Support NeoGAF

[Shahed]

Because it's not selling as well as they'd hoped it would. Making a quality game is one thing, meeting your publisher's expectations is another.

Yeah but that's not on the dev. If CD made a game that meets internal quality and external critical benchmarks then they've done their job. Other factors outside of development affect sales. Brian's comment deliberately avoids talking about sales and the commercial reception, so in that context Square and MS should be happy with the game it's self.

Obviously if they were talking about sales it would be a different matter entirely. But they very specifically chose not to do so.

I wish people would move on. It's already announced for other platforms, Phil already "decided" to not do these anymore, and it's obvious how this one performed. No need to beat a dead horse.

This won't be forgotten for years. You will hear and read comments about long lasting franchise damage from now until even after the third game comes out and like it!

 

[ZeroX03]

Is there a reason people expect comments on sales? Is there any reason they should publicly talk about sales other than to investors? Of course they're going to talk about quality.

 

[Jawbreaker]

Yep, by all accounts, they should be happy with how the game turned out given how it's reviewed and user opinion. Sales, on the other hand...

 

[Scientist Supreme!]

Is there a reason people expect comments on sales? Is there any reason they should publicly talk about sales other than to investors? Of course they're going to talk about quality.

Read the op?

 

[Chobel]

Wasn't that just for the Xbox One version? The 360 version is supposed to move it closer to the 57k figure.

Nope, 42K was for XBO and 360.

 

[scitek]

Yeah but that's not on the dev. If CD made a game that meets internal quality and external critical benchmarks then they've done their job. Other factors outside of development affect sales. Brian's comment deliberately avoids talking about sales and the commercial reception, so in that context Square and MS should be happy with the game it's self.

Obviously if they were talking about sales it would be a different matter entirely. But they very specifically chose not to do so.

Choosing not to do so in a thread specifically focused on sales speaks volumes, and unfortunately, when a game fails to meet expectations, the marketing team and the people not involved with development never seem to be the ones punished.

 

[Acosta]

The dev team have nothing to feel bad about it, by any metric they made a good game.

The ones who should feel bad were the decision makers who decide to go exclusive and launching at the very same day of Fallout 4. The whole thing is like a manual to manufacture a sales disaster step by step.

In all honesty I'm glad, with some luck it will serve to put Tomb Raider in the freezer for some time and let CD do other thing.

Spoiler

LEGACY LEGACY LEGACY

 

[danm999]

Be interesting to see how the PC and PS4 versions sell down the line of course; I'd save the talk of irreparable damage to the franchise until we get that info.

 

[Hitokiri03]

Other posts from him.

The dev team is not responsible for sales and therefore we look to reviews and releasing on time to gauge our performance. We acomplished these goals. The press considers Rise of the Tomb Raider a high quality game based on the scores. I don't see any of this as a lie.

Link

I didn't mean to go off topic or patronize, but there was suggestion in the thread that the reported sales numbers reflect poorly on the dev team. Square/Microsoft are happy with Crystal and Eidos Montreal and the game itself. As to the topic of sales, I'm unqualified to discuss it so I won't have anything else to say on this thread. Much love TRF and happy holidays.

Link

 

[ZeroX03]

Read the op?

He's speaking on behalf of the developer, not the publisher(s?) on the development of the game in a thread full of worry. There should be no expectation that he would talk numbers. How about you read all his comments?

 

[stryke]

Is there a reason people expect comments on sales? Is there any reason they should publicly talk about sales other than to investors? Of course they're going to talk about quality.

He didn't have to participate in that thread if he didn't want to talk sales.

 

[foxbeldin]

Other posts from him.

Link

Link

Thanks ! Will update the OP.

 

[Finale Fireworker]

I wish people would move on. It's already announced for other platforms, Phil already "decided" to not do these anymore, and it's obvious how this one performed. No need to beat a dead horse.

It's hard to move on when when you care about the franchise more than just getting to play it.

And even if all you care about is playing it, Tomb Raider became an immensely popular game. Having to wait an entire year to play a game you already have waited two years for is hard. Especially when it's technically available.

I might spend $350 to play Tomb Raider. I wish it wasn't this way. These threads are my only comfort.

 

[ZeroX03]

He didn't have to participate in that thread if he didn't want to talk sales.

I didn't mean to go off topic or patronize, but there was suggestion in the thread that the reported sales numbers reflect poorly on the dev team. Square/Microsoft are happy with Crystal and Eidos Montreal and the game itself. As to the topic of sales, I'm unqualified to discuss it so I won't have anything else to say on this thread. Much love TRF and happy holidays.

He was defending his team. They made a good game. He's not in a position to discuss the sales (but he can speak to other claims made against his team in said thread), so if people have silly expectations that's their mistake.

 

[Kayant]

Other posts from him.

Link

Link

Well he's not wrong there but there is also the fact he choose to make such a comment in a thread about sales.

 

[Principate]

You guys saying they are happy and taking this at face value aren't thinking about this correctly

Even if MS covered a significant part of the cost no publisher/developer is going to be remotely happy that the 6 years trying to build a franchise has resulted in a sequel that will likely sell less than the first game. That is a massive investment in time and energy that they can't recoup.

Yes but that certainly won't be their disappointment in this since that was almost certainly going to happen after they did this deal. If they cared about that wouldn't have done the deal in the first place. Square Enix cared little about the franchises future and wanted to cash out early.

 

[NeloAnjelo]

The quality of the game isn't being questioned though. It's the performance in terms of sales. Everyone knows that the game reviewed extremely well, so it's obvious MS and Square are happy with the Dev team. That addresses nothing.

The real question is whether this franchise will last and produce another sequel to a fantastic game... a game which is kept off the dominant system for a year. A game which not old sold more, but performed better on PS4. A year is a long time, and I hope Square and MS haven't killed this franchise as a result of this deal. The "Holiday 2015 Exclusive" tag line may be a direct result of the game being released when it did, keeping it in 2015 holidays for MS, and giving it a year for the duration deal.

I love this game and this franchise. Hope it continues, and hope its multi platform out with the holiday period, or not squeezed between big multi platform releases.

 

[AnthonypUK]

"Square are happy with Crystal and Eidos Montreal"

From what i heard, no they are not, Square especially, CD were the ones who have the close relationship with Microsoft, and they worked with Microsoft to put the deal to square.

 

[Shahed]

Choosing not to do so in a thread specifically focused on sales speaks volumes, and unfortunately, when a game fails to meet expectations, the marketing team and the people not involved with development never seem to be the ones punished.

Oh yeah if you read between the lines you know the truth. Sometimes what someone doesn't talk about comes across louder than what they do talk about.But taking Brian's comment in isolation he said nothing wrong. MS and Square are probably happy with the devs about the game itself. Anything else that he deliberate didn't say in another matter entirely.

 

[Kayant]

He was defending his team. They made a good game. He's not in a position to discuss the sales, so if people have silly expectations that's their mistake.

How exactly?? His team wasn't being attacked in the first place. The quailty of the game was never in question to the comment he was replying to or the thread.
Comment -

It's funny looking back at some older posts how we had the same conversations when Reboot came out. History is definitely repeating itself.

Nothing in relation to the game's quality or dev team.

 

[CrichtonKicks]

I wish people would move on. It's already announced for other platforms, Phil already "decided" to not do these anymore, and it's obvious how this one performed. No need to beat a dead horse.

I'm more concerned about the viability of the franchise now. These type of split releases don't seem particularly heavy on the long run (ie I seriously doubt it will ever come within shouting distance of YTD sales of TR 2013). Hopefully they recognize the reason for the low sales and greenlight another entry anyway.

 

[Johndoey]

He's speaking on behalf of the developer, not the publisher(s?) on the development of the game in a thread full of worry. There should be no expectation that he would talk numbers. How about you read all his comments?

He was in a sales thread tho.

 

[SolidSnakex]

"Square are happy with Crystal and Eidos Montreal"

From what i heard, no they are not, especially Square, CD where the ones who have the close relationship with Microsoft, and they worked with Microsoft to put the deal to square.

This doesn't surprise me. Many people have pointed the finger at Square over this, but like you said, CD are the ones with the tight relationship with MS. They've only been working on Xbox hardware since last gen. They haven't developed a game for non-Xbox hardware since the PS2. Nixxes handled the porting of their games to the PS3/4 and PC. So I could definitely see them thinking it would be a good idea to team up with MS for the game when Sony was planning to release Uncharted 4 this year.

 

[le.phat]

Look, the decision to cut out a significant percentage of fans has got to sting. The corporate soulselling must undoubtedly be a bitter pill as well.
And the game being largely ignored by the masses must suck as well.

But they are absolved of all sins because SE, right ?

 

[Garrett Hawke]

Other posts from him.

Link

Link

These seriously don't make it sound all that bad. I doubt SE or MS were expecting incredible sales figures after the way things are turned out. From what he's saying, neither company is angry with them which is good news imo because it means a higher chance of getting a sequel.

 

[AnthonypUK]

This doesn't surprise me. Many people have pointed the finger at Square over this, but like you said, CD are the ones with the tight relationship with MS. They've only been working on Xbox hardware since last gen. They haven't developed a game for non-Xbox hardware since the PS2. Nixxes handled the porting of their games to the PS3/4 and PC. So I could definitely see them thinking it would be a good idea to team up with MS for the game when Sony was planning to release Uncharted 4 this year.

eh, square still bear the blame since they ultimately signed off on the deal, but CD weren't just pawns in some corporate deal behind their backs, they wanted this deal, they got it, do the math if you think square would be happy with the outcome.

 

[Memento]

The way he specifically avoided to talk about sales is alarming... looks like it really bombed :/

 

[Mihos]

Look, the decision to cut out a significant percentage of fans has got to sting. The corporate soulselling must undoubtedly be a bitter pill as well.
And the game being largely ignored by the masses must suck as well.

But they are absolved of all sins because SE, right ?

I think it was more of a failed experiment and both sides probably new the risks up front.

I personally will still most likely double dip on PS4 and PC when it comes out. I have an xbone, but honestly just rather wait. I think over all the franchise will be fine.

 

[GutZ31]

So let's imagine an alternate reality where the game launched on both Xbox One, and PS4 at the same time.

Does everyone believe the sales would be much(much) higher just because it would be on the more adopted system?
I think the quarter of the year it came out in was filled with great games that make it hard to justify buying the game over others.

Some of the games that have come out of 4th quarter for an idea.

Elite: Dangerous (XBO)
Assassin's Creed Syndicate
Darksiders II: Deathinitive Edition
Halo 5: Guardians (XBO)
Need for Speed
Call of Duty: Black Ops III
Fallout 4
Rise of the Tomb Raider (XBO)
Star Wars: Battlefront


This is in order of when they came out by reference here.
*All of these are picked for perceived popularity on my part, leaning to Xbox One to illustrate the fact that it has games out in the wild while Rise drops.
I completely left out PS4 exclusives for obvious reasons.

On this alone, it's hard to find a reason to pick up tomb raider if your time is already being sucked away by games like Fallout, CoD, Halo, NFS, Star Wars, or Assassins Creed.

In my opinion, its just a hard sell with all the games already out, or coming out this quarter.

 

[EventHorizon]

It never ceases to amaze me how many are quick to post in a thread without reading source for context and clarification. Yes, it is obvious given the charts we have heard about already and no statements about total sales numbers.


But I still thought the game was pretty fun. It felt like a step up over the reboot in terms of tone and gameplay, imo.

Yes the context was quite obvious. In a thread about sales he wanted to talk about the dev team.

Btw, I bought and played the previous TR. While I liked TR, I didn't like the new tone of RotTR. I don't own an XB1, but I have little desire to buy RotTR when it comes out for the PS4. Let's get real for a second. RotTR coming out on the same day a Fallout was a bad idea and cost it sales, but it was placed there because it was determined that going head-to-head against Halo, Battlefront, or Black Ops would be even worse. If your game has to run from every other game to have even a chance to sell decent numbers then perhaps your game isn't targeting a large enough audience.

Tomb Raider can't claim that it is a small franchise to seek shelter either. It is up there with some of the most iconic games and characters in the industry. A truly well done Tomb Raider game would have other titles running from it, not the other way around.

 

[Y2Kev]

I highly doubt tomb raider as an IP is in trouble. I guess we will see.

 

[RootCause]

I just hope there isn't another deal for the next Tomb Raider game.

 

[AnthonypUK]

In my opinion, its just a hard sell with all the games already out, or coming out this quarter.

http://www.videogamer.com/ps4/tomb_..._over_twice_as_much_on_ps4_than_xbox_one.html

I think they could have more than doubled sales for sure.

 

[Chobel]

Yes but that certainly won't be their disappointment in this since that was almost certainly going to happen after they did this deal. If they cared about that wouldn't have done the deal in the first place. Square Enix cared little about the franchises future and wanted to cash out early.

At very least they should have expected the game to do well on XBO, which isn't the case here.

 

[Shahed]

So let's imagine an alternate reality where the game launched on both Xbox One, and PS4 at the same time.

Does everyone believe the sales would be much(much) higher just because it would be on the more adopted system?
I think the quarter of the year it came out in was filled with great games that make it hard to justify buying the game over others.

Some of the games that have come out of 4th quarter for an idea.

Elite: Dangerous (XBO)
Assassin's Creed Syndicate
Darksiders II: Deathinitive Edition
Halo 5: Guardians (XBO)
Need for Speed
Call of Duty: Black Ops III
Fallout 4
Rise of the Tomb Raider (XBO)
Star Wars: Battlefront


This is in order of when they came out by reference here.
*All of these are picked for perceived popularity on my part, leaning to Xbox One to illustrate the fact that it has games out in the wild while Rise drops.
I completely left out PS4 exclusives for obvious reasons.

On this alone, it's hard to find a reason to pick up tomb raider if your time is already being sucked away by games like Fallout, CoD, Halo, NFS, Star Wars, or Assassins Creed.

In my opinion, its just a hard sell with all the games already out, or coming out this quarter.

They could have always delayed it. There's a whole year for games to release.

 

[CrichtonKicks]

I highly doubt tomb raider as an IP is in trouble. I guess we will see.

The IP has far too much name value and recognition to disappear. I just worry that we will seen another reboot which will be its 4th if you count the soft resets (AoD and Legend).

 

[Ricky_R]

Meanwhile, back at SE in the sales performance meeting.

 

[Memento]

I just hope there isn't another deal for the next Tomb Raider game.

There wont be. Why would they? I mean, the deal wasnt good for anyone. Both Microsoft and Square lost.

 

[SolidChamp]

Is there any way they'd (Square) pull the plug on the PS4 version of the game as a result of poor sales?

 

[foxbeldin]

Is there any way they'd (Square) pull the plug on the PS4 version of the game as a result of poor sales?

That would mean :

-Sales are poor enough
-SE thought of an exit clause in this case (implies they're smart enough)
-MS let SE put such a clause in the contract (implies they're dumb enough)

So chances are very, very slim.

 

[EventHorizon]

Is there any way they'd (Square) pull the plug on the PS4 version of the game as a result of poor sales?

I doubt it. I believe someone else is doing the port so it isn't taking resources away from their dev team and the PS4 port should at least bring in enough money to be able to cover the costs. From a purely PR standpoint they have to bring RotTR to the PS4 if they want to keep the franchise on that console. You can't simply skip a game.

 

[GutZ31]

http://www.videogamer.com/ps4/tomb_..._over_twice_as_much_on_ps4_than_xbox_one.html

I think they could have more than doubled sales for sure.

Good point. I should have did the same thing for the old game as the new one.
So let's do that. The first (Tomb Raider) Definitive Edition for Xbox One and PS4 came out in January of 2014 on the 28th.
Lets name off some of the hard hitters for the first quarter that would be stealing people away from playing Tomb Raider.
I will start and stop at the month it calls into, January.

Tomb Raider: Definitive Edition

What, were you thinking there was more multiplatform games out that month?
Nope.
With a month wide open to them, with sales at the best they could be.
Ok, lets be fair, it was near the end of january, right? let's include Feburary.

The Lego Movie Videogame
Strider
Plants vs. Zombies: Garden Warfare (XBO)
Thief

And March

Metal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes

They could have always delayed it. There's a whole year for games to release.

And this is the point I am trying to make clear.

 

[Ryng_tolu]

Wait for the numbers, if so.

 

[SolidSnakex]

eh, square still bear the blame since they ultimately signed off on the deal, but CD weren't just pawns in some corporate deal behind their backs, they wanted this deal, they got it, do the math if you think square would be happy with the outcome.

Square definitely has a hand in it as well since they signed off on it in the end. I was just referring to some people in the previous thread that were blaming Square over this as if CD were just along for the ride.

 

[Ricky_R]

Is there any way they'd (Square) pull the plug on the PS4 version of the game as a result of poor sales?

That would be brand suicide imo. I'm sure they'll be able to recoup whatever they invest on the PS4 version, so they won't cancel it. It would be worse to do so.

 

[Lemondish]

That would mean :

-Sales are poor enough
-SE thought of an exit clause in this case (implies they're smart enough)
-MS let SE put such a clause in the contract (implies they're dumb enough)

So chances are very, very slim.

I don't think you understood the post. He/she was asking if the poor sells would lead to SE cancelling the PS4 version. I don't think exit clauses would affect that decision.

 

[Familienoberhauptvogel]

That's a great category. What are the other nominees there?

I will take a blind guess and say Nolan North and/or Troy Baker.

Still think if Square has faith in the title they can do a sort of relaunch next year.

It worked before.

 

[Blobbers]

Bah god, they actually nominated Camilla Luddington for best performance. The absolute madmen.

 

[RootCause]

Bah god, they actually nominated Camilla Luddington for best performance. The absolute madmen.

is her performance in Rise that good? It was pretty poor in Tomb Raider (2013).

 

[cameron]

Bah god, they actually nominated Camilla Luddington for best performance. The absolute madmen.

They're smoking the good stuff.