Rise of the Tomb Raider coming to PC Early 2016. PS4 Holiday 2016

Status
Not open for further replies.
TsuWave said:
c'mon man, you''re joking right?
Click to expand...

I don't think I need to say this, but to the people that aren't on gaming forums and just don't have a clue on every detail in the gaming industry, yes it'll look like an exclusive.

Yesterday, I had to explain to my friends that Tomb Raider isn't exclusive. All they heard was Tomb Raider only on Xbox, and I had to correct them.

The general public does not pay attention to this sort of stuff, and if someone without any knowledge walks into a Gamestop and sees an Xbox version of Tomb Raider on the shelve and not a PS4 version, they'll probably think two things. The PS4 version is not in stock or it's not available on it period.

Or maybe my area is just stupid.
 
benny_a said:
What's my implication on pointing out an incorrect statement as incorrect?
Click to expand...

If you said that it wasn't true because neither is available to everyone, then fine. But you didn't. You said it was because he was ignoring platforms, as though PS4 + PC meant SFV was available to everyone.
 
Septic360 said:
It's not a case of me being oblivious to the way I'm being 'treated'. Like I've said before, these kind of third party deals are shitty. But no matter what excuse people pull, the end result is this:

EVERYONE gets to play Tomb Raider eventually
NOT EVERYONE gets to play SFV.

So ultimately it all boils down to business. Who then cares about the comparative degree of development assistance for the two titles when all you care about is how you are treated?

This is the reality of the industry that you really need to face (and I'm not saying accept it). I have done what I think is best and bought all the consoles and yes I admit that not everyone is in a position to do that, it definitely is the best way forward to ensure you never miss out on anything.
Click to expand...

The problem with MS deal is its going to affect the game future and sales also which is worse. SFV exclusivity (releasing same time on both PC and PS4) mostly wont have any negative impact on its sales and future, but Tomb raider franchise (& this game) going to suffer a lot due to this timed exclusivity.
 
biglittleps said:
The problem with MS deal is its going to affect the game future and sales also which is worse. SFV exclusivity (releasing same time on both PC and PS4) mostly wont have any negative impact on its sales and future, but Tomb raider franchise (& this game) going to suffer a lot due to this timed exclusivity.
Click to expand...

This gets repeated so often, but I'm really not sure how much merit it has tbh.

The most common comparison to this scenario is Resident Evil on Gamecube... but honestly that series seemed to do pretty well for itself the moment it was multiplat again... even in the one ecosystem it had skipped entirely the previous generation (Xbox). I don't really think things like this have much long term effect at all tbh.
 
c0de said:
But why would they make a deal then? ;) That doesn't make any sense.
And no, in 1997 Saturn wasn't dead. And N64 wasn't a "kids" console, it also got Resident Evil later in its life and had many games that were not for kids.
Click to expand...

PaRappa said:
TR came out in 1996 on the Saturn - I bought it for the system at launch.

N64 had Mortal Kombat, Doom, Resident Evil and Killer Instinct Gold. It wasnt a kiddy system.
Click to expand...

I never called the N64 a "kids" console, I just said it was marketed as more "kid friendly" console.
 
Good to finally have this in the open now, MS really didn't want to talk about it, even though we all knew it was coming (apart from a few fanboys who were clinging onto the hope of a console exclusive)

So PC version is early 2016, guessing 3 - 6 months after Xbox One release then. Then PS4 Holiday 2016.

So the question is, coming a year later, will PS4 version see any improvements ? it's likely it will come bundled with any DLC that gets released, will they lock it at 30fps or aim for 60fps again and will there be any other improvements to graphics ? Another Definitive Edition so to speak ?
 
Septic360 said:
EVERYONE gets to play Tomb Raider eventually
NOT EVERYONE gets to play SFV.
Click to expand...

Sony wasn't so cryptic for SFV unlike MS for Tomb Raider. Shit, they even try to hide PC version as well. That's why there is no negativity about SFV. Sony was straight. I'm pretty sure that SFV would not be done without help from outside cuz Capcom's awful financial situation a year and a half ago.
 
Synth said:
If you said that it wasn't true because neither is available to everyone, then fine. But you didn't. You said it was because he was ignoring platforms, as though PS4 + PC meant SFV was available to everyone.
Click to expand...
He very clearly said he is ignoring platforms. Meaning Wii U, PS3 etc. You just misunderstood badly.
 
Bluth54 said:
Well they could technically stream the PC version to their Xbox.

Though of course most Xbox owners aren't going to have a gaming PC so that doesn't really count.
Click to expand...

I think you are confusing Xbox to PC streaming? Its not the other way round and still doesn't make much sense.

driver116 said:
I dare say everyone would be enjoying both games at the same time, hadn't MS moved first.
Click to expand...

Well that's pure speculation and goes against the sentiment that SFV is releasing because of Sony's involvement in the development of the game.
 
Septic360 said:
Seriously? You're going to be this pedantic? Will Xbox owners get to play SFV on their console?
Click to expand...

GAF will tell you its all good because. dev needed money and Sony supported them. But no where it says Microsoft wasnt interested in SFV. So I have seen lot of double standard here. Same with scummy Destiny deal. I feel like that even worse, Xbox player even pay for the stuff now and get it 1 year later.
but its Sony and majority here owns that console so all good. As soon as you hear something like this on other side, everyone will shit the bed.
 
Megatron said:
Sure. The follow up to the most successful 16 bit system was 'doomed from the start' because they were going up against the creator of the Walkman who was making their first console. Hindsight is 20/20 and all that...
Click to expand...

Yes, the Genesis was the most successful 16-bit console, the Super Nintendo just couldn't keep up to that blast PRocessing... Sure....

Honestly the original TR will always be remembered most fondly on the PlayStation regardless of deals. TR's fan base was established on PlayStation. Even now, with the reboot, the time exclusivity is great for MS, but there are tons of Sony fans who want the game but have to wait.

Personally I don't care if MS gets it as a timed exclusive, It just sucks for people who fans who have been playing the games since the PS1 on Sony platforms to have to wait a year. While I enjoyed the reboot, It wasn't compelling enough for me to want to play the sequel immediately.
 
Septic360 said:
Seriously? You're going to be this pedantic? Will Xbox owners get to play SFV on their console?
Click to expand...

Will a PS3 owner get to play this crossgen game? It's not pedantic it's a very pertinent point. There may be "xbox owners" who can't play SFIV but there are also ps3 owners that can't play TR for example.
 
OEM said:
GAF will tell you its all good because. dev needed money and Sony supported them. But no where it says Microsoft wasnt interested in SFV. So I have seen lot of double standard here. Same with scummy Destiny deal. I feel like that even worse, Xbox player even pay for the stuff now and get it 1 year later.
but its Sony and majority here owns that console so all good. As soon as you hear something like this on other side, everyone will shit the bed.
Click to expand...
WTF is this true? I own the game (havent touched it in months to be fair), what am I missing out on by owning it on XB1?
spannicus said:
Buy Xbox one 199.99 you can play the game 1 year early
Or wait 1 year for 1080p and shady framerate.
Click to expand...
Both are 1080p but good try!
 
A year huh? I was expecting 6 months. Still when I have barely enough time to play all the games I want to as it is, waiting won't be hard.

Hopefully they improve on the last one. While I enjoyed the game for what it was, I didn't like it as a Tomb Raider. I was disappointed by the lack of tombs and/or puzzles. It felt more like a slightly more open Uncharted which I've never been a massive fan of. Heck I felt it had even more set pieces. Leave those in Uncharted please. The token Tombs they had were like 2 minute jokes and optional at that. I want some real meaty puzzles and tombs to explore and figure out
 
JoJo UK said:
WTF is this true? I own the game (havent touched it in months to be fair), what am I missing out on by owning it on XB1?
Click to expand...
I don't play Destiny but you miss out on quite a bit if you own a Xbox, if I remember correctly I believe in the 1st expansion you missed out on a map. Your essentially paying the same price as the PS4 gamer but getting less content. Sony this Gen seems to be going after a lot of console exclusive DLC. Their E3 conference was filled with it.
 
OEM said:
GAF will tell you its all good because. dev needed money and Sony supported them. But no where it says Microsoft wasnt interested in SFV. So I have seen lot of double standard here. Same with scummy Destiny deal. I feel like that even worse, Xbox player even pay for the stuff now and get it 1 year later.
but its Sony and majority here owns that console so all good. As soon as you hear something like this on other side, everyone will shit the bed.
Click to expand...

If MS have interest in SFV maybe they should allow cross platform play .
This is a good deal for MS.
Still i hope SE don't be stupid if the game don't sell a certain amount .
 
Three said:
Will a PS3 owner get to play this crossgen game? It's not pedantic it's a very pertinent point. There may be "xbox owners" who can't play SFIV but there are also ps3 owners that can't play TR for example.
Click to expand...

Hold up; how on earth is this timed exclusivity stopping PS3 owners? It has NOTHING to do with exclusivity. It is Square Enix's decision not to make a PS3 version.
 
Conduit said:
Sony wasn't so cryptic for SFV unlike MS for Tomb Raider. Shit, they even try to hide PC version as well. That's why there is no negativity about SFV. Sony was straight. I'm pretty sure that SFV would not be done without help from outside cuz Capcom's awful financial situation a year and a half ago.
Click to expand...
SFV could happen without Sony support, Capcom ain't so poor that they wouldn't be able to to make one of their most popular fighter. Sony bought exclusivity on SF because they wanted a exclusive fighter, just like MS wanted a 3rd person action adventure game so they bought exclusivity on Tomb Raider.
Personally I like Ms approach because atleast everyone gets the game eventually (sorry WiiU)
 
They honestly shouldn't;= of announced the PS4 version until the Xbox One version came out and is available for awhile on the market imo. I mean surely people figured it was eventually coming, but they didn't know when exactly. Now PS4 owners know for fact that is coming and might possibly wait for it and still have Uncharted 4 to hold their attention as well. Maybe this will not tamper with sales as much as I am anticipating, but I could be wrong.
 
This is a case of siding with the lesser of two evils. Both companies do it (and if you want to even put Nintendo in the discussion, well that's just not fair), and it starts these petty "my console is better than yours" discussion that we all love so much. But it's part of the life we have to live as gamers; if these "console" exclusivity deals didn't happen, what would be the point of having a mutli-console market? You have to side with the potential of the console that deems best value for YOU personally; that doesn't mean you're not going to get burned in the process.

It sucks for those who want to play a game on their console (i.e. PS4), but have to wait a year to play it because they don't have the one it came out on first. But this happens all the time, and the petty back and forth between us gamers is exactly what Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo's PRs are chomping at the bit for. At least, Sony is getting the game, EVENTUALLY. Microsoft owners aren't getting the opportunity to play SFV like a lot of you pointed out. But the way this "console exclusivity" ordeal has transpired is definitely a punch to the gut; at least Sony was upfront with their PR about SFV and it being ONLY on PS4 and PC.

I for one, am fortunate to own both the PS4 and Xbox One, and I have a choice to either play it earlier or later. And honestly, with all the games that are coming out this fall, and early 2016 (remember, Fallout 4 is releasing on the SAME DAY as ROTTR), I'm kind of glad I can wait and see what edition Sony will get next year.
 
Whoa the salt in this thread has given me hypertension. It is always surprising to me how regularly gamers on the Sony side take any sort of MS exclusively so personally and blow it way out of proportion with comments like "They don't want my money" and "ignoring most fans for money". It is just silly imo.
Anyway no complaints from me at all. I will happily play this on my ps4 when it drops. I love the new Lara & TR series so far.
 
As I understand it, they're targeting 30fps on Xbox One. The PC version can be whatever, including 60fps, with capable enough hardware. Hopefully the extra year will allow PS4 version to hit 60fps, possibly made possible by the beefier GPU.
 
Dynasty said:
SFV could happen without Sony support, Capcom ain't so poor that they wouldn't be able to to make one of their most popular fighter. Sony bought exclusivity on SF because they wanted a exclusive fighter, just like MS wanted a 3rd person action adventure game so they bought exclusivity on Tomb Raider.
Personally I like Ms approach because atleast everyone gets the game eventually (sorry WiiU)
Click to expand...
Preach it brother! Capcom is dropping tons of AAA games this gen so far, they can easily do SFV by themselves! Lol

Come on, man. Capcom is only releasing remasters for a reason.
 
Dynasty said:
SFV could happen without Sony support, Capcom ain't so poor that they wouldn't be able to to make one of their most popular fighter. Sony bought exclusivity on SF because they wanted a exclusive fighter, just like MS wanted a 3rd person action adventure game so they bought exclusivity on Tomb Raider.
Personally I like Ms approach because atleast everyone gets the game eventually (sorry WiiU)
Click to expand...
http://www.gamespot.com/articles/ono-says-no-budget-for-street-fighter-v/1100-6411507/
 
Dynasty said:
SFV could happen without Sony support, Capcom ain't so poor that they wouldn't be able to to make one of their most popular fighter. Sony bought exclusivity on SF because they wanted a exclusive fighter, just like MS wanted a 3rd person action adventure game so they bought exclusivity on Tomb Raider.
Personally I like Ms approach because atleast everyone gets the game eventually (sorry WiiU)
Click to expand...

LOL!!!
 
Dynasty said:
SFV could happen without Sony support, Capcom ain't so poor that they wouldn't be able to to make one of their most popular fighter. Sony bought exclusivity on SF because they wanted a exclusive fighter, just like MS wanted a 3rd person action adventure game so they bought exclusivity on Tomb Raider.
Personally I like Ms approach because atleast everyone gets the game eventually (sorry WiiU)
Click to expand...

I wouldn't be so confident with that claim, nearly every new game they've made so far this gen has been a collaboration with someone else (Dead Rising, Monster Hunter, Deep Down, SFV) and if they are going solo it's remaster after remaster, only game I've seen them make on their own entirely is Resident Evil Revelations 2, which started off as a download title before it hit retail.
 
The end result is this,

PS4 owners get to play Tomb Raider a year later
X1 owners don't get to play SFV

one is worse for gamers than the other, what leads up to it doesn't change the outcome.
 
Septic360 said:
Hold up; how on earth is this timed exclusivity stopping PS3 owners? It has NOTHING to do with exclusivity. It is Square Enix's decision not to make a PS3 version.
Click to expand...

How exactly do you know this? It's a crossgen game. Much the same way it might be "Capcoms decision not to release SF IV on XB1" because of cross platform play. Point is not to speculate why it isn't coming on a platform but the fact that it clearly isn't, contrary to what you suggested.
 
Kayant said:
How so? Will PS3 owners get to play TR? Point is "everyone" doesn't get to play either game.
Click to expand...

Three said:
Will a PS3 owner get to play this crossgen game? It's not pedantic it's a very pertinent point. There may be "xbox owners" who can't play SFIV but there are also ps3 owners that can't play TR for example.
Click to expand...

the 360 version will probably get cancelled or be a shitty port that's not even worth talking about like SoM.

also using the PS3 to compare this to SFV is lame.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

LTTP: Tomb Raider (2013)
16
560
Gamerguy84 replied
Tomb Raider Pinball FX Announced
News 
4
167
Madflavor replied
Marvel 1943: Rise of Hydra delayed to early 2026
News 
0
80
Draugoth replied
Amazon Tomb Raider seems to be based on Angelina Jolie
Opinion 
26
409
Shaki12345 replied
Is Tomb Raider twitter teasing the next Tomb Raider reveal at The Game Awards?
2
82
5K
ShaikhCroft replied
Top Bottom