Tomb Raider: Underworld Preview

Tomb Raider: Underworld is the third game in the series to be developed by Crystal Dynamics. We recently caught up with creative director Eric Lindstrom to discuss Lara's return, the new focus on exploration and the questions surrounding the game's Xbox-only DLC.

VideoGamer.com: There seems to be a pronounced emphasis on exploration in Tomb Raider: Underworld. Was that always going to be the case, or did you ever consider a more action-driven approach, like some of the older titles in the series?

Eric Lindstrom: It was from the start, because what we did with Legend, we did a lot of work figuring out what we thought was successful about Tomb Raider, what we thought was successful about Lara Croft. And it turned out not to be in the details, it was in the expression of those emotions and feelings that people got in the original Tomb Raider. It was that sense of being where no-one else was, where no-one else had been for thousands of years, with the wind whistling through the caves; to be on your own, discovering things no one had seen for such a very long time, getting these ancient machines up and running and fighting the increasingly strange denizens of these places. That is what made Tomb Raider special, and Legend went back to that. We're very proud of what we did, but at the same time there was a whole lot more we could have done. So with Underworld we wanted to take those lessons learned about what was valuable and special about Lara Croft and Tomb Raider, and do it up big.

VideoGamer.com: That sense of free-roaming exploration seems very tied to Lara's moves. How do you maintain a balance between giving players lots of options and not swamping them with too many possibilities?

EL: I think that what was really important was this idea that increasing her abilities in the world actually made things simpler, and not more complicated. That was because what makes things complicated are usually two factors: One, a lot of complicated controls that are needed to achieve the ends you want and two, a lot of arbitrary boundaries about where you can and cannot do things: There are certain objects you can throw, certain objects that you can't; certain objects you can touch, certain objects that you can't. By trying to break down those barriers as much as we could, we actually made things easier - because people could use their own logic to do what they needed to do. Some of the early response we got about our control scheme was very gratifying, because people were saying that it was more intuitive to control Lara and to explore these spaces, and some of the people saying this weren't even cognizant of the fact that what they were doing was actually more complicated.

VideoGamer.com: So was that the thinking behind the whole 'What Can Lara Do' philosophy? The idea of opening options to the player, rather than forcing them down a path?

EL: Right, so instead of memorising a lot of arbitrary rules and boundaries and seeing whether there are invisible walls or not, it's about, 'I'm in this situation, so what would I do if I were there?. What could Lara do? I could climb that wall, I could throw this object. We try to fulfil as many of those intuitive gut-reaction beliefs of the player as possible. It doesn't mean all those actions will get you anywhere, but at least you're getting a response - you then have to work out what makes sense within that space.

We were conscious of not wanting to overwhelm the player with abilities, and we were also conscious of not wanting to overwhelm the player with all the choices in the layout of the space but really it game down to logic. Because when you have this giant articulated statue of Shiva and you need to open this temple, there are many aspects of that experience that are entirely player-driven. You have to get all these different armature mechanisms working properly. It doesn't matter what order you do them, but you're not going to get in until you've done them all. There are plenty of logical elements that define the order in which things can be done, and that gives it a kind of structure, but it doesn't feel like an arbitrary game structure. It doesn't feel like, 'Oh, I have to do A to B to C because that's the way the game has been designed'. Sometimes you have to do A to B to C because that's what you'd have to do if you were really there. You have to be able to make those jumps of logic.

VideoGamer.com: Xbox 360 owners are delighted with the fact that they'll be getting exclusive DLC, but it's also true that a few PS3 users are feeling a bit left out. Were these levels always going to be restricted to the 360, and is there any chance we'll see something for Sony fans in the future?

EL: To be honest, it completely came down the other way. We were approached by Microsoft, who asked us if we could make some downloadable content for them. It was a great opportunity, it was a great deal and we're happy to do it. The DLC that we're making for Microsoft is especially made. It's not part of the main game that we saved - we put all the game out there that we were going to put out there. Now we're going to the trouble of adding on spaces where they logically make sense, telling parts of the story. Backing up a bit... Whenever you make a story like Tomb Raider, you're only telling part of it. We come up with all these logical motivations and rationale behind the scenes that inform what story the player understands - but there are all kinds of details that never see the light of day. Rather than making up a bunch of new stuff, there's plenty out there that's never been told - that was never really going to be told - but that we now have a chance to do it, and we're doing it. So it really wasn't about, 'let's make these levels and only give them to Microsoft'. It kinda came around the other way.

VideoGamer.com: Is it absolutely confirmed that there will only be a demo for the 360, or is there a chance we'll see one for the PS3?

EL: I'm not entirely sure. I've been talking to brand, and I don't think there's a final answer on that yet.