

It actually is excellent and probably the best out of the LAU trilogy, but it simply pales in comparison to TRI and fails miserably as a remake.

Anniversary underwent a bizarre process of gentrification to adapt a charming classic to the masses, only if just worsened what the source material brought to the table. Honorable mention goes to Obelisk of Khamoon, but that one was more of a genuine reconstruction rather than a vast improvement.Ī dull colour palette, endless corridors, poor retcon of Lara’s background, confusing mechanics, inadequate level design. There are only two instances that felt drastically improved in Anniversary, and these are the entirety of St Francis’ Folly and the challenge rooms in Palace Midas. If you play original first, Anniversary can feel disappointing in many areas.Ĭomparing them side by side, you can easily spot faithfully remade areas, but overall the experience you get from Anniversary falls short when contrasting it to the original masterpiece, in my opinion. Id play anniversary first, then play the original, mostly because it will be easier to respect the older one when you see what it inspired. Anniversary plot feels more spoonfed (which isn't bad, 10 year old me understood Anniversary and had no idea what the first game was showing me). well fleeting visions that you put together. more mysterious and harder to follow in vision cutscenes, as they were more.

The remake definitely had the better Natla though, although they failed at the Natla 'queen of Atlantis' reveal (lotsa people didn't play the original so they didn't know about Natla having wings and being atlantean).

Colours are duller, there's less 'awe' and atmosphere and many levels are dumbed down or shortened (Looking at Natlas mines for example). The original was definitely more challenging and had more atmosphere, plus better soundtrack, although Anniversary has some awesome music too, just mostly when it comes to boss fights.Īnniversary definition improved places like St Francis Folly, but that's about it.
