Tomb Raider reboot

TheGameGuru wrote:

It amazes me that Microsoft still can't figure out that if they can tie Xbox Live in 100% with the PC and open up some cool cross platform gaming that they WONT pull from Xbox sales/attention but rather directly grow and contribute both platforms. Mind boggling.

Man, we just got done killing off GFWL. Let's not give them any ideas about bringing it back from the grave, please.

I would gladly buy games on some Xbox Live platform for PC if it came to that. At least if they would attempt not to make the platform as user-unfriendly as "Games for Windows Live" is.
Just do the opposite of GfWL and Uplay and you should be fine

Chaz wrote:
TheGameGuru wrote:

It amazes me that Microsoft still can't figure out that if they can tie Xbox Live in 100% with the PC and open up some cool cross platform gaming that they WONT pull from Xbox sales/attention but rather directly grow and contribute both platforms. Mind boggling.

Man, we just got done killing off GFWL. Let's not give them any ideas about bringing it back from the grave, please.

They just need to make an app similar to steam/origin and it would be fine. I still to this day cannot even fathom how GFWL came to be the way it was. Everything about it was just terrible.

Quintin_Stone wrote:

Dark Souls games haven't achieved the widespread popularity that Tomb Raider has.

Damn shame of the new millennium, right here.

TheGameguru wrote:

Those are pretty nitpicky.. The end result is the same... just because its not Dark Souls 3 doesn't make it better or different. I mean this isn't a sequel either technically.. its a reboot!! (insert Hollywood pitchman voice)

To clarify.. that is the crux here.. Sony did exactly what Microsoft just did.. take a cross platform studio (DS and DS2 both were released on PC/PS/Xbox) and make it a platform exclusive. There was zero outrage.. none..zip..zero.

What are you talking about? Rise of the Tomb Raider is a sequel, not a reboot.

Labeling every criticism as "outrage" helps marginalize it. There were certainly disappointed by Bloodborne's exclusivity: you can see for yourself in the Bloodborne thread. Of course the reason it hasn't received the same kind of reaction is that A) Bloodborne isn't pitched as a sequel to Dark Souls and B) Dark Souls games haven't achieved the widespread popularity that Tomb Raider has.

WizardM0de wrote:
Quintin_Stone wrote:

Dark Souls games haven't achieved the widespread popularity that Tomb Raider has.

Damn shame of the new millennium, right here.

One of the major reasons Dark Souls gains so much praise is that it is difficult, unforgiving, and doesn't have hand-holding. You can't really have those qualities *and* widespread popularity. Some things are meant to be niche and are better off that way.

In the same vein, I would prefer a Tomb Raider that's more like an adventure game, but I understand why that wouldn't sell as well as their current formula of mostly-a-manshoot.

WizardM0de wrote:
Quintin_Stone wrote:

Dark Souls games haven't achieved the widespread popularity that Tomb Raider has.

Damn shame of the new millennium, right here.

Well Tomb Raider has been out for like 20 years and has like a dozen games under its belt. Dark Souls only has 2, 3 if you count demon souls.

I'm actually pretty upset at this announcement. Microsoft's play to keep it an Xbox One exclusive means that it won't be available for my PS1, where the series belongs!

ccesarano wrote:

CryTek also recently brought up how unhappy they are with XOne's numbers, hence the port of Ryse I believe. Wouldn't be surprised if Dead Rising 3 is similar.

I'm sorry, but if they thought a launch title was going to sell many millions of units at full price, their analysts are not very good at what they do.

They probably took good money from Microsoft up front to develop Ryse as an Xbox One exclusive at launch, alongside ~20 other launch titles. The should only have expected to sell to some small fraction of the total install base at launch, which is a small number itself. And the reality is that the sales price of that title 3-6 months after launch would be falling off just as more and more people are buying the console. They were never going to sell a huge number of units at full price.

I suppose game designers have learned a lot from politicians – there's always a scapegoat to be found for their poor plans.

The thing is, the game's release is a year and a half out, and chances are if it is a timed exclusive they can't say anything about it. Part of the contract likely means no announcement until X amount of time after its exclusive debut. So I'm going to play optimistic for now, but let's also face the fact that Xbox marketshare could be different a year from now and releasing multiplatform won't be a necessity.

I'm sure this is part of those contracts. Microsoft is doing this to sway folks who are on the fence of one console versus the other. If there's an early hint that you could play this on either console in a year, it lessens the impact of their investment.

Even delayed announcements of other platforms seems to be a thing these days. Blizzard consistently announced Diablo 3 and D3 RoS for Playstation without mentioning Xbox. They didn't ever mention exclusivity either. Then some time later it's like 'yeah sure, its also coming for Xbox same day as PS'. Can't be a coincidence. Can't imagine what console makers would pay for such a small window of make-believe-exclusivity though. Maybe they just share some of the early advertisement cost.

firesloth wrote:
The thing is, the game's release is a year and a half out, and chances are if it is a timed exclusive they can't say anything about it. Part of the contract likely means no announcement until X amount of time after its exclusive debut. So I'm going to play optimistic for now, but let's also face the fact that Xbox marketshare could be different a year from now and releasing multiplatform won't be a necessity.

I'm sure this is part of those contracts. Microsoft is doing this to sway folks who are on the fence of one console versus the other. If there's an early hint that you could play this on either console in a year, it lessens the impact of their investment.

Agreed. As much as I dislike this exclusivity nonsense, I completely expect RotTR to have at least a PC port.

firesloth wrote:

Microsoft's play to keep it an Xbox One exclusive means that it won't be available for my PS1, where the series belongs!

It might be a bit hard getting it to run on console that's nearly 20 years old.

Quintin_Stone wrote:
TheGameguru wrote:

Those are pretty nitpicky.. The end result is the same... just because its not Dark Souls 3 doesn't make it better or different. I mean this isn't a sequel either technically.. its a reboot!! (insert Hollywood pitchman voice)

To clarify.. that is the crux here.. Sony did exactly what Microsoft just did.. take a cross platform studio (DS and DS2 both were released on PC/PS/Xbox) and make it a platform exclusive. There was zero outrage.. none..zip..zero.

What are you talking about? Rise of the Tomb Raider is a sequel, not a reboot.

Labeling every criticism as "outrage" helps marginalize it. There were certainly disappointed by Bloodborne's exclusivity: you can see for yourself in the Bloodborne thread. Of course the reason it hasn't received the same kind of reaction is that A) Bloodborne isn't pitched as a sequel to Dark Souls and B) Dark Souls games haven't achieved the widespread popularity that Tomb Raider has.

Yeah I got confused.. I thought it was going even further back into her past..but it appears its picking up after the events of the first game. In the end it was mostly meant as a joke.. of course its a sequel (I did the Hollywood pitchman to indicate the joke)

Is it weird that MS just got exclusivity for the MS Xbox, and part of that deal was that the game couldn't be released on MS Windows? I guess they're getting tired of hearing PC gamers say "why would I bother getting an Xbox when I can just play everything on the PC?"

Way to make me lose what little interest I had in Temple of Osiris, Crystal Dynamcs.

Well, that, for me, is the disappointing end to a promising reboot.

IF it is a timed exclusive, maybe I'll pick it out of the $10 bargain bin, or used. One good turn deserves another.

I laugh that PC and Playstation players are suppose to be happy with the crappy spinoff games.

Really??

To be fair the crappy spinoff game for Tomb Raider was great. Better than plenty of the actual Tomb Raiders games I would argue.

Chaz wrote:

Is it weird that MS just got exclusivity for the MS Xbox, and part of that deal was that the game couldn't be released on MS Windows? I guess they're getting tired of hearing PC gamers say "why would I bother getting an Xbox when I can just play everything on the PC?"

That might play into it a bit.. and its a shame that Microsoft views the PC in some ways as the "enemy". But when the internest beats them up on "Exclusives" then I sorta sympathize with them. Another area where Sony seems to enjoy the fruits of "disassociation" for better or worse Microsoft is tied into the PC ecosystem.

TheGameguru wrote:
Chaz wrote:

Is it weird that MS just got exclusivity for the MS Xbox, and part of that deal was that the game couldn't be released on MS Windows? I guess they're getting tired of hearing PC gamers say "why would I bother getting an Xbox when I can just play everything on the PC?"

That might play into it a bit.. and its a shame that Microsoft views the PC in some ways as the "enemy". But when the internest beats them up on "Exclusives" then I sorta sympathize with them. Another area where Sony seems to enjoy the fruits of "disassociation" for better or worse Microsoft is tied into the PC ecosystem.

Microsoft doesn't get a cut of the sales of PC games. They only get the one-time licensing fee for Windows. I'm not surprised they've been pushing the Xbox instead.

ChrisLTD wrote:
TheGameguru wrote:
Chaz wrote:

Is it weird that MS just got exclusivity for the MS Xbox, and part of that deal was that the game couldn't be released on MS Windows? I guess they're getting tired of hearing PC gamers say "why would I bother getting an Xbox when I can just play everything on the PC?"

That might play into it a bit.. and its a shame that Microsoft views the PC in some ways as the "enemy". But when the internest beats them up on "Exclusives" then I sorta sympathize with them. Another area where Sony seems to enjoy the fruits of "disassociation" for better or worse Microsoft is tied into the PC ecosystem.

Microsoft doesn't get a cut of the sales of PC games. They only get the one-time licensing fee for Windows. I'm not surprised they've been pushing the Xbox instead.

Do they not make any money off of DirectX being used by developers? I assumed this is why every game I own has a different version of DirectX and all of them are needed (rather than just including the old stuff in the new versions).

ChrisLTD wrote:
TheGameguru wrote:
Chaz wrote:

Is it weird that MS just got exclusivity for the MS Xbox, and part of that deal was that the game couldn't be released on MS Windows? I guess they're getting tired of hearing PC gamers say "why would I bother getting an Xbox when I can just play everything on the PC?"

That might play into it a bit.. and its a shame that Microsoft views the PC in some ways as the "enemy". But when the internest beats them up on "Exclusives" then I sorta sympathize with them. Another area where Sony seems to enjoy the fruits of "disassociation" for better or worse Microsoft is tied into the PC ecosystem.

Microsoft doesn't get a cut of the sales of PC games. They only get the one-time licensing fee for Windows. I'm not surprised they've been pushing the Xbox instead.

My point has always been it doesn't (and shouldn't) need to be an "either/or" scenario. In my muddled brain there is a strategy to push and compliment both platforms equally to each others benefit.

I guess you can blame me, because I'm the guy going "I already have a PS4, but maybe now I'll but an XB1 some time next year. I really did like that Tomb Raider reboot."

beeporama wrote:

I guess you can blame me, because I'm the guy going "I already have a PS4, but maybe now I'll but an XB1 some time next year. I really did like that Tomb Raider reboot."

If anyone makes you feel bad about supporting this title then thats beyond lame. In any case its entirely possible as this will be a next gen title that Square Enix was not willing to fund what Crystal Dynamics entirely wanted to do with this title and thus Microsoft stepping in to help realize their vision with buckets of money.

TheGameguru wrote:
beeporama wrote:

I guess you can blame me, because I'm the guy going "I already have a PS4, but maybe now I'll but an XB1 some time next year. I really did like that Tomb Raider reboot."

If anyone makes you feel bad about supporting this title then thats beyond lame. In any case its entirely possible as this will be a next gen title that Square Enix was not willing to fund what Crystal Dynamics entirely wanted to do with this title and thus Microsoft stepping in to help realize their vision with buckets of money.

With 6 million units sold, I find this unlikely/improbable.

It's one of those moments i'm real glad i have an XBox1, but it's also one of those moments i'm damn sad for gaming. IMHO, this is highly likely to be the death of the rebooted series if it's only coming out on XB1 and never on PS4 and PC. I just don't see it selling that well and MS don't feel like it's gonna be invested in future iterations, they just want a quick exclusive to try to boost sales of the console then they've used the fool out of you and they got what they wanted (assuming that even works with this title) The reboot was pretty awesome on PC. I'd rather play the next one on PC as well but will probably pick it up on Xbox1 considering how much i loved the last one and i do own this console already. There's no way in hell it'd sell me on the console though if i didn't already decide on it and buy in.

IF it's the case that we're only getting this game because MS was willing to fund it as an exclusive though, then by all means, i'm the dick and bravo to MS.

Demosthenes wrote:
TheGameguru wrote:
beeporama wrote:

I guess you can blame me, because I'm the guy going "I already have a PS4, but maybe now I'll but an XB1 some time next year. I really did like that Tomb Raider reboot."

If anyone makes you feel bad about supporting this title then thats beyond lame. In any case its entirely possible as this will be a next gen title that Square Enix was not willing to fund what Crystal Dynamics entirely wanted to do with this title and thus Microsoft stepping in to help realize their vision with buckets of money.

With 6 million units sold, I find this unlikely/improbable.

Granted FY14 wasn't an operating loss like FY13 was but if you wanted an Uncharted level of game out of the next TR its not entirely "improbable" given Square Enix's portfolio pipeline right now vs their cash situation. And if there is anything I know from 13 years of Private Equity/Venture Capital is that its ALWAYS better to spend someone else's money.

edit

Regardless how its spun money is money.. so the dollars from Microsoft will ultimately go to the development of something at Square Enix.. the CEO just doesn't go and buy a few more airplanes with it.

As it turns out, the original Tomb Raider did eventually meet Squeenix's expectations -- initial sales weren't that strong, but it had a very long tail, because of places like this constantly saying, "wow, this is a great game, you should buy it!" (and, for the most part, it was, though Lara took enough damage to kill at least five people in the cutscenes alone, never mind actual gameplay. After several of those sequences, she didn't need a nap by the fire, she needed hospital time.)

They're going to be cutting their sales by 3/4, since the PC and PS4 are both quite a bit stronger than the XBone, so I hope for their sake that Microsoft scratched them a big check.

Bums me out, because I played the original on PC, and my PC is far, far more powerful than any console. There's no real reason why I shouldn't be able to play the game, but they're telling me it now has a $500 cost of admission.

No, thanks. And if it does come out on the PC, I won't likely be buying at full price. If they made me wait that long, I can wait a little longer.... $30 is probably as far as I would go.

Just read that the original TR was a big hit on the Playstation and Sega Saturn.. TR2 was exclusive to the Playstation... oh the irony.

In September 1997, Sony Computer Entertainment America signed a deal with Eidos to make console releases for the Tomb Raider franchise exclusive to the PlayStation, preventing the Sega Saturn or the Nintendo 64 from having any Tomb Raider game released for it until 2000, a deal that would prove very beneficial to Sony both in terms of revenue dollars and also in further cementing the PlayStation's growing reputation as the go-to system for must-have exclusive titles.[9]
TheGameguru wrote:

Just read that the original TR was a big hit on the Playstation and Sega Saturn and PC.. TR2 was exclusive to the Playstation and PC... oh the irony.

Fixed.