TR: Underworld - no reviews/opinions here yet?

[fallenangle]

I've read a rather mixed review at Eurogamer for TR: Underworld and there are a few others like Edge's but I'm surprised nobody here has had anything to say about it yet.

The Eurogamer review gets more than a little stick in their forum but read pretty fair to me. It makes it sounds like Crystal Dynamics have spent much of their time on inconsequential graphical features rather than gameplay polish or (heaven forbid) genuine originality. This is a criticism that seems it could be applied to so many games this generation. Otherwise everything else, both good and bad from the entire series, appear to have been included amost verbatim.

It certainly doesn't put me off, far from it, but I'd like to hear more from gamers with no particular axe to grind who have the game about what they think.

[Neon Ignition]

I've got the game but haven't really spent much time with it due to the wave of recent releases I'm still wading through. Early first impressions? I liked Legacy/Anniversary and this feels very similar. The lighter controls make me feel like it'll be an improvement on those but not by much, certainly won't convert anyone to the cause. Visually its nice but still playing catch up in gameplay & visuals to the still, definately better Uncharted

[Spatial]

Lack of reviews could be due to Eidos doing some more `Kane & Lynch` behaviour if you believe this

Eidos UK PR firm Barrington Harvey has confirmed that British sites are being asked not to post Tomb Raider: Underworld reviews with scores lower than 80 percent until Monday.

The game releases today for 360 and PS3.

Gamespot UK journalist Guy Cocker revealed the tactic in a Twitter post on Wednesday that said: ?call from Eidos?if you?re planning on reviewing Tomb Raider Underworld at less than an 8.0, we need you to hold your review till Monday.?

Said a Barrington Harvey rep on the phone this afternoon: ?That?s right. We?re trying to manage the review scores at the request of Eidos.?

When asked why, the spokesperson said: ?Just that we?re trying to get the Metacritic rating to be high, and the brand manager in the US that?s handling all of Tomb Raider has asked that we just manage the scores before the game is out, really, just to ensure that we don?t put people off buying the game, basically.?

British site Eurogamer has already gone live with a 7/10 score, an act the rep said had caused ?problems?.

OXM UK has also posted a 7.0 score.

The news is unlikely to go down well. Eidos?s efforts at controlling review scores are still fresh in the mind: it was a row over Gamespot?s 6/10 review of Kane & Lynch that cost popular US journalist Jeff Gerstmann his job.

Tomb Raider: Underworld?s Metacritic average stands at 78 percent.

followed by this

Barrington Harvey is not in the position of telling reviewers what they can and cannot say. We love Tomb Raider and believe it merits a score of at least 8/10, but if someone disagrees that?s entirely their prerogative. No problem at all. Seriously: no problem.

Our original NDA stated that in order to receive an advance copy of the game, reviewers agreed not to post reviews ahead of 5:00pm, Wednesday 19th November 2008. Nothing else. No further obligations whatsoever.

As you can clearly see from the scores posted so far, Barrington Harvey has no issue with scores of below eight out of 10 being posted online. The Eurogamer review in questions caused ?problems? in so much as it originally contained a couple of minor factual inaccuracies which, to its credit, the site has quickly rectified and addressed (without, quite rightly, changing the context of the review).

Any site, be it Gamespot or whoever, is entirely within their rights to post whatever score they want and no-one is under any sort of obligation to delay any review.

As an ex-journalist myself, I firmly believe in editorial integrity and the right to express an individual opinion. As an agency, we never - ever - make demands of the press in terms of awarding scores; at the end of the day, they are free to score as they wish.

Barrington Harvey has been working hard to ensure the launch scores of Tomb Raider Underworld are in line with our internal review predictions over the launch weekend - but to suggest that we can in some way ?silence? reviews of the game is slightly overstating our influence.

[fallenangle]

Thanks (craytaxinext), look forwards to hearing more.

I found the Wii review at IGN and it wasn't that good but mainly due to the reviewer said felt like tacked on and not very good. motion controls. This makes me slightly happier as people have said the Wii version, at least graphically, is similar to the PS2 version, the only one I'm likely to get to play.

I read that thing about the claims Eidos were trying to manipulte the reviews scores, and the rebutal, elsewhere. It's a pretty disturbing claim to make because it suggests that 'honest' reviews or at least honest ratings won't be allowed by the publisher. I can't think of any other media form where that would even be allowed let alone accepted by journallists/reviewers with any integrity.

If I was put in that situation I'd be tempted to simply lay into the game in the body of the review but still rate it 10/10 and hope readers would understand the irony intended.

[SuperBeatBoy]

I'm going to get it when it gets cheap like Legend. I heard it has a really dissapointing ending and i thought the one in Legend was bad enough.

[sj33]

It's difficult to give Eidos the benefit of the doubt, given their track record with this kind of thing.

Eurogamer have a habbit of giving a game a review score which does not reflect the text of the review. That said, 7/10 is a fair score for a high-quality Tomb Raider game, that is unfortunately conservative to the extent that anyone expecting any kind of real progress will be disappointed.

[melody]

Having finished Uncharted I find the new gen Tomb Raider games completely unplayable, the camera and general logic behind the platforming and puzzles is woeful. Also Nate > Lara!

I find the DLC and media bullying very distasteful too.

[rmoxon]

I thought the demo of this was rubbish and has the worst camera ever made, so I doubt many people are intrested in it anymore.

[fallenangle]

I thought the demo of this was rubbish and has the worst camera ever made, so I doubt many people are intrested in it anymore.

If you think TR's camera is the "worst ever" you clearly can't have played as many 3D platformers as I have. Unless they've ballsed it up completely I can't imagine it's that much worse than Legend or Anniversary and they're playable, if far from perfect, camera-wise.

One thing I noticed in one of the reviews is that they said the camera sometimes gets stuck. Certainly not a unique fault but it reminded me particularly of a similar problem with Crystal Dynamics' Soul Reaver (which I recently replayed on DC). The camera required much more management than the old TR games ever did.

[rmoxon]

If you think TR's camera is the "worst ever" you clearly can't have played as many 3D platformers as I have. Unless they've ballsed it up completely I can't imagine it's that much worse than Legend or Anniversary and they're playable, if far from perfect, camera-wise.

One thing I noticed in one of the reviews is that they said the camera sometimes gets stuck. Certainly not a unique fault but it reminded me particularly of a similar problem with Crystal Dynamics' Soul Reaver (which I recently replayed on DC). The camera required much more management than the old TR games ever did.

The camera is alot worse than in tomb raider legend and anniversary, or at least it was in the demo.

Most of the time you cant actualy tell what angle youre suppose to jump at and unless you get it exactly right you die, likewise you can oiften jump in the right direction but the camera will turn while youre in midair and you will end up falling to your death. I play alot of games and I wasnt joking, the camera was one of the worst ive ever seen.

Its also got nothing to do with you having to manage the camera, its that the camera tries to manage itself and its completely useless at it.

[Dogg Thang]

I haven't played the new game or the demo. But while the camera was a pain in the ass the odd time in the last two games (especially because some moves were camera-dependent, unlike the early games), I have certainly experienced worse.

Though I'd be expecting something as fundamental to the game as the camera to get better, not worse.

[sj33]

I did find the camera annoying in the Underworld demo, much moreso than Legends or Anniversary... but not to the extent that it's gamebreaking. What put me off from buying the game was that it's nothing we've not played before, thus maybe better off waiting until a sub-?20 price tag.

[fallenangle]

I've read a few comments from some of my more reliable TR online 'chums' at places like Gamefaqs and you're right quite a few are complaing about the camera. They report exactly the sort of thing mentioned ie. the shifts of the camera during position dependent moves. That was sometimes a bit of a problem in Anniversary too, particularly the balancing pole pits in Egypt and certain notorious grapple swing tasks during the game.

[Wools]

I loved the Demo and had no problems whatsoever, so much so it's the game I've asked for Christmas and going by the Edge score of 8 it should be brillaint.

Don't understand the hate from what I've played of the Demo and Uncharted, whilst fun, gets far too much praise on here.

[Salsa Party Animal]

Me think I will wait until it drop to 18 quids or thereabout.