Forums > Game Forums > Tomb Raider: The Lost Artifact > Why are the controls so bad?
chirinea (47495) on 2/6/2014 4:11 AM · edited · Permalink · Report
Recently I bought Lara Croft Tomb Raider: Anniversary, and it prompted me to play this one instead, which is in my backlog since god knows when. For the sake of continuity I should probably play the remake of the first one, but I don't have the second or the third, so there.
I've tried played this one before, and I rage-quit it. This time I'm super resilient, but not less enraged: the controls are awful! Back when the first one came out, I remember being in awe; graphics were great for the time, the atmosphere was cool and the controls seemed OK. Maybe it was because everything was harder back in the day, maybe I got spoiled by modern games. Or maybe the series got worse as time passed.
To give you some perspective: this game tracks how long you took to beat a level. I just finished the first one, and it says it took me 38 minutes. Yeah, 38 minutes because you're not counting all the time I spent reloading my last save because I missed the last jump! This game is basically: reach a platform; look around to see where you'll jump next; save; [jump; miss; reload]x99; reach a platform (and restart this ordeal).
Sometimes you have something in the ground you want to pick up. You walk toward it, stop in front of it, press the action button. Nothing happens. Give a baby step forward, press the action button: nothing. Give a baby step to the left, press the action button. Well, you see what I'm getting to, you take forever to beat a level not because it is long, but because it becomes artificially longer due to the terrible controls!
I hope they've fixed it in the later releases, specially in this Anniversary one I bought.
Adzuken (836) on 2/6/2014 4:37 AM · Permalink · Report
Man, my two most prominent memories of the Tomb Raider series are its terrible controls and the shifting textures of the Playstation versions. Also locking the butler in the refrigerator in the second game. Heh!
I really need to get around to playing those games.
vedder (70822) on 2/6/2014 8:12 AM · edited · Permalink · Report
By today's standards the controls are definitely not very refined. It's similar to the old Prince of Persia in that it's both grid and animation based. You can only stand on grid positions and usually you can't interrupt animations. You must also take into account it was designed to be played with a PlayStation controller. So that's a time before analogue sticks (and the reason people have much fonder memories of Mario 64's controls).
I loved Tomb Raider 2 when I bought it way back when. And played through Tomb Raider 1 a while back. The controls took getting used to, but in the end I thought it was o.k. You just have to take the game at a more leisurely pace. Also remember that controls are chained. So if you press the jump button during a run, Lara will jump at the first possible moment where the animation will allow it. This is different from most modern games where input is more instantaneous. In effect it means you have to press buttons slightly before you want their action to happen. I find it helps to just hold the jump button instead of just pressing it.
EDIT: Also I played a bit of one of the newer games, but was thoroughly disappointed. Though the controls are more modern and easier to use, I found the games had lost all atmosphere and appeal to me. Not sure why.
chirinea (47495) on 2/6/2014 9:41 PM · edited · Permalink · Report
Yeah, I get the similarities with Prince of Persia. I love Prince-like games, the fidelity of characters' movements always had a special place in my heart. And that's probably why I didn't realize TR controls sucked this much back in the day. But you know, once you eat filet mignon it's hard to get used to eat some cheaper beef again. It seems to me that in 2D it was done right; in 3D we had to wait things like the Sands of Time trilogy to get it properly done. I bet that badly implemented controls are what made Prince of Persia 3D flop.
After some time you get used to the controls; the timing for the jumping isn't such an issue now, but directing Lara still is a bit tough. It took me considerably less time to beat the second level (I just did it) than the first, though the clock has 20-something minutes of gameplay for the second one. Right in the beginning of the level there are some quick response sections that are only beatable after you've memorized what will happen. It's a lot of trial and error, and that's a design option, it seems.
Oh well, I guess I'll beat it this time, if I keep this pace.
Indra was here (20755) on 2/7/2014 3:37 AM · Permalink · Report
What is this obsession between South Americans and Prince of Persia? :p I haven't insulted dr. Katze in weeks. Dude, you still alive?
vedder (70822) on 2/7/2014 8:39 AM · edited · Permalink · Report
[Q --start chirinea wrote--]It seems to me that in 2D it was done right; in 3D we had to wait things like the Sands of Time trilogy to get it properly done.[/Q --end chirinea wrote--]
Sands of Time definitely was an eye opener that forever changed the minimum requirements for all future 3D platform games. And play enough Assassin's Creed and every other third person action game's controls will feel clunky and outdated in comparison :)
Parf (7873) on 2/7/2014 10:15 AM · Permalink · Report
I actually found the controls in the first AC (only one I've played) to be extremely weird, as it didn't feel like he did what I wanted, but had an agenda of his own. The guy doesn't understand to "attach" to a wall and run up it while at an angle, so he'd do some weird air sprint and end up falling all over. It felt like they wanted so badly for the game to look cool that they compensated on the free movement of the character.
Donatello (466) on 2/8/2014 5:52 AM · Permalink · Report
Sorry, but whoever complains about Tomb Raider's controls loses instant respect in my eyes. Or, to put it more lightly, I don't think it's a valid criticism.
The controls are structured, responsive and fit the level design and required jumping perfectly.
The only entry in the series that one might complain about in this aspect is the first one, because of the delay in long jumps, which has been fixed since TR2.
chirinea (47495) on 2/8/2014 2:54 PM · Permalink · Report
I'm sorry if I'm going on your black list for criticizing the controls, but if you think that it is OK that Lara can't get an object from the ground unless it is standing exactly between her feet (and in just one possible position, it seems), then I don't care much about respect, I guess. =)
Donatello (466) on 2/9/2014 3:55 AM · Permalink · Report
I apologize for my wording there. Came off a lot more rude then I wanted to.
Well, I don't remember having a problem with picking up objects, and I was playing the first game about a year ago. Generally, you're not required to pick up any objects quickly, and when it comes to switches, especially underwater ones, there's quite a bit of leniency as the game autopositions you to pull the switch.
I just feel that you have a wrong judgment on the controls. That amounts to criticizing a novel with an argument "well, I didn't find the main character sympathetic (ie he wasn't following my moral compass), therefore it sucks."
chirinea (47495) on 2/10/2014 12:04 AM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Donatello wrote--]I apologize for my wording there. Came off a lot more rude then I wanted to.
Well, I don't remember having a problem with picking up objects, and I was playing the first game about a year ago. Generally, you're not required to pick up any objects quickly, and when it comes to switches, especially underwater ones, there's quite a bit of leniency as the game autopositions you to pull the switch.
I just feel that you have a wrong judgment on the controls. That amounts to criticizing a novel with an argument "well, I didn't find the main character sympathetic (ie he wasn't following my moral compass), therefore it sucks." [/Q --end Donatello wrote--]Don't worry, I'm not offended. =)
Anyway, my judgement on the controls are a matter of opinion, of course, so I don't expect that everybody agrees with me. As some other people on this thread also had some issues with it, I bet it isn't an unanimous position that the controls are good. I understand that you're saying they were designed to be like that, and I respect the decision of the developers, then. It's just that I don't like their decision. =)
Anyway, by now I'm enjoying playing the game. It still has a lot of trial and error, but it's kinda fun to explore the levels. I don't know if you're familiar with this game in particular, but just to give one example of what's wrong with it (and I guess my problem isn't with the controls anymore, but with the design): you're supposed to go down in a certain drill hole. It is a square hole with half height walls which you can't climb: they're downward slopes on the other side. So you have to jump the little wall, turn the other side during the jump and then grab the ledge at the end of the slope. Meanwhile, the drill is coming down. You can't see anything while facing the wall, so it's hard to know what to do next. You're supposed to go down the wall a bit, then go to the right and let yourself fall into a platform below (which also is a slope, but not that steep so you won't slide). From there you have to jump to the other side and then you can proceed. The problem is that you can't plan your moves: you have to try your moves, die and reload.
I bet that watching a speedrun for the game is beautiful, because you get to see the person doing all this acrobatics in a fluid way, but trying to do the thing is ugly. You die, and die and die. It's kinda like Super Meat Boy, but a bit worse, because there you could see what to do, here you can't. There you died because you wasn't able to do the tricks, here you die because you can't see what you have to do beforehand.
Again, it's not as I'm not having fun; it's just that the fun comes with a lot of (in my opinion) unnecessary sacrifice.
Lain Crowley (6629) on 3/21/2014 7:10 AM · Permalink · Report
You are operating under one false pretense, at least. One that has molded game design from let's say 2005 to now.
That pretense is that death is failure.
In an arcade game death is failure, because death means you have to pay more money. In a game with no microtransations and free saving death is just as much a part of gameplay as jumping or picking up an item. Dying can't take the game away from you.
Remember back when adventure games would claim they had 60-80 hours of gameplay? That estimate was based on the player spending many hours not knowing what to do.
I'm not surprised you spent 40 minutes on the first level. You had to learn a completely new skillset. We all had the same experience the first time we played mario 64. And then every game after Mario used the exact same controls as mario, and we never had to learn a new skillset again.
Slug Camargo (583) on 2/11/2014 2:50 AM · Permalink · Report
Well, that's a weird complaint to make.
I never played TLA, but I take it it's the same engine as in TR3, and the gameplay in the early Tomb Raiders (meaning 1 through 5) was anything but trial & error: The grid-based movement assured that you could always calculate perfectly where every jump would land you. TR was actually the first game (series) that could claim to have successfully taken the classic platformer gameplay into a fully 3D world.
In fact, I seem to remember that the "trial & error" criticism came with the Crystal Dynamics re-boot(s), because their freedom of movement made the jumping much less predictable.