underworld

Albert Conklin wrote:
> J.H. wrote:
>> legend was pretty good, anniversary was actually really
>> fun.....despite that slo-mo target thingy. can't remember what it was
>> called.
>
> Rage Attack!

ugh....and you say it with such enthousiasm. did you like it? did you
think it added anything to the game?

>
>> and now for the age old a.g.tr question. what else is out there to
>> play in the meantime?? the few games i've tried have been
>> disappointments. especially assassins' creed. boy that game was
>> horrible. maybe i just didn't give it enough of a shot, but i really
>> didn't like it.
>>
> I was just waiting to upgrade so I could even play Assassin's Creed,
> but now you make it sound like it isn't worth it.
> Albert

it's not that it isn't worth it, it is entertaining......mostly. and
can get interesting.

but it is overly complicated as far as controls go and the camera is
terrible. i had to resort to a controller to play it because they
keyboard config just wasn't working out. there's too many key combos to
accomplish something simple....like running and jumping or climbing.

i guess i expected it to be more like thief meets TR. that just isn't
the case.



--
My photography, videos, incoherent ramblings can be found at
http://justaguyhanginout.blogspot.com/

J.H. wrote:
> Albert Conklin wrote:
>> J.H. wrote:
>>> legend was pretty good, anniversary was actually really
>>> fun.....despite that slo-mo target thingy. can't remember what it
>>> was called.
>>
>> Rage Attack!
>
> ugh....and you say it with such enthousiasm. did you like it? did you
> think it added anything to the game?
I guess I should of used a . instead of a !. I did not care for it and
had to use a save game to get past the 2 "horses". I could hide by the
destroyed parts of the building to get by the T-Rex.

>> I was just waiting to upgrade so I could even play Assassin's Creed,
>> but now you make it sound like it isn't worth it.
>> Albert
>
> it's not that it isn't worth it, it is entertaining......mostly. and
> can get interesting.
>
> but it is overly complicated as far as controls go and the camera is
> terrible. i had to resort to a controller to play it because they
> keyboard config just wasn't working out. there's too many key combos to
> accomplish something simple....like running and jumping or climbing.
>
> i guess i expected it to be more like thief meets TR. that just isn't
> the case.

Albert

"J.H." <justaguyhanginout.RemoveThis@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:qnYYj.4205$KB3.844@edtnps91...

> have they figured out a way for us to explore?? THAT'S critical and not
> being able to puts the game on rails in a very UN-tomb raiderish way.
>

I agree! You have to be able to just go exploring and do stuff "off-rail".
That's the main reason I became a Grand Theft Auto fan (in addition to TR).
In GTA games, you can roam around and explore every inch of the world, do
"side missions", mess with stuff and find things to do and places to go --
some of which were not necessarily built that way on purpose.

I'm a huge fan of the "corner jump bug" in the early TRs. That allowed you
to go places you weren't supposed to be. That was often more fun than the
games themselves.

I'd love to play the new GTA that just came out, but it's for PS3 (and X-box
360), and Sony crossed (way) over the line on pricing this time, so, ain't
gonna. I'm just waiting for the next TR (which I think is still for PS2,
right?).

The one thing I rather dislike about GTA games is that you play a thug. A
somewhat likeable thug, but a thug. You're the best of the bad-guys. I
want a hero, like Croft. If only they'd give Lara a world that's as
free-roaming as the GTA worlds.

--cleve