Jump to content

Talk:Tomb Raider/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Nude raider paragraph hard to understand

"by a gamer who stated that Eidos sent something to their house and discovered that it was a lawsuit and that in the lawsuit filed against him by Eidos because of the Nude Raider patch, Eidos stated in the lawsuit, that he said in the lawsuit it stated that Eidos sent the lawsuit to both gamers and servers, which some say is up to around 60-80 pages on the electronic mailing list, that the Nude"

Now what the fuck is that supposed to mean? It's a bit hard to follow, I think :> — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.186.167.87 (talk) 12:58, 17 November 2004 (UTC)

Gold2468 (talk) 18:36, 13 July 2012 (UTC) I agree. They keep repeating words, and that does make the section quite difficult to follow. By the way, remember to use your signature, so I know who I am communicating with.
==Custom Jeep for movie ==

I found out that Jeep made a custom Wrangler for the Movie "The Cradle of Life", but I'm judging whether or not it's worth adding.

[1]

Here's what I wrote in case any of you decide this is worth adding: "During the production of The Cradle of Life, Jeep was assigned to make a specialized Jeep Wrangler for the movie. It was basically a custom Jeep Wrangler with attachments to improve durability and lighting. It was later marketed as a custom Jeep Wrangler Rubicon Tomb Raider edition, and its sales hinged on the success of the movie. " — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.13.64.101 (talk) 00:00, 29 January 2005 (UTC)

Article name

This article should be moved to Tomb Raider (series). - 86.142.147.12 (talk) 21:36, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Characters

Can someone please help me update the separate character pages so they can be more detailed? We also need some for Takamoto, Tony (TR3) and the Chronicles flashback characters.

Thanks. --The Aussie Freak 15:38, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Lara's evolution picture

I noticed this picture being resized back and forth. Setting it at 200px doesn't really do justice to this image. It looks weird and out of place either way, but by structuring it a little better into the article (and giving it a decent, watchable size) I do think it is a useful contribution to the article. --Steerpike 17:46, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Major changes 02/02/06

As some of you might have noticed, I gave the Tomb Raider page a complete overhaul. Now before you start reverting everything back, let me explain what exactly I have altered and, more importantly why I did so. First of all I thought a split was necessary because each Tomb Raider game by itself contains enough info for an entire page. I like the short synopsis of each game on this page, including the locations Lara visits, but I feel that there is a lot more to tell about each release, and they all deserve their own page. This page is handy to centralize all information on Tomb Raider in a short, to-the-point manner.

Second, the Tomb Raider franchise by now contains enough spin-offs and related media to warrant lengthy inclusions on this page. So a general Tomb Raider page seems ideal.

Here is a list of all changes:

  • Moved “Tomb Raider” to “Tomb Raider series”
  • changed the introduction
  • added the Tomb Raider logo to the top
  • added short info on Lara Croft and her character.
  • Restructured the headings
  • Restructured the pictures
  • Rewrote part of the game info.
  • Removed the long explanation behind “Angel of Darkness” commercial failure. It should be included in that game’s own main article. It’s too long to include on this page.
  • Expanded the movie section with plot synopsis (lifted from their respective pages, admittedly)
  • Changed the page “Tomb Raider” to a full information page on the original game (click and enjoy).

Please leave your comments here. --Steerpike 23:56, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Replaced section - Nude Raider

A rather unsavoury development in Lara Croft's history is the so-called "Nude Raider" patch. It is alleged that someone within Eidos created the patch then released it on the Eidos website back in 1996, where it remained for a few hours until Eidos discovered it and removed the patch. However, many people downloaded the patch and uploaded it to different websites. This program, when added to an existing Tomb Raider game, causes Lara to appear naked, which is unsurprisingly popular among a certain proportion of gamers. In April 2004, an insider from Eidos reported to a Tomb Raider electronic mailing list that Eidos Interactive had begun suing gamers using the "Nude Raider" patches and sent cease and desist letters to servers hosting the "Nude Raider" patch, enforcing their intellectual property of Tomb Raider. It is also reported that Eidos intend to pursue action against unauthorized "home-made" patches for the game, and indeed any other games that the publisher has ownership rights to. However, the complete accuracy of such reports may be called into question, as it is likely that the rumours are exaggerated to an extent.

A quick Google search will find you such a patch, if you so desire.

POV needs to be fixed, but it is intresting information.--Tznkai 03:57, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

Material on level editor

I added this material as an anonymous user:

"Included with the PC and Mac release of Tomb Raider: Chronicles was a level editor which allowed players to create their own levels for use with the previous Tomb Raider game engine, Tomb Raider: The Last Revelation. Fan-built levels are distributed via Tomb Raider fan sites and forums."

--Skulking 23:24, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

folks at larashome.com/forums have added some bits to it as the original was biased and have forgotten a big part of the community which is still very alive, although may not be as active as previous days. but there are many "elite" builders and players are still in the field, including myself.

GeckoKid 05:18, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

I'm going to add info about some tools to this part, not all of them, just some of the most well-known. Ggctuk 09:24, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

I've updated some info regarding unofficial LEs and engine patches ;) . I think that this section of article must be separated and placed into Tomb Raider Level Editor article (which is now simply redirects to this article). TR level editing deserves more than this small section. I have worked on TRLE article in russian Wikipedia for a while, i hope that someone will also expand this topic in english Wikipedia. -- Pyuaumch 01:04, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
Seconded. Seeing as this part of the article WAS once in its own article (I started it, but it was moved here due to lack of content). I'm going to start transferring info there. Tomb Raider Level EditorGgctuk 10:19, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Moved section completely to new article. Find it under Tomb Raider Level Editor. Ggctuk 14:46, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

The stuff under Tomb Raider Level Editor on this article has been completely moved. The link is in the article itself. Ggctuk 15:57, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

You can't do that. You have to at least write a synopsis under the header in this article. Otherwise it's just a title with a link under it, which is not normally done in Wikipedia articles. --Steerpike 13:05, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
done that now. Ggctuk 12:08, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Possible inclusions

Pop culture figure and cultural critique

There is room for discussion of Lara Croft as a pop culture figure. Lara's popularity, apparent power and calculated sexual appeal have made her the subject of debate, particularly among female gamers and cultural critics: What message does she send? Does her breast size and exaggerated body lead to unhealthy ideals in female and male players? There is the debate about various types and depictions of violence, too, although that's hardly unique to Tomb Raider games.

There are some interesting details in this area: Video games sometimes reward player excellence with varying amounts "female flesh" the player will see at the end. The end of Tomb Raider II defies this trend: just as it seems Lara is about to undress in front of the camera, Lara says, "Don't you think you've seen enough?" and shoots the camera with her shotgun. The camera spends the last moments of the game viewing the ceiling.

Obviously, this material will have to be presented in an a neutral tone. I think it is possible to persent ,the major points on both sides of the argument in a clear, concise manner.

The move to "Next Gen" concoles and fallout

Another area that could see some development is the changes to the franchise attempted with the first "next gen" concole game Angel of Darkness, the financial failure of that game, and the loss of the game by Core followed by their replacement by Crystal Dynamics for Legend.


Third-person shooter and action-adventure game

Finally, the material on the original game's unique technical and gameplay shapes the game as primarily a third-person shooter using a now relatively crude, but once inovative 3D engine. While all this is important and should definately stay in the article, Tomb Raider is also one of the first Action-Adventure games, a trail-blazer in that genre too. Puzzle solving and story-telling elements have only become stronger over the course of the series.

--Skulking 23:24, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

Some fan ideas

I think that Tomb Raider: Angel of Darkness is a combination between Batman (The cartoons) and Tomb Raider 

Proofs:
  • her new look
  • the soundtrack, the title music is te perfect example, we can hear the classic violin at the same time with classic sound of Batman's soundtracks
  • the atmospere of the game: huge caves, moony roofs, dark places.

Another thing would be: one of the resons for the failure of both Tomb Raider movies. in game Lara is called Miss Croft and in the movies she is called Lady Croft (huge difference) --Locketudor 12:42, 15 August 2005 (UTC) The matter however may have been(intentionally or unintentionally)addressed in the released Tomb Raider Legend wherein Takamoto calls Lara "Miss Croft" while Nishimura's bartender calls her "Lady Croft".

About TRL info

I have added some info about TR Legend. I've found it on www.tombraiderchronicles.com page (http://www.tombraiderchronicles.com/tr7/synopsis_02.html). I think this site is reliable but if you have any other info about the new TRL - just edit the TRL part.

--sturm 22:01, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

Split this article?

I think, given the amount of info there is on each game, we should split this article up in several pages, one for each game, and one that gives an overview of the series/franchise. --Steerpike 23:35, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Thats a good idea... i could take care of that but in a couple of weaks since i have a lot of work to do right now plus im working on the Prince of Persia part on wikipedia... something similar to the Prince of Persia series would be fine.--sturm 01:09, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Mac versions of Tomb Raider

There is no information regarding Tomb Raider video game releases for Macintosh computers. This link could be used as a reference unless anyone else has better information. It has release dates and publisher information.

http://www.gamedb.com/ssps/0/11/search/?PHPSESSID=109732561a46909e024c2a0e69d7be8a&search_name=1&search_description=1&search_category=1&search_keywords=tomb+raider — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rexbinary (talk • contribs) 13:06, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Tomb Raider finally on Nintendo

It was announced that Tomb Raider: Legend will have a gamecube version. http://cube.ign.com/articles/699/699529p1.html

And a GBA version [2]--88.105.239.131 18:20, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

They'd better announce the anniversary remake for Xbox 360... --Steerpike 22:54, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia Impartiality

There has been several questionable changes to some of the paragraphs within the article. Specifically towards the end of Tomb Raider Legend where author or authors comment on the sexualiztion of the Legend Lara. Whether they have a point or not hardly matters since the whole article is meant to impart impartial information and facts not opinions of the writer. If anyone notices any kind of opinions posted on any subject within Wikipedia feel free to edit or, if need be, delete such posts since this site is considered an encyclopedia not a magazine article.

I recently edited that stuff out. --Steerpike 20:06, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

I deleted lots of the external links, there was way too many. Wikipedia is not a link directory. Normally, one link to a fan site is enough. - TexMurphy 13:20, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

  • Well, when some links lead to relevant websites, with additional information that's not on WP, I don't see why it should be a problem. And TRC is not that great, anyway. - Klow 16:32, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Relevant is one thing, but the list contained many links to sites that just repeats the information from other sites. I don't mind if you put some back as long as they're 'unique' (lacking a better word). And a description next to the link so we know what it contains won't hurt :) - TexMurphy 08:35, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Just repeats info from other sites?! Every single fan site repeats info from official site. If you we go that way, there must ONLY be official site listed.

Please do not remove TombRaider.Ws link from Wikipedia pages, as we are one of very few Tomb Raider fan portals with rich content and media, and directly supported by Eidos (even credited in recent TR Anniversary game as "Tomb Raider Community"). We have relevant information on original series as well, so I would appreciate if this add/remove un-pleasantries stop happening. Oh and yes, we REPEAT the info from official sources, as everyone else does, since we are officially supported. My regards! Shehriyari 12:03, 1 November 2007 (UTC).

You weren't the only site to appear in the credits. According to Moby Games, many fan sites appeared in the credits. Checking your website, it appears your "relevant information" from the original series is incomplete - you don't have pages for Tomb Raider 2 or Tomb Raider 3. Also, according to WP:FANSITE, sites which require registration are usually to be excluded as links - since your site seems to be based around this system, it will likely continue to be removed. ~~ [Jam][talk] 12:43, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Tomb Raider 8 or 9?

I've changed the article back to saying that the next game in the franchise is going to be the eighth one, as the Anniversary Edition is a remake and not a new installment. Gamespot agrees. Shrensh 22:30, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

If you do a Google search for "tomb raider 8", you could find many more references, just in case somebody asks. ColdFusion650 23:14, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, yeah, that as well. I figured that linking to Gamespot was the simplist way to illustrate my point, but if you Google search it you'll find that everywhere considers the game coming after Anniversary to be Tomb Raider 8. Shrensh 09:55, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

One more category can be add to the article

There is nothing said about the history of the triangle/circle (The Scion Logos) logo that appears a lot in the movies and in the next generation games, after the Lara Croft Bio has been reedited. I give a link to some german fan site Link here. Thank you, I hope it will be helpful. --Tudor Tulok 15:02, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

I would say my German's rusty, but that would imply that at some point I actually knew German. ColdFusion650 15:42, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

"Evolution of Lara" image

Since TRA is just an enhanced, though not a 1:1, remake of the original TR, and given the fact that Lara of TRA is graphically inferior to Lara of TRL, should TRA really be placed at the end of the evolution chain? rohith 21:53, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

TRL and TRA use the same engine. Based on playing the demos, I would say that they are graphically on par. In the screenshot, the lighting for TRA isn't the best, creating the impression of inferior graphics. I would say that since the images go in chronological order, they should actually be in chronological order. Moving the TRA image would make it... not in chronological order. ColdFusion650 22:32, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
I think it should stay in this (chronological) order. Moving the screenshoot could confuse some people. Another thing is this discussion should be done in the evolution picture page not Tomb Raider series since this image is used in several articles. --sturm 08:13, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
I would also leave them in chronological order. The image shows the changes in the Lara model over the development of the series. On that note I recommend replacing the TR2 image with one of Lara in her signature outfit as it would better show such changes. The TR2 image is also out of sync with the others both in alignment and in backdrop. The AOD image probably should be replaced with an image that is obstruction free. Should we do an image showing the 2D versions of Lara from the various hand held games? Generalleoff 13:01, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
Showing 2D Lara doesn't make sense since 1. its a different kind of a game 2. the resolution wont fit. I do think that TR2 image could be replaced, if anyone has time to do it. I'm not sure why i placed a pic that doesn't exactly fit the others there (maybe i had some problems with getting a good screenshoot? cant remember).--sturm 21:07, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
I meant a separate photo not a combined photo. I made it (see below) but it really is pretty ugly and I agreed it is not worth using in the article. The image is currently marked for deletion. I would do the TR2 image but these shots appear to be from the PC versions and all I have is the PlayStation versions of the games. The shot would be out of place. Generalleoff 18:37, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

I went ahead and made an image of Lara Croft in Tomb Raider/Tomb Raider: Curse of the Sword (GBC), Tomb Raider: The Prophecy (GBA)and Tomb Raider: Legend (GBA). If anyone feels it is worth adding to the page or wants to add other 2D renditions of Lara or otherwise modify it go for it. Image:Trevohh.png Generalleoff 18:39, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Those are of such horrible quality, it's a stretch to call them pictures. Their really just a collection of colored squares. I see no point in putting them in the article. And since they won't be used in any article, they should be nominated for deletion. And things would go easier if the author nominated it under the "Orphan" rationale. ColdFusion650 20:51, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
Fair enough. They are pretty damn ugly. Generalleoff 22:23, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Tomb raider angel of darkness screen2.jpg

Image:Tomb raider angel of darkness screen2.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 04:42, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Tombraider journeys1.jpg

Image:Tombraider journeys1.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 05:31, 13 September 2007 (UTC)


Why are URLs to some fansites allowed and others not?

tombraiderchronicles.com is a fan site and not an official Eidos site. How come links to all other fansites are deleted from the Tomb Raider Wiki pages, but that to tombraiderchronicles.com is not? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.102.212.40 (talk) 13:28, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, I think it is up to other editors to comment as I've already spoken to you about this, but I don't believe tombraiderchronicles.com is a fan site. It covers a wide range of material related to Tomb Raider, and has very good sections of information about each of the games. The link you were suggesting (http://www.tombraiders.net/stella/) has very little information (even the site itself admits this - see the link comparison table) compared to tombraiderchronicles.com for example. ~~ [Jam][talk] 13:55, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Define "fan site" for me then. What is it about Tomb Raider Chronicles that makes you believe that it is not a fan site? If it isn't a fan site what is it? Free advertising for the game company Eidos, supported by Wikipedia? What has the "link comparison" stats have to do with anything? Are you claiming that if a fan site is "big enough" it ceases to be a fan site? By the way - saying "I've already spoken to you about this" as if you've in some way settled the argument is patronising. I'll continue to "speak to you" about this until you make logical sense. Or else what is the point in you being an editor for Wikipedia? And if you ignore me then I'll assume that you've changed your mind and that it is OK to edit the URLs on this page. 77.102.212.40 (talk) 11:49, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

As I have already said what I think about tombraiderchronicles.com, I feel it would be inappropriate for me to comment further as we have both already said our piece. I think that other editors need to get involved and air their thoughts on this. Please do not assume because I do not continue to reply to this that I have in any way changed my mind - my stance on the issue still stands.
As I said in my previous reply, I do not feel that tombraiderchronicles.com is a fan site because it covers a wide range of material relating to the Tomb Raider games. Whether that makes it applicable for inclusion as an external link, I don't know. Feel free to read the External links guideline and decide for yourself. I've read it and feel that tombraiderchronicles.com could be considered valid. Other editors (perhaps more experienced in this than I am) may decide otherwise, and it is up to them to comment in this discussion and make their views heard.
Eidos gets free advertising wherever Tomb Raider is mentioned, so what that has to do with this discussion, I don't know. Maybe tombraiderchronicles.com generates a little bit of "free advertising" from being included here - put "tomb raider" into Google and see where tombraiderchronicles.com and Stella's Tomb Raider site come respectively. I think someone looking for Tomb Raider information is far more likely to look there than on Wikipedia. ~~ [Jam][talk] 12:08, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Can anybody tell where the "original Tomb Raider logo" as seen at the main article, comes from? It should be verifiable, and at this point it isn't since the "source" (as seen at the fair use rationale of the image) is only pointing to the article that uses the image. The "source" should point to the place where the image originally came from, and only then can it be verified that this is the real deal, and not something made by a fan or something. twsl ► Talk 21:28, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

It would appear that the logo has come from here, but with the II removed. I've put in a request for clarification from the original uploader. ~~ [Jam][talk] 21:32, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Tomb Raider Times Edition Error ?

The link here goes to the Last Revelation, so is this wrong ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.36.215.64 (talk • contribs) 09:51, 29 June 2008

The game is not notable enough to have its own section. However, it appears the section on it was removed some time ago. I've re-instated a small section about it into the TLR article. ~~ [Jam][talk] 12:55, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Another Continuity?

Why is it that when we are writing about the series in general we always have to mention how everything is split into these 2 apparent different countinuties. It is true that a back story, written in an instruction manual only, has been contradicted, but the word retconning comes to mind, not continuities. Then Lara's apperent coldness in the first few games, her reaction to the death of characters such as Larson is just plainley not shown due to a lack of cutscenes (most likley due to less advance gaming at the time). And Croft Manor, they had to make it again from scratch in Legend, they couldn't just copy the old one, like they used to do for obvious graphicall reasons. And lets not forget Anniversary. Not only is it a remake of the first CORE Desgin game, but it also makes references to other games (Lara reads books in the Mansion that talks about the Dagger of Xian and the Infada Stone). So really, shouldn't the change in backstory (that was never actually mentioned or used in the first 6 games) just be put down to retconning.Super Badnik 18:16, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I think you are right. There is no official word that I know of on the whole continuity issue so it probably is best just to call it retconning or simply changes. Saying there are two completely different continuities is original research unless the developers confirm it.~ Dusk Knight 03:31, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the support. Yeah, your right, it is orginal research. Maybe i should go through a few articles in a minute and tweak where this continuity thing is mentioned.Super Badnik 09:56, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

I've started a "Canon" section (not sure if that's the best title) to present the differences. It needs work, but I think it adequately shows the differences without drawing unverifiable conclusions. I tried to avoid too much detail so this page doesn't overlap too much with the Lara Croft page.~ Dusk Knight 01:01, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

"Reboot, in serial fiction, means a discarding of much or even all previous continuity in the series, to start anew" - Reboot_(continuity). Legend starts off by 'rewriting' the turning point in Lara's life, the plane crash. Anniversary follows up by taking the original first adventure and rewriting it to fit in the new overall story of Lara trying to find her mother. In these, we essentially have first a declaration that this is a new version of her story, and then an adaptation of an old story into this new overall story. It is a reboot. Crumplecorn (talk) 11:57, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

But TR1, TR2 and TR3's stories are all referenced to in TR: A, which suggests that it has not been disregarded. I just think that they just decided not to acknowledge what was written in the instruction manual 12 years ago.Super Badnik 21:26, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Anniversary doesn't reference TR1's story, it is TR1's story, but adapted it into the new continuity. It is safe to assume the other TRs also occurred in Crystal Dynamics' continuity, but with the details changed. Rebooting doesn't mean disregarding the original continuity completely, it means retelling the same story with the style or events changed. Even if you disregard what was written in the manual, they have still taken canon events from the original series and presented a new version with significant changes. The main example being that Lara's motivation in Anniversary Vs. TR1 is changed to suit an overarching story which simply didn't exist in the original series.
Saying that 'lasers' should be changed to 'phasers' in Star Trek is a retcon. Going back to the very beginning of the story and changing what happened, followed by redoing the first outing of the original series but rewritten to fit with new story elements which were not stated nor even alluded to in the original series, and which contradict ancillary elements of the original back story, is not a retcon. Crumplecorn (talk) 12:52, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Ok i think i got that. I think these changes have had a big deal made out of them. I think it was decied to just ignore the backstory given in the instruction manual (it has not ever actually been used in any game) and added some extra lines in Anniversary to backup Lara's backstory introduced in Legend. And how would you know that (if these were 2 continuties) that TRs 2 and 3's stories were changed? You wouldn't so it's safe to assume they happen how they happen in the games. It has never been stated that CD's games are a different continuity so it shouldn't just be assumed just because something written in an instruction manual is contradicted.Super Badnik 18:59, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Ok, so forget about the instruction manual. I have already demonstrated how it is a reboot even without that. And aside from the plot elements, there's the more fuzzy issue of the changes in her behaviour. Crumplecorn (talk) 12:04, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
This was posted by Eric Lindstrom on tombraiderforums.com. It's the closest thing we have to an official word on continuity issues. Sorry I don't have the link to the specific post (I can find it if necessary). In case anyone doesn't know, Eric was involved with developing the story for all three Crystal games and was creative director for TRU. He was laid off from Crystal recently, but he used the opportunity to answer many fan questions on TRF (forum posting isn't permitted for employees). I guess this is a self published source, so it's probably not usable in the article unless there is some way to verify that it was Eric Lindstrom making the post.~ Dusk Knight 05:29, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Another thing to say at this point is about whether we at Crystal think the events of past games, especially AoD which was intended to set up a longer story, did or did not really happen. And the answer will disappoint many. I didn't decide one way or the other. Strange, huh? I don't think so...I think of it as fair. We never said how old Lara is, or what year it was, so maybe Legend happened before other games, maybe it happened after but didn't refer to them...just like how TV episodes will have a story that doesn't reference or acknowledge past episode events but isn't saying they didn't happen. Maybe they did, maybe they didn't. I not only didn't want to make a statement about whether AoD or other games did or didn't happen, I actually didn't believe one way or the other! I still don't. Sure, changes to Lara's bio would have a ripple effect, but not necessarily to the point of negating everything.

And about that bio change. Toby and I did it for the sake of the Legend story. In the grand scheme of things the changes were minor. And those who say it changed her personality, I disagree. Just because she had an archeologist father and inherited his fortune doesn't change that Lara is a very headstrong, independent operator. If you never read her bio, you wouldn't think Lara was a rule-follower, authority-respector, etc... But really, I do appreciate that people didn't like the changes. I know that the number of times Batman's backstory changes will be of no consolation, and I can only sympathize.

— Eric Lindstrom

Well that backs up that these aren't nessary two continuities. And to Crumplecorn, that's just your intrepirtation and the official word above disagrees..Super Badnik 21:14, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

The 'official word' says nothing on the status of the continuities, it simply states that Crystal don't know what they are doing. Also, that Lara's primary motivation is changed, and that Crystal modified an existing story to fit their overall story is fact, not interpretation. Crumplecorn (talk) 13:38, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Character Sections

Looking through the game articles, i can see that many have a characters section that just links to the TR characters page. Not saying there shouldn't be a link to that page but shouldn't be a short summary of each major characters and their role in the game?Super Badnik 21:14, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Jordan the country apparently modeled as Lara Croft

Was just looking in the info box at the bottom and the bit that says who has modeled as Lara. The first one in the list is Jordan and I wanted to check if it was Katie Price/Jordan. However it takes you to the page about Jordan the country. Can someone change this as I'm not sure about changing links. Ta Dark verdant (talk) 13:59, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

 Done ~ Dusk Knight 04:38, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Release Dates

According to information found on Gamerankings, the first Tomb Raider game was released on Playstation before it became available on Sega Saturn. I'm posting the links here for people to investigate and discuss.

[3]

[4]

Broadbandmink (talk) 21:10, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Reception for the early video games

Since this is the COTW, I thought I'd offer a little indirect help. If there are plans to add coverage of the games' critical reception, numerous links to online-archived print reviews for Tomb Raider 1-4 can be found in the T section of our Online print archive. Since not many people know about the archive yet, I thought I'd contribute the information. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 23:57, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Suggestions

I think we should make an article about Tomb Raider music, whatever should be called. There is a big evolution in Tomb Raider tunes, from classic violin to modern beats. Lot of fans are absolutely loving this kind of music. --Locke 10:29, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes, because this section is getting too extended and technical. -- RRS 20:59 09 january 2010. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.27.216.103 (talk) 22:59, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Table for the list of games in the Series

I think the list of games should be put in a table to make it easiet on the eye.


There seems to be no mention of the games in the series.. did these get deleted somewhere?121.73.68.27 (talk) 08:21, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Removed table from the articles page

Instruments Oboe String
orchestra
 		Choir Harp Brass
section
 		Violin Vibraphone Orchestral
percussion
 		Sound
FX
 		Piano Chimes Electronic
percussion
Singing
voice
 		Ethnic
percussion
Ethnic
string
instrument
 		Duduk Pan flute
Tomb Raider Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No No No No No No No
Tomb Raider II Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes No No No No No
Tomb Raider III Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No No Yes Yes No No
Tomb Raider: The Last Revelation Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No No No No No No No No No
Tomb Raider Chronicles Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes No No No
Tomb Raider: The Angel of Darkness Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Yes Yes No No No No No
Tomb Raider: Legend No Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Tomb Raider: Anniversary Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No Yes Yes No No Yes No No No
Tomb Raider: Underworld No Yes Yes Yes No No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No No No No

This table has been removed from the article's page. It looks like it doesn't belong to the Tomb Raider page, but I believe it stays ok for future ideas, critics or suggestions. --TudorTulok (talk) 10:03, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

tombraiderchronicles.com

Here are some talks made after Thejadefalcon wanted to point out in one of his edit summaries: "As I said, discuss on the talk page. Edit summaries aren't long enough" on 23:12, 14 January 2010. Here are previous edit summaries regarding the problem.

"Undo. In my experience, this is a notable one, possibly an official fansite (they have the music for download, for instance). Take it to talk page?" by Thejadefalcon on 16:27, 14 January 2010 (for using the link)

"Don't know what to say about make a external site to be the only fan site here" by TudorTulok on 16:39, 14 January 2010 (for using the link)
"This site is merely a fan site, not remotely official. Self important, yes; official, definitely not. Other fan sites have music and all sorts of stuff to download. Why include this one only?)" by 87.114.70.149 on 23:10, 14 January 2010 (against using the link)

--TudorTulok (talk) 04:02, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

It's a fansite plain and simple. —Mike Allen 04:14, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
OK, then. Out with it, permanently, and no more debates. --TudorTulok (talk) 04:56, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
There has already been some discussion about TombRaiderChronicles.com [5]. It was decided that the website should be kept as a list as it is deemed more than a fansite. I'm not saying we shouldn't have a review, but you might want to read that previous discussion.
TombRaiderChronicles.com is also used frequently as a reference on multiple of the Tomb Raider articles (also been questioned but left alone previously). Phynicen "Chat" 11:46, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
I agree with JGXenite's views. That seems to say basically everything I can think of. If people feel a discussion is warranted, then I'm happy with that. If not, the status quo seems to be to keep the link. --ThejadefalconSing your songThe bird's seeds 18:11, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
It's ok, one more thing, shouldn't we have some bot-archiver here, on this talk page, maybe a lazy one because the page seems too long, or maybe just for the near future. --TudorTulok (talk) 22:06, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
Bot set up. --ThejadefalconSing your songThe bird's seeds 22:11, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
I think it's ok to use it as a source (via their news section) on certain things that are not reported else where, but not for an EL, it's a fan site. If that makes sense? —Mike Allen 00:28, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Assessment of Tomb Raider

I have requested an assessment of Tomb Raider to determine if the current rating is correct or could be raised to B class. Phynicen "Chat" 23:48, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

I really would like someone to do something about what is written in assessment: "The <<Films>> section focuses on plot, which is not suitable for a series article, contributing to a slightly "in-universe" feel." --TudorTulok (talk) 13:37, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
I have already partially dealt with:
  • "citations needed in character section, possible to copy across from main article as appropriate. Verification and additional citations required in "Games" section lead, as tagged. "Music" section requires additional citations. Further sections are ok, but would benefit from 'borrowing' citations from their main articles, to ensure the facts are clear."
  • "Additionally, the music section could be compressed and written as summary, rather than the current broken-down layout. The music section would definately benefit from its core paragraph being expanded, whether these subsections remain or not."
These could obviously be changed a little more but for the most part, I think these points have been addressed. The film section is now the main one. Phynicen "Chat" 14:14, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
I have just finished addressing the problems with the film section. I've included one sentence for each giving a short summary of what the film is about, then focused more on reception and box office performance. I think all points have been met now. I'll ask for a re-assessment. Phynicen "Chat" 15:36, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

B-class Assessment

1) The article is suitably referenced, with inline citations where necessary.

  • ☒NFail, citations needed in character section, possible to copy across from main article as appropriate. Verification and additional citations required in "Games" section lead, as tagged. "Music" section requires additional citations. Further sections are ok, but would benefit from 'borrowing' citations from their main articles, to ensure the facts are clear.

2) The article reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies.

  • checkYPass, enough detail to satisfy the casual reader.

3) The article has a defined structure.

  • ☒NFail, the lead section should not contain citations, as material there should be present and cited later in the article. Additionally, the music section could be compressed and written as summary, rather than the current broken-down layout. The music section would definately benefit from its core paragraph being expanded, whether these subsections remain or not.

4) The article is reasonably well-written.

  • ClockCMostly Pass, the readability suffers slightly from the sections being very short, and it gives the article a slightly fragmented feeling.

5) The article contains supporting materials where appropriate.

  • checkYPass, the article has good links to split-pages, and uses tables well.

6) The article presents its content in an appropriately accessible way.

  • ☒NFail, the "Films" section focuses on plot, which is not suitable for a series article, contributing to a slightly "in-universe" feel.

Hope this assessment helps, feel free to poke me at my talk page with comments/queries. --Taelus (talk) 00:06, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Re-assessment

1) The article is suitably referenced, with inline citations where necessary.

  • checkYPass, issues cleared up. "Games" section could still use additional citations for absolute clarity, but the detail can be gained from other sources present in and around the section already, thus fine for B-class.

2) The article reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies.

  • checkYPass, as previously assessed

3) The article has a defined structure.

  • ClockCMostly Pass, the lead section should not contain citations, as material there should be present and cited later in the article. Music section is better now.

4) The article is reasonably well-written.

  • checkYPass, the reading flow is much better after recent changes.

5) The article contains supporting materials where appropriate.

  • checkYPass, as previously assessed.

6) The article presents its content in an appropriately accessible way.

  • checkYPass, the problem section has been cleaned up in recent changes.

Again, hope this helps, once the lead section is fixed it should be B-class quality. To be very specific, try moving the cite about Square Enix into the infobox if it is suitable, possibly create a "Reception" section to hold the citations for the sales figures and popularity expressed in the lead. Happy editing, --Taelus (talk) 17:12, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

I've addressed number 3. I have removed the passage about Square Enix and moved the citation to the infobox. The passage about the popularity of the Tomb Raider games has been moved to the bottom of the Games section. I believe it suits here better than a new section titled Reception (it is one line of text). That should be everything now Phynicen "Chat" 17:43, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
Yup, that is fine. B-class given. (Will update listing at WP:VG/A) --Taelus (talk) 18:33, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks! Now to work on the other Tomb Raider articles :D Phynicen "Chat" 18:39, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Tomb Raider Peer Review

I have created a peer review for Tomb Raider to see people's opinions on what could be improved. I'd like to try and get Tomb Raider to a Good Article status and eventually, A-class. Phynicen "Chat" 14:19, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Glad you want to improve the articles (I saw the list on your user page). Need any help? --TudorTulok (talk) 10:03, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
Sure i'd love some help! I'm going to try getting each article to B-class, asking for assessments. When that's done, i'll eventually ask for a peer review on each page to try and get more in-depth information to update them to Good Article or A-class. Feel free to ask for assessments of the other Tomb Raider pages listed on my page while I work on this one. Phynicen "Chat" 10:50, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Lara Croft and the Guardian of Light as a main game of the series

I believe that Lara Croft and the Guardian of Light should not appear on the main series section of the Template:Tomb Raider series. We know from this moment that it is not a main game. We should reconsider putting it in another section, maybe called other games. Thanks --TudorTulok (talk) 22:41, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Well right now it's under "Spin-offs". I don't see anything wrong with that -- now. But when Guardian of Light sells well they are making more "Lara Croft" downloadables and maybe it would fit better under a "Lara Croft series" or something. Mike Allen 22:44, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
I just noticed this comment is old. Sorry. Mike Allen 23:18, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
We shall have to see if this is really a spin-off or not, I mean... if the story of LCatGoL fits in the main series then it is not a spin-off, but this thing can be understand only when a new game is released afterwards. --TudorTulok (talk) 08:04, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
None of the spin-offs fit in the main series. That's why it's called a spin off. The story of GoL is totally different from the main series. That's already been established. I'm saying if it is a successful and they make more and more, then a section in the navbox could be created for that particular series. Mike Allen 08:26, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
When I think of Lara Croft and stories that do not fit in the main series I remember the break between the continuities. Tomb Raider is capable of integrating spin-offs in the main series. I can expect that. I don't know if other games have done it or if the main story is as chopped as in TR, but I feel very unsure when thinking if it would be possible for TR to integrate a spin-off in the main series. I can say it loud: YES, they can do such thing, I see them capable to do it. But I really don't know the story details of GoL. --TudorTulok (talk) 08:42, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
According to Tombraiderchronicles.com and Tombraiderforums.com, both official and trustworthy sites of Tomb Raider, it's listed as a "Digital Experience." This would most likely be the proper name. Plus, Eidos has said that it is not part of the Tomb Raider series, hence why it does not bear the title.Sallyboy44 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:24, 18 July 2010 (UTC).
Actually they're fans sites and shouldn't be used on Wikipedia where there's better sources available. Anyway, GoL is already listed in the spin-offs section of the navbox. I don't see the problem, that's what it is a -- a spin-off. Mike Allen 19:13, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
Also consider, that Tomb Raider is not primarely a film series, bit a game series. Meaning, gameplay issues are quite important when it comes too categorizing "main series" an "spinn-off". Well obviously Lara Croft has a completely different gameplay to it. Even if the Story "fits", is canoncical, it would still be a spin-off.87.174.241.26 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 01:48, 21 July 2010 (UTC).

Tomb Raider Ascension

I am surprised there is no mention of the movie Tomb Raider Ascension in this article. 24.79.5.196 (talk) 19:25, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

What movie? Mike Allen 19:37, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

What happened to the Game Boy Games?!

Exactly my question. I cannot find them in the article. They should be in the List of the Games. They exist, even if they are mediocre spin-offs! 87.174.194.61 (talk) 13:10, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Music

Rather than having links to an unofficial fan site - Refs 16 and 23 - why not have direct links (assuming the information isn't just unfounded fan rumour)? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4u-l0zZXaeM, http://www.nme.com/nme-video/youtube/id/4u-l0zZXaeM/search/the-survival-podcast Ostercy (talk) 06:30, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

The following is a list with the templates used in the main article. Sometimes is hard to find them fast, considering this list to be a good shortcut list.

--TudorTulok (talk) 16:44, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Music section - large table

The Music section is way too large. It needs moved into it's own article - however a solution has already been proposed. The music table, the first table listing the games in the article, happens to be under music. This is very very confusing and should be re-written, linked to its own article or just outright deleted. Deletion petition. Psydude (talk) 01:12, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Tomb Raider 10

Tomb Raider 2013 is the 10th game not 9 as it states on timeline graph — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.43.21.228 (talk) 16:58, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Edit request

Not sure what brought this level of protection on, but oh well ...

We now have additional information on the upcoming Rise of the Tomb Raider, which per consensus is still included here prior to separation into its own article. Microsoft Studios, as part of its exclusivity deal, will publish the game for its consoles.

The following sentence:

The game is set for a holiday 2015 release for Xbox 360 and Xbox One,[17] with a release on other platforms possible after an unspecified date.[18]

Should be replaced as suggested here:

The game is to be published by Microsoft Studios and is scheduled for a holiday 2015 release for Xbox 360 and Xbox One,[new reference][17] with a release on other platforms possible after an unspecified date.[18]

Source: <ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.gamespot.com/articles/rise-of-the-tomb-raider-will-be-published-by-micro/1100-6424104/|title=Rise of the Tomb Raider Will be Published by Microsoft|author=Rob Crossley|work=gamespot.com|publisher=CBS Interactive, Inc.|date=9 December 2014|accessdate=9 December 2014}}</ref>

--McDoobAU93 14:57, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Doesn't seem controversial.  Done — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:49, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

British Spelling

As is indicated at the top of this page, and is common throughout all TR articles, UK spelling and date formats should be used. I have repaired these herein, and will wait for a bot to complete the in-reference dates. Please do not change back to US spellings. Thanks MrMarmite (talk) 22:48, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Spelling

This is a British subject and so will people stop changing to US spelling. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.1.83.107 (talk) 14:36, 15 November 2014‎ (UTC)

  • Personally, I don't care, but the word Theater (or Theatre) is spelled two different ways in two different paragraphs. Pick one spelling for the various words and stick with it. As to "Domestic" vs "US"... again, where was the movie made? If it was made in Hollywood, then the term "Domestic" is appropriate, if not necessarily more correct. US is certainly less ambiguous. Again, how do other pages do it? This should be consistent with how other articles spell and label things. -- TomXP411[Talk] 21:38, 3 December 2014 (UTC)


Serge's notes/questions/suggestions

  • I was asked to give a read through on the article's rewrites. Here are some notes I'm leaving over the course of my read through.
  1. The introduction sentence says that it was 'stylized as as an alternate title for a period. "Stylizations usually refer more to things like Kesha going as Ke$ha or bizarre capitalizations/formatting (Filter (band) often writes their name as FILTER.) I'd chose something more to the capacity of "was known as" or "called" or something. Otherwise, the lead does a great job of summarizing a lot of content, I like it. Sergecross73 msg me 23:55, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
  2. I know in the games section, you're mostly just outlining titles and platforms, but it might be good to say how/why the spinoffs are spinoffs. (ie mentioning a genre/gameplay shift. Nothing more than a phrase, or even just a genre addition - "In 2009 they released the racing video game Lara Kart" type comment.) However, if you object, then that's fine too - I see you removed this element from my version of the Tales (series) article years back as well. It took me this long to realize it there, so obviously its not that big of a deal. I don't know how it is in the Tomb Raider series, but I know in some series (Sonic the Hedgehog (series)) the fanbase is always bickering over main/spinoff status stuff. This might help if it occurs here at all. Sergecross73 msg me 17:46, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Origin platform

It's absurd to try to claim the only platform of origin was the Saturn due to a 3-4 week exclusivity period. It's not like it was later ported to Windows and PlayStation, they were initial release platforms. Sega just got a few weeks marketing time. -- ferret (talk) 15:03, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Seconded. It clear that all three releases are all the same game, developed concurrently with one another. This isn't a Saturn game, later ported to PlayStation, or something like that. (That sort of thing pretty much never happened, due to the complicated Saturn hardware...) Sergecross73 msg me 13:16, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

2013 continuity

The 2013 continuity should maybe refer to the new games more, for example there is no plane crash mentioned in them, and Lara's father is said to have been killed by a Trinity assassin (though at the beginning, Lara believes he has committed suicide). What actually happened is hinted to be revealed in an upcoming game 217.85.208.67 (talk) 13:02, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 27 external links on Tomb Raider. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:56, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

"Probable"

Re: "However, alongside this praise, she has divided opinion as to her character design and consequent sexuality: particularly among feminist critics, she is both hailed as an empowering figure for women, and a negative role model due to her probable proportions. Later, apparently more "realistic" redesigns lessened these criticisms to a degree."

Would "probable proportions" correctly be "improbable proportions"? If not, some other wording might make the intent clearer. Thisisnotatest (talk) 03:34, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Tomb_Raider/Archive_1&oldid=1142446765"