1 again, TRA would let you down in that regard.
Something that I consider a much bigger flaw are the console loading tunnels that TRA is littered with. The original game had very few tunnel-like locations, largely between levels. Within a level the game would just stream everything as one giant grid, so you got big rooms and complex structures wildly connected. In TRA however, there's a very noticable structure of open showcase areas, followed by tunnels, to allow the streaming and loading of these showcase locations, kind of like Metroid does with their doors. At the time around the obelisk these tunnels turned into mindnumbing die-and-repeat sections, that greatly damaged the flow of the game. It's sad, because these tunnels only exist for technical reasons.
All in all, I consider TRA a game I'd strongly recommend to anyone that has an interest in seeing TR 1 with different eyes, and a good introduction to the original Lara as a character.
>>2790753
I honestly think this game is a lot prettier than Mario 64. People criticize the game for its pixelated graphics all the time, as if anti-aliasing and texture filtering wouldn't have made the game ugly as shit. This was the resolution you got on the PlayStation, and smoothing out something this low-res produces horrible results. The game doesn't seem to get any praise for its solid artstyle either, something Mario 64 completely lacks in comparison.
>>2794121
If I remember correctly, if you release the up button in mid-air, Lara will not move at all after landing, so she won't accidentally slide down the slope.
>>2794594
Texture filtering and high resolution was available on the Glide version. You're kind of right though, it made the blocky structures more obvious. The low resolution and unfiltered textures of the software renderer worked together, to produce a more consistent look.
>>2794596
If the slope is too steep I'm pretty sure she will slide down immediately.
Anyway, I kind of miss a primer on Tomb Raider custom level the way DOOM and Thief have gotten.
>>2794609
How available was Tomb Raider's level editor? Also, the way the levels are built, it's a pain in the ass to get more complex structures set up
>>2794615
It's free right now. And they still make levels for it. I guess a primer isn't necessary since all custom levels and campaigns are distributed with their own TR4 exe and run by themselves.
>>2794594
>smoothing out something this low-res produces horrible results
Objectively false. Pic related. Texture filtering almost always looks superior to nearest-neighbor (for textures of identical resolutions) unless the pixelated look is required for a particular artistic style.
Most people think that texture filters are some kind of blur algorithm that works on top of the final product, but this is simply because they don't understand how texture filtering actually works. Bilinear filtering uses 5 times more texel data to create pixels than nearest neighbor does, because you interpolate a texel color with four surrounding texel colors, rather than just grabbing the nearest texel color and just losing whatever texels existed between those pixels.
>>2794606
> it made the blocky structures more obvious
That's because it was a poor implementation of texture filtering, like most early hardware acceleration ports.
You have to interpolate the edge texels of textures with the texels of adjacent texels, otherwise you get a visible seam artifact. This is one of the reason shitty emulation of N64 games produces texture seams that don't exist on the real console.
>>2794624
I have a problem with TR5 and also 4 in that all blocky 3D objects like the door here have their textures obviously segmented. Is that what you mean? Anyway to make it look less bad?
>>2794624
>>2794594 is refering to the problem that when you apply bilinear filtering to very low resolution textures, the result is too smooth to be recognizable. In such cases it can be a much better option to leave it unfiltered and use a smaller render target.
>poor implementation of texture filtering
It was standard bilinear filtering, just like what's used today
You have to interpolate the edge texels of textures with the texels of adjacent texels
That refers to the problem that >>2794630 is describing, which is unrelated to the issue I brought up, and hardly visible on Tomb Raider 1.
It seems like you're missing the point being made. When you have low resolution and unfiltered textures, everything takes on the same blocky and pixelated look, and the simple polygonal structures work just fine to convey the convex landscapes found in Tomb Raider. The viewer fills in the blanks and the game looks good. However, when you apply bilinear filtering to its textures, and increase the resolution, you get a much "better" look at the polygonal structure. Suddently the blocky structure is far more obvious, and the smoothed textures tend to look like fabric wrapped over a wireframe, they're unable to convey any depth.
>>2794630
There's no way I'm aware of to fix this in post processing. It's an aspect of how the textures are applied to the polygons. I don't think it can be fixed with a patch either, since the game uses a texture atlas, so the texels adjacent on the model are not necessarily adjacent on the atlas.
>>2794606
Both texture filtering and perspective correction can be turned on/off in the game's options.
>>2794636
See also: http://freespace.virgin.net/hugo.elias/games/g_poly1.htm
>>2794692
Got a screenshot to prove that? Especially perspective correction is usually something that required hardware support.
>>2790814
>it ain't seein polytits
Someone never played the Nude Raider mod.
>>2794636
>when you apply bilinear filtering to very low resolution textures, the result is too smooth to be recognizable. In such cases it can be a much better option to leave it unfiltered and use a smaller render target.
But that's false. It doesn't matter how big or small your texture is. It still looks better with texturing filtering than none. Why? Because as I wrote above with texture filtering you are displaying pixels calculated with more data.
>When you have low resolution and unfiltered textures, everything takes on the same blocky and pixelated look, and the simple polygonal structures work just fine to convey the convex landscapes found in Tomb Raider. The viewer fills in the blanks and the game looks good. However, when you apply bilinear filtering to its textures, and increase the resolution, you get a much "better" look at the polygonal structure. Suddently the blocky structure is far more obvious, and the smoothed textures tend to look like fabric wrapped over a wireframe, they're unable to convey any depth.
This sounds like nothing but unscientific anecdote. It might be better phrased as an argument that a noisy image tricks the player into seeing detail that doesn't exist.
>>2794967
Just to add more to this here's another image of how a game with low resolution textures actually looks without the aid of bilinear filtering.
As poor as N64 textures are, they would be FAR worse off without that bilinear filter.
>>2794971
And here's one more comparison...
Fuck the derailing, have some more Tomb Raider instead
>>2794967
What a blurry mess, difference beetween normal and bilinear filtering is like between being sober and drunk.
>>2794967
>filtering displays pixels calculated with more data
>???
>therefore, filtering looks better than unfiltered
There's no logical connection there that's going to convince people it looks better. You just look at the pictures and decide for yourself. In Quake I prefer no filtering, in Tomb Raider I do use it for whatever reason.
>>2795091
>There's no logical connection there that's going to convince people it looks better.
Maybe people that operate by nostalgic feelings instead of understanding of actual computer science.
ONLY RETARDS SAY THESE GAMES CONTROL LIKE SHIT
MUST SUCK BEING A BRAINDEAD FUCK
>>2795098
Computer science has nothing to do with trying to "prove" a picture is more attractive.
I see that someone deleted the post which mentioned "data loss" as if we were talking about faithfully reproducing an audio source or something, lol.
>>2795153
>I see that someone deleted the post which mentioned "data loss"
It was deleted by a janitor. I guess that shows how much technical discussion is valued on this board if feeling get hurt by objective facts.
Nearest neighbor IS lossy (and yes, it can be compared to audio) because some texel data is completely discarded during rendering.
Bilinear filtering ensures that far more texel data gets read, even if those texels themselves don't end up being displayed. Even though it's still possible for some texel data to get discarded, it's dramatically less than nearest neighbor. Hence it's less lossy.
http://blog.codinghorror.com/the-myth-of-infinite-detail-bilinear-vs-bicubic/
>Bilinear filtering samples nearby pixels in an effort to guesstimate what the missing pixels would look like in a larger image.
Which is exactly how lossy audio encoders work. The better they guesstimate, the "less lossy" they are. It's not the perfect analogy, but it'll do.
>>2795191
"Lossy" is a very misleading word to use because it implies a goal of faithful reproduction (fidelity), which is definitely NOT the aim of bilinear filtering. The aim to bilinear filtering is to make things look better and less pixelated, not to provide a more "true" version of a texture.
>>2794971
This picture shows a much more faithful reproduction of the textures used, even though I agree it looks much worse. If I wanted to know where the artists originally put all the pixels, seeing the chunky pixel divisions is information I need.
Using a word like "lossy" in this context is just trying to make your preferences sound more objective and there's no need for it. Some people like filtered, some people like unfiltered, it takes two seconds to look at comparison pics and decide and there's no reason to try to convince anyone to change their minds.
>>2795216
>because it implies a goal of faithful reproduction (fidelity), which is definitely NOT the aim of bilinear filtering.
But that is the goal of bilinear filtering. It aims to remove aliasing visual artifacts from resampled images.
How is visual artifact defined?
>anomalies during visual representation
These anomalies were not present in the original image. Hence, the goal of bilinear filtering is an attempt to bring the image closer to the original than nearest neighbor. It achieves this by sampling more data from the original image than nearest neighbor does.
>Some people like filtered, some people like unfiltered
Look, I don't disagree that personal preferences exist, and people can prefer the style of nearest neighbor.
I'm merely pointing out that people act as if nearest neighbor is the *original image* and bilinear filtering has come and tarnished the authenticity of the original when in actual fact, on an objective computer science image processing level, the opposite is true.
That doesn't mean that people shouldn't like nearest neighbor, but they should accept that their preference is for textures with more visual anomalies. And well, some people find anomalies endearing .That's ok.
The inability of the engine to change the fog color was crippling in this scene. Anniversary made me do a spit-take when I saw what this was supposed to be
>>2795245
>on an objective computer science image processing level, the opposite is true.
No, you are just choosing one metric among many and declaring that to be the correct way of measuring fidelity.
Bilinear filtering creates RGB values that did not exist in the source image. By this metric, it is objectively less faithful. In the same vein, it reduces contrast and hard boundaries between values. This is objectively less faithful.
>>2795254
The T-Rex fight in TRA sucked ass though. What was a crazy effective jump scare, followed by several seconds of "oh shi-" in TR 1 turned into a QTE with a minor puzzle, that took so long, it completely normalized the T-Rex, turned it into yet another enemy.
>>2795264
>No, you are just choosing one metric among many and declaring that to be the correct way of measuring fidelity.
The metric I'm choosing is how much data from the input source was used to create the output. And with bilinear filtering, more data is used. That's why it's closer to the original, because more of the original exists in the bilinear output than the nearest neighbor output.
>Bilinear filtering creates RGB values that did not exist in the source image. By this metric, it is objectively less faithful.
Those RGB values are not modified at random. They are modified using data extracted from the original image. The original RGB values are known to the bilinear filtering calculation.
Nearest neighbor simply discards RGB data. The data it discards is absolutely unknown to the nearest neighbor calculation. It doesn't even read those RGB values.
> In the same vein, it reduces contrast and hard boundaries between values. This is objectively less faithful.
This comment is absolute rubbish as the original image doesn't have hard boundaries that nearest neighbor produces, so bilinear is objectively MORE faithful.
If your original source image, does in fact have hard straight boundaries, then that's one of the few test cases you would not use bilinear filtering for.
>>2795285
>more data is used. That's why it's closer to the original
Why don't I make every pixel the average of ALL the other pixels in the image? Then I'm using the most amount of data possible. Your metric is completely arbitrary, dude.
>>2795302
>Your metric is completely arbitrary, dude.
Because you're inventing fucking strawmans dude. Bilinear interpolation is NOT an arbitrary mathematical algorithm. Bilinear filtering is merely an image processing implementation of the bilinear interpolation algorithm.
Your posts are the equivalent of troll logic science. Why does it work? It's goddamn mathematics.
Let's say you have four values. Which of the following outputs represents those four values as a whole more?
Output A) Averaging the four values
Output B) Grabbing one of those four values at random
>>2795329
You're trying to make a fact out of the concept of beauty out of maths.
You're an insane scientistic. Like, it's your religion.
>>2795329
That's a pretty good example, actually, and the answer is "it depends on what you're trying to do." B) tells me what one, at least, of the four values was. A) makes it impossible to know what any of the values were. If you think that's a question with an obvious, objectively correct answer, then that's the problem.
>>2795347
>If you think that's a question with an obvious, objectively correct answer, then that's the problem.
I don't think it's a problem with an objectively correct answer. And that is precisely why I said bilinear filtering is not always the best solution.
But you have to agree that most of the time A would be the correct answer.
B would only be the correct answer if you know with almost complete certainty that an operand on those four values would result in one of those four values being returned.
An image processing equivalent would be an image that is composed of absolutely straight lines. That's definitely one situation you don't want to use bilinear.
>>2795254
>The inability of the engine to change the fog color was crippling in this scene
from this video it seems the PowerVR was able to do colored fog
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5GMesT4WKzI
>>2791726
>I have all 5 volumes of the tomb raider comics they made into tankobon form
>Tankobon
it's TPB you weeb
>>2794992
Those fuckers freak me out even today.
Anyone else?
>>2795868
Hoarding ammo and not using them until Atlantis? Everytime.
Magnums are super useful early on, and I'll use the shotgun a couple of times when I need to take out something up close in a one or two shots, but at Atlantis I say 'fuck it', and use Uzis exclusively.
Same with not using the Grenade Launcher until Floating Islands/Dragon's Lair in TR2.
That 3D engine is weird. Everything is sort of Minecrafty, built from cubic segments. Although their top faces can be sloped for a sort of heighmap effect when you want to do terrain.
>>2796946
weird, but powerful. The grid makes it trivial for the engine to figure out what to load when. The columns allow for complex terrains, and the different slows allow for complex terrain interaction, while keeping collision detection sane.
>>2796969
No doubt. I assumed it was done that way because TR1 was originally created for the Saturn which renders in quads.
I remember this is why TR1 was one of the first polygonal Pocket PC games. There's also more recent engines designed for weak platforms based on that type of engine like Yeti 3D, Cube and Cube 2 ("Sauerbraten")
>>2790753
>pop in Tomb Raider 2
>looks fucking god awful, can't tell anything apart from anything. Literally 30 seconds into the first part of the game, can't even escape this weird ass gray pixel cave I'm in
Nope.
>>2796972
I doubt very much that quads have anything to do with it, the gain is too little, and the engine "wastes" a bit of polygon count by forcing everything to be the same sized cubes. If you got a large flat floor, you'd want to use fewer polygons for that, but can't.
What's much more useful is that you can move Lara's 2D map coordinates instantly to a pillar (just bitshift the coordinates and you got the index in the level data), and hence a floor and a ceiling. No complex collision detection needed. That alone saves so much computation, that you can actually do the complex environments you see in the game.
>>2796976
Someone hasn't realized how to make the resolution higher than 320*200
>>2795868
I'm working on my hoarding habit for games in general.
For TR games, I generally use the pistols whenever I can find a safe spot or the opponent is so far away that shooting them is no problem.
It's only in other situations that I will use other guns. In TR2, I will mostly use the Magnums (or Automatic Pistols as they were renamed) if I'm faced with a lot of ranged mafia assassins.
TR4 had some really weird ammo distribution imo. The entire first half is chock full of shotgun ammo, but starting from Cairo it gets rarer and rarer.
I also found it weird how the Revolver was basically TR4's Desert Eagle, but in TR5 it got significantly nerfed while they also re-added the DE.
Say, some levels in TR2 felt like they were initially supposed to be one level that got divided up. Like, to me the Wreck of the Maria Doria and the Living Quarter level being seperate levels was just kind of odd. Then again with the Catacombs and Ice Palace in Tibet. You can even see the palace in the beginning area of the catacombs.
>>2797020
>some levels in TR2 felt like they were initially supposed to be one level that got divided up
Most levels in TR 1 are "connected" to look like one big area. For example first level to second level, has that tunnel. Second to third, has the waterfall. In Greece the same thing.
One area being a sequence of levels with a clear connection has been something very typical for Tomb Raider since day 1.
>>2797025
I was talking about TR2 specifically. Like, they were making a level and the engine couldn't handle the size or realized it was just TOO large a level, so they divided it up.
After exploring the upside down main portion of the wreck, was there really a point going through the living quarters that were just another part, but right up this time?
>Most levels in TR 1 are "connected" to look like one big area.
And in TRA they really were.
>>2797032
>was there really a point going through the living quarters that were just another part, but right up this time?
The ship was split apart when it wrecked, not all parts stayed upright
>And in TRA they really were.
Explain. I didn't find TRA more connected than TR 1. In fact, the tunnels made it look more disconnected.
>>2797036
>The ship was split apart when it wrecked, not all parts stayed upright
I know. But the Wreck was already a big level, so going through yet another part of the ship felt like a drag.
>>2797036
All locations were one huge level, with the original level ends and starts having become checkpoints. You can walk from Vilcabamba to the beginning of the Caverns, for example.
>>2797039
>with the original level ends and starts having become checkpoints
That's precisely how TR 1 worked. Level 1 to 2, for example, Lara stays in the exact same location. Only the doors are open/closed differently for the next level.
Meanwhile in TRA every major location, even within a level, is connected by a tunnel of random acrobatics. Instead of each level being one big location, several levels are a string of small locations. I'm not sure that's an improvement.
>>2797041
That's not precisely how it works, as they are separate levels/maps with loading in between. In TRA, Peru, Greece etc. are continuous maps.
>>2797043
Every single tunnel is a loading/streaming opportunity. That's precisely why they're in there. The only difference is the way the loading is visualized between the two games. TR 1 gives you a quick progress bar, TRA bores you with random acrobatics.
>>2797048
>I rather sit and watch a bar grow than actually use gameplay elements
Sorry, that sounds terribly dull.
>>2791469
Legends is my favorite modern TR. Short, but the levels are great and I really liked the banter between the characters.
>>2796976
Really? Getting out is easy. If that part frustrated you then perhaps it's best you skip the rest of the game.
Tr1 & tr2 are god tier, it was downhill after tr2.
>>2797050
Every damn scaling part in TRA is the same. Assassin's Creed wall running would've been preferable to that chore, because doing that crap is not playing the game.
Navigating St. Francis' Folly was nothing short of a nightmare.
>>2797935
I really liked Chronicles. It was the first TR that I actually managed to finish (I had tried TR 1-3 before, but could never pass the first chunk of levels in any game. I was just a kid back then, though)
>>2797032
>in TRA they really were connected
This is not my memory. TRA levels were considerably shrunk and streamlined, with fewer large open areas and simple connections between the level sections.
I believe you if you say that there are places where in TRA you can walk from A to B that were originally in separate maps in TR, but it sounds to me like that's because they condensed and simplified the layouts, not because TRA combined huge maps into even huger ones.
Haven't played TRA, but boy did they royally fuck up The Lost Valley, and probably every other level. Gone is the eerie, lonely, dark atmosphere, replaced with bullshit bright, exotic jungle.
>>2799046
That opinion is a bit prejudiced. The devs of TR 1 intended for the valley to be a valley (it's in the TRA commentary) but the engine just used inform black fog. So the valley in TRA is actually closer to the original vision. The truly underground parts are just as dark and interesting as before.
>>2799063
Disagree. It's mostly good, but the music cues are worse (the action music in particularly is not very TR1-ish) and it's awful when games insist on introducing cool moments via cutscenes and QTEs instead of natural exploration and feeling like something is just happening to you as you play.
>>2795254
Not having had it spoiled and TR1 being my first PS game, that scene still totally knocked my socks off when it happened.
>>2798274
Chronicles was ok. But i vividly remember playing tr3 and thinking that it sucks shit.
The franchise lost its appeal to me after Tr2 really.
>>2801310
For me it was the first game then it started losing appeal. I loved the first one so much that I kept playing them, but none ever lived up to it again. 2 is one of my least favorites because it was such a tonal shift from the first game and that stuck.
TR to me was about empty tombs, ancient puzzles and being attacked by animals. Not gunfights in Venice and sunken ships.
>>2801396
Not retro, but Underworld felt a lot like a return to the TR1 style of game. I highly recommend it.
>>2791469
>Underworld which is an incredible game
Hold forward to win is an incredible game? Jesus christ man. Credit where it's due as it's the first TR to successfully stir my loins ingame, rather than some shitty prerender but as a game it's just too fucking easy and inconsequential.
>>2803724
Your mom was too fucking easy and inconsequential
>>2803736
>>2792568
>muh 8k display
kill urself, youve upscaled that image
>>2803724
>Hold forward to win is an incredible game?
Did you even play it? I don't even get where you would get that from. It's not like Tomb Raider was actually difficult, it's an exploring puzzles game
>>2801396
Maybe there was a tonal shift, and I also missed the dark caves and tombs, but throughout all 5 games, every one of them managed to keep that amazing sense of loneliness. Why can't games these days have that?
How do I get the first few to work on Win7? I tried installing them a few months ago but none worked, and they won't recognize my soundcard on my 98 PC.
>>2803879
le gog
I never actually finished TR1 ad a kid, but I did tonight. Didn't expect the direction the fame was taking. Really enjoyed it, anyway.
>>2804172
Tomb Raider 1 is a borderline horror game to me from the start, so I totally expected the direction the game eventually took.
>>2801396
I understand this feeling about TR1 vs TR2, but replaying them both I felt that TR2 added so much with the level complexity, dynamic lighting, and extra moves (climbing is great, and sidestepping/rolling mid-air are a huge help for movement) that it made up for it. I was disappointed when I first played TR2, but now that I know what to expect, I can appreciate all the improvements they made.
>>2791376
>I'm 12
I played TR2 first, though I have beat both. I love the level design of 1, which is really great, but overall I think 2 is the better game.
>>2791376
Quake predates it by one day, so go fuck yourself.
>>2791850
I've loved this stage
>>2791561
I was borderline comatose while playing the "new" TR. It's so boring. The voice acting is boring. The cutscenes are boring. The combat is boring. The puzzles are boring. The environments are boring. The weapons are boring. The CONTROLS are boring. The exploration, of all things, is boring. The entire game was a snooze-fest designed to pander to normies and their dull sensibilities because Square Enix of all publishers decided we needed a reboot of a perfectly dead franchise.
