Considering the mountain of shit The Chinese Room got from PC gamers over Dear Esther and A Machine for Pigs (walking simulator, pretentious, not a game, not as good as The Dark Descent etc.), maybe they're happy taking some investment dosh from Sony rather than rely on the fickle goodwill of gamers. I'm no champion of buying up exclusives but this might be a case of the Chinese Room simply taking an easier route for, you know, their own convenience and sanity.
Is "Everybody's going to the Rapture" similar to the Tomb Raider X1 deal? Uh no
- Thread starter alexandros
- Start date
Considering the mountain of shit The Chinese Room got from PC gamers over Dear Esther and A Machine for Pigs (walking simulator, pretentious, not a game, not as good as The Dark Descent etc.), maybe they're happy taking some investment dosh from Sony rather than rely on the fickle goodwill of gamers. I'm no champion of buying up exclusives but this might be a case of the Chinese Room simply taking an easier route for, you know, their own convenience and sanity.
I find that strange also. Like it can't be true. If it is MS are crazy.
Pound_lb003
Member
Kind of want to point out that at one point is was going to be PS3 console exclusive, presumably because there had been someone from Sony in a 'Developer Relations' (or SCEE equivalent) position touching base with them for ages.
The difference between this and Tomb Raider is that Tomb Raider already had quite extensive resources behind it, courtesy of Square Enix.
Whereas Everybody's Gone to the Rapture was probably struggling along (as any independent development does, even those following previous indie successes) and given their standing relationship with some Sony guys they were given an opportunity to have their work fully funded, and some help in achieving their vision.
Comparing an indie project to a AAA project is where you tripped over yourself. The former could always do with support and evangelism.
The difference between this and Tomb Raider is that Tomb Raider already had quite extensive resources behind it, courtesy of Square Enix.
Whereas Everybody's Gone to the Rapture was probably struggling along (as any independent development does, even those following previous indie successes) and given their standing relationship with some Sony guys they were given an opportunity to have their work fully funded, and some help in achieving their vision.
Comparing an indie project to a AAA project is where you tripped over yourself. The former could always do with support and evangelism.
sorry, i edited my post to be more clear with what i meant.
I don't think a publisher would downright dismiss them, but rather the terms of a contract are likely to be more beneficial to the publisher than to the developer if the project failed to secure funds through kickstarter/crowd sourcing.
Saviour Phil was referring to a positive short-term development of S-E's bank account.
Of course. That's tangential, however.
Well, Sony owns EGTTR despite TCR sinking its own money into the game. I'd also argue that in terms of securing publisher faith, TCR dismissing the idea of crowdfunding doesn't compare favourably to the hypothetical reality of a failed campaign.
Yep. Sony would probably give a lowball number because they know they would more desperate after a failed attempt at crowdsourced funding.
I think it's at least relevant to the discussion. When many people in your buying public don't even consider the stuff you make 'real games' or say stupid shit like 'all indie games are the same', maybe you don't want to go begging for funds from them.
SuperSonic1305
Member
People sure are desperate to find reasons for "Sony too"
Tangential to my earlier point, not the topic at hand.
It's pretty much a guarantee these days. Was Microsoft Too a thing when Sony was in the NeoGAF time-out chair?
gigantor21
Member
The only major difference is that it's not the latest iteration of a series that's been multiplatform for several years. It's not like there was a previous game ("Nobody Knows About The Rapture Yet So We're Just Chillin") that sold millions across multiple platforms beforehand.
Beyond that, a moneyhat is a moneyhat, whether it's a AAA title or an indie game. I would've loved to play this on PC.
Nice to know that the persecution complex exists on both sides, I guess. :/
Beyond that, a moneyhat is a moneyhat, whether it's a AAA title or an indie game. I would've loved to play this on PC.
Nice to know that the persecution complex exists on both sides, I guess. :/
Dragonborn
Member
The only major difference is that it's not the latest iteration of a series that's been multiplatform for several years. It's not like there was a previous game ("Nobody Knows About The Rapture Yet So We're Just Chillin") that sold millions across multiple platforms beforehand.
Beyond that, a moneyhat is a moneyhat, whether it's a AAA title or an indie game. I would've loved to play this on PC.
It's a moneyhat. The game would not exist if it were not exclusive, they ran out of funds and needed help (hence partnering with Sony and getting help from SSM).
Op there is no comparabale game to the TR or TF moneyhats on PS4. You'd have to go back like 10 years to find any eveidence of a Aony moneyhat (outside of DLC which is now a mainstay for both companies)
So many these threads. OP you should understand what you're talking about before making a thread. Like others have said TR didn't just pop up last week. Its a damn title than has spanned countless systems for years. This is what folks are pissed about.
Microsoft sleeper cells were give execution code "nullify"
Microsoft sleeper cells were give execution code "nullify"
alexandros
Banned
Yeah, I'm sure that was the reason.
http://www.pcgamesn.com/indie/dear-esther-has-now-sold-well-over-750000-copies-thanks-humble-bundle
They sound distraught.
CambriaRising
Member
The most relevant reasons have already been explained to you, all that exists in this thread now is idle conversation and speculation.
shacklesmcgee
Member
But what does 750,000 Humble Bundle sales equal to in dollars? That could be any amount of money really, no?
perfectsil
Member
No , only because TR is timed exclusive, this game is exclusive.
alexandros
Banned
Exactly.
Doctor_Thomas
Member
It could be nothing up to millions.
shacklesmcgee
Member
Exactly. They could still be ecstatic about the 750,000 sales, it is a wicked amount, but they still could have been in financial troubles.
shacklesmcgee
Member
That doesn't necessarily mean they had enough money to make EgttR
KoopaTheCasual
Junior Member
I was actually privy to agree with you OP. Spencer's comments about aiding development really muddied my resolve on the matter. But after reading the excerpt below, it seems EGTTR is a Bayonetta situation. It's irksome that they didn't try before they said they couldn't do it, but they're pretty frank with saying the game wouldn't have happened.
That being said, the Spencer quote of actually doing more for the game than just buying exclusivity, makes me feel a lot better about it being timed exclusive. Even completely fine with it.
Well, yes, that much is obvious: if TCR had the money to finish development itself, this thread wouldn't exist.
Acquiescence
Member
And yet they are both dissimilar in that one game is an installment in a big franchise that has a long history of appearing on multiple platforms and is already backed by a big publisher in Square Enix, whereas the other is a new IP developed by a small independent team who may have quite possibly needed the funding given to them by Sony in order to create the game they want to make a reality.
shacklesmcgee
Member
Well, yes, that much is obvious: if TCR had the money to finish development itself, this thread wouldn't exist.
haha realized that after I clicked reply, "wait, isn't that the whole crux of this thread"
and the fact that they haven't released one semblance of gameplay, I feel like The Chinese Room may have needed some help? I honestly don't know anything about the game besides that it's in CryEngine, it's gorgeous, and it has multiple paths.
Yup. Further specifics don't matter to me as a consumer.
It's not 750,000 Humble Bundle sales, the Humble Bundle just pushed them over 750,000. Who knows what it ended up as before the bundle.
Man-is-Obsolete
Member
Santa Monica is a fascinating studio. To be a fly on the wall at that studio...
travisbickle
Member
Did Sony buy the EGttR ip?
If they own the ip that is very different to TR because Phil said they don't own the ip.
If they own the ip that is very different to TR because Phil said they don't own the ip.
AyaisMUsikWhore
Member
Well aside from marketing and allowing the devs to focus on one console for the time being, Square isn't a small studio. They get the benefits of someone else alleviating all the background issues they have, but all the for front issues, there's no doubt in my mind that the deal was still necessary. It clearly wasn't.
Maybe it's me but I don't like the fact that Phil explain the deal in such detail tbh. I'd rather he keep it as a timed exclusive without all the crazy reading gymnastics and subjective interpretation that the statement is bound to stir.
No, if Sony did not fund the game, The Chinese Room said they wouldn't have been able to make it. Completely different.
Oppo
Member
so are you boycotting the new Tomb Raider because it's "despicable", like Rapture? if you think they're the same?
ProfessorMoran
Member
Not sure how you can confuse an indie developer with limited resources getting a publishing deal with a large, full fledge publisher like Square selling timed exclusivity of a game intended to hit multiple platforms.
travisbickle
Member
If they own the ip, why is this comparison even being made?
They sold the game to Sony.
If MS bought the TR2 ip, people would still be angry but it wouldn't have been as confusing/frustrating over the last couple of days.
how is having a failed kickstarter campaign better than not having one at all (but that you knew was likely to fail) when seeking a publisher?
One game needed the funds to continue development (which they assessed they weren't likely to gather from kickstarter). The other one didn't.
One game is part of an established brand that has been multiplatform for over 15 years. The other one isn't.
One game has the technical support of a publisher with thousands of employees. The other one doesn't.
Just like Bayo 2, I would rather have the game exist, albeit exclusive to only one platform, than not at all.
LordBaztion
Member
ROTB would have existed without MS' help? Sure, would it be at the same AAA competitive position without the deal? Probably not (most likely not otherwise they wouldn't have signed the agreement), the investment risk would be higher then.
That situation is different from an indie game receiving first party support to make the game. There are two types of projects, while in the second the additional investment makes the product posible, in the first one, makes the investment viable or more profitable. These are investments on different scales that has different needs.
That situation is different from an indie game receiving first party support to make the game. There are two types of projects, while in the second the additional investment makes the product posible, in the first one, makes the investment viable or more profitable. These are investments on different scales that has different needs.
MS "save face" moment after all the other crap that's come out of this. Spencer could give someone a 5 spot and say they helped with Dev costs, no one's going to see actual numbers on this. Microsoft's money is going to go to marketing first and foremost by a huge margin, marketing for Xbox versions of the game that come out before the other versions release the next year.
It's not better, but it's also not worse than saying "We don't believe we have a sufficiently large fanbase for a crowdsourcing campaign to be viable."
Cave Johnson
Member
It was only after they revealed that statement when under pressure. Everyone else would come to the assumption that it would be a "true" exclusive otherwise.
Except in one case the game wouln't exist without money changing hands so it would be coming to no-one, and in the other case the game would still exist without money changing hands, and it would be coming to more people sooner. Those pesky details.
A game having the chance to be made is worse than denying an already announced sequel to an established multiplat franchise from coming to other platforms...because it's not on PC? I don't think some of you are actually thinking about the situation.
When an indie developer suggests a game wouldn't exist without outside help, I know I'd be more inclined to believe them than I would million dollar corporations making the same claim if nothing else.
Though I thought Dear Esther was shit so this game isn't even on my radar, so I have no emotional investment here.
Though I thought Dear Esther was shit so this game isn't even on my radar, so I have no emotional investment here.
You may be kidding but sadly I fear there is a good chance this is what they will say next and many will eat it up or they will say the game actually was at risk of not getting funded until ms stepped in and people will still eat it up
It's been happening since the X1 reveal, every bad decision MS has made has come with people saying "Sony will be doing it too", even so called "games journalists" were doing it or using some excuse to compare strategies. As it turned out Sony weren't, and they used that fact to get ahead, which probably annoyed quite a few people.
I would rather have the game on PC as well as consoles. Instead, Sony bought it in exchange for work.
The result is the same. Millions of gamers on the original announced platform will never see the game. The road traveled is different though, thus your opinion on it may change. Result is the same.