Risin’ Up – finally a Tomb Raider game worthy of the concept

Lara-Croft-Rise-of-the-Tomb-Raider-1-min-1000x600

All the arguments have been had, multiple times; what do the motivations behind our involvement with the Tomb Raider franchise tell us about our perceptions of gender equality and progressivism? Does the incremental intangible sophistication and overt desexualisation of the main protagonist over the years mirror the changing attitudes in society, or has society forced these changes within games and the gaming world? Or was it just the scope of realism afforded to developers through technological advances? Perhaps the early cartoonish incarnations of Lara Croft was one big, long, post-modernist joke, and the character created, in part, to rile those who obsessively (and therefore pointlessly) raged against forms of cheap female objectification?

You’ll be aware of these arguments; they may or may not have merit, but, well, who cares? I mean, it’s a fucking game, man. The suggestion that anyone would be aroused by a heavily pixilated, unnaturally proportioned figure is odd, but then again we live in a post Jessica Rabbit world that has Bronies in it. So, yeah, maybe some are, but where’s the harm? Whatever floats your boat, I suppose.

Anyway, such debates miss the true strength of the Tomb Raider games, and the reason the franchise has succeeded, namely its ability to combine combat with engrossing narratives that necessitates the player match the inquisitiveness of the character’s legend and finds gratification from using the old grey matter to solve the game’s puzzles. At its best it managed to offer an enticing suspension of reality by combining fanciful elements of future-esque technology with old world mythologies, think a sophisticated Harry Potter-esque world, only without a sanctimonious and myopic author lording it up on Twitter like some rotten embittered has-been.

croft evolution

It’s been over a decade since I last played a Tomb Raider game, so comparatively this second game of the reboot (technically within the Lara Croft timeline it’s a prequel – hence the name) contains multiple drastic enhancements. Improvements in graphics and physics are par the course in this era of games. Still, I’m playing the game in 4K with the settings on medium and well, the detail of the landscape and the characters is impressive despite having been gaming at a 4K resolution for months now. It’s the attention to detail too; clothes rip, Lara’s skin gets cut, bruised, dirtied and bloodied, and her clothes fray. Lara’s movements are fluid and her physical capabilities (not only her measurables) are somewhat realistic; she can no longer hold her breath for three minutes, and she can’t break the Olympic long jump record from a standing start. Then again, just to repeat, this is a game. It would be no fun if Lara accidently fell off a ledge twenty feet up only for the game to say abruptly – game over – Lara’s got a sprained ankle, no more climbing or rappelling for three weeks.

What makes Rise Of The Tomb Raider great is the addition of integrating survival activities and tactics to its successful formula. It forces you to be inquisitive to survive – over and above what even a hardened fan of the series would normally be. You can’t survive and complete the game without doing at least some of it. You need to gather resources (collecting salvage metals and animal skins, as well as gold coins to buy crafting tools) to build and improve/acquire weapons and pouches which increase the amount of ammunition you can carry – you can also loot dead opponents, another nice feature. You’re also rewarded with improved survival and combat skills, this incentivises searching all the crevices, nooks and crannies the game offers. There’s nothing worse than the thought of missing a reward or a secret, because that means you’re not playing the game properly. This elongates the game, making it seem longer than the directly associated campaign events and missions would be if you played them without distraction.

Hunting for animals, in particular, is quite good fun. If you’re a wildlife lover this game might not be for you, as Lara is certainly no WWF member. Eventually, more egregiously, you gain the ability whereby the rough locations of ‘exotic animals’ (in certain cases that’s a euphemism for endangered these days), such as Bears, Boars, Stags and Snow Leopards, appear on the map. There’s something very ‘White Hunter Black Heart’ about encroaching into a Bear’s den and choosing how to antagonise and kill it. All I know is John Huston would’ve approved of such vanity hunts, and within this fictitious realm of diminished consequences so do I. Mind you, if you agree with Germaine Greer’s assessment that Steve Irwin and his like was/are asking for it by brazenly trifling with nature for sheer self-aggrandisement, you’ll be glad to know that the larger animals are quite dangerous and or difficult to kill. All of the death sequences at their hands, sorry paws and teeth, are visceral (and yes I’ve seen them all now). Seeing Lara’s throat being ripped out by a Bear is significantly more gruesome than the effect of a long fall (which you see from a distance), being shot by a Trinity henchmen (collapsing with a groan as it fades to grey), being impaled on spikes, or getting caught in a strong water current which pulverises her against the rocks.

Lara is tiny, comparative to the other characters. Even other female characters seem to tower over her. Some may see this as an unnecessarily cynical modification of Lara’s stature to engender sympathy within the player for her character sans her skimpy attire, but clearly she, and the game, is an analogy of how small Mother Nature can make humans when we’re stripped of the many technological advances that sees us often thrive in inhospitable climates and terrains. What Lara’s eventual Pocket Rocketness certainly does do is aid the game’s narrative, as, at the start, her youth and diminutiveness is part of the reason her adversaries take her for granted. She looks and sounds like a naive girl, and they hope she is, however her confidence in combat grows the better she (and you) become at it. In particular I loved one sequence, and was completely surprised, when she attacks a squad of eight or so (I too much fun gunning them down to count) Trinity stooges, and one of them shouts ‘take her down’, to which she replies, ‘come on then, come and try’. Not very lady like, but it’s clearly a signal that her naivety’s been replaced by self-belief. Plus, it reminded me of Dad’s Army’s Lance Corporal Jones’ exclamation ‘that they don’t like it up ‘em’. In fact, the only thing that would’ve topped this quip is after Lara had finished them off there was a cut scene where she said something equally dismissive along those lines.

As with most games, shooting, or rather free aiming, is far quicker with a mouse than the gamepad. Sadly, if, like me, you’re on a gamepad, but use a mouse to free aim, the default controls compromises the use of special rounds of ammubition. You could of course change the button to left trigger instead of right in the options (so you could still use the left mini-stick to control Lara’s movements whilst shooting), but I’ve gotten used to this configuration now. However, as with all games, every other action; moving, jumping, climbing, etc is far more intuitive on the controller. I had a go at climbing a rock face on the keyboard and it was pure misery, also, those chaotic, and brilliant, quicktime cinematic sequences where you have to move quickly as ice and rocks are falling, and pathways are crumbling all around you, are nigh on impossible to complete on an unintuitive port designed for typing. Overall, the ‘Survivor’ setting, which is the most difficult of the difficulty settings (and this is the only setting I’ve tried), manages to successfully straddle the difficult line of being neither too easy nor too hard.

Many of the levels are openish world and challenges and side missions can be done in any order (or not at all), but why wouldn’t you? Unless you’re desperate to conclude the game’s story sooner, but that would be a waste. Usually the narrative in most games is secondary to the gameplay, but in Rise Of The Tomb Raider it’s important, as Lara’s past is inextricably linked with her current quest, and wanting to understand that is key to understanding what’s going on. Finding the documents littered over the levels from various figures and eras, with their differing motivations, further fleshes out the story. Even better, thus far, having only completed half of the game, there has been one completely unpredictable twist during one of the cut scenes, hopefully there’ll be more.

I only have a few mild criticisms of the game – first, there aren’t enough puzzle tombs. There are nine in the game. It’s called Tomb Raider, give me more. So far I’ve only done four. They all posed their own challenges, and while the solutions for some presented themselves easier than others, one in particular had me stumped for a good solid hour. It’s a satisfying irritation which makes you question your own intelligence, followed by relief as you feel the inner warmth of sheer vindication develop when you finally solve it, or, in certain cases, get the timing right.

The option of any DLC content is a nice, but at £7 each for what are two side missions seems a little steep, and why couldn’t there be DLC puzzle tombs? I reckon those would’ve been very popular. The other quibble is semi-related, the unlockable rewards, particularly the trading cards thingy, is an idea incorrectly executed. Why cards? It seems gimmicky at best, petty extortion at worst. It’s doubly frustrating for those of us who go looking for the challenge of the game’s highest difficulty immediately, from start to finish, only to discover that these unlockable rewards and certain advanced settings have been oddly conflated as extras. Why not just have these in an advanced settings menu, or the others as in game rewards/collectables? For example it would’ve been good to turn on Lara’s susceptibility to the cold (‘frostbite’ gradually losing heat – meaning you have to return to a base camp periodically) on or off before I started my current save game.

But there is no such thing as perfection, and you don’t need any of these garnishes anyway, this game is challenging and interesting enough, as is its story, so no one who plays Rise Of The Tomb Raider can have any significant problems with it. It not only pays homage to the game’s considerable legacy, but this edition of the reboot has improved its template for future releases.

Posted in Odds & Ends | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Song Of The Day – The Word Girl by Scritti Politti

From the album ‘Cupid & Psyche 85’ (1985)

Posted in Song Of The Day | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Song Of The Day – Street Of Tears by Black Heat

From the album ‘Black Heat’ (1972)

Posted in Song Of The Day | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

So yeah, another fecking election.

frank-kelly-4_3584820b

So, yeah, another election, and there’ll be another one, well technically it’ll be another referendum, shortly after this. We should be thankful for choice, as some countries don’t have votes or stable democracies. Even so, most of us seem to be approaching these upcoming votes with as much enthusiasm as vet sticking their finger up a cat’s arse. In Scotland, this is unquestionably due to fatigue. We’ve had too much democracy over a condensed period of time, the Independence referendum and last year’s General Election occurred in close succession, and not only that, a lot has changed, and some of those changes were unexpected. As I wrote here, the spectre of the EU referendum is the big turnoff. Looming like a repulsively humongous festering dog shite lying in the middle of the pavement, its bilious existence due to a perpetual junk diet of insidious petty party political politicking and an associated media campaign. If you thought the referendum on Scottish independence was nasty, bitter and petty, the EU referendum should take it up another notch. It’s going to be a symposium of lies and scaremongering, populated by the loudest, shrillest and nastiest xenophobes, and, quite frankly, racists around. It’s enough to make adopting the compulsive all-encompassing Father Jack brand of alcoholism sound like an idea worth entertaining, and this coming from someone who hasn’t had a drink in over a decade. Finally, and infuriatingly, many people still seem unable to grasp the mechanics of Proportional Representation used in Scotland (the Additional Member System to give it its proper title), and that this system is designed to neuter tactical voting, which, staggeringly, seems to be a legitimate topic of debate again. Anyway, on that last point…

…don’t overthink this. Vote for who you want.

There are three things preventing this; one – the voting system (AMS) is essentially a vote for two different things. You’re casting a vote for who you want to win your constituency (there are seventy three of them for Scotland) this is decided by the auld fashioned shitty first post the post method, basically, whoever gets the most votes wins the seat. But you’re also casting a vote for regional list MP’s. Here the intention is for you to vote for a party. The party with the most votes has its vote share divided by the number of constituency seats it’s won. Under the D’Hondt counting method this means the first seat on the regional list is likely to go to the party with the second most votes, who then see their vote total divided by two, and so on (for a more thorough breakdown of the process, check this out). This system actually gives smaller parties a shot of winning seats in Holyrood, and better reflects, through representation, each party’s percentage share of the vote than the first past the post system does.

The only downside? The parties select their list candidates, not party members and certainly not the public. This means the most contemptible liars and gobshites, such as Labour’s Anas Sarwar, whom the public firmly rejected last May, can be placed at the top of a party’s regional list and are highly likely to get elected. Just as shamelessly, there’s no rule to prevent individual candidates standing for a constituency seat and a list seat. Ruth Davidson and Kezia Dugdale (the leaders of the biggest opposition parties) have done exactly this to ensure they’re elected, so has Patrick Harvie of The Greens. While they aren’t breaking the rules, the rule itself is rotten and completely craven, and it needs changing. Candidates should only be allowed to stand on one or the other.

Second, this brings us to tactical voting. There was an attempt made by Unionists to engage in some tactical voting at last year’s General Election, and it failed, laughably. This occurred under first past the post voting system where it was more likely (in theory) to succeed. Under AMS, you simply have no chance of affecting events, because it’s two votes, which, when combined, are designed to penalise the most popular and successful party (to an extent) to better represent each party’s regional vote share.

Third, and most problematic – many folks will see these Scottish elections as a potential mandate for another independence referendum, and will vote as such depending on whether they’d like another one quite soon, at some point further in the future or not at all. Thing is, whether you’re for or against it, last May fifty-six SNP MP’s were sent to Westminster, out of a possible fifty-nine constituencies. That was achieved on fifty percent of the vote in Scotland, under the dreadfully unfair first past the post voting system, but it was a much bigger statement of intent to retain the question of independence within political and public conscience than re-electing an SNP majority in Holyrood will. Doing the latter doesn’t bring another referendum on Independence any closer – it’s maintaining the status quo, not ‘a material change in circumstances’.

Plus, nobody has a clue if and when another referendum will happen or what will cause it, so acknowledging this fact when voting in this election seems sensible, to me anyway.

Don’t believe the polls, because they’ve been continuously wrong.

Sure, there are people out there that follow this stuff, even blog about it, but these polls and pollsters have gained too much value or sway in influencing the debate around politics, and, more worryingly, influencing how people may vote. My message, much like being pre-occupied by independence when voting is foolish, so is being mindful of the polling samples. Don’t be swayed into voting another way by them, don’t assume your party’s doing well, or worse than you think, allowing you to change your list vote because ‘it won’t matter’, or if Survation’s final poll suggests that voting for a minority party would be a waste because they’re barely registering. According to most of them the Tories weren’t supposed to win a majority last May, according to many of them the Yes campaign had narrowed the gap on the eve of the referendum date to one or two percentage points (it hadn’t) and according to them the UK will vote to remain in the EU, yet the current government promised a referendum on the issue and won a majority…mmm. If you ask me, they’re complete and utter shite, unless they tell you what you want to hear.

The SNP are unlikely to gain many seats.

Another pointless prediction, but remember, when it comes to predictions I’m worse than the cabbaged brain owned by the one and only Paul ‘Village’ Merson, so I reckon I should give myself a few bankers now and again. This likelihood has nothing to do with the polls and all to do with the SNP reaching a saturation point of popularity when spliced with the mechanics of AMS. They’ll probably win most of the constituency seats again, and a clear majority. But increasing their share of the vote seems tricky. Lest we forget: there are still an awful lot of No voters out there who simply won’t vote for them.

snp-reelect

Also not helping is that ‘Re-elect’ billboard with Nicola Sturgeon (above). In it she wears a dismal, almost condescending smile, the kind that one wears when they’re dreadfully unhappy about something but are too proud or ashamed or under too much external pressure to admit it. You’re consciously trying to hide that fact by smiling, but subconsciously you want people to notice it’s a disingenuous one. It’s like a cry for help, ‘I’m in a loveless marriage’, ‘I work in a call centre’, ‘I empty bedpans’ or ‘I put puppies to sleep for a living’. In this case I suspect her frustration is quite banal, she just hates having to sit around for an hour plastered in make-up while some dickhead photog tells her to offer a smile ‘with more pizazz’.

The popularity of the smaller parties is unclear.

There’s been talk of RISE and Tommy Sheridan’s Solidarity gaining a list seat in Glasgow. Okay, I’m aware that their budgets are small, but I’ve seen virtually no campaigning presence, either online or in public, from any of them, other than Tommy being Tommy. I’m sceptical of the effect leafletting has, but to have any shot you, at the very least, have to make people aware that you exist. Case in point, last May I entered the polling booth only to discover a party I’d never heard of appear on the paper – Britain First. I gleaned from the name what they may stand for, but it wasn’t until I did some checking later on did I discover where they landed on the political spectrum. Comparatively they made Nick Griffin look as benign as Peppa fucking Pig. Maybe cultivating ignorance is the plan? Perhaps you can get enough votes from romantic socialist folk who’ll vote for a party based on the name alone? RISE, yeah, rise up, uprising, I like the sound of that. Solidarity? Sure, I’m down with the workers. At least the names are positive. Now, for something positively shite…

How badly will Labour do?

Somehow, someway, they’re still haemorrhaging support…and you don’t need to believe the current polls to deduce this, we have recent General Elections, both Scottish and UK, proving their support is still decreasing. They have fifteen constituency seats from 2011, they took one of fifty-nine last summer. They could finish behind the Tories in Scotland for the first time, in, well, I dunno, the thirties? Such an event could lead to a collective mental collapse akin to William Foster in Falling Down. In Scotland, the Labourites will blame the cult of independence for their decline. But then, when you’ve filled the Northern Branch with second raters and careerist dickheads with sense of entitlement (the kind that believes they should be popular because of who and what they are, not what they’ve become), you’ll do anything possible to avoid introspection. It’s easier to lie to yourself and others and hope (enough) people eventually forget.

Of course let’s not forget that this election is just the wee dram before the twelve year old malt – the EU referendum, the outcome of which is gravely in doubt, is taken out of the box. But whatever the outcome, much like the question of independence in Scotland, this upcoming EU referendum won’t settle the question of Britain’s long term inclusion within the Eurozone. My prediction – the support for Scottish independence will increase whatever the result; if it’s an Out vote, but Scotland votes In, as expected, that’s a material change in circumstances. If it’s a narrow In vote, with Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland keeping the UK In, with England voting narrowly to leave, fully expect the rhetoric of jingoism and xenophobia to arise from the Brexit lot towards anything deemed non-English, fuelled by the media, talking heads and elitists who have weirdly conflated preserving Britishness with isolationism. Perhaps, just perhaps, this frothing, spiteful anti-Scottish sentiment will be voracious enough to irritate, even anger, enough No voters into voting Yes, in a form of retaliatory spite, next time.

Posted in Politics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Song Of The Day – Deep Inside Of You by Gloria Ann Taylor

From the reissue/compilation album ‘Love Is A Hurtin’ Thing’ (2015)

Posted in Song Of The Day | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment