Support NeoGAF

[Conduit]

WTF? Did i read if some game has a bow as weapon, it's borrowed from another game ( in that case TLOU from TR 2013 )? That's a hilarious logic.

Well, all Uncharted games have a AK 47. It's probably borrowed from MGS. Or in TR 2013 you can rest with Lara near campfire. I'm pretty sure that the same thing it's borrowed from a Dark Souls where you can resting at a bonfire.

 

[xxracerxx]

I can't believe there is someone out there who thinks the bow was put into TLoU because of Tomb Raider. Haha, holy shit.

Looking forward to the release.

 

[Bladenic]

I liked TR2013 and Hitman Absolution.

Okay? They were considered sales failures.

 

[Retsudo]

+1 on team waiting for a price drop. And this coming from someone who bought the CE of the last game on PS3 and the remaster on PS4.

Regardless of how they handled this whole shitshow, too many games coming out at that time. Rather reward someone who doesn't take their customers for granted.

 

[Beerman462]

Great game. $60...nah

 

[StrongBlackVine]

+1 on team waiting for a price drop. And this coming from someone who bought the CE of the last game on PS3 and the remaster on PS4.

Regardless of how they handled this whole shitshow, too many games coming out at that time. Rather reward someone who doesn't take their customers for granted.

I did the same thing and agree 100 percent.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Chance it was a 6 month exclusive and Sony asked for or paid them to make it one of Neo's showpieces. I fully expect this game will be shown when they announce Neo. I'm betting 4K/30 or 1440/60?as they have it running great already on Xbox 1.3TF. Probably why they feel they can ask for $60 IMO.

Lol, no.

Sony will show a patched UC4 long before they promote a third party game that signed a competitor's semi-exclusive deal.

Stop with the crazy juice.

 

[BigTnaples]

They can keep that shit, if it's going to be $60.

-d0hv

I mean. It's a new game, and a good one? Why the hell would it not be 60?

 

[SolidChamp]

I'm fine with this. I don't see the issue.

 

[Garlador]

I mean. It's a new game, and a good one? Why the hell would it not be 60?

There's nothing new about it.

It's like when Mass Effect 3 launched on the Wii U a year late with less content than its competitors at full price... at the same time the Mass Effect Trilogy came out on every other system.

And EA was all "huh, I wonder why it didn't sell on the Wii U?!"

 

[farisr]

I mean. It's a new game, and a good one? Why the hell would it not be 60?

It's a game that's been out for a year, and is readily available at a fraction of the price on other platforms due to its age.

That's why it should not be 60.

 

[Kaisos]

It's a game that's been out for a year, and is readily available at a fraction of the price on other platforms due to its age.

How many PS4 owners do you think own an XB1 or a good enough gaming PC?

For most it might as well be new.

 

[StrongBlackVine]

I mean. It's a new game, and a good one? Why the hell would it not be 60?

We will see why when those NPD numbers drop. Sub-200k if it $60 regardless of what's included.

 

[farisr]

How many PS4 owners do you think own an XB1 or a good enough gaming PC?

For most it might as well be new.

"might as well be new" =/= new. Plain and simple. It's an old game with a delayed port that is available on the cheap on other platforms. Releasing in October at full price, against other absolutely brand new games never available on other platforms before?

Good luck.

Anyways that's my last input on the matter, not worth arguing when I won't be buying the game at launch or even used. Maybe if there's a flash sale or something and it's sub $10 I may get tempted. I have way too many games to play as it is. Heck, Tomb Raider DE is in my backlog (thanks to a flash sale), so I don't even know if I really even want to play this yet as playing that game is what'll make me decide.

 

[Primethius]

I doubt it'll be $60 for long. It'll have pretty significant price cuts a week or two from release. SE probably just wants the few buyers they can get at the $60 price margin before moving to the more mass market appropriate price point.

 

[OnionPowder]

We will see why when those NPD numbers drop. Sub-200k if it $60 regardless of what's included.

Isnt that similar to the launch numbers for XB1?

I remember it not charting that month or any month

 

[Chobel]

I was just arguing with someone about the price of these "new" delayed ports, I'm in the camp of : it wasn't available to me before so it's "new" to me. So she gave a counter-example that I didn't have an answer to... yet (paraphrasing here) : "Someone who just bought a new console, should all games be a $60? All these games are new to them."

Anyone have a counter to that counter? It has questioning my original opinion lol.

 

[StrongBlackVine]

Isnt that similar to the launch numbers for XB1?

I remember it not charting that month or any month

It sold right around 200k and did not chart.

 

[Mascot]

If it releases at full price then half of me wants it to tank so that developers and publishers realise that timed exclusives are the work of thundercunts, but the other half of me wants it to succeed so that a franchise I love will continue in the future.

 

[Nightengale]

We will see why when those NPD numbers drop. Sub-200k if it $60 regardless of what's included.

200k would be great.

 

[mao2]

I was just arguing with someone about the price of these "new" delayed ports, I'm in the camp of : it wasn't available to me before so it's "new" to me. So she gave a counter-example that I didn't have an answer to... yet (paraphrasing here) : "Someone who just bought a new console, should all games be a $60? All these games are new to them."

Anyone have a counter to that counter? It has questioning my original opinion lol.

Eh, I don't think you need others to tell you how you should feel about something. If you're OK with paying $60 for a delayed release for whatever reason, then go ahead and do it.

 

[Nightengale]

Short answer , the price is whatever the publisher wants the price to be.

 

[Inuhanyou]

no confirmations from nixxes yet..

 

[SolidChamp]

no confirmations from nixxes yet..

Is it odd that the people who are supposedly working on this have been completely radio silent?

 

[foxbeldin]

Is it odd that the people who are supposedly working on this have been completely radio silent?

Not disclosing the date right now might be a part of the deal they cut with MS.

Anyways, i'm on team 'buy used'. I was ready to give SE my money last year but they didn't want it. I don't care how petty it looks, this deal was handled poorly and i'm making a wallet statement. I'm not mad that it was a timed exclusive, i'm mad at how they danced around it like we were morons who couldn't add 2 + 2.

 

[EGM1966]

I was just arguing with someone about the price of these "new" delayed ports, I'm in the camp of : it wasn't available to me before so it's "new" to me. So she gave a counter-example that I didn't have an answer to... yet (paraphrasing here) : "Someone who just bought a new console, should all games be a $60? All these games are new to them."

Anyone have a counter to that counter? It has questioning my original opinion lol.

You're friends actually right and it's a good example to show the error of those arguing the "it's new to PS4" position.

The game is late to PS4. That overrides it being "new" to the platform and is why it would be better launched at lower price. That's how consumer markets work. There's a price to be paid for launching late and the RRP is it.

SE have two choices. They can launch full price, pick up better revenue from those who buy into game at that RRP then let price drop to where more people purchase or launch at lower price and get higher initial sales but lose some revenue.

They'll probably go for the former but I'd argue they should go god the latter. My reason is the former will gather more negativity on social media and market than the latter and given SE have basically hurt brand image of their own IP with the deal I believe they should put tee pairing the damage over revenue/margin as that'll pay of better longer term.

They won't though I suspect so I have to shrug and watch the continuing car crash of how badly they've managed their reboot of this IP.

 

[Mithos]

Will definitely buy.

Initial price doesn't matter - Tomb Raider 2013 dropped like a stone.

The game was 50% off weeks before release on PC even.

 

[Surface of Me]

Going up against Mafia 3 and TF2 and BF1 shortly after. Dont see this selling much.

 

[Conduit]

Going up against Mafia 3 and TF2 and BF1 shortly after. Dont see this selling much.

At full price it won't. At 40$ it will have some chance.

 

[Manny Calavera]

Played this only on 360 so far and I've been looking forward to this PS4 release. Hoping they'll cut down the price a bit and include the DLC.

 

[Chaserjoey]

Hmm, I just recall the fact that TR2013 and Hitman Absolution were considered failures (and Sleeping Dogs). Probably SE's decision to accept the exclusivity deal and Hitman's sequel being episodic.

Man, every day I'm disappointed that Sleeping Dogs was considered a failure and they decided not to make a sequel (and instead focused on Triad Wars which was an actual failure).

As for RoTR, I've been upset ever since the Microsoft deal went out so I'll be holding off for it to be cheaper. Well, whatever price EB Games decides is cheaper when it puts it in a sale (so probably $90 instead of $120 lol)

 

[StrongBlackVine]

200k would be great.

I said sub-200k and right now it might be sitting at 2.5 million on the other 3 platforms combined. This game will likely end up selling less than half of what TR2013 did. Regardless of what they got paid the franchise has taken a massive hit.

 

[EmilioLargo]

If I want to get into this (still not sure) would I be better off starting with ROTR or the original TR reboot from 2013?

 

[KORNdoggy]

£25 is the most i'm willing to spend on this and it would need all the DLC included.

 

[Bitch Pudding]

As this game seems to be launched in October it should have a full-fledged Neo Mode.

Maybe they will call it the "Definitive edition" once more because of that and therefore go for full retail price.

 

[Rhazer Fusion]

Of course Tomb Raider will be $60. FFX HD Remaster, Sleeping Dogs, Dark Souls 2, and FFType 0 to name a few were $60 despite being old ports, so why would Tomb Raider be any different, especially considering it has never been on PS4? Again, the are releasing it at the worst possible time again. Why do publishers/companies keep releasing their games when all of the other high profile titles are available? Makes no sense whatsoever. Tomb Raider as great as it was, will be thrown to the wolves yet again unfortunately.

 

[Nightengale]

In the case of this game, it's clear that they're obliged to release it no earlier than October.

They could go for December or January but ultimately it's between a rock and hard place

 

[Liamc723]

Of course Tomb Raider will be $60. FFX HD Remaster, Sleeping Dogs, Dark Souls 2, and FFType 0 to name a few were $60 despite being old ports, so why would Tomb Raider be any different, especially considering it has never been on PS4? Again, the are releasing it at the worst possible time again. Why do publishers/companies keep releasing their games when all of the other high profile titles are available? Makes no sense whatsoever. Tomb Raider as great as it was, will be thrown to the wolves yet again unfortunately.

All the games you list there are full remasters, Rise Of The Tomb Raider is a port of a year old game. It shouldn't be $60.

The fact that it hasn't been on PS4 doesn't change the fact that it's an old game, why do people keep using this as a reason for it being full price?

 

[ps3ud0]

In the case of this game, it's clear that they're obliged to release it no earlier than October.

They could go for December or January but ultimately it's between a rock and hard place

I still dont understand what motivated SE to extend the contract - they ultimately lost sales on the XO when people knew it was coming shortly to PC and eventually to PS4 and then because of the extension theyve placed themselves in a similar situation to the XO launch where there will obviously be bigger games vying for gamers money. Its better that us consumers are better informed when it would hit, but Im sure most would have probably been happier with a shorter delay than knowledge of exactly when it could hit...

6 months (unknown to us at the time?) just meant theyd have a nicer window to place the game, in hindsight with the extension this holiday period doesnt let up until March 2017...

ps3ud0 8)

 

[Inuhanyou]

If I want to get into this (still not sure) would I be better off starting with ROTR or the original TR reboot from 2013?

tr2013

 

[BokehKing]

I'll be picking this up, I haven't liked what I heard coming out of some of those Uncharted Threads and Tomb Raider introduced some mechanics in the reboots first entry I really enjoyed. I believe there was some hunting and crafting going on. I remember simple little quests like "kill x amount of wolves" "gather material to craft this" etc etc. Even though it was kind of stream lined it was still fun. Plus Lara has been my game crush since I was a teenager.


Edit: if digital Foundry ends up saying it's on par with Xbox one I might as well get the cheaper version I guess.

 

[Triggerhappytel]

If it releases at full price then half of me wants it to tank so that developers and publishers realise that timed exclusives are the work of thundercunts, but the other half of me wants it to succeed so that a franchise I love will continue in the future.

I'm sure the franchise will continue regardless, but Square-Enix will not accept any more dumb exclusivity deals which will only succeed in damaging the brand rather than help it.

 

[TheBlueBomber]

Sweet, definitely grabbing it if this ends up true, i loved the first one, and have been waiting for this for too long now lol

 

[DeepEnigma]

All the games you list there are full remasters, Rise Of The Tomb Raider is a port of a year old game. It shouldn't be $60.

The fact that it hasn't been on PS4 doesn't change the fact that it's an old game, why do people keep using this as a reason for it being full price?

Sometimes consumers are their own enemies, lol.

Why do people want to pay more for anything? Let alone jumping through hoops and mental gymnastics to defend the right to pay more, lol. Fascinating, it truly is.

"No sir, I refuse to pay less for this 2015 model Mustang, even though it is "brand new", and the 2016 models are out. Let me pay 2016 price for the 2015 model, good sir."

What was that old capitalism saying? "A sucker is born every day."?

 

[psychotron]

Of course Tomb Raider will be $60. FFX HD Remaster, Sleeping Dogs, Dark Souls 2, and FFType 0 to name a few were $60 despite being old ports, so why would Tomb Raider be any different, especially considering it has never been on PS4? Again, the are releasing it at the worst possible time again. Why do publishers/companies keep releasing their games when all of the other high profile titles are available? Makes no sense whatsoever. Tomb Raider as great as it was, will be thrown to the wolves yet again unfortunately.

I decided to fire up Sleeping Dogs last night to see how the PS4 version compared to 360. I was feeling good until I got in a vehicle. Frame rate turns to shit.

 

[DriftingSpirit]

Sometimes consumers are their own enemies, lol.

Why do people want to pay more for anything? Let alone jumping through hoops and mental gymnastics to defend the right to pay more, lol. Fascinating, it truly is.

"No sir, I refuse to pay less for this 2015 model Mustang, even though it is "brand new", and the 2016 models are out. Let me pay 2016 price for the 2015 model, good sir."

What was that old capitalism saying? "A sucker is born every day."?

Right lol.

Some are taking the lower price to mean -

A)There is an implication the quality of Rise of the Tomb Raider isn't worth $60.

And others feel -

B)PS4 owners shouldn't get "special treatment" just because of the exclusive situation.

That is what it is really about. As you said, it doesn't make sense to fight for higher prices otherwise lol.

 

[Liamc723]

Sometimes consumers are their own enemies, lol.

Why do people want to pay more for anything? Let alone jumping through hoops and mental gymnastics to defend the right to pay more, lol. Fascinating, it truly is.

"No sir, I refuse to pay less for this 2015 model Mustang, even though it is "brand new", and the 2016 models are out. Let me pay 2016 price for the 2015 model, good sir."

What was that old capitalism saying? "A sucker is born every day."?

Your analogy would hold weight if there was a 2016 edition of Rise Of The Tomb Raider, but there isn't.

The PS4 version is a port of a year old game, there literally isn't any disputing that. It's a fact.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Your analogy would hold weight if there was a 2016 edition of Rise Of The Tomb Raider, but there isn't.

The PS4 version is a port of a year old game, there literally isn't any disputing that. It's a fact.

You did not help you rebuttal with that at all. Sorry. Especially if the XboxOne version is $30-$40 when this one comes out.

And there are plenty of times cars would not change, at all, only the year in the name.

 

[Inf3cted_b3ast]

Sometimes consumers are their own enemies, lol.

Why do people want to pay more for anything? Let alone jumping through hoops and mental gymnastics to defend the right to pay more, lol. Fascinating, it truly is.

"No sir, I refuse to pay less for this 2015 model Mustang, even though it is "brand new", and the 2016 models are out. Let me pay 2016 price for the 2015 model, good sir."

What was that old capitalism saying? "A sucker is born every day."?

Well said.

 

[NullPointer]

Sometimes consumers are their own enemies, lol.

Why do people want to pay more for anything? Let alone jumping through hoops and mental gymnastics to defend the right to pay more, lol. Fascinating, it truly is.

I'm perfectly fine paying what I think something is worth.

If the price is even lower than I'd expect then great - low prices help me take a risk where a full price might keep me away. Do I feel the game provides less value because it was previously released on the Xbox? Not at all. Do I think its wise for SE to lower the price and/or bundle DLC and make improvements over the Xbox version because PS4 players were arbitrarily held back? Yes.

If people want to wait until the game hits their sweet spot for value or buy it used or borrow it from a friend or rent it, more power to them. That makes perfect sense with any product. I just don't understand the idea that games should plummet in value purely because they've released on another platform for a period of time. The gameplay isn't affected. If anything we may see an improved version.

To the person who asked whether all games for a new console buyer should be $60 because its new to them - well publishers can give that a shot if they want, but anybody could find those games for sale used and choose their own entry point for each game that makes sense to them. As there are no used copies of RoTR on the PS4 yet, there isn't that market to explore. Again, "yet" is the key word there. I don't think people waiting on price drops will have to wait all that long.