Just What Tomb Raider Really Needed... Multiplayer

I learned my lesson about judging the multiplayer of a game too early when I found out first hand how good Assassins Creed Brotherhood was. Having said that, I was optimistic about Dead Space 2 and got burned there. Who can say what this will turn out like? To me, a multiplayer mode is neither here nor there, I come to Tomb Raider for the single player experience and I've been concerned with the way they're approaching it ever since the early torture porn/'press A to not get raped' cutscene.

And this Blog-post is Coming from the Guy who Wets Himself over the Devil May Cry-Reboot.

EVERY GAME NEEDS MULTIPLAYER! Doesn't it, don't we need to win over the idiots who refuse to do research that a mere bullet point on the back of a box sways them to purchase a game.

Well this is not really surprising and honestly I don't really care if they do because I can just simply ignore the whole multiplayer thing in the game. I mean Naughty Dog pushed The Last of Us back several months because they wanted to add multiplayer stuff to it. What game companies, like Crystal Dynamics, are doing is stupid and pointless but at the same time you have to sympathize with their intentions because most games that sell well are mostly games that have multiplayer in them. It's thanks to pointless decisions such as this that makes it evident that Crystal Dynamics are paranoid that they might lose a lot of their profit if the game sells like shit instead of trying to polish a game to captivate a certain group of people who love Tomb Raider such as Brad. I don't know if I'm really right in saying that they're paranoid, but that's my theory.

This is old news, isn't it?

I remember Brad talking about this months ago...

I guess it depends on how they do the multiplayer. Maybe it will turn out pretty good - I really liked RE5's co-op. But I'm definitely not buying it for multiplayer; if the single player sucks, the entire game will suck.

No.

Ugggg.....Not every game needs multi-player. It's just a pity excuse to market towards people who play shooters.
I understand that developers want money, but trying to be the next big multiplayer experience is old and sad now.
Wouldn't the past already tell these developers that this doesn't work either.
A game needs to be built on it's multiplayer to be about/have good multiplayer, instead of just tagging it on last minute.
There are loads of games that have rushed development only to have horrible multiplayed added on last minute. It detracts from the overall experience and harms the game as a whole.

I remember the concept art for Tomb Raider revealed multiplayer back in 2009. I thought everyone knew this.

My excitement for this game is slowly waning :|

I have no problem with the darker themes that they seem to want to approach, i love when developers do that, because it can be done very well.
I do however not like all this talk about QTE's and super scripted sequences.

Now i love Uncharted (example), but Tomb Raider is Tomb Raider and Uncharted is Uncharted. Tomb Raider has always focused on tricky puzzle solving using platforming as a major component (from whe few tomb raider games i have played) while Uncharted has focused on delivering a more straightforward epic adventure with minor puzzles but mostly focusing on very linear platforming and combat.

I love both, but so far it seems Tomb Raider is becoming more and more of a darker themed Uncharted.

This game just seems like an Uncharted clone (but without the fantastic writing) at this point. I'm sure the multiplayer will be decent but it still won't feel like the Tomb Raider experience that people have come to know and love.

It should be noted that Eidos Montreal will be making the multiplayer for Tomb Raider, not Crystal Dynamics.