This last gen pc thing reminds me of a interview I saw a long time ago from that Assassins Creed's game director Jade something, saying that you would need a extremelly powerfull pc to run the first AC cause they were no match for last gen lol...

Maybe when it's on sale for 20 bucks Ill get it. I played the original version already, but if I got it cheap I wouldnt mind playing it again.

Doesn't impress me in the slightest.

Also, lol at that Scientology pop up ad while watching the video. Anyone else see that? Confirmed: IGN is funded by Scientology.

I played through the game on PC just a few weeks ago. It was good, I really liked it and would probably also play a sequel, but I'm not interested in playing through the same game again in the forseable future.

What's important is that you're getting a game resembling something that should be "next gen" graphics for these new consoles. If I buy a PS4 game that originally came out on the PS3 I would want to see a vast gra[hical difference, and I see it here.

Also it's an awesome game, and everyone should play it. Just leave all your pre-release negativity and pre-conceived notions about sexism and all that at the door and you should have a fun time.

Gross that it's full price for people who already have Tomb Raider.

Those particle enhancements sound real fancy, but improvements in hair-tech™ are the only graphics gauge you need.

TR on PC easily runs at 60FPS on a modest rig. That's a pretty big difference besides the potential resolution increase.

Wow that game actually looks kind of shitty on PS3. Probably on 360 too. Wow. The difference is insane.

I don't understand how people think she doesn't look good. Just wow.

I imagine this new version will be 60 too.

I'll probably play through this when I can buy it at a discount. I've actually beaten it on 360, but could really use something to play on my Ps4.

This game is poop and the story is silly billy.

Its great that they put real work into the next-gen version, but its not worth playing again for me. It was an alright game but I found it to be too focused on cinematic angles and animation rather than on more involved gameplay.

Having never really interacted with PC gamers before getting deeper into this site, I have to say some of y'all are incredible. The constant moaning I see on these forums over deals for free or heavily discounted games because you've already played or beaten them so they're worthless deals, always doing graphical side by sides...it's really interesting to me how eager most PC players seem to be in arguing they are...I don't know, playing video games "the right way"? It's really weird to me.

On the topic at hand, this does look like an incredible leap, and a friend of mine who just bought the game on Steam last week seems like he's enjoying it. I dig the Uncharted games so I'd probably be pretty into this, but I've never had an interest in the Tomb Raider series (ironically, a friend in the neighborhood owned Tomb Raider for their PC and I thought it was a terrrrrrrible game) so I have to admit this makes me more hopeful the game ends up on PS+ someday but doesn't really inspire me to make a purchase.

I unfortunately didn't play the original, so I'll definitely try to pick this up the day it comes out on PS4. I wasn't sure beforehand if I would like the new face model, since even though I hadn't played the original, I had already identified her as she was, but now, after I saw the comparison yesterday, I'm already more into the new model: it looks more natural, when I had initially, merely by a picture, thought it didn't. It's a bit conflicting, because I would have loved to play the original before this, more so now due to wanting to personally compare the two, but what's conflicting, is that if I had played the original, I don't know if I would have cared to play the Definitive Edition. I know there are people that don't want this, like a lot of the people that had already played it, but since I haven't, I'm excited for it; it looks like a great new game to spend my time in for the new consoles, but also just a great looking game on its own terms.

I don't like her new look

This isn't for you if you've already played it (especially on a half-decent PC). So many people are like "lol so PC version?". I played through it on PC set at Ultra and I still think this looks damn pretty. Tomb Raider was one of the best looking games last year, I'm glad people without good PCs can now experience it how it was meant to be seen. Some places the PS4 version looks better than PC, and I think that's awesome as a PC gamer. Why shouldn't console gamers get a pretty version of a game for once? I'm not paying for it again, but it's totally worth the price if you've never played it.

Looks at my screenshots of the PC version it looks like nothing new was added as far as I can tell (other than the model changes) effects wise, so no reason for a PC petition.

Who cares? It was a great game, and if you wanted good graphics, as with every other game in the past two years, you could have just played it on PC. This is such a weird thing, I don't understand who it's marketed to.

It's marketed at the people who are feeling bad that they have hardly anything to play on their new consoles so they'll play a game they skipped the first time around.

Pretty much.

I'm one of those people but still have no interest in picking this up, I'll wait for a dirt cheap Steam sale price.

Well it literally is. The PC version of Tomb Raider is the last-gen version of the game. This version was made for next-gen. Regardless of resolution differences you can't really argue that. It's not a qualitative term, it's just based on release date.

Anyways...

So crazy this is 59.99.

Just not gonna happen. Yes, people are hungry for PS4 games, but not like this. Probably we get a sale 6 months out when Square realizes it made another real dumb move.

Edit: that tress effects hair looks like shit.

@xyzygy: Right? So much negativity up in here that I dont get.

Tomb Raider was the game I most enjoyed playing in 2013 but I dunno if I'm gonna go through it again on the PS4. Just seems silly.

So I can pay 60 dollars to replay it with a slight graphical boost....Or I can pay 0 dollars and replay it without fancy new graphics...

I was willing to pay $40 for a 10 year old game that added a complete graphical overhaul, better framerate and a nice suite of multiplayer extras when I bought Halo Anniversary, but this here is a game with no singleplayer DLC, a slight graphical bump and a completely dead (and pointless I might add) multiplayer portion. Whoever decided this was worth the cost of a brand new game is delusional.

Not a chance. The silly hair physics alone requires a stupid amount of grunt.

No one is saying she doesn't look good, it's just that the difference in character models is only major if you pretend the PC version doesn't exist.

It is interesting that the changes they made make her look less pasty British and more multicultural. She is tanner, her eyes are shaped differently, her nose is smaller and upturned, and countless other changes to the point where there is now more noticeable makeup too. Crystal D seems to have improved Lara by using the standard mathematical measurements and ratios for pretty faces then slapped on darker makeup. Instead of making her more realistic they just went for 'pretty' symmetry and instead of accepting her makeup would be gone by making her look more natural they just slapped on more makeup because it makes her a pretty, pretty princess.

She on a frickin torument/torture island, and thus has been dunked under water and sweated like a pig for days...but now she has PERFECT makeup. How truly liberating and modern this character is now! What a paragon of flipping the scrip on what femininity "is" by change her character to look more 'pink aisel' girly. [sigh]

@korwin:

I mean this is all speculation until someone plays it so saying anything one way of another with any certainty seems kind of crazy to me.

Actually, it's marketed at people whom a lot of internet commenters seem to forget: those who have no interest in owning gaming PCs, did not play the game on previous consoles but might be convinced to pick it up for new consoles to play during the slow summer months. I personally use Macs and have no interest in owning another computer JUST to play games on. I already have a PS3 and, come March, a PS4 for that.

For people like myself, who's only really looking at Resogun, NBA 2K14 and inFamous for PS4 games right now, if I wanted a big blockbuster action game like Uncharted to fill that void in those three games (assuming inFamous remains fairly weak on the story front) I'd probably be looking real hard at this Tomb Raider re-release.

So basically people who have a new console and nothing to play on it, just like I said?

...

Personally I don't buy computers just to do one thing on, I have a Mac but I also have a computer. I don't think many people buy a computer to do nothing but play games on, outside of living room PCs which are more often than not also used as media hubs.

I am all too aware of people that don't want gaming PCs, so I believe you. I don't have my gaming PC at university because it takes up too much space.

I've been gobbling up all information I can on this. So excited. As an owner of both the PS3 and PC edition, I'm actually surprised at how much better the next gen version is looking compared to both of them.

The PC game was created based on the last generation of their engine, so while it looked higher resolution and had better AA, it was still essentially a last gen port. PC's don't really have generations themselves. I find it really stupid when people all say PC's are next gen already... Right, so some Pentium 4 shitbox that someone is running is next gen right? It is a PC after all...?

The PC has the potential to be more powerful then consoles easily, but that doesn't mean that the majority of people out there have a PC that can handle next generation graphics.

Do you live in a closet, in your university? I mean how big is that gaming case? (please don't say rig)

As said, this is for people who bought new consoles and might not have played Tomb Raider (something that should be a crime punishable by a mandatory playing of Tomb Raider) and now have a good incentive to try it out and see how good console games look on these new machines.

Also I can understand people not wanting gaming PC's. For a while I didn't want one either after years of PC gaming. The constant need to upgrade, the technical issues, it got a bit much. People who don't want the hassle of PC gaming, and let's not kid ourselves it's a bit of a hassle compared to console gaming, they'll just buy a nice laptop that does Word and internet which is all most people ever need. Despite the relative ease of putting one together these days (and man was it a nightmare in like '99) gaming PC's are still sort of an enthusiast hobby.

I bought the game for 360. Played only a little, but like what I did play and I do plan on getting into it at some point. And, while I own a PS4...and I did get the PS3/PS4 Assassins Creed IV upgrade and am playing the game on PS4 now, I've gotta say it'd take a considerable amount more for me to repurchase Tomb Raider on PS4 at full price. I mean, saying it looks better just isn't enough. Maybe if they had done an upgrade as well, maybe I would have dived in.

But, I guess Vinny was right. We're just a few months into next gen consoles and we're already getting an HD re-release of an already HD game.

Well you would be wrong. There was a ton of stuff that was rebuilt, retextured and with a bunch of new effects applied.

Coming from someone who didn't play the original and am glad I waited, I can't wait to pick this up in like a year for the One.

Most of the details described were in the PC version, someone is going to have to make a comparison video to prove they actually improved anything compared to the PC version.

No he wouldn't.

I was somewhat impressed by the comparison video on IGN. Not blown away and ignoring the whole "on a PC... blah blah blah".

Impressed in the changes. Looking forward to a true next gen TR game

Yes, he would.

No he...oh wait he said "looks like nothing new", oh ok yeah he's wrong, but I can see why he wouldn't have noticed that much. There isn't a leap unless you're watching that video comparing a PS3 version to PS4.

I can't comment on how much of a change it is over the PC edition, but if what they say in that article true, then it's a big change.

I love this game, but come on, in no way is it "night and day" different. They changed a few things, but nothing a full $60 worth. If you don't have a PC and want to get it on a next-gen system, then yeah, go for it. But if you have a PC, go with that one.

@jsnyder82: Even though I have a PC I'd rather play stuff on console.

I take the middle road and play stuff on my PC with a controller.

I have a wired 360 controller and play some stuff sometimes but more often than not stuff I buy on PC is stuff where I boot up and go "Hey, I remember how neat this game was" and then turn it off after 10 minutes. Point in case I've had Don't Starve on PC since launch on PC never touched it. Finally comes out on console on PS4 and I've now put like 12 hours into it.

by the time i get a ps4 it will be like 30 so i will get it

This game is not for you if you have already played it. This is for people who missed it last year and may be swayed into playing it now that the visuals are improved for newer consoles.

And yes, there is a difference. Not a mind-blowing obvious next-gen difference, but enough to notice that it does look significantly prettier. Square figured that they could make just enough improvements for the new console version to sell the game again, and I believe they'll be successful at it.

I can agree with the "significantly" part if we're talking about PS3-PS4. But in no way is it significantly better than the PC version on Max settings.

But yeah, if you want a pretty game on your pretty next-gen console (and many might, seeing as there are scant few next-gen console games out there), then this is the one for you. I just don't think they should be charging full price for it. That's gross.