The Raven

The Raven (http://raven.theraider.net/index.php)
-   Indy Video Games (http://raven.theraider.net/forumdisplay.php?f=8)
-   -   Indiana Jones Vs. Tomb Raider Games, Which is better (http://raven.theraider.net/showthread.php?t=14213)

DiscoLad 05-11-2008 09:54 PM

Indiana Jones Vs. Tomb Raider Games, Which is better
 
These games are both very good in there own ways...TR= Good Graphics for the times and the smokin' hot girl...IJ= Cool lookin'-Nazi-beatin'-whip crackin' guy- But they both have there flaws, like Tomb Raider is slow and Indy is Not the best graphics game out there... What do you guys think..?

Nurhachi1991 05-12-2008 12:29 AM

I think Indy should bang Tomb Raider

The Tingler 05-12-2008 08:30 AM

As if you have to ask!

The only time TR and Indy have gone up against each other (figuratively) was in 1999 with Tomb Raider: The Last Revelation and Indiana Jones and the Infernal Machine.

Infernal Machine was superior.

All the Indy games differ wildly whereas Lara Croft has stayed the same since the first Tomb Raider. While they are fun games (except for Angel of Darkness) they are also extremely irritating.

Finn 05-12-2008 09:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Tingler
Infernal Machine was superior.

As an Indyfan, I agree.

As an objective game reviewer, I call it a tie. Indy had better level design and story, yet the game mechanics were a little "stiff" compared to TR4 that played rather fluid.

My personal preference too is IM, but I wouldn't say it's "superior".

The Tingler 05-13-2008 12:13 PM

This is a general gamer talking. I got a few levels into The Last Revelation and got both pissed off and bored at the same time - something I've never managed before or since.

The neverending Egypt setting gets tedious, the storyline was boring, the controls were the same as always - impossible to predict (Indy's controls may be stiff, but at least they allow some degree of accuracy with jumps), and both character and camera had minds of their own.

Nah, Infernal Machine all the way.

DiscoLad 05-13-2008 07:06 PM

Amen to the boredom of TR. I've only played a few minutes worth but it was ultimatly boring.

|ZiR| 05-13-2008 10:04 PM

I think Tomb Raider might be just a tiny bit more fun than Indy, or at least The Emperor's Tomb.

Though it's been years since I last played a TM, my friend and I played the hell out of one the of PS games back in the day. I remember she had two guns, and two is always cooler than one; plus I seem to recall something about a T-Rex enemy. (Might be mixing my games up, idk.)

TM had an okay soundtrack, too. Nothing like classic orchestral style music to accompany rapid gunfire. :gun: One thing that does strike me as odd is that they never tried to make her look like a real person, even in the later games. I guess Lara Croft is meant to be more of a cartoon character than a human.

Still. I have to go with the original tomb raider: Indiana Jones. His games span various genres, unlike TR, which keeps me coming back to them, whereas I haven't touched a TR game since the late 90s.

Perhilion 05-13-2008 10:54 PM

*sigh* what a pointless question. you know everyone will say Indy...except me! Lara dominates Indy when it comes to gaming. Now, comparing their treasure hunting skills-I think it would be a tie.

indifan101 05-14-2008 06:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nurhachi1991
I think Indy should bang Tomb Raider


I second that:D

ResidentAlien 05-14-2008 08:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by |ZiR|
One thing that does strike me as odd is that they never tried to make her look like a real person, even in the later games. I guess Lara Croft is meant to be more of a cartoon character than a human.


Heh, not really. They definitely made her more realistic for Tomb Raider: Legend. Toned down her bust, and heightened the level of realism a good deal. And from what I've seen of Anniversary (haven't played it yet myself), it looks even more realistic.

...she still does crazy acrobatics, though. That much hasn't changed. And in fact, some of her acrobatics have gotten even more outlandish in the newer entries.

The Tingler 05-14-2008 08:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by |ZiR|
Though it's been years since I last played a TM


What the heck's a TM?

|ZiR| 05-14-2008 10:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Tingler
What the heck's a TM?

It's a typo. I meant "TR," as in "Tomb Raider." Sorry. I really need to read my posts before I hit the submit button. :o

Quote:

Originally Posted by ResidentAlien
Heh, not really. They definitely made her more realistic for Tomb Raider: Legend. Toned down her bust, and heightened the level of realism a good deal. And from what I've seen of Anniversary (haven't played it yet myself), it looks even more realistic.


I did not know that. Interesting.

ResidentAlien 05-14-2008 10:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by |ZiR|
I did not know that. Interesting.



Yeah and Tomb Raider: Legend is my favorite of those I've played. Played through the entire game in under a week; absolutely addicting.

Ska 05-14-2008 12:22 PM

Anniversary is just as addicting. The graphics and engine of Legend, with the story and locations of the original. It's the perfect Tomb Raider.

And let's be honest, Indy games haven't been that great. Sure FOA is very good, but the rest are "meh". Both Infernal Machine and Emperor's Tomb have their high points...but the low's outweigh the high's. Although I'll never tire of throwing bad guys off cliffs and roofs in ET...

That's not saying that the Tomb Raider series is flawless. TR3 and Chronicles bored the hell out of me. Taking Lara out of the tombs and into urban locations is not my style of TR.

And (even though it had a lot of urban locations) I've enjoyed what I've played of Angel of Darkness. I just recently bought it, after being scared of the horrible reviews. Sure the gameplay isn't very tight, but the story is kinda compelling. It has more of a Dan Brown novel feel than an adventure feel.

For what it's worth (which is nothing):
I'd give the TR games an average of 8.0.
I'd give the Indy games an average of 7.0.

Both have room for improvement (see Uncharted: Drake's Fortune for setting the bar). If they made an Indy game in the style of Uncharted (meaning making it more of a movie...since that IS what Indiana Jones games are inspired by), the Indy games could be a force to be reckoned with.

-Jones- 05-14-2008 01:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ResidentAlien
Toned down her bust


You have to be jocking xD....

Perhilion 05-14-2008 05:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ResidentAlien
Yeah and Tomb Raider: Legend is my favorite of those I've played. Played through the entire game in under a week; absolutely addicting.

wow. that's quite a contrast of the general opinion of the TR fan community (myself included). It's fun, but just doesn't feel TR to me.
Quote:

Amen to the boredom of TR. I've only played a few minutes worth but it was ultimatly boring.
Which one did you play? If it was one of the classics (old ones) then you didn't play enough. That "boredom" is what us TR fans love so much about the classics: you get to thoroughly explore your environment, having to figure out puzzles on your own instead of having your hand held like so many games do these days. And the slow pace is almost always interrupted by some new enemy or trap. Trust me, if you like Indy (but not so much that you damn any other treasure hunter to hell) then you should give one of the classics TRs, say TRII (seen as the best), a shot. You'll like it. Unless you're into the fast-paced run and gun bloody-gore fest games have become.
Quote:

Nah, Infernal Machine all the way.
Ironic, since that game is basically TR with Indy's skin on it. You played The Last Revelation? Wrong TR to start with. It's very hardcore, even some TR fans don't like it. I suggest trying Chronicles to ease into it, or if you want the best experience play TR I or II.

ResidentAlien 05-14-2008 05:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by -Jones-
You have to be jocking xD....


No.

In fact, I coulda sworn I read an article about the bust reduction too. She's definitely scaled down considerably. Just look at the cartoon proportions in earlier games.


EDIT:


http://kotaku.com/gaming/playstation...oft-037768.php

Perhilion 05-14-2008 05:15 PM

She definitely has. Looks much more human now.

DiscoLad 05-14-2008 05:24 PM

Well, really here...That new Indy gmaes gonna blow TR out of the water... Agreed?

Perhilion 05-14-2008 05:25 PM

how can we possibly know that? we know next to nothing about it. just because it has good graphics, physics, etc, doesn't mean it'll be fun. if it's ever released.

DiscoLad 05-14-2008 05:38 PM

She's not realistic at all!
No archeologist runs around in tight daisy dukes and a skimpy tank-top...

DiscoLad 05-14-2008 05:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Perhilion
how can we possibly know that? we know next to nothing about it. just because it has good graphics, physics, etc, doesn't mean it'll be fun. if it's ever released.


That's enough for me to make the assumption

Perhilion 05-14-2008 06:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DiscoLad
She's not realistic at all!
No archeologist runs around in tight daisy dukes and a skimpy tank-top...

and no archaeologist runs around in a leather jacket with a bullwhip fighting Nazis for treasure.

-Jones- 05-14-2008 06:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ResidentAlien
No.


One way or the other, her breasts are too big.

ResidentAlien 05-14-2008 06:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by -Jones-
One way or the other, her breasts are too big.



No. There are many women who are naturally well-endowed. Many more-so than Lara, especially in her latest adventures.

Personally, I don't hold to the adage that bigger is better, but she's not absurdly anatomically incorrect.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:59 PM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.