Support NeoGAF

[Manmademan]

Yeah I was asking cause I was curious so that was a tad aggressive, but it's all good. I think part of the difference is that Sony directly commissioned bloodborne, and was involved from the very beginning. Def finally more than just publishing.

Correct. Sony approached FROM with the idea to make a follow up to DeS, and the resulting effort is described as a "collaboration" between the two companies by Yoshida, and they're both listed as developers for the game.

It's impossible to break down exactly who was responsible for what part, but every interview seems to suggest Sony and Japan Studio were heavily involved here. This wasn't simply handing FROM a check to make a game for them.

 

[Bgamer90]

Yeah, I doubt that. MS would have payed the lost sales of at least 2 million copies (TR sold 7 million), and let's not forget the lost sales of PC version.

I wasn't referring to MS there. I was talking about Crystal Dynamics. They already got money from MS via the moneyhat and would probably get more money on top of that based on how the PS4 version of the game does (due to what you said).

The more they delay the PS4 version, the less attention/sales they got. Good luck selling $60 port after a year from its original release.

I wouldn't say this. Many who own the PS4 like Tomb Raider. As long as they add DLC and/or make it appear to be more than the XB1 version of the game then I think it will get attention from PS4 owners whenever it releases (well, as long as it's within a year of the XB1 version).

Yep, things looking really better for RoTR and XB1 now that UC4 won't come this year. MS should use this opportunity to help XB1 sales in Europe.

Agreed.

 

[Somnia]

Correct. Sony approached FROM with the idea to make a follow up to DeS, and the resulting effort is described as a "collaboration" between the two companies by Yoshida, and they're both listed as developers for the game.

It's impossible to break down exactly who was responsible for what part, but every interview seems to suggest Sony and Japan Studio were heavily involved here. This wasn't simply handing FROM a check to make a game for them.

I almost can gurantee you MS is more than just writing checks for games like Ori and Killer Instinct. In fact on KI we know they help on programming.

So my point still stands about true first party games on both sides. Hopefully both sides output kicks it up this year and next.

 

[Docflem]

Pretty sure MS did the same with Ori, they've been involved in the beginning of that game. It's also fully commissioned and owned by MS. Not just publishing.

Has the studio said that? The basic roll of the publish in a lot of games is to pay for development in order to get the ip, it doesn't really signify any developer level involvement I think.

 

[DOWN]

I wouldn't say this. Many who own the PS4 like Tomb Raider. As long as they add DLC and/or make it appear to be more than the XB1 version of the game then I think it will get attention from PS4 owners whenever it releases.

It definitely will hurt sales overall. They are not going to sell as many copies with this deal as they would have with multiplatform. And Microsoft is paying for that loss because they think it is worth the attention for their brand. You don't get to release ports 6-12 months later on some platforms and have it do the same numbers as they would have if they were day one simultaneous.

That said, call the ports Definitive, add some particle effects, and include all DLC, and they certainly can generate more attention than your average port because many people are holding out for the end of this timed deal now that we all know it is one. This deal in particular pushed more people than most to choose to side against the timed exclusive holder due to the nature of the franchise's multiplatform history. CD themselves have admitted that the game development would have existed without the deal, which is why it bitterly has made people feel that Microsoft played the gross game of just paying to take it off platforms that would have gotten it in addition to Xbox One.

On a side note, I don't think Microsoft understood the nuance of this particular deal sentimentally and how negative the reactions would be from Tomb Raider's larger fanbases on PS4 and PC. Ideally, Microsoft and CD wouldn't have wanted to have to keep saying in blogs how much they love all their fans and Phil wouldn't have to say it is timed in various reiterations).

 

[Somnia]

Has the studio said that? The basic roll of the publish in a lot of games is to pay for development in order to get the ip, it doesn't really signify any developer level involvement I think.

MS is known to send technical assistance when they own an IP like Ori. There is no way to be 100% for sure, just as there is no way to know Japan Studios real involvement with Bloodborne for example. Each of us are just guessing on their overall involvement.

Also a publisher like MS who owns an IP and pays for a game is going to help oversee the game, it's what Ken Lobb and his team are responsible for for example. They are known to send technical employees to help with game engine and programming on the system.

edit: Steverulez explained it better than me, but yes MS has a lot of employees working on game development on games published by them and sometimes not (Destiny for example, them helping getting it to 1080p)

 

[Steverulez]

Has the studio said that? The basic roll of the publish in a lot of games is to pay for development in order to get the ip, it doesn't really signify any developer level involvement I think.

When I played it [Ori] at a preview event last year I spoke to someone from the MS side that was working on it and he said to me he was working on it 24/7 along with a few others, developing the game with Moon Studios (we were chatting but when he said it I asked a bit more and he said it).

MS were on-board with Ori after it was pitched to them and they signed it.

Theres an Ori dev on Gaf who can say more, but that is what I was told.

MS have a ton of people who work with outside studios on games (Ryse, DR3, Sunset Overdrive, KI, Ori, Gears etc). Sony have them more publicly noted with logos etc on games and housed in places like SSM and Japan Studio, for MS they're all in Redmond in various "studios" (Studio A, B, C etc), they just fall under "Microsoft Studios" and I think theres some stuff at European publishing which is linked to Lionhead's office too.

 

[Docflem]

When I played it [Ori] at a preview event last year I spoke to someone from the MS side that was working on it and he said to me he was working on it 24/7 along with a few others, developing the game with Moon Studios (we were chatting but when he said it I asked a bit more and he said it).

MS were on-board with Ori after it was pitched to them and they signed it.

Theres an Ori dev on Gaf who can say more, but that is what I was told.

MS have a ton of people who work with outside studios on games (Ryse, DR3, Sunset Overdrive, KI, Ori, Gears etc). Sony have them more publicly noted with logos etc on games and housed in places like SSM and Japan Studio, for MS they're all in Redmond in various "studios" (Studio A, B, C etc), they just fall under "Microsoft Studios" and I think theres some stuff at European publishing which is linked to Lionhead's office too.

Cool thanks for the info, that's a little more concrete than just owning an IP. Its just that every publish under the sun would tell you that they were "instrumental" in any successful game, it's good to hear from some of the people on the ground level.

 

[Chobel]

I wasn't referring to MS there. I was talking about Crystal Dynamics. They already got money from MS via the moneyhat and would probably get more money on top of that based on how the PS4 version of the game does (due to what you said).

And I'm also talking about SE/CD, MS won't pay that much money, because it would be an insane amount for just a timed exclusive game. Also MS is the publisher which means they're taking a cut from what should be SE only profits (LOL).

I wouldn't say this. Many who own the PS4 like Tomb Raider. As long as they add DLC and/or make it appear to be more than the XB1 version of the game then I think it will get attention from PS4 owners whenever it releases (well, as long as it's within a year of the XB1 version).

We've seen it many times, delayed ports sell like way worse than the first release especially when priced full price, it's because the buzz and the hype will be long gone by the time it's re-released. Also AAA games usually comes with huge advertising campaigns around lunch and that's why they sell a lot, I doubt SE are going to launch big advertising campaign for a the delayed PS4 version.
EDIT: Also, any date after September 2016 (Fall) is like sending the game to death. No way a delayed game is gonna stand in the busy season of the Fall.

 

[Bgamer90]

And I'm also talking about SE/CD, MS won't pay that much money, because it would be an insane amount for just a timed exclusive game.

I'm not referring to MS paying more money after the Holiday season -- Just talking about the money SE/CD would get from the PS4 version.

________________________

We've seen it many times, delayed ports sell like way worse than the first release especially when priced full price, it's because the buzz and the hype will be long gone by the time it's re-released. Also AAA games usually comes with huge advertising campaigns around lunch and that's why they sell a lot, I doubt SE are going to launch big advertising campaign for a the delayed PS4 version.

It definitely will hurt sales overall. They are not going to sell as many copies with this deal as they would have with multiplatform. And Microsoft is paying for that loss because they think it is worth the attention for their brand. You don't get to release ports 6-12 months later on some platforms and have it do the same numbers as they would have if they were day one simultaneous.

Of course. I never said otherwise. I was actually saying how smart it was for MS to get it during the Holiday months when game sales are usually very high; It's taking away the possibility of some (big Tomb Raider fans) getting a PS4 during the Holiday season just to play Tomb Raider. So yeah, this being a timed exclusive deal during the Holiday season definitely impacts overall sales; It would have sold much more if it released on various platforms at the same time (especially since the game is coming out during the Holiday season).

My point though was that I think Tomb Raider on the PS4 has a better chance of doing well after the release of Uncharted 4 instead of around the same time (if it's somehow impossible to release it before Uncharted 4 releases). That's all I meant.

 

[CrimsonEclipse]

Meh - no matter what MS do...they are simply fucked. May as well start planning work on the next xbox at this point in all honesty.

j/k

I am really curious on seeing how their E3 turns out, they have been rather quiet recently. I am expecting some games that will be dropping 6 months after e3 reveal and some smaller titles in between till holidays.

 

[Docflem]

My point though was that I think Tomb Raider on the PS4 has a better chance of doing well after the release of Uncharted 4 instead of around the same time (if it's somehow impossible to release it before Uncharted 4 releases). That's all I meant.

That's why I said square is probably pissed they did the deal now, because without it they COULD release before uncharted, and I think it would do awesome now that all us PS4 owners are starved for some good 3rd person climbing on old shit game play. I think over all this deal is going to end up being a negative for them, hugely if the ps4 and pc sales are lackluster.

 

[Chobel]

I'm not referring to MS paying more money after the Holiday season -- Just talking about the money SE/CD would get from the PS4 version

I know what you meant, I should have worded my comments better, but the gist of it is that the sales of PS4version are not a bonus.

You said "PS4 Rise of the Tomb Raider sales would be "bonus money" due to MS paying the right amount to keep it off the PS4", MS is only paying for the projected lost sales that comes from delaying PC/PS4 versions. Unless the lost sales are going to be less than what's projected (they won't be IMO) then PS4 version sales won't be a bonus.
In another words, SE needs these PS4 sales.

 

[Head.spawn]

you tell me

You should probably read what I was replying to for clarification, the guy was splitting hairs, talking specifically about studios, but just to be sure, From Software is not a first party studio. I probably should have clarified in the post, as just putting "first party" kind of reshaped what I meant to say.

So you're saying they aren't working on a PS4 version? Also, while Sony's first party output has been pretty meh Bloodborne alone is ahead of what Microsofts first party offers atm, this is completely subjective though.

I'm no insider, I have no clue. The only thing I take with any merit is that the game is currently exclusive. According to MS it's a similar situation as what they did with Ryse and DR3. Two games that aren't on PS4, but did see multiplatform release (XBO/PC). I don't expect more than that. A lot of people think it's a no-brainer that it will go to PS4, but I have yet to hear any compelling evidence to support it. Someone on another page said an insider said it was in the works, who was it? There are very few of them that I consider even remotely trust worthy.

I agree Bloodborne is a solid release, reviews back up that claim and sales will likely follow. Definitely subjective, but I wouldn't pick that one title over the Xbox line-up this year. There just isn't anything else to sway me that they have announced for this year. I know for a lot of people, slightly better multi-platform titles is a huge boon, but personally it's a non-factor. Next year with Uncharted is a completely different story, I just pray it is a lot better than Uncharted 3, as it was a letdown for me as a follow-up to Uncharted 2.

 

[Bgamer90]

You said "PS4 Rise of the Tomb Raider sales would be "bonus money" due to MS paying the right amount to keep it off the PS4", MS is only paying for the projected lost sales that comes from delaying PC/PS4 versions. Unless the lost sales are going to be less than what's projected (they won't be IMO) then PS4 version sales won't be a bonus.

Alright, I see what you mean now. My point is still similar though since I do think there's a higher possibility of lost sales being less than expected if TR doesn't release around the same time as Uncharted 4 in comparison to if it did release around the same time.

I would also imagine that the PS4 will have a bigger user base in 2016 (helping game sales) than what was probably expected during the time the Tomb Raider deal was made. Seems like the PS4 is doing much better than many would have imagined.

 

[Louis Cyphre]

After this holiday season Microsoft will take a serious look at the outlook for the XBox One. Projects for 2015 and those planned for 2016 that are already green-lit is Microsoft's commitment to regain any lost marketshare to that of the Xbox 360. If sales don't meet or exceed those of the Xbox 360 during the same timeline and the PS4 continues to widen the gap I think Microsoft will take a hard look at where the future lies for the Xbox brand.

It was initially a catalyst to get into the living room but the direction they are taking with Windows and its investments into cloud computing could remove the need for the proprietary box.

We might get a trifecta because there is a possibility Halo 5 also gets delayed to 2016.

 

[Chobel]

Alright, I see what you mean now. My point is still similar though since I do think there's a higher possibility of lost sales being less than expected if TR doesn't release around the same time as Uncharted 4 in comparison to if it did release around the same time.

I would also imagine that the PS4 will have a bigger user base in 2016 (helping game sales) than what was probably expected during the time the Tomb Raider deal was made. Seems like the PS4 is doing much better than many would have imagined.

When the deal was made, PS4 version is supposedly to come in Spring with no competition from UC4. Now the game will either release very close to UC4, or got delayed to Summer (or worse Fall), whatever the case the lost sales should be worse than what's anticipated in the exclusivity deal.
And for "PS4 is doing much better than many would have imagined", ironically it would mean SE/CD got less money from MS for the lost sales than what they should have.

 

[Steverulez]

I know what you meant, I should have worded my comments better, but the gist of it is that the sales of PS4version are not a bonus.

You said "PS4 Rise of the Tomb Raider sales would be "bonus money" due to MS paying the right amount to keep it off the PS4", MS is only paying for the projected lost sales that comes from delaying PC/PS4 versions. Unless the lost sales are going to be less than what's projected (they won't be IMO) then PS4 version sales won't be a bonus.
In another words, SE needs these PS4 sales.

Am I missing something here? Without knowing the details of the deal this is impossible to say for sure? Unless you're privy to the specifics of the deal, I can't see how you can claim that MS would have only paid for that, we have no idea what the terms are and what money exchanged hands for specific bullet points (lost sales, development costs, a nice bonus for SE on top etc)

There could be plenty things they paid for (or didn't pay for) to make it worth their while and justify the deal to SE in the first place.

Edit: Theres other things I find somewhat questionable that you've written but I don't really want to get sucked in to this debate too much.

 

[Head.spawn]

Am I missing something here? Without knowing the details of the deal this is impossible to say for sure? Unless you're privy to the specifics of the deal, I can't see how you can claim that MS would have only paid for that, we have no idea what the terms are and what money exchanged hands for specific bullet points (lost sales, development costs, a nice bonus for SE on top etc)

There could be plenty things they paid for (or didn't pay for) to make it worth their while and justify the deal to SE in the first place.

Edit: Theres other things I find somewhat questionable that you've written but I don't really want to get sucked in to this debate too much.

We know MS is paying development costs, aiding in development and they are going to baloon the marketing budget.

Anything else is insider-fan fiction IMO.

 

[Chobel]

Am I missing something here? Without knowing the details of the deal this is impossible to say for sure? Unless you're privy to the specifics of the deal, I can't see how you can claim that MS would have only paid for that, we have no idea what the terms are and what money exchanged hands for specific bullet points (lost sales, development costs, a nice bonus for SE on top etc)

There could be plenty things they paid for (or didn't pay for) to make it worth their while and justify the deal to SE in the first place.

Sure I'm don't know the specifics of the deal, but what I'm saying is common sense in business. You don't expect MS to spend (significantly) more than they should, especially when the game is timed exclusive.

We know MS is paying development costs, aiding in development and they are going to baloon the marketing budget.

Anything else is insider-fan fiction IMO.

They are not paying development costs, otherwise it will never some to PS4.

 

[Steverulez]

Sure I'm don't know the specifics of the deal, but what I'm saying is common sense in business. You don't expect MS to spend (significantly) more than they should, especially when the game is timed exclusive.

Do you know what are the norm for Microsoft (or other first parties/publishers/platform holders) when they sign these sorts of deals?

Not to mention the difference in install bases (and possible future differences) I suspect would have been taken into account.

I expect MS to offer and SE to take a deal that makes business sense, I doubt SE arent being well compensated for it, regardless of what is happening with Uncharted 4 and other ports later on.

They are not paying development costs, otherwise it will never some to PS4.

This is pretty baseless too, just because they're spending money on developing it, where else is part of the money going to go exactly? They're obviously paying to help develop it, and SE have said in their financials they want that investment to mitigate risk:

"And we will definitely be spending money on developing the game - I want to make sure that it’s as great as it can be.”

Kotaku

 

[StrongBlackVine]

It definitely will hurt sales overall. They are not going to sell as many copies with this deal as they would have with multiplatform. And Microsoft is paying for that loss because they think it is worth the attention for their brand. You don't get to release ports 6-12 months later on some platforms and have it do the same numbers as they would have if they were day one simultaneous.

That said, call the ports Definitive, add some particle effects, and include all DLC, and they certainly can generate more attention than your average port because many people are holding out for the end of this timed deal now that we all know it is one. This deal in particular pushed more people than most to choose to side against the timed exclusive holder due to the nature of the franchise's multiplatform history. CD themselves have admitted that the game development would have existed without the deal, which is why it bitterly has made people feel that Microsoft played the gross game of just paying to take it off platforms that would have gotten it in addition to Xbox One.

On a side note, I don't think Microsoft understood the nuance of this particular deal sentimentally and how negative the reactions would be from Tomb Raider's larger fanbases on PS4 and PC. Ideally, Microsoft and CD wouldn't have wanted to have to keep saying in blogs how much they love all their fans and Phil wouldn't have to say it is timed in various reiterations).

Yeah timed rights Tomb Raider definitely isn't some coup for Microsoft that will be celebrated like Bloodborne. It has a stench that will never go away.

 

[cantona222]

I hope XBone does well. However, I don't know if Halo 5 will have half of the hype & sales of Halo 3.

 

[Chobel]

Do you know what are the norm for Microsoft (or other first parties/publishers/platform holders) when they sign these sorts of deals?

Not to mention the difference in install bases (and possible future differences) I suspect would have been taken into account.

I expect MS to offer and SE to take a deal that makes business sense, I doubt SE arent being well compensated for it, regardless of what is happening with Uncharted 4 and other ports later on.

This all started when Bgamer said PS4 sales are "bonus", which I understood it as MS payed enough money to cover not releasing on PS4. MS may payed SE a good amount of money but it's shouldn't be big enough to cover losing PS4 sales. Also SE is not the best company when it comes to business decisions, so if I had to guess I'd say MS payed them less then what they should really get from the deal.

Of course, this is a just a conjecture from my part.

This is pretty baseless too, just because they're spending money on developing it, where else is part of the money going to go exactly? They're obviously paying to help develop it, and SE have said in their financials they want that investment to mitigate risk:



Kotaku

SE didn't need MS to develop RoTR. Source: Kagari, so it's just a moneyhat.

 

[Steverulez]

SE didn't need MS to develop RoTR. Source: Kagari, so it's just a moneyhat.

The rest is fair enough but that doesn't mean that Crystal Dynamics haven't been afforded the chance to make it bigger and better with that money, I mean, its a direct quote from the guy that signed the deal... he can of course exaggerate or mislead, but it would make sense to enter into this sort of deal if the investment and help being given helps you make something that it wouldn't necessarily have been otherwise.

 

[Nightengale]

Bigger and better during development would had delayed the game, and Kagari stated the deal happened June last year, and the game was already slated for Holiday 2015 even before that.

Sure, I expect the game to get a larger marketing push than ever before, but I find it hard to believe the game is now more ambitious than before MS came in development-wise.

 

[Hans.Gruber]

you tell me

FROM is First Party?
It's a hardcore niche game anyways.

 

[N.Domixis]

FROM is First Party?
It's a hardcore niche game anyways.

It's is, it's not niche, will sell a couple million.
Unless every exclusive from both ms and sony excluding halo, gears, uncharted, last of us, gt is niche.

 

[Hans.Gruber]

It's is, it's not niche, will sell a couple million.
Unless every exclusive from both ms and sony excluding halo, gears, uncharted, last of us, gt is niche.

Well that "niche"-thing is very debatable. Earlier ITT you told me that Forza was insignificant, so thats my measurement now.
And it's a great game (I heard, hated DS1 so I didn't get it).

 

[Head.spawn]

They are not paying development costs, otherwise it will never some to PS4.

1) They are paying for development, they were pretty clear about that.
2) I agree. That is why I thought it wouldn't come to PS4 as well. But other people see it differently.

It wouldn't make any sense for MS to go all out, getting exclusivity for a short period of time. If that were the case, SE would still be the publisher of the game. I really don't think Microsoft Game Studios would be publishing, funding development, aiding with development and paying for marketing just to have the game go another platform a few months later; that would make no sense.

Also you are right, I wouldn't consider it a money-hat situation either if that were the case. But it's MS, so people just assume the worst abs would rather add their own narrative.

 

[sade]

Have MS a time machine to go back in time and fix 2013's E3 and machine design flaws?

Then no.

 

[jryi]

My assumption is that MS will do amazing deals again + 3rd party bundling/marketing + Halo 5 (and other exclusives), all of which will eliminate Sony's lead in NA down to 25%.

Of course, this is assuming Sony will not drop the price by any notable amount. The most I'm expecting from Sony is an official $50 price cut.

I'm thinking $299 PS4 will ensure Sony wins this holiday season, but realistically it will probably be $349 (MS wins at that point).

25% of what? That's kind of a meaningless number without actual figures to compare it to. It would be better to say something like "I expect PS4 LTD to be 5M vs 4.8M for Xbox One" or something like that (not actualy numbers, mind you). Then we could discuss how realistic that guess is.

I am expecting Sony to drop the price of PS4 by 100 dollars/euros at either E3 or Gamescom. If the comments on this forum are to be believed (and why wouldn't they), Sony has not traditionally made official price cuts of only $50. It is also feasible to assume that they have managed to push manufacturing cost down enough to make such a price cut affordable.

And no, MS will not catch up this holiday season nearly as much as they did last year.

 

[StrongBlackVine]

It's is, it's not niche, will sell a couple million.
Unless every exclusive from both ms and sony excluding halo, gears, uncharted, last of us, gt is niche.

Add God Of War to that non-niche franchise list since the mainline games are good for 4 or 5 million. (I agree that niche is used way too liberally here).

 

[StrongBlackVine]

1) They are paying for development, they were pretty clear about that.
2) I agree. That is why I thought it wouldn't come to PS4 as well. But other people see it differently.

It wouldn't make any sense for MS to go all out, getting exclusivity for a short period of time. If that were the case, SE would still be the publisher of the game. I really don't think Microsoft Game Studios would be publishing, funding development, aiding with development and paying for marketing just to have the game go another platform a few months later; that would make no sense.

Also you are right, I wouldn't consider it a money-hat situation either if that were the case. But it's MS, so people just assume the worst abs would rather add their own narrative.

Microsoft is not paying the entire development costs of that game. If they were it would be a true exclusive.

 

[jryi]

Microsoft is not paying the entire development costs of that game. If they were it would be a true exclusive.

Microsoft might have to pay more than the development costs. They have to cover all the lost sales for the game not coming to PS4. (Or for it coming later, but same difference.)

edit: Jeez, I got a title. When did that happen?

 

[mike4001_]

I'm no insider, I have no clue. The only thing I take with any merit is that the game is currently exclusive. According to MS it's a similar situation as what they did with Ryse and DR3. Two games that aren't on PS4, but did see multiplatform release (XBO/PC). I don't expect more than that. A lot of people think it's a no-brainer that it will go to PS4, but I have yet to hear any compelling evidence to support it. Someone on another page said an insider said it was in the works, who was it? There are very few of them that I consider even remotely trust worthy.

I have written this also several times.

We know it´s coming on PC but we just don´t know anything regarding a PS4 version.

Basically I would think it comes to the PS4 because it always has .... but is MS put a deal in then ... we just don´t know.

And obviously the talk about "similar to Ryse and DR3" speaks highly against a PS4 version.

 

[Chobel]

1) They are paying for development, they were pretty clear about that.
2) I agree. That is why I thought it wouldn't come to PS4 as well. But other people see it differently.

It wouldn't make any sense for MS to go all out, getting exclusivity for a short period of time. If that were the case, SE would still be the publisher of the game. I really don't think Microsoft Game Studios would be publishing, funding development, aiding with development and paying for marketing just to have the game go another platform a few months later; that would make no sense.

Also you are right, I wouldn't consider it a money-hat situation either if that were the case. But it's MS, so people just assume the worst abs would rather add their own narrative.

That was most likely some PR talk for misleading people. Also if it was not coming to PS4 then MS would have shouted it through the roof, just like they did with Titanfall.
Phil himself said the exclusivity has "duration" and after that SE is free to do whatever it wants with the game and the franchise after the exclusivity deal ends, that surely doesn't sound like PS4 is not happening.

And it's a moneyhat, SE didn't need any help from MS to develop RoTR, so MS money was for delaying the other versions of the game.

I have written this also several times.

We know it´s coming on PC but we just don´t know anything regarding a PS4 version.

Basically I would think it comes to the PS4 because it always has .... but is MS put a deal in then ... we just don´t know.

And obviously the talk about "similar to Ryse and DR3" speaks highly against a PS4 version.

And that's exactly MS' intention, they want to mislead you into believing the game isn't coming to PS4.

 

[Nightengale]

Similar and same are two different words with different meanings.

 

[chiliboy]

We'll have to see after E3, it really is hard to predict stuff like this

 

[Hans.Gruber]

I have written this also several times.

We know it´s coming on PC but we just don´t know anything regarding a PS4 version.

Basically I would think it comes to the PS4 because it always has .... but is MS put a deal in then ... we just don´t know.

And obviously the talk about "similar to Ryse and DR3" speaks highly against a PS4 version.

I'm with you on that. MS would lose so much credibility if the PS4 version came out
(at all or within the following 3+ years).
But people on here claim that "insiders" have confirmed the PS4 version comes out like 6 month after the Xbox launch. They could be right.

 

[Head.spawn]

That was most likely some PR talk for misleading people. Also if it was not coming to PS4 then MS would have shouted it through the roof, just like they did with Titanfall.
Phil himself said the exclusivity has "duration" and after that SE is free to do whatever it wants with the game and the franchise after the exclusivity deal ends, that surely doesn't sound like PS4 is not happening.

And it's a moneyhat, SE didn't need any help from MS to develop RoTR, so MS money was for delaying the other versions of the game.



And that's exactly MS' intention, they want to mislead you into believing the game isn't coming to PS4.

We will see.

DR3 and Ryse had a duration.. and then they came to PC, and that's where the story ended. Now if that changes and like 5 years from now it finally comes to PS4, then people can say, "I told you so! It was a duration!". It's a rather vague assumption to bank on.

 

[Cthulhu_Steev]

Out of the three console owners, Microsoft seems to have the tightest grasp on their first party teams; consistently offering some good too great games across the X1 launch all the way to last fall. Granted, their has been a number of issues for the games (launch tittles had issues or were only okay while latter games like MCC had a bad launch) but at least they put out alot of first party games for the new generation . And that is something I expected Sony to do, considering the PS3's first two years, but oh well.

Regarding this fall, they have a lot of games coming this year:
-Halo 5
-Rise of the Tomb Raider
-Gears of War Collection (they can say no to this a much as they want, but it is very likely this will happen at some point )
-Another Racing tittles (Forza 6 maybe?)
-Rare's big X1 game (hopefully Banjo comes out this year or something from Rare does like a digital-online Batttletoads)
-An unannounced tittle from a new team

All of these look amazing and while I don't own a X1, I can make a reasonable guess that Microsoft has done a lot to change the image that they tarnished prior to the X1 launch .

Unannounced game - might be though, who knows?, unannounced game, unannounced game from an unannounced team.

Some amazing top stuff in there alright.

 

[Bgamer90]

And no, MS will not catch up this holiday season nearly as much as they did last year.

Don't know how anyone can say this when we still don't know everything they have planned yet. The Xbox One's gaming line-up for late this year has more major games than the system's line-up last year; Could things it going either way as of right now (similar catch-up, better catch-up, or worse catch-up).

 

[semiconscious]

Don't know how anyone can say this when we still don't know everything they have planned yet. The Xbox One's gaming line-up for late this year has more major games than the system's line-up last year; Could things it going either way as of right now (similar catch-up, better catch-up, or worse catch-up).

thread title: 'Will this be the defining holiday season for Xbox One?'

you: only valid answer is 'maybe' ...

 

[Bgamer90]

thread title: 'Will this be the defining holiday season for Xbox One?'

you: only valid answer is 'maybe' ...

In terms of how successful the system will be in sales, yep. I think the gaming lineup for the Xbox One this year will rank very high when looking back on the system maybe 5-6 years from now; Major games from various genres. I'm personally really looking forward to some Forza Motorsport 6 footage and details. Forza Motorsport 4 is the best console racing sim in my opinion. It's a given that Forza Motorsport 6 will top it in graphics but if it's the better game overall (especially in content) then I'll be very happy.

 

[jryi]

Don't know how anyone can say this when we still don't know everything they have planned yet. The Xbox One's gaming line-up for late this year has more major games than the system's line-up last year; Could things it going either way as of right now (similar catch-up, better catch-up, or worse catch-up).

I don't believe that line-up has too much to do with the sales, especially since more than 90% of the biggest titles will be available on both consoles. We have heard this chest-thumping about vastly superior offering on Xbox for fifteen months, now, and the only time Xbox has been able to win PS4 were last November and December. And neither of those months was won because of games line-up.

 

[gtj1092]

Don't know how anyone can say this when we still don't know everything they have planned yet. The Xbox One's gaming line-up for late this year has more major games than the system's line-up last year; Could things it going either way as of right now (similar catch-up, better catch-up, or worse catch-up).

Do you realize that you question everyone who doesn't pick the X1 to catch up to Ps4 by saying that they don't know what will happen. Yet in nearly every sales thread you lay out plans on why the X1 will close the gap. I guess only your hypothesis are correct in that the best Sony can hope for is a tie and NA or losing to the X1.

 

[Bgamer90]

I don't believe that line-up has too much to do with the sales, especially since more than 90% of the biggest titles will be available on both consoles.

I think it will play a bigger role than last year. More games that are coming out this year are current gen only. Add that in with the exclusive gaming line-up of the Xbox One being bigger than last year and I think it makes for a very good combination for many 360 owners to move to current gen via the XB1 (as long as MS sets the system up at a good price too).

We have heard this chest-thumping about vastly superior offering on Xbox for fifteen months, now, and the only time Xbox has been able to win PS4 were last November and December.

15 months? ::scratches head::

Either way, I'm not sure what the first year in the console's life is suppose to prove. As I said before, there are fewer cross gen games coming out this year, bigger exclusives, and history has shown that console sales usually go up during a console's third Holiday season in comparison to its second Holiday season. What makes the Xbox One's situation different though is that it sold VERY well last Holiday season so that may be hard to top; 1.3 Million in November 2014 alone is very high.

And neither of those months was won because of games line-up.

Games line-up overall? So people were buying consoles to not play anything (haha)?

____________________

Do you realize that you question everyone who doesn't pick the X1 to catch up to Ps4 by saying that they don't know what will happen. Yet in nearly every sales thread you lay out plans on why the X1 will close the gap. I guess only your hypothesis are correct in that the best Sony can hope for is a tie and NA or losing to the X1.

Wrong.

I simply lay out a plan as to how I can see it possibly happening but I never say it WILL happen. There's a difference (that may not come across simply because I have a difference of opinion than others).

 

[Spectromixer]

I could see a lot of my time going into Halo 5... if it is better than Halo 4.

 

[NeloAnjelo]

1) They are paying for development, they were pretty clear about that.
2) I agree. That is why I thought it wouldn't come to PS4 as well. But other people see it differently.

It wouldn't make any sense for MS to go all out, getting exclusivity for a short period of time. If that were the case, SE would still be the publisher of the game. I really don't think Microsoft Game Studios would be publishing, funding development, aiding with development and paying for marketing just to have the game go another platform a few months later; that would make no sense.

Also you are right, I wouldn't consider it a money-hat situation either if that were the case. But it's MS, so people just assume the worst abs would rather add their own narrative.

MS are funding development costs for the Xbox version of the game that is clear. They are also supporting via marketing. However, if this game wasn't coming to other platforms then Square would not have said that the deal "has a duration". Also, the wording is cleary "exclusive holiday 2015". This means that out with that period Square can (probably) start working on other versions of the game. What stinks here is that there hasn't been another "timed" exclusive where the parties are not saying when it deal will end.
This is clearly contractual, and they are well aware that if people know, they will wait and pick it up on the consoles they currently own, rather that getting a new system. It's cleary a business decision. Square needs the money, MS wants to to push X1 ones.The typical consumer will not focus on the "holiday 2015 part" only the "exclusive" part of that makrketing line.

This game, like TF was already in developement for other systems. The MS moneyhat has just delayed other versions. Square would not say its has a duration if it didn't. Even Spencer has not claimed full exclusivity. Why have TR go up aganist UC, when they can have one on each console, with no direct competition between the PS4 releases of both? The ironic thing here is the UC4 was delayed and woudn't compete for PS4 sales. This deal helps MS mostly now. TR will launch on PS4 XMAS 2016.