Right, let’s get this very straight: Mike and I are on opposite sides of the fence when it comes to Tomb Raider (2013). He reviewed it with the mindset of someone who enjoyed Uncharted, while I’d be removing Nathan Drake’s teeth from a wall like the cerebral cortex of Johnny from GTA V off of one of the protagonist‘s boots. In short, I hate Uncharted, and I don’t need Rhianna Pratchett’s bland recharacterization of my favorite character in gaming doing a Nathan Drake impersonation. To be fair, she’s the not only writer of 2013’s reboot, but she’s the most notable among them.

So, why in all that is holy and held in an ancient tomb, protected by traps and angry animals that don’t see many visitors, am I reviewing the sequel, Rise of the Tomb Raider? Well, it goes back to 2018. I picked up Xbox Game Pass and decided one of the first games I’d play would be Rise of the Tomb Raider. I might have my prejudices towards its predecessor, particularly for that entirely unnecessary rape scene; however, I thought I’d give the sequel a shot. I’m not joking or being obtuse about it, I think Lara Croft is the greatest video game character of all time.

I don’t need your Mario, all your Nintendogs, or anyone else for that matter; Mario is as bland as the beige wallpaper in your mum’s “special room.” What was Lara’s character before this reboot? Dead parents, millions of pounds in the bank, a weird butler, and a big house. Aside from her penchant for guns and killing, she’s a blend of Batman and Indiana Jones. However, arguably what makes her so brilliant, in my eyes, is simply the fact she turns on her wealth. She doesn’t care about the money, she seeks adventure. If you’ve read my opinions on Doctor Who, you’ll know I like that when it is an adventure.

Rise of the Tomb Raider doesn’t revert her character, she’s still moaning about Jonah up and down every mountain from here to Timbuktu. She still has PTSD after watching her dad take the grieving process hard, trying to do what he couldn’t do because it was a suicide mission, funnily enough. I still think the characterization lands with all the thud of every dead Lara you’ve killed in 2013’s murder porn game. Yet still, I’ve not answered the question, why review this one if I didn’t like the former?

Well, I don’t have the seething hatred toward Rise of the Tomb Raider that I do for David Cage Directors: Tomb Raider. Out with the Quick Time Events (QTEs), mostly, and in with a few simple puzzles and some actual tombs to prance about in. Almost as if the title Tomb Raider means something to the game’s actual plot and the character of the woman heavily breathing into my ear, saying, “I have to do this.” No, you don’t, my dear. It is what you are currently doing, don’t be stupid; I raised you better than that. I also had you put an old man in the fridge a few million times too, but we’ll ignore that.

Are the puzzles fantastically obtuse and as deadly as sitting behind me after having enchiladas while Lara stole an Aztec medallion? No, they are your typical triple-A action-adventure “leave no man (or wo-man) behind” kind of puzzle. I’d argue they are a bit of a cop-out for not using accessibility and clever design rather than picking the quickest and easiest way out. A good puzzle has you feeling a bit stupid for a moment before you have that “Eureka!” moment. Rise of the Tomb Raider isn’t making me exclaim for Deputy Andy.

The first proper “Challenge Tomb,” as they are called, is the large Byzantine galley in an underground ice cave, which isn’t much of a challenge. Take this from the man that grew up with the slight obtuseness of Tomb Raider III. That galley is a cakewalk and (more or less) nothing ramps up the large tomb challenges from there out. Yet somehow, I still don’t hate it. I’d have liked it to have been expanded on a little more, progressively making them larger and more difficult, but I think I’m just grateful they are there.

That said, I’m still a little annoyed about every game since 2012 legally having to feature crafting of some shape or form. Rise of the Tomb Raider doesn’t do the full Minecraft, but on the fly, you can craft arrows that are as flimsy as a man’s knees can be before he becomes a guard. This also means we do have an upgrade system for weapons, as we go prancing about a disused soviet outpost and Shangri-la. There are also some upgrade points so Lara “can do this.” I don’t mind the slight move towards the times, but I think there should be a question of such a shift being necessary.

This only really leaves the story as the last piece of the puzzle, which once you add in gameplay isn’t as awful as the predecessor. Still, we’re stuck on trying to make Lara care about her parents, not that she didn’t before. She just sought adventure above anything else. So instead of globe-trotting for artifacts for her personal museum, she’s just doing the same suicide mission her dad did, but she can do better because of the same breathy line I’ve heard a hundred times, “I have to do this.” Get an inhaler and understand that mortality is a part of life, that way you and I can get to the good stuff – raiding tombs and shooting tigers.

See, I think the point that crossed the story into the “ok, I can put up with you” is the Croft Manor missions that unlock after the prologue. A simple little expedition around the meager edition of Croft Manor, you as Lara jump around uncovering tapes, papers, trinkets, and otherwise to complete a small story. I will say the final “puzzle” makes about as much logical sense as selling the Eiffel Tower for scrap metal, but once you get there, there comes a conclusion to an hour to an hour and a half’s work. Effectively, that Croft Manor expedition is a mini non-life-threatening tomb that you explore. Minus the Uncharted problem of everything you can touch being scratched up, it is classic Tomb Raider of a sort.

The interconnected bits of the main game’s world with bonfires that you travel between is fine. I quite enjoy Dark Souls for a reason, but I honestly prefer the classic level design. It makes exploration less of a chore as I’m not left finding 83 Byzantine coins in the snow. I’d prefer to be figuring out the deadly spike-based death traps filled with tigers and those monkeys that steal your health packs. That said, again, I understand that times have moved on and so has design philosophy. Not to mention I have Tomb Raider III on my PC so I can play that anytime anyway. At least with a level there is a bookend to an area.

Ultimately, Rise of the Tomb Raider isn’t bad, but it hardly feels like a proper modern Tomb Raider all the same. I’m not going to swear about how Rhianna Pratchett changed the story of Lara because it hardly feels like this is proper Lara. To which, anytime you say this (and I’ve had this), you are instantly labeled a pervy sexist for claiming the great melon smuggler of the 90s is proper Lara. I’ll say it a million times, I don’t care that she smuggled melons, I wouldn’t care if she still did, nor do I care that she doesn’t anymore. What I do care about is her sticking her finger up at the money, stealing priceless artifacts, and shooting animals in the face.

Yes, this is an attempt to make Lara a far more grounded character, basing her adventures on what her dad did. However, it arguably makes her a bit more shallow as a character. The woman of the 90s was not only of great wealth, but a great education; not only of ancient history but of basic concepts. This Lara, Survival Lara, seems to be dumbfounded by simple things; yes, questions are important, but what use are they if the character isn’t really the one answering them. With the plot happening around her rather than because of her. She’ll question the actions of those around her, but never her own to see how stupid she’s being.

This is where 90s Lara comes in. Her entire attitude was that of a video game character controlled by a human. One of the biggest issues with games is simply how cognitively different characters are between cutscenes and gameplay: Classic Lara and Trevor Philips being two of very few to never change between the points of control. Both are raging psychopaths, neither faltering much from their targets, and ultimately, they are the epitome of video game characters. Survival Lara simply doesn’t have that spark of insanity, the ability to zero in on a goal and just take what she wants.

One of my biggest issues with survival Lara is that her character, for the most part, is based on her getting beaten, battered, and bruised in every possible situation. That isn’t character development, and it is a problem we’ve had since Uncharted because people seem to think that’s how you make a character now. No, a character is built on a pattern of actions and reactions; this is why Mario is bland, you don’t know where he is going to be next or what he’ll do in a situation as he plays tennis with his archenemy.

You know Nathan Drake will quip about killing people, while Peter Parker does that charm. Uncle Kaz will stand up for true honor. Meanwhile, survival Lara will hum and haw over what to do next (maybe think about her dad), all the while classic Lara would have shot the problem in the face and got on with it, titanic boobs or not. Classic Lara is just a better and more decisive character.

Phenixx Gaming is everywhere you are. Follow us on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and Instagram.

Also, if you’d like to join the Phenixx Gaming team, check out our recruitment article for details on working with us.

Phenixx Gaming is proud to be a Humble Partner! Purchases made through our affiliate links support our writers and charity!

Rise Of The Tomb Raider

$29.99

7

Score

7.0/10

Pros

• Puzzles and Tombs are added back in.
• Croft Manor's return.
• A far lighter tone than its predecessor.

Cons

• I have a heavy breather on the other line.
• "I have to do this" again and again.
• Open-world busyness with fast travel camps.
• Climbable or interactable walls being scuffed.
• Scripted Uncharted-like perils and danger.