Support NeoGAF

[StrongBlackVine]

So you actually think because they "bought" this exclusive it actually takes away from some other phantom exclusive that may never be now? Seriously we don't even know how much they paid for it ( not that i would give a shit anyways i am not an investor) secondly there were games in development way before this deal was made. I doubt that because they made this one deal for this one game , all of a sudden any other new IP's will not happen.

People are always pushing the notion that MS has this huge fucking bottomless top hat that they can just pull any amount of money out to "buy an exclusive" so if they are so infinitely rich with this never ending war chest, surely they can have this exclusive and continue to fund new IP's at the same time.



How does one cut through bullshit with more bullshit?



Oh ok you mean like LXP and Black Tusk?

Black Tusk that now going to be a Gears Of War factory? That studio doesn't add anything. They still need more.

 

[Vire]

I remember more than a few people shitting on the first one. I still have yet to finish it mostly due to not having the time lately, but what i played wasn't all that bad.

I would have liked to play the first one, (I got it on PS Plus), but the constant camera bobbing in third person perspective made me incredibly nauseous. Unfortunately there was no option to turn it off either.

Really the only times I can remember getting visibly ill from playing a game was the reboot of Tomb Raider, Marathon and Half Life 2's vehicle sequences.

 

[Faustek]

Pretty slick. That's why I want one of those fancy Spencer buttons. He's badass.

Never saw it from that pov. But yeah I can see how someone can admire that.

Yeah, I said this in another thread but I'm wondering if Microsoft included that clause that won't allow it to come to Playstation systems. Historically it seems likely, but Tomb Raider has so much history on Playstation systems.

I think that is what many are worried about. But as the quoted above me pointed out earlier it could be just cleverly worded to make people question if it will come to other platforms and not wait for more information and give in and buy a XBO.

Didn't Blow say he invested much of his OWN MONEY in the dev of that game in the documentary? Where did you get that info from?

I'm pretty sure Blow said those words yes.

I remember more than a few people shitting on the first one. I still have yet to finish it mostly due to not having the time lately, but what i played wasn't all that bad.

It isn't. After I got over my expectations, train scene , and shook that of me the game become pretty ok imo.

 

[matrixman92]

I will buy it on Xbox one..just like I will buy all Sony timed stuff on ps4

 

[BurnOutBrighter]

MS marketing this means we'll get a whole season of "Exclusive to Xbox One this holiday" ads :S

 

[Ateron]

People are always pushing the notion that MS has this huge fucking bottomless top hat that they can just pull any amount of money out to "buy an exclusive" so if they are so infinitely rich with this never ending war chest, surely they can have this exclusive and continue to fund new IP's at the same time.

I know you don't believe th,at and neither do I.
I don't think they can buy whatever exclusive they want, the investors have a say in the matter and would oppose something ridiculous like GTA or Elder Scrolls. But even though TR is not a Behemoth, it's not exactly dirt cheap... And since I don't believe they have infinite money, I believe they should be more selective on how they wish to spend it. They could either spend 20 million on GTA DLC exclusivity or fund an Uncharted, for example. I might be mistaken but MS payed a shit ton of money for those DLCs. Sony probably saw that as a waste (and it was) and instead applied them somewhere else. Could have perfectly used it to fund an Uncharted, or Heavy Rain. That's why so many people dislike MS. They would rather see that you don't get something than invest and make something of their own. Sometimes it's a gamble, sometimes you hit (Heavy Rain) sometimes you miss (tearaway) but those were fresh experiences and only benefit us, the consumers.

If they hadn't splurged this money on pointless exclusivities (because I can't see a ps4 only owner buying an X1 just for that game, the franchise doesn't have that sort of pull anymore, but I might be wrong) they could have injected some of that cash into the creation of yet another cool exclusive, like Sunset Overdrive. Xbox owners would ALWAYS get access to TR. They've gained nothing from this deal, except fanboy wars ammo. If this was Sony's deal, I would be equally and royally pissed. It's a waste of money, money that could be spent elsewhere. I don't give a rat's ass who gets to play a certain game, the more the merrier. I only care about getting more and more new IPs, and to see the money we give the platform holders every month getting spent wisely to expand the portfolio.

I'm not trying to be an asshole about this, or trying to pick a fight with anyone. I just think this is a douchey move, no matter if it's MS's, Sony's or Nintendo's. No one gave them shit for bringing back Bayonetta when it was dead (at least anyone with half a functioning brain), no one should be givving Sony shit about Bloodbourne, that game is being co developed by them and pusblished as well. No one should give MS shit for Sunset Overdrive: sony wouldn't let them keep ownership of the IP, MS did, were smart. It's Sony's (and mine too, as a ps4 gamer) loss. But that was perfectly ok in my book.

This, on the other hand, just feels wrong. SE is really clueless.

 

[Zombie James]

“Right now we have a relationship with Square and Crystal on publishing the game,” Spencer confirmed.

OK, so if MS is publishing then why all the "it's their game, we can't speak for their game and their plans" talk from the other day?

 

[abadguy]

Black Tusk that now going to be a Gears Of War factory? That studio doesn't add anything. They still need more.

They are? That's news to me.

 

[Sydle]

Yes, clear as day...a day after the original announcement. Additionally, that "clear as day" statement didn't say a thing about co-publishing. In fact, his comments of "it's timed" and "I don't control where it goes" seem a bit odd if Microsoft had partnered with them in co-development and co-publishing duties.

Seems to me that Microsoft threw money at the game in a panic some time within the last few days to seal it up. At least, that's my hunch.

And what does all that matter if it's only wrapped in a deal with an expiration date?

 

[licktheenvelope]

I still find it funny Spencer talks about how he wishes Xbox had an action game with the type of clout that Tomb Raider had... so they bought the exclusivity...

Someone needs to tell Microsoft if you build these damn games you don't have to buy exclusivity!!! The brand has existed for 13 years how you have not had a 3rd person action series is shocking.

 

[Mononoke]

Well, there's only so much you can do. They also need to be careful and don't want to take on full responsibility for something they don't feel is a sure thing, you know? Hence pick a few quality games from quality teams, and then maybe snag a big one like Tomb Raider. It's something they have to be cautious with as always.

MS has already taken a beating in the PR department. Why would they secure a major sequel to a multiplat series that was played by a majority more people NOT on X1. Surely...the downside to that is more negative PR (as it's a decision that impacts a lot of gamers and potential customers across the industry). And X1 users were always going to get the game, so I don't see the positives.

I mean, I know what they are hoping (that it moves X1 units). But damn.

 

[BPoole]

Thanks Phil, I'll be sure to not buy it for X1

 

[Alebrije]

feel sorry for Xbone when the most talked point about its Tomb Rider deal is if it is temporary or complete and not about the game or even the conosole

 

[StrongBlackVine]

Actually that confuses things even more since those are only coming to PC after XB1.

I'm certain it is coming to PS4 now. Phil isn't going say more than he felt the pressure to admit.

 

[inm8num2]

See this is a smart guy. All the complaining means nothing if you guys are still gonna buy it.

Agreed.

I'm not swearing off the game or anything, but I feel like the lesson MS and CD should learn will be lost if/when the game sells well, on XBox or the other platforms.

Time will tell how people remember this situation and whether it affects their decision to purchase. Part of me feels that this kind of situation happens because gaming companies know their audience all too well, in terms of usually buying the product anyway.

 

[abadguy]

I know you don't believe th,at and neither do I.
I don't think they can buy whatever exclusive they want, the investors have a say in the matter and would oppose something ridiculous like GTA or Elder Scrolls. But even though TR is not a Behemoth, it's not exactly dirt cheap... And since I don't believe they have infinite money, I believe they should be more selective on how they wish to spend it. They could either spend 20 million on GTA DLC exclusivity or fund an Uncharted, for example. I might be mistaken but MS payed a shit ton of money for those DLCs. Sony probably saw that as a waste (and it was) and instead applied them somewhere else. Could have perfectly used it to fund an Uncharted, or Heavy Rain. That's why so many people dislike MS. They would rather see that you don't get something than invest and make something of their own. Sometimes it's a gamble, sometimes you hit (Heavy Rain) sometimes you miss (tearaway) but those were fresh experiences and only benefit us, the consumers.

If they hadn't splurged this money on pointless exclusivities (because I can't see a ps4 only owner buying an X1 just for that game, the franchise doesn't have that sort of pull anymore, but I might be wrong) they could have injected some of that cash into the creation of yet another cool exclusive, like Sunset Overdrive. Xbox owners would ALWAYS get access to TR. They've gained nothing from this deal, except fanboy wars ammo. If this was Sony's deal, I would be equally and royally pissed. It's a waste of money, money that could be spent elsewhere. I don't give a rat's ass who gets to play a certain game, the more the merrier. I only care about getting more and more new IPs, and to see the money we give the platform holders every month getting spent wisely to expand the portfolio.

I'm not trying to be an asshole about this, or trying to pick a fight with anyone. I just think this is a douchey move, no matter if it's MS's, Sony's or Nintendo's. No one gave them shit for bringing back Bayonetta when it was dead (at least anyone with half a functioning brain), no one should be givving Sony shit about Bloodbourne, that game is being co developed by them and pusblished as well. No one should give MS shit for Sunset Overdrive: sony wouldn't let them keep ownership of the IP, MS did, were smart. It's Sony's (and mine too, as a ps4 gamer) loss. But that was perfectly ok in my book.

This, on the other hand, just feels wrong. SE is really clueless.

Fair enough.

 

[Omnii-chan]

It'd be stupid to spend so much money on something that isn't fully theirs. You'd think it would be at the most like Dead Rising 3; with a PC port possible in the future.

 

[TheLostBigBoss]

Too much stupid drama and confusion, don't want to contribute to the continuation of deals like this.

I'm outtie.

 

[RexNovis]

It's weird that you omit these:

Sounds like you want to see it one way and glossed over a lot that doesn't quite fit into your story.

Actually no I did reference "It has a duration."

And please enlighten me as to how that phrase is at all clear. It's pretty much the epitome of non committal PR. We know what the phrase timed exclusive means. It has implications that have been defined by past examples. We have absolutely no idea from this comment what their contract is just that it will not continue until the end if time. The two are not remotely the same. Nobody says "it has a duration" nobody. I have never once heard that phrase prior to it coming out of Phil Spencer's mouth. The only reason you would say such a thing is if you're trying to be overtly vague and non committal which is exactly what he is doing.

This is also true

That's actually the point. There are multiple elements to this saga over the past few days, some times it's clearer than other times, other times it's buried in mud, sometimes it's all mixed together... clear in some parts of an article, unclear it yet others.

This is called obfuscation. It is the very reason we on NeoGAF - a very well informed segment of the gaming community - keeps having a billion threads on this subject.

Their whole or strategy here is textbook swindling. Banking in misleading vague comments to confuse people to the pint where they have no idea what is actually true or not and frankly I find it despicable

 

[BennyBlanco]

"I dont want to be obtuse, but watch as I dance around this subject and don't really confirm or deny anything." - Phil Spencer

 

[semiconscious]

The exact details of what publishing means and when it gets done are part of that deal - I’m not trying to be opaque about it....

right ...

 

[DoubleTake]

It's timed, Jim.

 

[Vestax]

Can someone tell me if this is coming to the wiiu?

I literally LOLed....

 

[Sean*O]

I will LOL when this game doesn't save them after they've sunk $100 mill (guessing) into marketing and blocking it from other systems.

SE are freaking idiots too.

 

[SEGAvangelist]

It'd be stupid to spend so much money on something that isn't fully theirs. You'd think it would be at the most like Dead Rising 3; with a PC port possible in the future.

Dudes. MS is just practicing what they preach. They want us to rent games as a service similar to the way they rent IPs.

 

[teiresias]

Remember how much bickering and fighting there was over Final Fantasy 13 pre-release?...

What a waste of time considering the game fucking blew. Would be amusing if this new Tomb Raider turned out to be a hunk of garbo.

This whole issue is less about the game at this point and more about gaming audiences being fed up with corporate PR-speak BS.

 

[Nanashrew]

Too much stupid drama and confusion, don't want to contribute to the continuation of deals like this.

I'm outtie.

Same here. Been in too many of these threads and there's just too much confusion. My feelings are best summed up in one of Drek's posts and the article on Gameindustry.biz

 

[Sydle]

Actually no I did reference "It has a duration."

And please enlighten me as to how that phrase is at all clear. It's pretty much the epitome of non committal PR. We know what the phrase timed exclusive means. It has implications that have been defined by past examples. We have absolutely no idea from this comment what their contract is just that it will not continue until the end if time. The two are not remotely the same. Nobody says "it has a duration" nobody. I have never once heard that phrase prior to it coming out of Phil Spencer's mouth. The only reason you would say such a thing is if you're trying to be overtly vague and non committal which is exactly what he is doing.

Well, you also omitted to read the part where the interviewer asked if it has a duration and he said yes, it has a duration.

Interviewer's words.

It seems you have still failed to read. Please, go read the full article from a better media rag. Maybe twice if you need to? Shut off the distractions. Clear your mind. Focus for the full 20 seconds it's going to take to read the article and become enlightened.

 

[Stare-Bear]

I know you don't believe th,at and neither do I.
I don't think they can buy whatever exclusive they want, the investors have a say in the matter and would oppose something ridiculous like GTA or Elder Scrolls. But even though TR is not a Behemoth, it's not exactly dirt cheap... And since I don't believe they have infinite money, I believe they should be more selective on how they wish to spend it. They could either spend 20 million on GTA DLC exclusivity or fund an Uncharted, for example. I might be mistaken but MS payed a shit ton of money for those DLCs. Sony probably saw that as a waste (and it was) and instead applied them somewhere else. Could have perfectly used it to fund an Uncharted, or Heavy Rain. That's why so many people dislike MS. They would rather see that you don't get something than invest and make something of their own. Sometimes it's a gamble, sometimes you hit (Heavy Rain) sometimes you miss (tearaway) but those were fresh experiences and only benefit us, the consumers.

If they hadn't splurged this money on pointless exclusivities (because I can't see a ps4 only owner buying an X1 just for that game, the franchise doesn't have that sort of pull anymore, but I might be wrong) they could have injected some of that cash into the creation of yet another cool exclusive, like Sunset Overdrive. Xbox owners would ALWAYS get access to TR. They've gained nothing from this deal, except fanboy wars ammo. If this was Sony's deal, I would be equally and royally pissed. It's a waste of money, money that could be spent elsewhere. I don't give a rat's ass who gets to play a certain game, the more the merrier. I only care about getting more and more new IPs, and to see the money we give the platform holders every month getting spent wisely to expand the portfolio.

I'm not trying to be an asshole about this, or trying to pick a fight with anyone. I just think this is a douchey move, no matter if it's MS's, Sony's or Nintendo's. No one gave them shit for bringing back Bayonetta when it was dead (at least anyone with half a functioning brain), no one should be givving Sony shit about Bloodbourne, that game is being co developed by them and pusblished as well. No one should give MS shit for Sunset Overdrive: sony wouldn't let them keep ownership of the IP, MS did, were smart. It's Sony's (and mine too, as a ps4 gamer) loss. But that was perfectly ok in my book.

This, on the other hand, just feels wrong. SE is really clueless.

Listen to this man!

 

[Izuna]

It isn't exclusive!!! Does anybody read anymore!?




First things first, Tomb raider ISN'T EXCLUSIVE. Ok. It's not exclusive, it's a timed exclusive so it will be released on other platforms but it isn't exclusive.


Second of all, you began your argument saying that first party studios of Sony (which is Sony btw) were being payed BY Sony to make the games exclusive to Sony. Like think about that for a second man. Screw everything, screw this tomb raider non-sense, screw console wars and everything. Just focus on what you said and realize how ludicrous it is. You basically said Sony payed themselves off for exclusivity on their own god damn IPs.


Now onto the rest of the words you jumbled up together to think that you would have a peg to stand on.

Bloodborne and tomb raider aren't even remotely in the same situation since (go back to what i said about tomb raider being timed exclusive) Sony is more than likely paying for almost total of development costs of Bloodborne. So the only reason why it's being made is because Sony is paying for it, if Sony didn't give From Software the funds than more than likely Bloodborne would not be a thing and they would probably be working on Dark souls 3.


I seriously can't lay this out anymore clearer for you man, if you still aren't seeing the point I'm trying to get across to you than you're a lost cause.

1. I compared Demon's Souls/Bloodborne to Halo CE

2. I know it is timed-exclusive... why are you bringing this up? I only argued this in that saying MS are not evil for not explicitly saying how long it is or not, that's just stupid

3. OH MY GOD. You think From would be making Dark Souls 3 instead of Bloodborne if Sony didn't decide to fund it? Do you really think that Sony is the brains behind all of their first party game design?

I think the confusion is coming from this... Sony Santa Monica, SCEA, SCEJ whatever, let's call them all Sony. Let's actually call Naughty Dog Sony as well, from your definition, and lets call Bungie (prior to more recent events) Microsoft.

Now a dev like Kojima or Kamiya or whatever wants to make a game, or hell, Squeenix. Sony or MS can choose to fund/pay whatever for that game to be exclusive/timed/dlc whatever.

My point before is that this is happening all of the time. From the very first time a studio is bought or talent is bought, these devs are making their games for either the PS or Xbox based on where the money led them.

MS choosing to pay for timed-exclusivity for a game which is FAR from being completed is not the most ridiculous thing in the world. Many of the games you now know as pure Sony IPs started off a similar way where are game was anywhere between 0-90% complete and they chose to make it full-exclusive.

Or are you telling me that if Tomb Raider WASN'T timed-exclusive then MS wouldn't be evil? If they don't buy the whole IP they are not allowed to spend any money at all for their console's success?

What are you talking about, I still don't get it. First you talked about Sony's first party and compared it to SE and MS deal, so you're saying that SE is first party to MS now?,

Later talk about Bloodborne, a game Sony Japan Studio, a Sony's first party studio, is co-developing with FROM soft, and compared it to SE and MS deal. Still totally different situations, I don't see any MS studio co-developing with SE.

Seriously, I know I'm not smart but plz try to be more clear because to me the three situations are completely different.

First-party or not, we are talking about Tomb Raider's exclusivity. I was listing examples of the many ways Sony or MS can fund/pay/moneyhat(if you prefer) a game to be exclusive. It is done all the time. They pay for talent or for the most part, they pay talent for their IPs and strike deals for it to be part of theirs.

Didn't Blow say he invested much of his OWN MONEY in the dev of that game in the documentary? Where did you get that info from?

My bad. I watched a ton of this talks years ago and I assumed this is what happened.

--

There is nothing wrong with paying up for timed-exclusivity or even "moneyhatting" a game for full exclusivity. If there is, then by no means is MS the only one who should get blamed for this. There is NO WAY you should refuse to play a Tomb Raider game when it eventually comes out or if you have both consoles just because of this deal. That's insane.

 

[Bumblebeetuna]

Idk why people would expect them to come out and detail exactly what the logistics of the deal are, and the time frame? They want you to think this game is exclusive to their platform for a long enough period of time that you pick it up on their platforms. That doesn't work if they come out and say "hey wait 6 months and you not only get the game but probably some extra content too!!".

 

[REV 09]

From the OP article:

Holy shit. I hadn't actually read it until now. There is literally nothing vague about this. At this point people just want to be mad at MS for securing a high profile exclusive.

 

[BronsonLee]

Jesus Christ Phil, are you the Mad Hatter or some shit

 

[Justice_Bolt]

Is it fully exclusive or timed exclusive Phil? It's not that hard to say...

 

[viveks86]

Same here. Been in too many of these threads and there's just too much confusion. My feelings are best summed up in one of Drek's posts and the article on Gameindustry.biz

Before you go, I'm curious to know what you think is the confusion. Also, is there a confusion now?

 

[javiergame4]

Competition is healthy, I hope it doesn't come out on ps4.

 

[StarlordDial]

welp...need that popcorn.gif now...this is more of a thrilling ride than what the actual game that is included in the deal here

i still stand to what i said , they could've taken a game that would've given them more value and would've swayed people a lot more

after that "decent"reboot of the 1st game..

this is turning up to be all hype for the wrong reasons (because it got turned to exclusive)

also

they really need to properly state the message...they're doing their usual fumbling messages again

edit:

^ really..that is your first post? also...that gamertag. lel

 

[SEGAvangelist]

Jesus Christ Phil, are you the Mad Hatter or some shit

"Jesus Christ Phil"

I want gifs now.

 

[Izuna]

Holy shit. I hadn't actually read it until now. There is literally nothing vague about this. At this point people just want to be mad at MS for securing a high profile exclusive.

Doesn't matter. Any reason to hate on Microsoft is reason enough to start a riot.

 

[Crimson_Gold]

Competition is healthy, I hope it doesn't come out on ps4.

I don't understand this. Are you saying that by denying a sector of the gaming market a chance to play a game that the industry is strengthened?

 

[orochi91]

Have you guys seen this. Someone at CD slipped up and used the forbidden word: timed

"Thank you for all of the feedback and questions. There has been a lot of coverage about Rise of the Tomb Raider, and a new round of articles followed Phil Spencer’s Eurogamer interview in which he confirmed that the exclusivity is timed. In case you haven’t read that article yet, you can do so here."

http://tombraider.tumblr.com/post/94529480860/rise-of-the-tomb-raider-update

There we go.

I can leave this thread somewhat happy now.

 

[Daemul]

The only part which confuses me is the publishing line. At first reading I thought that was Phil saying MS are publishing the game, but we had the whole fiasco a few days back where MS said they weren't. Which one is it?

 

[DoubleTake]

1. I compared Demon's Souls/Bloodborne to Halo CE

2. I know it is timed-exclusive... why are you bringing this up? I only argued this in that saying MS are not evil for not explicitly saying how long it is or not, that's just stupid

3. OH MY GOD. You think From would be making Dark Souls 3 instead of Bloodborne if Sony didn't decide to fund it? Do you really think that Sony is the brains behind all of their first party game design?

I think the confusion is coming from this... Sony Santa Monica, SCEA, SCEJ whatever, let's call them all Sony. Let's actually call Naughty Dog Sony as well, from your definition, and lets call Bungie (prior to more recent events) Microsoft.

Now a dev like Kojima or Kamiya or whatever wants to make a game, or hell, Squeenix. Sony or MS can choose to fund/pay whatever for that game to be exclusive/timed/dlc whatever.

My point before is that this is happening all of the time. From the very first time a studio is bought or talent is bought, these devs are making their games for either the PS or Xbox based on where the money led them.

MS choosing to pay for timed-exclusivity for a game which is FAR from being completed is not the most ridiculous thing in the world. Many of the games you now know as pure Sony IPs started off a similar way where are game was anywhere between 0-90% complete and they chose to make it full-exclusive.

Or are you telling me that if Tomb Raider WASN'T timed-exclusive then MS wouldn't be evil? If they don't buy the whole IP they are not allowed to spend any money at all for their console's success?




First-party or not, we are talking about Tomb Raider's exclusivity. I was listing examples of the many ways Sony or MS can fund/pay/moneyhat(if you prefer) a game to be exclusive. It is done all the time. They pay for talent or for the most part, they pay talent for their IPs and strike deals for it to be part of theirs.



My bad. I watched a ton of this talks years ago and I assumed this is what happened.

--

There is nothing wrong with paying up for timed-exclusivity or even "moneyhatting" a game for full exclusivity. If there is, then by no means is MS the only one who should get blamed for this. There is NO WAY you should refuse to play a Tomb Raider game when it eventually comes out or if you have both consoles just because of this deal. That's insane.

I dont even....

 

[Stare-Bear]

Holy shit. I hadn't actually read it until now. There is literally nothing vague about this. At this point people just want to be mad at MS for securing a high profile exclusive.

But it's not an exclusive!!! It's timed.

 

[Chobel]

Competition is healthy, I hope it doesn't come out on ps4.

Joke post?

 

[N.Domixis]

Competition is healthy, I hope it doesn't come out on ps4.

YOu can hope all you want, but it wont change that its coming to ps4 after the holiday.

 

[semiconscious]

This whole issue is less about the game at this point and more about gaming audiences being fed up with corporate PR-speak BS.

i think that's all it's really been about for many: ms' chronic inability to simply tell the truth. about anything...

 

[viveks86]

But it's not an exclusive!!! It's timed.

LMAO! Ok. I guess there is some confusion after all

I don't even...

 

[HORRORSHØW]

Competition is healthy, I hope it doesn't come out on ps4.

someone check his email addy

 

[javiergame4]

I don't understand this. Are you saying that by denying a sector of the gaming market a chance to play a game that the industry is strengthened?

Its most likely going to be xbox/pc only. MS is doing everything that it can to be at the top, Sony doesn't have as much resources as xbox has. I like when companies do this, just like Samsung and apple. Money talks sir.