Tomb Raider reboot

Malor wrote:

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.

The power of the platform doesn't matter that much in this regard. Lots of people in here complain about games being "only" 819p instead of 1080p, but there's a lot of consumers out there that cannot and will never be able to tell the difference. I think the same goes for whatever other minor differences exist between PS4 and XOne.

What's going to matter are exclusives and, to an extent, brand loyalty. I would have purchased the PS4 on the sole basis that the PS3 ended this generation with a lot of exclusives from Sony that showed promise. However, looking at how things are starting, I might honestly be more tempted to get an XOne. Why? Simply because what exclusives are available currently leaves me a bit more interested in Microsoft.

On the whole, though, I'm not itching for either platform.

TheGameguru wrote:

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]

We get it. Those of us who are unhappy with this have plenty of examples in the past to draw upon and should just accept it. Except we are going to at least complain about it because it does upset us and if all you want to do is post oast examples on the topic... all you're doing is prolonging the unhappiness and misdirecting part of it at yourself.

The power of the platform doesn't matter that much in this regard.

Well, what I meant was that there's zero technical reason why it can't run on the PC, since the predecessor does, and PCs can be far stronger than the XBone. And the PC has enormous market power compared to the new consoles as well, so skipping that platform really doesn't make a lot of sense unless Microsoft gave them a ridiculous amount of money.

Ultimately, Microsoft is locking me out of a game I might like to play, purely for their own benefit, so of course I'm angry about it.

TheGameguru wrote:

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.

The Saturn was also a dead platform by the time TR2 came out. No irony detected.

Malor wrote:

Ultimately, Square Enix and Crystal Dynamics are locking me out of a game I might like to play, purely for their own benefit, so of course I'm angry about it.

FTFY

That didn't happen without a whopping check from Microsoft.

Jayhawker wrote:
Malor wrote:

Ultimately, Square Enix and Crystal Dynamics are locking me out of a game I might like to play, purely for their own benefit, so of course I'm angry about it.

FTFY

The odds of Crystal Dynamics getting a say in this are about nil.

Of course MS is doing it for their benefit. That's the nature of exclusives. It's to give the consumer an incentive to pick their machine.

Shadout wrote:

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

No kidding. That game was one of the most fun co-op experiences I had last generation. I am pumped about the new one.

My attitude with things like this tend to be, "If you don't want to sell me your game then I won't play it."

I wasn't that keen on the original Tomb Raider though. If it was a game series I loved I wouldn't be happy. Things like this do have a negative effect. When ever Sky pinches a great new series from free TV I don't think, "Wow I must get SKY!" just grow a little more bitter and resolute to never get Sky.

Microsoft confirms Rise of the Tomb Raider Xbox exclusivity deal "has a duration"

Yeah, I'm definitely not going to be a full-price buyer. If they're going to make me wait, I can make them wait.

Malor wrote:

Yeah, I'm definitely not going to be a full-price buyer. If they're going to make me wait, I can make them wait.

As noted, if it's not discounted to the then current price of the Xbox One version for being months late (and post holiday season, where I'm sure some deals are going to be occurring), then I can wait until I can get a good used copy at about half the price or so.

Demosthenes wrote:
Malor wrote:

Yeah, I'm definitely not going to be a full-price buyer. If they're going to make me wait, I can make them wait.

As noted, if it's not discounted to the then current price of the Xbox One version for being months late (and post holiday season, where I'm sure some deals are going to be occurring), then I can wait until I can get a good used copy at about half the price or so.

It's more likely that the PC/PS4 version will be priced at $60 but will come with whatever DLC was released up to that point.

Higgledy wrote:

Microsoft confirms Rise of the Tomb Raider Xbox exclusivity deal "has a duration"

Called it... I can't believe the number of people I had to discuss the ambiguous language of the press release with though...

It seems like the console folks are intentionally pushing to create such ambiguous language—I can only imagine to create an illusion of greater exclusivity. I mean, it's not like PC versions aren't regularly delayed compared to the console version—having the same release date is the novel thing. So making a big deal about that delay? It's pure marketing crap.

The plus side is: I think there are actually less old-fashioned permanent exclusives.

The down side is that trying to figure out what I'll be able to play is pretty much impossible. It leaves me feeling like "f*ck it, I don't need a console anyway" instead of choosing based on which platform I like more. (In other words, it makes me hate them both because they're both doing this stuff regularly.)

Higgledy wrote:

Microsoft confirms Rise of the Tomb Raider Xbox exclusivity deal "has a duration"

As glad I am about that, this made me laugh:

Xbox person wrote:

"I have Tomb Raider shipping next holiday exclusively on Xbox. It is Xbox 360 and Xbox One. I'm not trying to fake anybody out in terms of where this thing is. What they do with the franchise in the long run is not mine. I don't control it. So all I can talk about is the deal I have. I don't know where else Tomb Raider goes.

Oh come on, you were trying to fake people out. Which is how the game is played, fair enough, but at least admit it.

Regardless, this also puts it much closer to steam sale territory for me. If I cant play it when it's 'fresh', then it matters a bit less when exactly I get to play it.

Just do like the rest of us: build up a massive Pile from Steam sales. Now delays and timed exclusives don't matter, because chances are, it was just going on the Pile anyway!

That is not how most of my pile works. What enters the pile stays in the pile. The only hope a game has is to be played before it is too late!

Shadout wrote:

That is not how most of my pile works. What enters the pile stays in the pile. The only hope a game has is to be played before it is too late!

That's my pile in a nutshell....i find i buy a super cheap game on steam sale and it just never gets played. I try not to buy much in sales anymore!

I'll buy TR when it releases on xbox1 and beat it and move on i'm sure.

Good news it'll make the rounds to PC and probably PS4 eventually tho, sometime summer i'd guess, but who the hell knows other than the people who won't say:P Still, good news.

Polygon has a well-reasoned look at why it's advantageous for a publisher to make an exclusive deal with a console.

Microsoft is throwing money at Square Enix, and it may be in a lower royalty paid to Microsoft on sales, or it could be in subsidizing the game's creation, or the promise of a huge push when it comes to marketing, or it could be all of those things at once.

"Square Enix isn't doing this because it thinks Microsoft is cool, they're doing it because they're getting well compensated in some way for doing it.

Or maybe it is just because they think Microsoft is cool...

I just don't get how timed exclusive help the console manufacturers. Does anybody actually go out and buy an XBox because they can't wait a couple of months for Tomb Raider to come out on a different platform?

The whole thing seems like a complete waste for Microsoft and it just leaves me baffled. Real exclusives are one thing, but timed exclusives seem to have very little value (unless they can trick customers into thinking they're real exclusives).

Seems like they should just take the money they burn on timed exclusives and reduce the cost of the console.

Kinda depends on how long. If it is a year, then yeah, an iconic franchise being available on one console will make a difference. Most gamers don't know or care why games they want are on specific platforms

gore wrote:

Does anybody actually go out and buy an XBox because they can't wait a couple of months for Tomb Raider to come out on a different platform?

Yes, assuming that the difference in release dates is more than "a couple months". Do we actually know how long the exclusivity lasts? If it's a year or more, I bet this helps drive sales.

To use a personal anecdote: in early 2008, I bought an Xbox 360 instead of a PlayStation 3 because I wanted to play BioShock, Braid, and Mass Effect. Eventually all of those games came out on the PS3 (BioShock in October of 2008, Braid in November of 2009, and Mass Effect in 2012), but when I made my choice of which console to buy they were Xbox exclusives, and I had no idea that was going to change. Even if I had, I'm not sure I would have wanted to wait the better part of a year to play BioShock.

gore wrote:

I just don't get how timed exclusive help the console manufacturers. Does anybody actually go out and buy an XBox because they can't wait a couple of months for Tomb Raider to come out on a different platform?

The whole thing seems like a complete waste for Microsoft and it just leaves me baffled. Real exclusives are one thing, but timed exclusives seem to have very little value (unless they can trick customers into thinking they're real exclusives).

Seems like they should just take the money they burn on timed exclusives and reduce the cost of the console.

Both camps do the exact same thing. Timed exclusives as well as third party exclusives. I'm fairly sure just looking at this forum that any social media/internet monitoring software would produce for both Sony and Microsoft a word heat map that had Exclusive as one of if not the largest word. That's predominately whats discussed when comparing consoles to each-other (there are others of course as well).

You can spend 10 minutes in your average internet gaming forum and realize why both sides use this tactic. Microsoft identified a hole in their lineup and figured grabbing Tomb Raider to have to compete against Uncharted for next holiday season was worth it to them to pony up dollars to lock out the competition for a period of time. Looking at what Holiday 2015 has right now scheduled (and we all know things will slip) this seems like a smart move from Microsoft for their console and their customers. Time will tell if this ends up being a mistake for Square Enix.

TheGameguru wrote:

Looking at what Holiday 2015 has right now scheduled (and we all know things will slip) this seems like a smart move from Microsoft for their console and their customers.

At the rate things are slipping from this holiday season I wouldn't be surprised if they all ended up coming out the following holiday season!

TheGameguru wrote:
gore wrote:

I just don't get how timed exclusive help the console manufacturers. Does anybody actually go out and buy an XBox because they can't wait a couple of months for Tomb Raider to come out on a different platform?

The whole thing seems like a complete waste for Microsoft and it just leaves me baffled. Real exclusives are one thing, but timed exclusives seem to have very little value (unless they can trick customers into thinking they're real exclusives).

Seems like they should just take the money they burn on timed exclusives and reduce the cost of the console.

You can spend 10 minutes in your average internet gaming forum and realize why both sides use this tactic. Microsoft identified a hole in their lineup and figured grabbing Tomb Raider to have to compete against Uncharted for next holiday season was worth it to them to pony up dollars to lock out the competition for a period of time. Looking at what Holiday 2015 has right now scheduled (and we all know things will slip) this seems like a smart move from Microsoft for their console and their customers. Time will tell if this ends up being a mistake for Square Enix.

Are these timed exclusives proven to work that way? Real exclusives - the way we used to use the word - have a lot of value, but I'm dubious that timed exclusives really have the same impact.

One can assume that real exclusives would be better for the console manufacturers and this is just the best they can get for the money. I just wonder whether it's actually worth it.

I think the impact has been reduced because everyone expects it to be timed now. So many once-exclusive games ultimately got ported to other platforms that now everyone expects them to be temporary.

I would say yes, for the holiday season anyway.

If a "hot" game for a season is exclusive to one console then that would influence the choice of someone who was planning on getting one that year. It probably won't cause someone to just suddenly decide to buy a console, but will likely influence which console someone who is already planning on buying one chooses.

gore wrote:
TheGameguru wrote:
gore wrote:

I just don't get how timed exclusive help the console manufacturers. Does anybody actually go out and buy an XBox because they can't wait a couple of months for Tomb Raider to come out on a different platform?

The whole thing seems like a complete waste for Microsoft and it just leaves me baffled. Real exclusives are one thing, but timed exclusives seem to have very little value (unless they can trick customers into thinking they're real exclusives).

Seems like they should just take the money they burn on timed exclusives and reduce the cost of the console.

You can spend 10 minutes in your average internet gaming forum and realize why both sides use this tactic. Microsoft identified a hole in their lineup and figured grabbing Tomb Raider to have to compete against Uncharted for next holiday season was worth it to them to pony up dollars to lock out the competition for a period of time. Looking at what Holiday 2015 has right now scheduled (and we all know things will slip) this seems like a smart move from Microsoft for their console and their customers. Time will tell if this ends up being a mistake for Square Enix.

Are these timed exclusives proven to work that way? Real exclusives - the way we used to use the word - have a lot of value, but I'm dubious that timed exclusives really have the same impact.

One can assume that real exclusives would be better for the console manufacturers and this is just the best they can get for the money. I just wonder whether it's actually worth it.

MS has Halo 5 for holiday 2015. Tomb Raider timed exclusive is just the cherry on top for sales.