Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

Rise of the Tomb Raider

74 replies to this topic
FranklinDeRoosevelt
  • FranklinDeRoosevelt

    32nd President of Los Santos

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 02 Aug 2013

#61

Posted 29 August 2014 - 04:47 PM

And you think it'll sell pretty well on that console alone if it was full exclusive? Because in June 2014, the first tomb raider hit 6.4 million sales in total from both consoles. This is a big mistake for Enix.

 

@OnceAgain: Again, that was released on the 13th August, I wasn't even at home where I could access my computer and check. I was away on a holiday. That's fine. Once again I'll repeat it. Timed exclusive is fine, I don't have anything against that.


Flynny
  • Flynny

    Where is Jessica Hyde?

  • Leone Family Mafia
  • Joined: 19 Apr 2012
  • Chad

#62

Posted 31 August 2014 - 10:51 AM Edited by Flynny, 31 August 2014 - 10:52 AM.

 

No I didn't. All I know is Microsoft claimed this is going to be exclusive, they didn't say timed exclusive.....AFAIK. So I assumed they somehow managed to bribe Enix to keep it on their platform. If it's timed exclusive, that's a different story, fine. Full exclusive, then that would have been the dumbest move by Microsoft ever since their reveal blunder :D
 
The only time exclusives make sense, is if the game is a first party title that has been funded by the respective companies, as in own those developer groups. Every third party should be on all platforms really.


If it was a full exclusive how would it be a dumb move by MS? Tomb Raider is one of the biggest names ever.

 

WAS one of the biggest frachises ever, I suppose it is unfair to say it isn't a big name anymore, because it always will be a big name but tomb raider is past its best by a long way. Tomb raider, for the first 3 or 4 games was a game that pretty much everybody was playing, everyone I knew anyway, now it just isn't, the sales are probably higher than the originals but only because the entire games market has grown at an amazing rate, if this tomb raider was like the old ones in terms of success then it would have got GTA V level of sales, to be honest Tomb Raider lost its crown with Angel of darkness, however it was on the way down before them, some people didn't like 4 and fewer liked 5, I hated 5, disliked 4 when I was a kid but like it now. I liked the new TR, but it wasn't as good as the first 3 in my opinion. Took me 10-11 hours for TR2013, and 30 mins of that were spent on figuring out the buttons for QTEs. The first tomb raider, well I didn't complete it til 2012 and I got it in 1996 (when I was a kid i gave up on a level cannot remember which). But in terms of playtime for my 2nd runthrough (which I have a steam figure for unlike my 1st) it was 12-14 hours. A lot of time in the old tomb raiders was spent thinking "can I make that jump?" or "I didn't see that ledge" or "I didn't know that was climbable" whereas the new TR you press a button to find all that out, a fine feature since it is optional, I like it, but I like the challenge of old a bit more. However TRoriginal's controls on pc were designed by the anti-christ, and controller no helpy.

 

It would be a bad move for CD for sure though, to release it on the 2nd lowest selling platform. But hey ho it is only timed, and for me, PC or PS4 doesnt matter, I will probably get it on PC like all the other games.


esmittystud101
  • esmittystud101

    I play both sides of the fence

  • Members
  • Joined: 17 Sep 2013
  • United-States

#63

Posted 02 September 2014 - 06:33 PM

Not really a big fan of the series, I had the Tomb Raider that came out a couple years ago on Xbox 360, but I didn't even finish it. Just wasn't too interested in it. I see why MS would try and make it an exclusive, but they are going to have to get a bigger title than that if they want more people to purchase a console based on exclusive games. Sunset Overdrive is a much better step in the right direction in my opionion. I can also name exclusives for Sony that are just as good, if not better. But to each his own, if you like the Tomb Raider series and you have owned all the games through the years and now you can't get the latest one due to it being an exclusive, I get it. I would be mad too.


Crossed Sabres
  • Crossed Sabres

    Miss LS Organizer

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Oct 2013
  • None

#64

Posted A week ago

Microsoft announces it will be publishing Rise of the Tomb Raider.

 

http://www.gamespot....o/1100-6424104/

 

 

A Microsoft executive has confirmed that the corporation will act as publisher for Square Enix's Rise of the Tomb Raider for Xbox One.

 

The newest revelation sheds light on the finer details of The Rise of the Tomb Raider's timed exclusivity deal for Xbox One, but also poses questions about how future ports to other systems will be handled.  Microsoft's agreement to act as publisher likely means it will handle marketing and distribution costs; which possibly could be a responsibility it has taken to help broker the exclusivity deal in the first place.


Eurotrash
  • Eurotrash

    Mark Chump

  • Members
  • Joined: 3 weeks ago
  • Romania

#65

Posted A week ago

Was looking forward to a new Tomb Raider game. But Square Enix jumping in bed with Microsoft pretty much killed any reason I'd have to buy the game instead of doing the bad thing.

 

What i've seen so far looks knda "meh" anyway. What I want to know is whether we actually get a proper open world this time.


nath22
  • nath22

    Mark Chump

  • Members
  • Joined: 03 Oct 2013

#66

Posted A week ago

Are people really that simple that they won't buy a game because it's being published by Microsoft? If it's a good game who cares?

 

It's an interesting deal for Microsoft, they could have done this with a lot of similar sized titles but they've picked Tomb Raider for a reason.


DarthShinobi
  • DarthShinobi

    The fall is FAST and STEEP

  • Members
  • Joined: 26 Sep 2012
  • United-States

#67

Posted A week ago

Was looking forward to a new Tomb Raider game. But Square Enix jumping in bed with Microsoft pretty much killed any reason I'd have to buy the game instead of doing the bad thing.
 
What i've seen so far looks knda "meh" anyway. What I want to know is whether we actually get a proper open world this time.


What exactly have you "seen"?
  • OnceAgainYoungFitzpatrick likes this

MikeyBelic
  • MikeyBelic

    Head Lad

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Jun 2012

#68

Posted A week ago

2013's Tomb Raider came out on PC, Xbox 360, Playstation 3, Xbox One and Playstation 4. 

 

Rise of the Tomb Raider, a direct sequel to the 2013 reboot that continues Lara's story from the first game, is coming out on Xbox 360, Xbox One and (potentially) PC. 

 

This is a problem. 

 

You do not make your rebooted franchise multi-platform with the first installment, then suddenly change your mind and make an exclusivity deal with a company. There are exceptions, but Rise of the Tomb Raider is not one of them. 

 

Bayonetta 2 would have never been made without Nintendo. So that game being exclusive to Wii U is fair enough. However, Tomb Raider is a big name. Square Enix is behind it. They don't NEED Microsoft to fund the development of the game. It would have came to fruition without them. Therefore, they have not contributed enough to warrant this exclusivity.

 

This isn't about fanboys or platform loyalty. It's about treating your customers with some f*cking respect. Square Enix and the developers of Tomb Raider gave us the reboot. ALL of us. Not just Microsoft platforms. It is downright unfair for the sequel to be exclusive. It wouldn't be as bad if this sequel was a re-reboot, one that has nothing to do with the previous game in terms of story and character progression. But it isn't. 

 

I am a PC gamer and I am all for Sony platforms getting Rise of the Tomb Raider. Playstation gamers bought the first game, they supported it. They helped make the sequel possible, along with everyone else. 

 

Rest assured, I would be saying the exact same thing if Sony was in Microsoft's position. So again, it's not about "platform loyalty" (whatever the f*ck that means nowadays). It's about fair treatment and not being such a pathetic, treacherous sellout.

 

What this guy said. They sold themselves out for the $$. The guy mocking 'PS fanboys' should stop being such a 'Microsoft fanboy' and unite with his common gamers to stop this sh*t happening in the first place, there needs to be Unity from all sides to stand up to this sh*t and stop it from happening in the future. 

  • Xerukal likes this

utack
  • utack

    Street Cat

  • Members
  • Joined: 15 Jun 2014
  • None

#69

Posted A week ago

Are people really that simple that they won't buy a game because it's being published by Microsoft? If it's a good game who cares?

Not sure what a publisher does.

But in this case wouldn't it make sense if MS paid all the development cost and then kept all the income from sales?

In this case I would surely not buy it, since Square Enix sees none of the money.


Crossed Sabres
  • Crossed Sabres

    Miss LS Organizer

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Oct 2013
  • None

#70

Posted A week ago Edited by Crossed Sabres, A week ago.

I disagree.  Without exclusivity, there would be no differentiation between the consoles, and therefore, no competition.  Competition is good for the overall industry and it helps drive value to customers.  Particularly, it can detrimental to those on the opposing side, but in this case, Rise of the Tomb Raider may not have seen the light of day without Microsoft's help.  Also, without competition, one company would just continue to exploit its customers and do far more damage than deny a particular game to its customers.  Microsoft is basically saying to Sony, "Think you can do better? Let's see you try."  That's good for the industry.  You might not see it, but it's there.

 

And I can say this objectively without getting my emotions involved because I own both consoles.  As long as business is involved, exclusivity isn't going anywhere.

 

Edit: I wanted to add this video.  ReviewTech responds to Street Fighter V's "exclusivity" on PS4.  Although I disagree with his sentiment about semi-exclusivity, he still describes it as business as usual.

 

 

Not sure what a publisher does.

But in this case wouldn't it make sense if MS paid all the development cost and then kept all the income from sales?

In this case I would surely not buy it, since Square Enix sees none of the money.

 

 

A publisher handles distribution, marketing and a full suite of other logistics.  They share a portion of profits with the developer.  The developer gets the largest portion, and in this case, SquareEnix.


nath22
  • nath22

    Mark Chump

  • Members
  • Joined: 03 Oct 2013

#71

Posted A week ago

I'm all for exclusive games but timed exclusives are a bit sh*t. What's the point? So that Xb1 owners can be happy at getting a game before others? It just seems a little superficial. Quick fix way to draw people in.

 

Exclusive DLC is an entirely different thing though that's something that needs to stop.


MadMugen
  • MadMugen

    Square Civilian

  • Members
  • Joined: 23 Aug 2013

#72

Posted A week ago

I would like to see this and uncharted 4 come out at the same time.


Coin
  • Coin

    Game Over

  • Members
  • Joined: 06 Jan 2014
  • South-Georgia-and-the-South-Sandwich-Islands

#73

Posted A week ago Edited by Coin, A week ago.

 

 


 

A publisher handles distribution, marketing and a full suite of other logistics.  They share a portion of profits with the developer.  The developer gets the largest portion, and in this case, SquareEnix.

 

It depends. In most cases though, the publisher will get the lion's share.

 

The only times a developer gets the largest portion usually is when they self publish.


Eurotrash
  • Eurotrash

    Mark Chump

  • Members
  • Joined: 3 weeks ago
  • Romania

#74

Posted A week ago

Are people really that simple that they won't buy a game because it's being published by Microsoft? If it's a good game who cares?

 

Anybody who isn't an Xbox gamer should. Microsoft publishing the Xbox version almost guarantees the following:

 

-That it won't have a PS3 / PS4 version until much, much later

-That the PC version will be a poorly optimized Xbox port


GTA3Rockstar
  • GTA3Rockstar

    --------------------

  • Andolini Mafia Family
  • Joined: 15 Mar 2002
  • United-States

#75

Posted A week ago

Are people really that simple that they won't buy a game because it's being published by Microsoft? If it's a good game who cares?

 

It's an interesting deal for Microsoft, they could have done this with a lot of similar sized titles but they've picked Tomb Raider for a reason.

 

Playstation/PC gamers care, because they won't be getting the game until later, if at all(don't know the full details).

 

Tomb Raider is well known franchise game, that's why.

 

I'm all for exclusive games but timed exclusives are a bit sh*t. What's the point? So that Xb1 owners can be happy at getting a game before others? It just seems a little superficial. Quick fix way to draw people in.

 

 

No, it's not about the Xbox owners. It's about Microsoft trying to get people to buy their consoles. That's why they do it.

 

 

 

 

Video games is a business of making money, not pleasure. If they think they can make some money doing such-a-thing, then they will do it.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users