synce
Member
Either SE spent way more on marketing or it took them twice as many people to make the game. Probably the latter since it was multiplatform although honestly I have no idea how much that affects budget
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Rise of the Tomb Raider timed Xbox exclusive for Holiday 2015 (No PS/PC, SE publish)
- Thread starter fluffydelusions
- Start date
Either SE spent way more on marketing or it took them twice as many people to make the game. Probably the latter since it was multiplatform although honestly I have no idea how much that affects budget
Pseudo judo
Member
So you get to decide what is relevant and what isn't? Sony the market leader is very different from the Sony battling for market share. Their business practices are obviously going to change to reflect that.
I've actually seen this move turn off many people who were gradually warming up to the idea of buying an xbox one, so the effect goes both ways.
Exploratory
Banned
Well don't direct that towards me I was just translating since what he was saying wasn't getting through.
It sucks thats the case but that's the life of those with 1 or 2 platforms. I mean I'm buying a Wii U solely for Smash Bros and I'll be buying an Xbox for those exclusives.
Also I'm fairly sure if you're a console gamer you can probabky afford another console. Gaming is expensive as far as hobbies go. You might not want to or it doesn't make financial sense for you due to the overlap (which makes perfect sense) but you can probably get Rise of the Tomb Raider in like 2 years when the XB1 is cheap.
Chobel
Member
But they are dramatically different. Sony actually is bringing a new game to PS4 with Bloodborne because the game otherwise wouldn't exist, MS are just delaying other versions of RoTR.
So yeah one is great (bloodborne) and the other is ... I wouldn't say evil but it's bad .
FranXico
Member
Before the exclusivity deal, the game would have been released on Xbox anyway. That's why there is no actual benefit.
No, I'm not the arbiter of what is relevant and what isn't. I thought my point was self-evident.
The currently employed software strategies of the platform holders affects the console gaming industry.
You seem to disagree with this, because you keep bringing up an example from 1996.
Pseudo judo
Member
The sexual implications there are not good.
other than CD focusing on one platform thus delivering a better polished game
its a shit move but has 1 positive
In this case it will be even worse, the majority of fans are pissed, some will still buy the game, but I bet a lot of them will just wait for a price drop. TR2 is not going to hit 6 million copies like the first one, nice work S-E, shrinking the fanbase instead of making it bigger.
Exploratory
Banned
Would the game otherwise not exist? Its an offshot of the Souls franchise made by a lot of the same people.
I think this rubs off badly on Phil Spencer. Since becoming top dog, he has but over backwards to be the gamers friend. Yet here he is, supporting an anti consumer move like this. Obviously it is just business, but i think it paints a clearer picture of things than his overtly positive tweets about things and pretence that he has any thigh other than MS' interests at heart
Also, after Sony being pretty damn clear about their exclusivity in their opening segment ('these are completely exclusive, these are coming first to playstation'), the stonewalling and unwillingness to simply state the facts doesn't reflect well in Spencer or MS. They might want to give the impression that it is fully exclusive, but there is too much shit flying around now, and too much attention. They should just come out and clearly state if it is timed. They don't need to say how long for. A timed exclusive is still useful to them, and I think honesty and clarity around this would reflect well on them.
Also, after Sony being pretty damn clear about their exclusivity in their opening segment ('these are completely exclusive, these are coming first to playstation'), the stonewalling and unwillingness to simply state the facts doesn't reflect well in Spencer or MS. They might want to give the impression that it is fully exclusive, but there is too much shit flying around now, and too much attention. They should just come out and clearly state if it is timed. They don't need to say how long for. A timed exclusive is still useful to them, and I think honesty and clarity around this would reflect well on them.
anonymous_abc
Member
Chobel
Member
The IP belongs to Sony and if From Software were really able to do it without Sony's help I'm sure they won't give the IP to Sony.
DOWN
Banned
On the weakest of the gen. Yeah right.
New gen = new growing pains. Multiply that by 2 and the need of a PC version and the state of AAA in Japan. When they do a exclusive, they can learn the hardware and have help directly from the 1st party and funding for the game.
I know a lot of the people that have met him say he's a great guy, but he's always come across as shady to me for some reason. Like he's one of those guys who tries to be nice but doesn't really sound sincere in his words.
It certainly makes me laugh at those "I believe in Phil Spencer" avatars though.
For some reason, I'm not even convinced that this isn't a cross-gen title. The initial PR wording was coming Holiday 2015 on Xbox. Not Xbox One.
FranXico
Member
I'm not sure what you meant by this. He is their employee, after all.
HellofaMouse
Member
sooo.. this is timed, and its gonna come out for pc eventually, but will it ever come to ps4?
Probably, but only because Sony would make it clear whether it's a PS exclusive or a first on PS type of exclusivity.
Half of the outcry stems from the fact that MS acts like it's a full exclusive when all signs point to timed.
Coupled with the fact that not even game journalists covering the event can get a straight answer. They treat them and us who can add 1+1 like idiots.
yeah but they can look pretty. quantum break looked nice
also the ps4 isnt really as powerful as some believe. isnt it like 30% or something ? or 50% ? thats some better effects here and there and 100p. you wouldnt get a substantially different game on your ps4.
Who knows, what we do know that the Souls franchise as it today might not exist without Sony funding in the first place.
But to stop this dumb argument. This is the point:
Platform holder funding independent game developer to make first party game: Good
Platform holder paying third party multiplatform publisher to restrict game to one platform: Less good.
Examples for the former: Sunset Overdrive, Ryse, Bayonetta 2, Demon's Souls
Examples of the latter: Well... ;-)
Those bean counters at square are obviously aware of this. So, it makes you wonder how much dough ms has put forth to secure this deal.
Must have been substantial.
OverlordSteph
Banned
MS securing Tomb Raider as an exclusive is a good thing, i dont understand why people are angry. Its a power play to remove games from their rivals, this happens in many other industries on an everyday bases, Business is Business.. this will only boost creativity and game innovation for Sony.
Yes, but before MS was courting potential buyers by saying Tomb Raider was on their system. Now, they can say that it's *only* on their system, which is a potential reason for people to buy in.
FranXico
Member
In fact, Sony did just that with Hellblade. They announced it as "making its console debut on PS4". And didn't even exclude PC with this.
Since it is clear that it is just a timed exclusive, nobody took an issue with it.
This so much! Bloodborne is being developed by Fromsoft together with Sony Japan studio and is a spiritual sequel to demon souls, which was a Sony exclusive game to begin with. Remind me with MS studio is developing Tomb Raider?
travisbickle
Member
Nothing like Bloodborne. I'm sure you could go back to the PS1 days and find something similar, Sony were very aggressive then.
Succinct Verbosity
Member
I understand why this happened, both from Square and Microsoft's point of view... I just don't like it that much because this is possibly the most blatently time-exclusive exclusive ever. It kind of seems like a soft exclusive that was scraped together for positive PR (again, understandable) than anything substantial. You know, in a weird way, if I KNEW this wasn't coming out on the PC or PS4 eventually I'd jump all over an Xbone... But I know it's coming.
Pseudo judo
Member
My point is simply this: Market dominant Sony is different from battling for market share Sony. These different perspectives make for different choices as far as leveraging their product goes.
FranXico
Member
Again, that benefits only Microsoft, not the people making their purchasing decisions.
The fuck are you talking about dude?
It sold double, but it still underperformed at retail. Estimates were 6m and it sold 3.6m. This means that they may not have planned a sequel, in which case MS may have funded it themselves or part funded development, just like they did with Titanfall.
http://uk.ign.com/articles/2013/04/09/square-enix-reveals-sales-expectations-for-tomb-raider
Just because it's common place in other industries doesn't mean it's good for the consumer.
Chobel
Member
CD is still using multipat engine, there will be little to no difference when the game is not exclusive.
It sold 6.5 million as of June. It ended up being profitable.
Which is business, right? And Sony, MS, and Nintendo are in this game for profit, right?
Microsoft wins because they woo some new consumers in that may have gone to other platforms for the game instead.
They expected 6m in month 1, and FAR more by June. It underperformed.
http://uk.ign.com/articles/2013/04/09/square-enix-reveals-sales-expectations-for-tomb-raider
I agree that this calls for different strategies but right now we're benefiting from Sony battling for market share.
And their tactic for that was to increase quantity of first party games. They have the highest amount of employees working on first party content of any of the three platform holder.
I'm of the opinion that increasing the output of your first party games is positive, because it increases the total amount of games for game players. Paying multiplatform publishers does not do that.
Unknown Soldier
Member
If I were the MS shareholders I would be wondering what exactly Nadella thinks he is pissing away money on right now.
Well of course it is. MS would be nuts to fund this (or very, very desperate) if the only goal was to try and slow up PS4 a bit.
The issue in my view, above all the low level discussion, is that on the evidence the reveal and strategy has gone badly do far.
I doubt Spencer expected to be grilled like the bad guy and end up forced to stick to "no further comment than our initial comment" like he was the bad guy mouthpiece for a huge corp.
I doubt CD or SE thought they'd get quite the mess they have in their forums or twitter feeds.
So far as I can see outside the Xbox fans MS are being painted as the bad guy, the media and social media is negative and in general MS are back as the big evil corp using money and dirty tactics.
That's hardly going to bring people over and to be honest after all the horror of the launch the last thing Spencer needs is this kind of PR.
Add to that general view on Sony post show is lots of new games and lots of fair exclusives.
Market perception is what's killing Xbox right now and helping Sony and this deal seems to have ended up playing right to the established narrative which is not a win for MS particularly in Europe.
One of the reasons why I'm glad Wada is no longer in charge. I do think Microsoft paid a bunch for this seeing as the new person used to handle Square Enix's finances so he would be able to calculate things like lost sales easily.
TR2013 is one of the best games in the past few years for me. I double dipped on XONE and am currently playing through it again.
Bumblebeetuna
Member
Awesome. I loved the reboot, and focusing on one platform can make the sequel better.
People are saying this like CD Is using a different engine just because of the timed exclusivity.
Pseudo judo
Member
So if it's obviously a timed exclusive, which I've known since the moment it was announced, what difference does it make if they don't admit it's timed? They aren't treating you like an idiot, you've already figured it out.