Talk:Tomb Raider: The Angel of Darkness

Plot

Oh my, the plot really is excessively long. *_* While on the whole it is a great passage of literature I really feel that it could be made much more concise. Anyone agree? I'll do what I can but I don't want to upset anyone. :) Nieveus (talk) 19:17, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

I totally agree with Nieveus. Someone keeps putting in a huge amount of data from the game, which is not needed for someone to know the story of the game. I've hand to edit it three times! Please, oh please, can this person get the message and put something like that on the Wiki that actually concerns Tomb Raider games, www.tombraiderwiki.com, where such details would be welcome. ProtoDrake (talk) 10:52, 3 September 2011 (GMT)

Why are there no scores?

Added the review scores to the first section. This game oddly has no reception section, and if we continue to let the companies keep these out of universally panned game's articles, then what are we? If you don't want the scores to be at the forefront of this article, then add an unbiased reception section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.253.65.189 (talk) 18:27, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Biased

This article is so biased.

i agree 100% —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.44.85.39 (talk) 16:17, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

How? And if it has something to do with the reception, then thats simply what reviewers wrote about it.Super Badnik 16:14, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

What can you expect from this kind of game, unsigned contributor? It was, to critics and fans alike, the worst game in the series. Filled with bugs, an outdated and cumbersome control system, horrific combat, added to a stratospheric difficulty level and a dark and disturbing atmosphere completely lacking from all the other games in the series (apart from the 2013 reboot from the trailers and gameplay I saw). There probably aren't many who could do a proper article about its plot, production or locals. The only thing they seem to have been perfect about is the story's lukewarm reception and ad-driven sales. --ProtoDrake (talk) 09:04, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Note

Here is some text that was cut from the page of Tomb Raider series when I changed it. Too much info to be contained on a synopsis but evidently it is useful to be put in the main page for Angel of Darkness. I'm copy pasting this as it was, but it really needs a rewrite if it's going to be inserted in the article. Same goes for the entire page as a matter of fact.

"It is a widely known fact that Tomb Raider: Angel Of Darkness came out before it was ready. After many late release date unfulfilled, the game's publisher Eidos Interactive made the developer Core Design release the game in June of 2003. The finished version of the game was a great disappointment to many in that it did not live up to what it had boasted earlier. But like with many games that have been beaten down from promised glory (and had things cut out, probably not for the better) Tomb Raider AOD still has some files in the game which show evidence of a much better game with a clearer story, other characters and dialogues of cut scenes that never had the chance to be finished. These include some dialogues with the female shaman character Putai, who had helped Lara in her recovery from the near-death experience she had in Egypt. Dialogues which would have been included in between sections of the released game as well as a lengthy list of items Lara could have had in her inventory throughout the game (few of which actually were in the game) can be found among these files. Some notable items include "Lara's Amulet", "cell phone", "Antique gun in car" and "Electrical flex- to escape from holding room". AOD was supposedly the first in a trilogy which, had it come out on its original release date the way it was supposed to (November 2002), could quite possibly have been developed in released by now, with the next, Tomb Raider: Legend, still being released for this year. The second in this planned trilogy would probably first take Lara on a quest to find Kurtis, his survival or death being an open ended part of the story. She (or they) would go to Turkey to the Nephililems' Realm (a sort of underworld) where more could be found out about the race and set up some story for the third one. The third in this trilogy would probably see Lara in for a final showdown for the story arc, probably leaving some story open ended to be touched upon in the ninth release of the game (Tomb Raider: Legend)."

--Steerpike 16:58, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

???

I think this article should have a section about the difference between this game and the other game. Even the music is totaly changed.

What other game? --Steerpike 16:16, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Sequel

Why does the article say that AOD is a sequel to The Last Revelation and not Chronicles?

I think because Chronicles was a bit of an aside, reflecting on Lara's past rather than continuing the story of TRLR, and so AOD really follows on better Last Revelation. But change it if you think otherwise. I won't have a problem with that. 138.38.32.84 18:51, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

I think it's because Chronicles is a prequel to The Last Revelation, and perhaps Dagger of Xian, whereas The Last Revelation is a direct prequel to AoD

I don't see that at all. Last Revelation, Chronicles and Angel of Darkness are a definite if disjointed trilogy. Chronicles is the bridge that tries to join the two games together and leaves the open question about Lara's demise (even though Angel of Darkness has many plot faults to ad to its software and graphics faults). And also, try to remember that Last Revelation was the only one that was properly done. The other two were, in a way, turned out in rather a hurry. --ProtoDrake (talk) 09:04, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Fresh Idea

I have a proposal. I posted some time ago an article that just doesn't fitted with Wikipedia's standards. This is my article: User:Locketudor/Tomb Raider music. I want to split it, remake it and distribued it to all Tomb Raider games. --Tulok 15:29, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

this game has a load of fans.

it really does! not everyone hates it. shouldnt it be mentioned in this article

Erm no, only official reviews should really be used.Super Badnik 16:13, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm playing it now. It seems enjoyable and runs smoothly. Why exactly were reviewers so hostile to it? 2fort5r (talk) 20:54, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Because in the seven years since the original Tomb Raider was released, there had really been no progress for Lara. Sure, the graphics improved, but she was still using the same clunky control scheme that people had been complaining about since The Last Revelation. Hence the reason Legend so heavily advertised its new "fluid movement" controls. But of course this is not to mention the enormous plot holes and occasionally atrocious voice acting, both of which probably resulted from the heavy cuts Eidos had to make.--203.217.59.190 (talk) 06:04, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Cleaning

I'm working on tidying this article; the information already contained is for the most part correct, but the wording is somewhat simplistic and there are grammatical errors scattered here and there. Also, there is more information that can be added in, which I am working on as I go. I'll likely go back and change certain edits I've already made, and so will no longer explain what was done on each edit aside from "fixed grammar and facts". If anyone has a dispute regarding some of the changes I've made, feel free to let me know. 70.74.138.187 11:24, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Title

I notice on the cover art and on eidosinteractive.com that the full title of the game is Lara Croft Tomb Raider: The Angel of Darkness. Shouldn't this page be moved to reflect that?~ Dusk Knight 03:58, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Actually WP policy is "Use the most easily recognized name" and "Subtitles and pre-titles...are not necessary", so I guess not.~ Dusk Knight 03:46, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Reception

The section has been deleted altogther. There really should be one as it's something the game is well known for.Super Badnik 15:03, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Physics Engine

I have been a huge fan of the Tomb Raider series since the first game and in this particular game, they have changed the physics engine. I also have to mention that my favourite engine is the Havok engine. Is there anyone who can prove me wrong and tell me what the engine is called? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.194.75.209 (talk) 13:30, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

No idea. It was probably one developed by Core Design. ~~ [ジャム]^[t - c] 14:50, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Missing important details

This title was the first Tomb Raider to be introduced on the Playstation 2 console. That was huge news for the series! It meant the developers had better hardware to work with, yet at the same time there was a challenge adapting to the new platform. That played a significant role in the game's turnout. I can't belive such an important historical fact was missed. I took the liberty of adding it. Call Me K (talk) 22:40, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't really know how notable this is. We don't mention in the Legend article that this was the first game to be released on Xbox 360, or that Underworld was the first on PlayStation 3, which could be considered as giving the developers even better hardware to work with. While I've left that there for now, you should probably find a source that backs up this statement. ~~ [ジャム]^[t - c] 06:17, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

What do you consider a good source? It's common sense to anyone that shops for tomb raider games that this is the oldest one available for the PS 2. I guess I could ref it to the core design website or something. I'll dig for a reference if it pleases you.

The consoles available do reflect the way a game turns out, and there ought to be a mention in underworld of the differences between ps2 and ps3 versions. I can't write it, since I don't have a ps3. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Call Me K (talk • contribs) 03:25, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Missing important details, 2

Aod was never finished, it was to be part of a trilogy, and its failure lead to the dismemberment of Core Design and giving the franchise to Crystal Dynamics. Why isn't there anything about this in the article?... Was it removed by bad faith people? Klow (talk) 20:01, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Background and Plot

There's an issue which seems to be reoccuring on this page. What can currently be seen on the page (as set by myself) is separate topic areas for the background to the storyline (i.e. the history which Lara discovers in the game) and the actual in-game plot. This has been done because some editors have been leaving out the actual plot of the game and instead mention only what supposedly happened before the game and how Lara put an end to it in the game. This leaves an incorrect description of the storyline on the page.

I agree that the plotline as it exists needs to shortened down by a fair amount, but the pre-story of the game shouldn't be mistaken for the actual plot of the game. Burbridge92 (talk) 19:24, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

To the two above, I have rectified that. You will see on that page now a very concise and clear outline of the plot of Angel of Darkness, with all the essentials that are needed for a reader to know what the game's story was like. I have split the story into its two parts (and noted many plot elements that the previous story synopsis rather carried on about). If any other Wikipedia Tomb Raider article needs polishing, it's the one about The Last Revelation, which is chronically truncated. --ProtoDrake (talk) 20:39, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Tomb Raider: The Angel of Darkness/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Tezero (talk · contribs) 19:51, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Good Article review progress box Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

This article is fairly close to GA status; my concerns, mostly minor, follow:

• The prose is awkward at times. These phrases should be reworded, and I'll give suggestions:
  • "dark, edgier" --> "dark, edgy"
  • "the new team had run away with themselves" --> "the new team had gone off the rails"
  • "a different setting and narrative situation" --> "a new setting and story"
  • "sales than previous titles" --> "sales than previous titles had gotten"
  • "scrapping the entire project once already and completing only the basic story" --> "scrapping the entire project and completing only the basic story of the new incarnation"
  • "Reviewers praised the storyline, improved graphics, sound and the environments, while they criticized large amount of bugs, control system, combat system, camera, steep system requirements etc." --> "Reviewers praised the game's storyline, graphics, sound, and environments, while they criticized its large number of bugs and system requirements and its poor controls, combat system, and camera movement."
• "The game garnered mixed to negative reviews from most critics." Per article conventions, this implies a range of roughly 35-50%, but Metacritic's scores are around 50 and GameRankings' are in the mid-50s. Delete "to negative"
• Gameplay and Reception should be a paragraph or two longer each. For Reception, I'd recommend going issue-by-issue and mentioning how each critic felt, as is common in video game GAs and FAs. You can keep the organization the way it is, but then you should go into more detail about issues rather than listing scores, which can be found in the infobox.
• Add a screenshot with explanation of the features it illustrates. As a reader, I want to know what Lara's new character model and the game's graphics and environments, which critics seem to praise, look like.

Fix these complaints (or tell me why they don't need fixing) and you will have yourself another GA. Tezero (talk) 19:51, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

I think I've done all the repairs to grammar and style: please tell me if I missed any or created new ones. The reception section has been expanded and detailed: the magazine reviews I can't do, because I don't have them in front of me. As to the gameplay section, I've done all I can think of, and I don't think I can extend it any further. I didn't want to include masses of stuff about her abilities from previous games without some reference that referred to them. I think I've done that, but I'm a little skeptical. I'm almost sure there's something else that will need doing, but for the moment I seem to have addressed or explained the issues above. --ProtoDrake (talk) 23:32, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Very good job. I'll be happy to pass this. Tezero (talk) 03:55, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

And this is different how?

The article here says that the ability to backflip has been added. But that was an ability she has always had, one which Crystal Dynamics did away with. Perhaps what is being referred to is the ability to twist as she backflips in order to grab an opposing ledge. Or perhaps the backflip was removed in Revelations or Chronicles and brought back for AOD. If so, it should be pointed out, because I clearly remember spending hours in TR1 trying to backflip onto the rocks outside the Colosseum, and I'm certain that ability remained unchanged through the first three games at the very least.Thetrellan (talk) 20:19, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

Source

• https://archive.org/details/edgeuk182/page/n87

Song

• Why is there no link to the song?
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angel_of_Darkness_(song)

71.80.203.159 (talk) 16:11, 13 May 2021 (UTC)