Support NeoGAF

[CosmicGroinPull]

So many games are timed exclusives now, or at the very least have timed exclusive DLC. Why is Tomb Raider the one game that has made people totally flip the fuck out? Most people thought Tomb Raider 2013 was either "good" or "very good"....but not incredibly OMGWTF awesome. So why is it such a tragedy that it will only be on Xbox for a while? Particularly when you have Uncharted 4 to compensate for Tomb Raider's absence...

I think timed exclusivity is probable, but I'm still angry at this.

The first game was multiplatform.

If they were gonna do this, then announce the sequel as an exclusive from the start. Not when people on other platforms already have expectations of playing the game.

Also, being locked up AFTER its initial announcement clearly reeks of moneyhats and anti competitive behavior. Nothing new on MS' part, but shame on SE.

Splinter Cell Conviction? No problem with that. It started as a Xbox franchise anyway, so the fans are concentrated there.

Titanfall exclusive was perfectly fine - it was a new IP, and the money probably helped them. Plus, when you focus on one platform, you can deliver a more polished game (lol).

So was Bayonetta 2 because Nintendo funded it.

Exclusive DLCs? DLCs are a big deal? Even as a Sony fan I scoffed at these things because it seems like it's all poor Sony could moneyhat?

 

[border]

How is the PC only Demographic supposed to play Uncharted 4 as an alternative to this?

The same way that the PC-only demographic is supposed to play Bloodborne. For whatever reason, people aren't nearly as upset about that moneyhat.....even though Dark Souls has a pretty avid PC gamer following.

 

[HORRORSHØW]

Tomb Raider could be a better game with this exclusivity. They can use the cloud to do something especial like Crackdown 3 physics. When you doesn't have to worry about different hardware's you can focus your entire team to squeeze one platform. The Rise of Tomb Raider could be the 2015 Game of the Year. That was a BIG BIG move by Microsoft.

quoting again for the laughs.

thanks

 

[Kolgar]

Straight up fuck them, and Lara, then.

Not going to support this kind of thing anymore.

Sorry for the course language, but if anyone from Square-Enix is reading, that's for you.

 

[Sydle]

I played through TR once and i still think it's a poor man's uncharted. But i'm one of those grumpy fans of the old TR games.

I get it, reminds me of my friend. He's played all of them, every single one and just loves them. I was not a fan of old Tomb Raider, but gushed over the new one so he bought it. Fast forward to now and he no longer talks to me about Tomb Raider lol

 

[Chobel]

Almost anybody on Steam has a backlog that's at least several months' long. Waiting for a new AAA release should be more of a relief than anything else.

Though if it wasn't obvious, I was referring more to comments like this:

WTF? This got to be the most creative way to spin this news. MS PR would be proud.

 

[HighResTomato]

this pre-order has been up since the announcement in June.

Fixed.

 

[DrSlek]

I'm confused. The Tomb Raider reboot didn't seel very well across all platforms, did it?

I don't understand how agreeing to an exclusivity deal with a single console will work out better for the Publisher....

 

[David___]

The same way that the PC-only demographic is supposed to play Bloodborne. For whatever reason, people aren't nearly as upset about that moneyhat.....even though Dark Souls has a pretty avid PC gamer following.

You do know that Sony is footing the bill, own the IP and is having Studio Japan co-develop the game, right?

 

[Apt101]

Hmm. Seems like a bad idea, and I don't see how SE could come out on top long term with this deal. Oh well, maybe they really needed the quick buck.

 

[SegaManAU]

its initial announcement clearly reeks of moneyhats and anti competitive behavior. Nothing new on MS' part, but shame on SE.

Anti competitive behavior? lol

 

[MercuryLS]

I think timed exclusivity is probable, but I'm still angry at this.

The first game was multiplatform.

If they were gonna do this, then announce the sequel as an exclusive from the start. Not when people on other platforms already have expectations of playing the game.

Also, being locked up AFTER its initial announcement clearly reeks of moneyhats and anti competitive behavior. Nothing new on MS' part, but shame on SE.

Splinter Cell Conviction? No problem with that. It started as a Xbox franchise anyway, so the fans are concentrated there.

Titanfall exclusive was perfectly fine - it was a new IP, and the money probably helped them. Plus, when you focus on one platform, you can deliver a more polished game (lol).

So was Bayonetta 2 because Nintendo funded it.

Exclusive DLCs? DLCs are a big deal? Even as a Sony fan I scoffed at these things because it seems like it's all poor Sony could moneyhat?

Didn't Sony moneyhat Tomb Raider on PS2? As well as the GTA series (timed)?

Sony used to do moneyhats quite a bit. They're no angels, they just realized that it's a better use of their cash to fund internal devs and some indies.

 

[TURBO1112]

Im in the group that enjoyed Tomb Raider more than Uncharted.

 

[border]

You do know that Sony is footing the bill, own the IP and is having Studio Japan co-develop the game, right?

So moneyhats are acceptable if they comprise some predetermined percentage of a game's budget? If Microsoft announced tomorrow that they were paying for 50% of Tomb Raider's development costs and having 343i collaboratively work on the multiplayer, that would make everything cool?

I also fail to see how Sony retaining the rights to the Bloodborne IP is really a good thing. Most people tend to think that if a developer has to give up creative control for money, that is a flaw within the current developer-publisher system.

 

[boredandlazy]

So moneyhats are acceptable if they comprise some predetermined percentage of a game's budget? If Microsoft announced tomorrow that they were paying for 50% of Tomb Raider's development costs and having 343i collaboratively work on the multiplayer, that would make everything cool?

I also fail to see how Sony retaining the rights to the Bloodborne IP is really a good thing. Most people tend to think that if a developer has to give up creative control for money, that is a flaw within the current developer-publisher system.

How is co-developing a game a moneyhat? And if Microsoft were helping develop the next Tomb Raider then yes, of course it would be understandable that exclusivity would be part of the equation. But since we know it isn't, why even bring it up?

 

[DOWN]

Never have I ever felt so disappointed by third party exclusivity. Wish Microsoft put that money into a new IP or first party title.

Sucks that the weaker hardware has locked in a long term multiplat that had more fans on PS4.

 

[SJRB]

I'm not sure what else can be said after 63 pages, but as someone who played the previous on PC, PS3 and PS4 there are no words for how angry I am over this.

This is the dumbest thing I've seen happen in years.

 

[CosmicGroinPull]

Didn't Sony moneyhat Tomb Raider on PS2? As well as the GTA series (timed)?

Sony used to do moneyhats quite a bit. They're no angels, they just realized that it's a better use of their cash to fund internal devs and some indies.

No idea about PS2. And GTA? That's totally new to me. You have a source on that? as well as other moneyhats? Because as far as I know, PS2 got so many exclusives because it was pretty much a monopoly.

 

[bargeparty]

Anybody post this yet? It lists Rise of the Tomb Raider as being Mantle supported.

http://videocardz.com/51018/exclusive-upcoming-games-support-mantle

 

[DOWN]

I'm not sure what else can be said after 63 pages, but as someone who played the previous on PC, PS3 and PS4 there are no words for how angry I am over this.

This is the dumbest thing I've seen happen in years.

125 pages bud

And I had Tomb Raider on 360. But DE on PS4.

 

[Bulgar]

The same way that the PC-only demographic is supposed to play Bloodborne. For whatever reason, people aren't nearly as upset about that moneyhat.....even though Dark Souls has a pretty avid PC gamer following.

I thought Bloodborne has been called a spiritual successor to Demon Souls which has always been a PS exclusive. Demon Souls has never been on PC. I'm sure that when Dark Souls 3 comes out it will be also on PC but comparing Bloodborne and Dark Souls is unfair unless you are comparing gameplay and not publishers.

 

[Chobel]

So moneyhats are acceptable if they comprise some predetermined percentage of a game's budget? If Microsoft announced tomorrow that they were paying for 50% of Tomb Raider's development costs and having 343i collaboratively work on the multiplayer, that would make everything cool?

I also fail to see how Sony retaining the rights to the Bloodborne IP is really a good thing. Most people tend to think that if a developer has to give up creative control for money, that is a flaw within the current developer-publisher system.

How hard is it to understand? Without Sony, Bloodborne wouldn't exist. However in RoTR case, it was already coming to PS/PC but MS payed money to stop these version from coming out.

So yes if MS were helping funding the game, it would make everything cool (for most people)

 

[border]

Also, being locked up AFTER its initial announcement clearly reeks of moneyhats and anti competitive behavior. Nothing new on MS' part, but shame on SE.

Sony also announced timed exclusivity on No Man's Sky after the title's initial reveal. Does that also reek of moneyhats and anti-competitive behavior?

 

[David___]

So moneyhats are acceptable if they comprise some predetermined percentage of a game's budget?
.

It isn't a moneyhat when you are completely funding the game from the ground up.

I also fail to see how Sony retaining the rights to the Bloodborne IP is really a good thing. Most people tend to think that if a developer has to give up creative control for money, that is a flaw within the current developer-publisher system

Except they haven't given up the IP since it was never FROM's. All Bloodborne is a collaboration between Sony's Studio Japan and FROM. The game wouldn't have existed in its current state if Sony never contracted FROM to do this.

Sony also announced timed exclusivity on No Man's Sky after the title's initial reveal. Does that also reek of moneyhats and anti-competitive behavior?

1) IIRC Hello Games isn't bound by a contract to release first on PS.
2) According to BruceLeeRoy Sony helped Hello Games when they got flooded out.

 

[boredandlazy]

Sony also announced timed exclusivity on No Man's Sky after the title's initial reveal. Does that also reek of moneyhats and anti-competitive behavior?

Didn't Sony help the studio get back to their feet after they almost lost a lot of their work due to flooding?
Seriously, it's hard not to have a shitty argument when you keep pulling counterpoints from your ass.

 

[Renekton]

I'm confused. The Tomb Raider reboot didn't seel very well across all platforms, did it?

I don't understand how agreeing to an exclusivity deal with a single console will work out better for the Publisher....

I thought it made sense.

1) They don't compete with Uncharted for the crypt robbing genre
2) Get some sweet Microsoft money
3) Steam version 6-9 months later

 

[CosmicGroinPull]

Anti competitive behavior? lol

Even at its loosest definition, this move will significantly reduce sales of the sequel by cutting out the PC/PS audience, hence reducing competition. Wrong? Hurr durrr lolllll

 

[jpd1408]

This won't warrant a xbox one purchase for me... To bad cuz I would of got it day one on the ps4

 

[border]

How hard is it to understand? Without Sony, Bloodborne wouldn't exist.

After the financial success of the two Dark Souls games, do you really believe that Bloodborne couldn't have been independently financed?

 

[RoKKeR]

Sony also announced timed exclusivity on No Man's Sky after the title's initial reveal. Does that also reek of moneyhats and anti-competitive behavior?

Quoting for posterity, though I imagine Sony is helping out that developer.

 

[darkwing]

I'm confused. The Tomb Raider reboot didn't seel very well across all platforms, did it?

I don't understand how agreeing to an exclusivity deal with a single console will work out better for the Publisher....

They got moneybags?

 

[Chobel]

Sony also announced timed exclusivity on No Man's Sky after the title's initial reveal. Does that also reek of moneyhats and anti-competitive behavior?

We don't know Sony's deal with NMS, they could be actually funding the game since Hello game are small studio with limited resources.

 

[David___]

After the financial success of the two Dark Souls games, do you really believe that Bloodborne couldn't have been independently financed?

New gen comes with new growing pains. Multiply that by 2 and then you have to deal with the PC version then see the state of AAA in Japan. So no.

 

[ProvenDeadly]

We don't know Sony's deal with NMS, they could be actually funding the game since Hello game are small studio with limited resources.

Do we know MS deal with CD???

Does it matter?? Money is being involved in both cases.

 

[CosmicGroinPull]

Sony also announced timed exclusivity on No Man's Sky after the title's initial reveal. Does that also reek of moneyhats and anti-competitive behavior?

Never heard of it, so I assume it's an indie game? AAA title? No. Sequel of a series with historical sales in the millions? No. What are you talking about?

 

[Chobel]

After the financial success of the two Dark Souls games, do you really believe that Bloodborne couldn't have been independently financed?

If Bloodborne could have been independently financed, I'm sure From Software would be absolutely do it themselves instead of losing the IP to Sony.

 

[pnoozi]

You do know that Sony is footing the bill, own the IP and is having Studio Japan co-develop the game, right?

And Microsoft is footing the bill (or at least a portion of it) for Rise of the Tomb Raider.

So what you're saying is it would be perfectly acceptable if, instead of purchasing exclusivity (possibly timed) for Rise of the Tomb Raider, Microsoft had purchased CD and Tomb Raider outright, so that all future Tomb Raiders are exclusive to Xbox indefinitely. That would have been okay. But paying to keep a single game exclusive to Xbox for a year is an outrage.

 

[StrongBlackVine]

I don't understand how the PS4 will sell 20 million units in 14-15 months but maybe I'm wrong.


I can see PS4 at 19-22 with Xbox at 12-14 million.

I see the gap being larger than that. PS4 should be sitting at at least 15 million by the end of this year and there are a lot big current gen only games in early 2015 (Batman Arkham Knight, The Witcher 3, The Order 1886, Bloodborne and MGSV TPP) that should continue to push PS4 sales. Your Xbox One numbers look about right.

 

[David___]

And Microsoft is footing the bill (or at least a portion of it) for Rise of the Tomb Raider.
.

Prove it. Funding a game from the ground up =/= writing a check to make sure a game doesn't come to platform x

 

[Ascenion]

I keep reading over the comments from CD and the initial reveal. If its timed it looks like it would be timed like ME1 imo but I don't think its timed. I also think we may be reading too much into coming in holiday 2015 from the presser.

 

[Goodacre0081]

oh reddit

 

[StrongBlackVine]

On a serious thought, unless PS4 sells 1.3 million consoles per month consistently it won't hit 30 million.

Maybe not 30 million, but 25 million before the Holiday 2015 is very doable.

 

[Chobel]

Do we know MS deal with CD???

We know that SE are able to develop RoTR without MS help.

Does it matter?? Money is being involved in both cases.

It does matter, funding games is different than moneyhatting out other platforms. RoTR were always coming to Xbox, all MS did was stopping other platforms from getting this game (for some period of time).

 

[shacklesmcgee]

After the financial success of the two Dark Souls games, do you really believe that Bloodborne couldn't have been independently financed?

Do you think Bayonetta 2 was money hatted?

 

[Mononoke]

So moneyhats are acceptable if they comprise some predetermined percentage of a game's budget? If Microsoft announced tomorrow that they were paying for 50% of Tomb Raider's development costs and having 343i collaboratively work on the multiplayer, that would make everything cool?

I also fail to see how Sony retaining the rights to the Bloodborne IP is really a good thing. Most people tend to think that if a developer has to give up creative control for money, that is a flaw within the current developer-publisher system.

Then you turn towards Crystal Dynamics and question their decision for the franchise. Question whether giving up half of the dev cost is worth cutting out of 50%+ of the user base that made up TR sales. Whether it's the best decision for the series and it's fans to block out the majority of fans from playing the next storyline in a series they've invested in.

Absolutely. Although I'm confused why you see Bloodborne as 1:1 with this. You really don't understand why fans would be upset? A successor to a new IP that was always exclusive vs. a major franchise that people are invested in story wise and are now being blocked from continuing. You really can't see it?

 

[Script_Flipper]

Hope this hasn't already been posted

"The business model of Square Enix is centered on the idea of "polymorphic content", which consists in developing franchises on all potential hardware or media rather than being restricted by a single gaming platform... According to Yoichi Wada, "it's very difficult to hit the jackpot, as it were. Once we've hit it, we have to get all the juice possible out of it"."

from wikipedia. Guess things change..

 

[rokkerkory]

We know that SE are able to develop RoTR without MS help.



It does matter, funding games is different than moneyhatting out other platforms. RoTR were always coming to Xbox, all MS did was stopping other platforms from getting this game.

Do you have proof this is not timed exclusive but full exclusive?

 

[HYDE]

Straight up fuck them, and Lara, then.

Not going to support this kind of thing anymore.

Sorry for the course language, but if anyone from Square-Enix is reading, that's for you.

Add me to this camp...

I bought Tomb Raider on PS3 and on PS4.

Such distasteful bullcrap shitty practices by both parties involved.

 

[Gorillaz]

After the financial success of the two Dark Souls games, do you really believe that Bloodborne couldn't have been independently financed?

Tech, Bloodborne was made during the same time Dark Souls 2 was.

 

[EmptySpace]

After the financial success of the two Dark Souls games, do you really believe that Bloodborne couldn't have been independently financed?

bloodborne has been most likely in the works after dark souls 1.

also, just realised from software made tenchu?!

wtf forget bloodborne what about tenchu???