You're browsing the GameFAQs Message Boards as a guest. Sign Up for free (or Log In if you already have an account) to be able to post messages, change how messages are displayed, and view media in posts.
I don't think people have really given a **** about Lara Croft for like 12 years. It pretty much ended with the first Tomb Raider movie. She's certainly not the "Queen of Gaming" anymore, since she's more regarded as a joke than anything else. She's in the same vein as the Dead or Alive girls at this point, only her games are less successful.
Samus, Cortana, or Female Commander Shepard are all more realistic choices.
I don't think people have really given a **** about Lara Croft for like 12 years. It pretty much ended with the first Tomb Raider movie..
Yea, and that is how a series of very average games lasts what? 10 iterations over 17 years....because nobody gives a crap. Use you god damn brain.
Yeah, and that is how a series of Ace Combat games lasts what? 10 iterations over 20 years.... because people really care about them and they are super popular and seen as blockbuster hits. Yeah, and that is how there are 13 Land Before time movies over 20 years... Because by you logic, they're popular and great films that people love.
And damn, man! Duke Nuke Em! He's been in 13 games in over 20 years! He must be the king of gaming, right? He's still insanely popular and his last game was well recieved and not average or mediocre in anyway and people love his character. Or wait, no. You're wrong. Truly, TRULY, I am surprised by the idea that your horrible reasoning doesn't lead to good conclusions.
Your opinion of Lara Croft =/= the majority of people. And thankfully so, because if the majority of people thought that sheer number of games meant anything at all then the industry would be ****ed. Making a bunch of games doesn't mean people care. Further, you don't reboot a franchise when it's still popular the way it is. Which is exactly why they're rebooting Tomb Raider. Use your goddamn brain.