Nope. This point has already been debunked an infinity times, not that I'd expect you to internalize anything that is actually true.
Adding value to console != subtracting value from another console.
Rise of the Tomb Raider was always coming out Holiday 2015 for Xbox One. That's where we start at. So, the only 'value' added was the one in which desperate fanboys add it to a rallying banner of theirs.
It actually has not been debunked at all, because you're somehow trying to argue that a timed exclusive on a big title somehow does not add value to a console, and, well, history as well as common sense proves you're absolutely wrong on that point. Just because you want it to be one way doesn't actually make it so. You're actually attempting to say you wouldn't be singing an entirely different tune if Sony announced tomorrow GTA 6 or Batman Arkham Knight is exclusive to PS4 for the first 6 months of release. Now try to tell me with a straight face you wouldn't view that as a major perception "victory" for the PS4 as a platform. If you actually say no or articulate anything that leans towards a no, then you are simply not being forthcoming.
You're the same person that historically went nuclear over the fact that a game that was
already coming to the PS3, Final Fantasy 13, was now coming to the Xbox 360 same day and date as the PS3 version. Using your logic, despite the fact that the PS3 had not somehow lost Final Fantasy 13, but now Xbox 360 gamers would simply be able to play and enjoy (or not enjoy as I like to say
) the same game on release, you had felt it was still enough of a big deal to blow your lid about it and call it the end of Sony. How exactly is the almost exact reverse of that situation: a situation in which such a big title that follows a very successful reboot in 2013 is expected to release on both next gen consoles simultaneously, but now we suddenly learn that it will almost certainly be delayed for an, as of yet, undetermined period of time on one of those systems,
not also a pretty big deal in your mind?
How do you square (no pun intended) classifying equal treatment of FF13 on Xbox 360 and PS3 from the previously believed exclusive for PS3 to being this monumental disaster of epic proportions for Sony and an apparent boon for Xbox 360, yet not at the very least also classify Rise of the Tomb Raider going from assumed simultaneous multi-platform release on both systems to timed exclusive on Xbox One with MS co-publishing and spending money on development of the game, and in which the deal has been directly compared to the same one Microsoft had in place for Dead Rising and Ryse (deals we have a much better understanding of at the moment), as something that isn't remotely beneficial to the perception of the Xbox One and a potential setback for the PS4? I just don't get that.
Lol
I'm not really jazzed about timed exclusivity on any platform as far as AAA releases go, unless the company has provided the devs with a cash injection without which the game wouldn't exist. In this case, I understand the business reason Microsoft has for delaying the other versions of the game, but I don't agree that this adds value to my xbox purchase. This was a game I would have been getting anyway, so all this timed deal does is makes me have to either play the inferior version or wait for the better one.
I get that, but for people who will want to play the new Tomb Raider on a next gen system immediately, the Xbox One is their only option. That fact is without a doubt something that has to be seen as an added value to the Xbox One.
