If so, why did it get announced at E3? That suggests it was already in production. And if they knew it was already going to be exclusive, you can be sure MS would have announced it loudly at E3
-
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
If so, why did it get announced at E3? That suggests it was already in production. And if they knew it was already going to be exclusive, you can be sure MS would have announced it loudly at E3
Speedy Blue Dude
Banned
Last figure we're heard from the Playstation Camera was it sold 1 million. Being generous and assuming it's sold an extra half million in the past 2 months, the camera only has a 15% attach ratio.
1.5 million cameras to 10 million consoles.
CriterionDog
Member
Is there a title change? This is now officially a timed exclusive? Confused.
They're hoping the casual consumer isn't smart enough to figure that out themselves. That sure worked the first time with the DRM idea last year.
Edge_Maverick
Member
MS should have paid for the inevitable Raitoningu Returns II.
deal with it
Perhaps it's the big rumored E3 3rd party exclusive that never materialized?
I'm one of those weird people who will buy both a PS4 and a Xbone so I personally don't care if a game ends up exclusive or timed exclusive on one machine but I have to say that ROTTR sounds like a waste of money to me.
Bloodborne is being developed with one platform in mind which can only be a good thing and of course the game will not come to any other platform making this a system seller (for example I'm buying a PS4 just for this game and I'm definitely not the only one), ROTTR from the looks of it it isn't developed with the Xbone only in mind which means no apparent advantages for the game tech wise plus it will be a system seller for a short period of time making the money spent on this not worth it IMO.
I'd rather see MS spending this kind of money at games like Scalebound or revivals like Phantom Dust & Killer Instinct. Seems like the smarter choice and a better investment over time.
nope. not at all. but focusing on xbox exclusivity can raise the profile for tr as a contender against uncharted. it makes decent sense from a business marketing stand point especially if ms ponied up enough cash. The "exclusiveness" marketing can help raise the profile. apart that that aspect none no way does xbone exclusiveness make any sense.
Well that is the only reasonable scenario from a business pov for se.
That was Scalebound.
FranXico
Member
I'm part of the 85% who chose not to buy a camera. Good thing for many people that it was optional from day one, otherwise it might have inflated the console price needlessly.
Can someone remind me why are we discussing camera peripherals now?
Heavy's Sandvich
Member
I must be living on a different planet, what is the issue here?
Phil Spencer is meant to do what is best for Xbox and by locking down an exclusive he has done what is expected of him.
Squeenix are to ensure their product is profitable in order to ensure they get a return on their investment in making the game, they have obviously given exclusivity for financial gain.
What's the issue? Some customers can't get access to the game?
If given the opportunity, are people seriously advocating that Phil Spencer should have given up on the chance of locking down exclusivity? If they do, either they're being disingenuous or are incredibly naive.
Phil Spencer is meant to do what is best for Xbox and by locking down an exclusive he has done what is expected of him.
Squeenix are to ensure their product is profitable in order to ensure they get a return on their investment in making the game, they have obviously given exclusivity for financial gain.
What's the issue? Some customers can't get access to the game?
If given the opportunity, are people seriously advocating that Phil Spencer should have given up on the chance of locking down exclusivity? If they do, either they're being disingenuous or are incredibly naive.
Unknown One
Member
I doubt it'll make it a contender to Uncharted. This move will push players to Uncharted.
Some customers? It's over half the customers.
Some customers? It's over half the customers.
Earthpainting
Member
Seems like good title to snag up as a (timed?) exclusive. The previous title sold quite a lot copies, did critically well, and it's a game in a genre that people like. Now they can focus on polishing up the SKU of slightly weaker hardware as well, doing it more justice. The fact that they're willing to do this proves they are willing to put money into this, increasing the appeal and value of their system. It's not enough to push me over the edge and get an Xbox One, but every bit helps.
Only the Sony boys are angry. I think Lara could be big as Master Chief on Xbox. People will buy a Xbox ones when they start to see the screenshots. Crystal Dynamics are one of the best guys out there. Gears, Halo, Quantum Break, Tomb Raider, Forza are a good reason to buy an Xbox.
FranXico
Member
PS4 players will definitely pay more attention to U4 now that RoTR is not coming any time soon.
Could be, but I thought the rumor was about an existing franchise. Eh, maybe faulty memory.
Exploratory
Banned
So would I. So would most people I imagine.
Some? Try over half your potential audience.
And my issue has always been that Microsoft refuses to clarify just what kind of exclusivity the game is, not the exclusivity itself.
CosmicGroinPull
Member
Mendax
Member
because we love games, microsoft doesn't.
Lara's whole history over numerous years right from the beginning has been with PC and Playstation. Now MS is paying for that to end.
It isn't good.
MS should be using their money to get Kameo or Banjo or Jet Force Gemini, etc back out there again, and not taking Lara away from the other platforms she has always been on.
FranXico
Member
Sit back and consider what could Microsoft have done to warrant such hate...
So you really expect voice and camera features to make their way into this game (that is releasing in late 2015) even though MS is effectively dropping Kinect?
Heavy's Sandvich
Member
I'm going to read 100 pages of tears?
Anyone want to answer the question I posed at the end?
Mihael Mello Keehl
Banned
So what ? It just breeds competition. Honestly its good for gamers*
plasmawave
Banned
Maybe MS should stop being dicks. Just a thought.
I think if given the choice, most people would have rather Phil Spencer spent that money on making new games and not locking a game out from other platforms.
Do you seriously don't understand that people who don't own a Xbone still want to play Tomb Raider like they always did? People want to play games. Who the fuck cares what Phil Spencer has to do? The politics behind the scenes is just for us diehards on GAF.
Let him dream.
Psycho_Mantis
Banned
Ok, lets pick that up. Spencer is seemingly unable to do the "it's totally exclusive" PR happydance. He is trotting out a very small and carefully worded PR statement. What can this mean? Only one thing really: the game will not remain exclusive.
Why are people unhappy? Others will go into this in greater detail.
I'm not unhappy, I just think the entire episode has highlighted Microsoft's lack of understanding on their situation, what they need to do to remedy it and their poor product portfolio.
Earthpainting
Member
I think most people will agree with this sentiment, but pulling up your sleeves and getting original exclusive titles is simply a lot more more expensive. Finding available developers is also a lot harder than it may appear. In the end they are doing both, which seems like a good thing for an Xbox gamer. Full exclusives and timed ones.
To be fair, I don't see why it's in Microsoft's or Square Enix' interest to clarify. If it was a full exclusive, I could see them coming out with it more strongly. Since they aren't doing that though, I doubt this is the case. If it's a timed exclusive, Microsoft wouldn't want to remind people that being patient and getting it on another system is also a possibility. Square Enix on the other hand may be looking for double-dippers.
sankt-Antonio
:^)--?-<
In my personal case the stunt backfired. Instead of developing new IPs that would get me into the xbox they fuck me over with anti consumer crap. The same kind of anti consumer crap that made me stop thinking about buying a one in the first place.
At the same god damned day the rival comes up with many new IPs and a cristal clear communication of what I can expect staying exclusive and what not.
In the age of twitter, beeing upfront and pro consumer is going to pay of, 10mill sold ps4 are proofing that.
I don't get what this avatar quote Is supposed to mean?
Pseudo judo
Member
The best corporate strategy is to do both. Limit the quality titles on your competitors system while creating exclusive quality titles yourself.
Phil Spencer has a very short time to turn things around and begin winning North America because the rest of the world is a lost cause. He probably has two more Christmas shopping seasons to do it. He can't do that based solely on new IP, not because MS hasn't made the investment but because it takes a considerably long time to make quality games. So he needs to limit his competitors. It's good business strategy.
What I don't get for all the people celebrating this move:
Consider the money spent for this deal. Let's say it was 10 million (probably way higher).
For that 10 million that Microsoft spent on this, you could have gotten a second game (maybe even a third or fourth) in addition to Tomb Raider exclusively made for Xbox One.
Now all you get is bragging rights on a message board.
Bottom line: You lose out on this just as much as the people who have platforms that Tomb Raider isn't coming out on because of this deal.
Consider the money spent for this deal. Let's say it was 10 million (probably way higher).
For that 10 million that Microsoft spent on this, you could have gotten a second game (maybe even a third or fourth) in addition to Tomb Raider exclusively made for Xbox One.
Now all you get is bragging rights on a message board.
Bottom line: You lose out on this just as much as the people who have platforms that Tomb Raider isn't coming out on because of this deal.
We have a winner. (PS: I own an xbox one and really liked TR)
OverlordSteph
Banned
When Sony secured No Mans Sky as an exclusive all i herd where good on Sony and all sorts, even i though what a great move. Did Xbox gamers give a dame or whine i dont think so. No Mans Skys was the game of E3 for most people.. and im sure that becoming a PS exclusive did not benefit many consumers but that did not cause as much as an outcry, But when MS do it, its wrong all of a sudden. I dont see how ?
Totally agree its time MS got there foot in the exploration/ adventure games
Fair point. I was gonna say like 50 million but I don't know how much they really spent on this deal. I'm sure you get the general idea though.
Even still, that could have been Tomb Raider along with 5 or 10 indie titles.
Except it has blown up in a storm of negative press. Everyone can see through the veil now, the last years of conference cycles have started to demonstrate the lack of Microsoft game funding. Rather than received as a rapturous piece of strategy, this is being exposed as papering over the cracks.
There's years left in the generation but the conference circuit next year is going to be vital for Microsoft. Especially if stuff like Sunset Overdrive gets pimped out to more platforms by Insomniac.
I'm not arguing the merits of the business strategy. I only entered this thread because I was baffled by the cheerleading it got from some people.
The psychology behind why people think this is amazing for the Xbox owners is what interests me.
The software strategy was just a tangent because you kept bringing up what I consider to be an interesting albeit irrelevant in todays market example from 1996.
He only said game, not AAA game. A Journey or another Ori doesn't sound impossible for that budget.
Pseudo judo
Member
No, the nature of the exclusivity would be revealed long before Christmas 2015. What they're hoping for is that they have a list of titles that are compelling enough that anyone who maybe on the fence about buying and Xbox One will not want to wait 6 months to play TR on a competing platform.
SliceSabre
Banned
Agreed.
But at the very least that money probably could have been spent better elsewhere, from the gamer point of view anyway.
No doubt Microsoft did a cost/benefit check and decided whatever amount of money they spent on this was worth it in the end.
Tomb Raider reboot was likely 30M in dev costs, but I wouldn't be shocked if they spent more.
I was examining his statement in the context of a replacement title for moneyhatting Tomb Raider. Of course an indie or AA tier title would cost less.
sankt-Antonio
:^)--?-<
No mans Sky will give its "debue on consoles" on ps4 the last time I heard. So it's timed console exclusive. Be it good or bad, that's a clear message.