Try our new beta!Click here
Submitted by jackanderson1985 541d ago | interview

Xbox boss Phil Spencer makes case for Tomb Raider exclusivity deal

It dominated last week's Gamescom and sparked thousands of comments on the internet.

In the 24 hours after Microsoft announced Xbox exclusivity for Rise of the Tomb Raider, forums raged. How could publisher Square Enix and developer Crystal Dynamics sell out? And wouldn't moneybags Microsoft be better off spending its cash on making its own games, rather than denying PlayStation and PC players the chance to play what will probably be one of 2015's biggest games? (gamescom, Phil Spencer, Rise of the Tomb Raider)

Alternative Sources
« 1 2 »
vishmarx  +   541d ago | Well said
You have exclusives that are made in house.

You have exclusives, like the recent Sunset Overdrive, where the developer gets to keep control of their product, so staying on one system makes sense.

You have exclusives, like Bayonetta 2, where one of the big companies helps fund the game which would have never been made otherwise.

With all of these I have no problem buying the game and is the reason I own all the major systems.

Then you have crap like this where one company pays to keep the game off other systems. This is complete anti-consumer shit. This is not helping the gamer. This is not creating exciting content for your fans. This is not making me want to support your company by hiring the most talented artist in the industry and giving them a chance to wow me. This is 100% complete mafia bullshit of taking out all competition and leaving me one single choice
jackanderson1985  +   541d ago
you should really read the article
sonarus  +   541d ago | Well said
why? so we can pretend this wasnt microsoft throwing money at square enix? Lets pretend its about relationships:D

Hey money doesnt make the world go round. Love makes the world go round. If you believe that then maybe you've been watching too much my little pony
johndoe11211  +   541d ago | Well said
Did YOU read that article??? That article is filled with so much pr bullsh!t my brain almost fried. None of the excuses he gave made a lick of sense and some of them even contradict each other. His answers were a joke and NOTHING he says would make anyone think anything other than Microsoft is a money hatting anti-consumer gaming industry destroying parasite. Maybe you need to read the bloody article again.
johndoe11211  +   541d ago | Well said

You know, not only have I been gaming since the 1970's but iv'e been involved in the computer field for a pretty long time too and what a lot of people here and in the gaming industry don't realize is that this is what microsoft does with EVERYTHING.

Microsoft never competes, microsoft buy's out. When ever a company comes out with a great product. Microsoft never says "hey lets's go develop a product of our own and go compete", no, they would either buy out that company or it's closest competitor. MOST of microsoft software was acquired this way.

In fact I will go out on a limb and say that you can probably count the amount of software that microsoft developed themselves on 10 fingers. This is what they do. They have done it since the beginning and they will continue to do it in every thing they touch. Hence the reason I have said and will continue to say that microsoft is the bane of the gaming industry.

That is NOT the type of mentality we need in gaming, that type of mentality will destroy gaming. The more I think about them the less inclined I feel to support them. They thrive off of anti-consumer practices and they have no idea how to do it otherwise.
jackanderson1985  +   541d ago | Well said
nobody is denying MS gave SE something... hell he admits they did.

It's about the reasoning behind it. Everyone knows SE has unrealistic targets for AAA games... MS are paying something (most likely advertisement and promotions) to keep the associated costs down with the game... rather than opt for some timed DLC, MS went for timed exclusivity

and PR bullsh**... he states outright they don't own the IP and the owners can do what they want with it... he even highlights Ryse and DR3 as examples of this.

Also he doesn't need to go into the deal breakdown because that's bad for business it's common sense... you don't share unnecessary details unless both parties agree and it's beneficial in some sense.

He also stated the reason is because MS don't have an action adventure game to compete against UC4... TR is it's UC4 for the period involved
nX  +   541d ago | Well said
Vishmarx is completely right and he most probably read the article, there is no excuse for this deal. Maybe you should rethink your principles as this is not a good way of making business. They have more than enough money to build own IP's but instead they buy out franchises, wtf man?

Also Spencer gets pretty pissy during the interview when asked about the duration, I hope he realizes how much damage he has done. I for one will not support these kind of deals (just like I never bought a CoD mappack or microtransaction), I don't want gaming to become like that - it would be bad for all of us, you included!
#1.1.5 (Edited 541d ago ) | Agree(64) | Disagree(25) | Report
uptownsoul  +   541d ago
All I got out of this is that Microsoft doesn't own many IP's. And because of that they have to spend money to keep games off competing platforms. From a strictly business perspective, I don't know how Microsoft can make money this generation since third parties are going to drive up the price of exclusivity based on increasing price of making AAA games; the growing install gap.
#1.1.6 (Edited 541d ago ) | Agree(56) | Disagree(13) | Report
NewMonday  +   541d ago

"This is not helping the gamer. This is not creating exciting content for your fans"

well said!

sad for XB1 owners because they gain absolutely nothing from this, in-fact they lose funding for a potential game just because MS wanted to temporary keep a game away from other platforms.

MS just proved they never change their policy, just momentarily delay them, and they will always go back to old habits whenever they have the advantage.

PS4 owners will play the game anyway after a few months, they will be busy playing Uncharted 4 to notice Tomb Raider is missing.
#1.1.7 (Edited 541d ago ) | Agree(72) | Disagree(24) | Report
choujij  +   541d ago | Well said
This is why they're a cancer in this market. Rather than putting the money into creating more games for their own platform and userbase, they would rather spend it on keeping games away from other gamers for a duration. That's a lose-lose situation.

As a 360 owner since launch day, I will no longer support this company or their practices.
InTheLab  +   541d ago
I read it and in the article, Phil compares this situation with Dead Rising and talks up how they turned that into a major franchise, and it's probably the dumbest most Matrick-like thing he's said so far.

TR is a legendary franchise that has had a few bumps, but is nothing like Dead Rising, PvZ, Ryse, or any other small time franchise that MS has paid for. It's a stupid comparison and only muddled the points Phil was trying to make. TR being exclusive does not make it a more notable franchise no matter how many marketing dollars gets thrown out there....

I can appreciate him saying they straight up paid for the game and that Sony was presented with the same opportunity. I appreciate him saying he wouldn't go out and buy a sci-fi shooter (which is a lie...Titanfall) because he already has one of that genre. Lie or not, at least he owned up to it.

But what bugs me the most about his interview is his attitude that this is good for anyone but Xbox in the short term. All this does is prevent more fans from getting the game in a reasonable amount of time.
LordMaim  +   541d ago | Well said
What's kind of interesting/funny is that the companies that Microsoft cites as having made similar deals with in the past (Crytek for Ryse, Capcom for Dead Rising) are both having money problems in spite of, or possibly as a result of their deal. Now both games are going multiplatform anyhow.

Sounds like it should be a cautionary tale for Square Enix.
fermcr  +   541d ago | Well said
I find most of these fanboy comments funny and stupid.

Doesn't matter how you put it, with all the justifications and excuses you want...

EXCLUSIVE means that a company PAYS A DEVELOPER to keep their game OUT of other platforms and exclusive to THEIRS. Simple as that.

Sony/Nintendo/Microsoft do it.

All of a sudden people are "shocked" because Microsoft did it. Stupid fanboys.
#1.1.11 (Edited 541d ago ) | Agree(29) | Disagree(72) | Report
LeCreuset  +   541d ago

For what? I did, and I can say that most of it was excuse making about not wanting to invest in marketing a game appearing on other platforms. That rationale is easily defeated when you consider other AAA games like COD and Destiny, which conventional wisdom says will do more to move Xbox and PS systems, respectively, than this timed exclusive TR deal will do for XB1.
LeCreuset  +   541d ago
Here's the TL;DR of the article: We haven't invested enough in creating 1st party content so we have to money-hat 3rd parties.

"Do I wish I had an owned IP first-party action adventure game? Absolutely. But I don't right now."

"Totally. I'm a big fan of Uncharted and I wish we had an action adventure game of that ilk. We've started some, and we've looked at them. But we don't have one today of that quality. This is an opportunity."
DragonKnight  +   541d ago
I find that Phil Spencer tried to be as honest as he could about Microsoft's intentions in this interview, but it also paints them as a company that doesn't try very hard when it comes to creating their own IPs. They'd rather buy someone else's games than make their own.

I also find it telling how, on more than one occasion, he tries to throw CD or SE under the bus by implying that either SE came to them with a deal (leaving the idea of if they went to Sony and were turned down, or just went to MS first and weren't turned down completely open), or CD has been actively pursuing a relationship with Microsoft for 5 years and no one is saying why.

It's sad he mentions games like Dead Rising or Ryse because they're nothing like the situation with Tomb Raider. In the cases of both of those games, Microsoft may not own the IP but they may as well because they paid for the game or franchise to be created and they continue to pay for the game or franchise to remain off other platforms. At least for a time.

Many people have already said it. Microsoft should be using the money they have to CREATE new IPs. Actually COMPETE with Sony and Nintendo in that arena and give Xbox One owners a reason to keep their Xbox One. Not buy timed exclusivity and piss off millions of other users, while telling Xbox One fans that they can't be bothered to make their own IPs and that the IPs they buy will just end up on other, better platforms anyway.

Phil is doing a better job than the previous Xbox execs were, but he's still mired in that overall Microsoft "buy everything out" attitude. And if people don't think that that's a bad thing, just have a conversation with Rare.
badz149  +   541d ago
seriously, why are we still talking about this? the game is timed exclusive, end of story, no?

the case is simple. MS needs something huge and what other things bigger than acquiring a 3rd party exclusive? so, they got their hands on the best thing they could get at the moment which is TR because I don't think any other major publisher would want to have a smaller market for their already successful IP or there aren't any other IP that can make a similar impact. SE saw it as an opportunity to cut on spending and they took it with condition that it's timed.

I don't really see a problem unless they buy the IP altogether. it's still a multiplat but will just come later to other platforms but the way I see it, it's SE's loss. the game won't come out for another one and a half year while many other games will be released before it and in the end, TR's absence on the other platform won't be missed much. I doubt it will make any impact considering there are a lot heavy hitters on the way which will be bigger than TR could ever be!
Godmars290  +   541d ago
"He also stated the reason is because MS don't have an action adventure game to compete against UC4..."

Given that they've been in the gaming industry for as long as they have, do they really have any excuses as to why they don't have anything similar to UC themselves?
FamilyGuy  +   541d ago
At the end he basically just stated that they wanted something on their platform that would be a direct competitor to Uncharted 4 in that games release window. Thing is, it was already a multi-platform title so they were going to have it anyway. All they did was pay to restrict access on other platforms.

In the past we had the multi-platform title Prototype go up against the exclusive Infamous. They were similar games, to a degree, that released at similar times. There was no need and never has been a need to restrict access like this.

MS needs to build their own games, buying exclusivity on an *established* *multi-platformed* title is dirty. I don't even care about Tomb Raider, this is just a dirty tactic in general, no matter what game it is.

Example: If Sony bought exclusivity on Just Dance, CoD, Battlefield, Need For Speed, Mass Effect, Street Fighter, etc it would be the same issue. MS is HURTING the games industry.
Consoldtobots  +   541d ago
OMG it's tomb freakin raider people, WHO CARES????

I know I don't
u got owned  +   541d ago
Ok people stop with the whining and move on. What are we, 10 years old kids? The game is timed exclusive. You'll get to play it on your console of choice soon enough after it releases on XBO.

Can we please move on to other things, this is getting really old.
gangsta_red  +   541d ago
I love how this is still an issue!!

Not too long ago Sony fanboys yelled and screamed that MS had no exclusives. Now that MS is getting exclusive Sony fanboys are now screaming about the way MS is acquiring them.

You know what...

Nothing MS does will satisfy the Sony fanboys and if you think about it...why should it, since they'll just continue to throw out the most insane reasons as to why this exclusive deal for Tomb Raider is such a travesty and blight on the gaming community.

I swear it's beyond funny. One minute Sony fanboys have too many exclusive games to play the next they are fighting mad because they can't play ONE game.

Which is it...are their too many or not? Make up your minds!
DevilOgreFish  +   541d ago
Evidently to many people, this is a major part of the franchise which many seem to care about. Tomb Raider Lost artifact was a PC exclusive 14 years ago, and i could remember none caring two hoots about it as we slowly entered the 128 bit generation.

Had this game not sported next gen visuals, or been a sequel to a defunct reboot; I don't think many would have made such a fuss about it.
GUTZnPAPERCUTZ  +   541d ago
AngelicIceDiamond  +   541d ago
I guess Phil Spencer's evil now.

Spencer said from the very beginning hes gonna do whatever it takes to get games and content to X1.

Phil's getting serious and its no telling what else hes gonna do in the future.

Anybody would know by reading this interview knows he answering in the best way possible. For a PR point of view anyway.

He can't flat out say "yes I underhandedly money hatted the game"

Or any of that fashion what else do you want the guy to say?

He's keeping it professional. Phils a really outgoing guy and will discuss anything improptu fashion. But when it comes to business acquisition's obviously he can't say OUTRIGHT what happened.

Phil knows we're not dumb. He knows that we know its money hat.

But Phil kinda works for a buissness and working for a buissness means you have to feed us that usual PR wall.
#1.1.23 (Edited 541d ago ) | Agree(4) | Disagree(22) | Report
Eddie20101  +   541d ago
Phil Spencer is becoming the biggest BS machine at Microsoft.
LeCreuset  +   541d ago

No, not evil. But he's looking less and less like the revolutionary, anti-Mattrick he was being hyped as. He knows what the problem is. He identified it in this interview when he says he wishes they had a game like Uncharted to roll out instead of buying a multiplat. But he still did it.

It's not like there's much disagreement here. His argument admits to what MS is being accused of by its critics. He just tries to justify it. That's where the disagreement comes in. He's taking the easy road for immediate results, much like his predecessors, at the expense of developing first party content.

Big retail releases, so far.




Dead Rising
Titan Fall

Big retail releases, so far, minus 3rd party:




#1.1.25 (Edited 541d ago ) | Agree(16) | Disagree(5) | Report
DragonKnight  +   541d ago | Well said
@Angelic: The difference is that Tomb Raider was already coming to the Xbox One anyway. Phil was aggressive in ensuring it didn't come to the PS4 and PC. That's not getting the Xbox One games, it's taking games away from everyone else that you would have been able to play anyway.

If Phil is serious about games, then why isn't he putting that money into first party studios? What happened to all of that money that was allegedly invested in first party exclusive titles?

If anything, this move is of final benefit to Sony. Why? Because Sony demands that timed exclusive games from other platforms gain some kind of improvement on their platform when it eventually releases so as to be a game worth the money of PS gamers. Also, it means that Uncharted 4 will have no competition and likely gain even more sales due to that factor.
AngelicIceDiamond  +   541d ago
@Creust Games coming soon and in the future

Fable Legends, Halo MCC and Halo 5,Rares new project Crack down reboot Phantom Dust, Ori And the blind forest, Killer Instinct, Forza and Project Spark Gears Of War and Screamride.

They have there own Ips obviously. I think MS is working with 3rd party to release games while strengthening on its first party offerings.

I give up bring logic here is so damn pointless is frustrating...

@Dragon have it ever crossed your mind that Don Mattrick sat on his ass last gen? Turning Rare into a Kinect Studio and depriving them of there talent? What happend to Kameo Elements of power 2? Oh that's right canceled because Kinect was invented. Fable a Kinect game? Come on...

Last gen he didn't invest in his own studios because well Halo and Gears were making them all the money. Therefor he sat there and didn't do a a damn thing 1st party wise or turned everything into a Kinetic studio.

Phil is cleaning up his giant mess when it comes to first party. You would think after all this years Their first party studios would be stronger when X1 was introduced. But nope last management didn't do his job nor didn't he care to.

Its not his fault first party is still falling behind.

So cut Phil some slack.
#1.1.27 (Edited 541d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(20) | Report
ABizzel1  +   541d ago
So much BS, the smell is stuck in my head.

Honestly it's shady business, and all around foul of MS, but business is business as they say.

The main people we need to have interviews with are Square and Crystal Dynamics. At the end of the day it was up to them to say Yes or No.
#1.1.28 (Edited 541d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(4) | Report
ShinMaster  +   541d ago
@ AngelicIceDiamond

Tomb Raider was already coming out to Xbox One anyway. This does nothing for his or Microsoft's image or for Xbox' first party line up.
He didn't bring a new game to Xbox by doing so. He just made it exclusive.

This makes no sense. Square Enix says that sales of TR were underwhelming and that it was only profitable once they released it across 5 different platforms, including the PS4 which sold double the amount of copies of the Xbox One.

So it makes absolutely NO SENSE for Square Enix to make it exclusive to the least profitable platform.

Phil Spencer needs to quit the "relationship" BS. It was a huge check. If you can't outright say it, then don't say anything.
#1.1.29 (Edited 541d ago ) | Agree(6) | Disagree(1) | Report
choujij  +   541d ago
@DragonKnight, LeCreuset & Shinmaster

I wouldn't bother with him. He's an Xbox fanboy masquerading as a neutral gamer:
Jun 15, 2014 ·

"Shenmue 3 PLEASE!! If MS makes it happen then there is no console war. The win would belong to MS."

The irony is, Shenmue 3 is a perfect example of a game that lacks funding, which could be published by MS.

It's unfortunate that some fanboys would rather ignore the facts and argue defending shady moves, such as the TR one.

I for one am glad Spencer is already showing his true colors. It reaffirms my decision to no longer support that platform.
#1.1.30 (Edited 541d ago ) | Agree(6) | Disagree(3) | Report
Pogmathoin  +   541d ago
Again, does MS have an obligation to explain to sony fanboys? People spoke with the PS4.... Now MS is in catch up mode.... What do you expect?? They need to do this, whether or not it is a good/bad thing....
Gaming101  +   541d ago
While the deal may be pissing off a lot of non X-bone gamers, it's capitalism. Microsoft decided to throw money at Square Enix for exclusivity since they don't have an adventure game to compete with Uncharted 4, which will undoubtedly be the Adventure game of the year when it releases. From a gamer standpoint it may suck, but Sony may not be worried about it because if Uncharted 4 comes out alongside Tomb Raider, having TR come out on PS4 as well will likely detract from U4 sales since it's the same genre, and lets face it the last Tomb Raider pretty much ripped off Uncharted and Batman Arkham Asylum's game design, so a lot of people aren't likely to buy both TR and U4 in the same release window.

This is why I don't care, and neither should anyone else. U4 will dominate, I'll get TR the few months later or whenever it is that it comes out. No skin off my back!
Petebloodyonion  +   541d ago
Like usual PPL. we hear the same complaint from the fans
about how MS are evil for every actions they make.
Yet Sony deny Destiny in Japan and nobody complains.

Heck Phil's evil cause he spitting Pr Bulls regarding the duration of the exclusivity But HEY!!! Sony's boss won't comment about if the game is time or full exclusive in Japan and he's ok!

Now let's all your raging hormones and analyse the situation for 1 min.

Heck Square has been vocals about how they weren't happy with TB's sales in the past and there's a reasons for it and it's call lack of hype and exposure.
You can blame MS for lots of thing but there's one thing they really excel at and it's marketing.
Something TB is sorely lacking.
so yeah MS can push this game as a AAA Uncharted killer and it might compete.
And honestly I love Uncharted but TB is in the same class too.

And remember, Sony would surely advertise and hype a direct competitor to one of it's main franchise.
#1.1.33 (Edited 541d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(6) | Report
mixolydian_id  +   541d ago
Seeing so many rage about this is hilarious.

Sony made Tomb Raider fully exclusive to Playstation for a decade.

Hypocrisy at it's finest!

Like or dislike this!

Final Fantasy from 7-10... following years of other platforms
Metal Gear Solids

It's a timed exclusive! What about Destiny's DLC?

I say "Grow up" to the teens of N4g, that haven't a clue!
#1.1.34 (Edited 541d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(2) | Report
Funantic1  +   541d ago
How's this different from Dead Rising 3 being exclusive? Sony fans should just demand their own exclusive version of Tomb Raider.
#1.2 (Edited 541d ago ) | Agree(13) | Disagree(55) | Report | Reply
IHassounah  +   541d ago
So PC fans could still be treated badly ? this deals is bs at it's finest.
johndoe11211  +   541d ago
You are just as delusional and clueless as phil spencer to think that its only sony fans complaining about this. This just goes to show how out of touch and clueless microsoft is when it comes to the gaming industry. T
LeCreuset  +   541d ago
Not to say that I'm completely fine with the DR3 deal, but are you really trying to draw a false equivalency between an eight year old franchise, just seeing its second console gen, that launched exclusively on 360 releasing a sequel exclusively on XB1 more than three years after the last iteration to an eighteen year old franchise, going into its fourth console gen, that debuted on multiple systems, that has made most of its money on PS releasing a sequel to a game they hyped as a reboot of the franchise and sold to PS gamers as recently as this year on PS4, which sold less on Xbox, as an XB1 exclusive?

That people weren't as upset at MS for the DR deal is evidence that this isn't just some hysterical hate for MS at play.

The only situation remotely comparable to this deal that I could imagine would be The Phantom Pain going exclusive after having released Ground Zeroes on multiple consoles.
lawgone  +   541d ago
John've been gaming since the 70's and you still behave this immaturely? Grow up man. Every console has it's exclusives. Why are you whining so much about this? Besides, it's just Tomb Raider.
castillo  +   541d ago
Come on you know you weren't going to buy it unless it was on sale or cheap, because like many of those that complained your heart and minds are set on supporting Uncharted 4 before anything released.
InTheLab  +   541d ago
So Uncharted comes along and suddenly, people hate Lara? And God of War comes along so to hell with Devil May Cry. And LBP,Ratchet,Sly comes along so who cares about Rayman. And Resistance and Killzone come along so forget Battlefield and CoD. And inFamous shows up so forget about Prototype. And since there's Gran Turismo, forget about NFS, Project Cars, and every racer out there.

That's the thing here. Sony has a answer to every major genre out there unlike MS and Nintendo but unlike MS and Nintendo gamers, we don't stop buying games simply because we have an exclusive for that.

No gamer in there right mind turns down more games.

And let's forget both version of TR sold better on Playstation while we're at it...
Why o why  +   541d ago
Lol....the last TR sold well on the ps3...wouldn't be surprised if it sold the same or more than it did on the 360 I know the ps4 version oustold the x1 version. Ps3 gamers just had the option of both just like they did for most games last gen... dantes inferno was a blatant gow clone yet it too sold well and to be fair it was a solid game that I enjoyed.

Basically your point is weak and lazy
#1.3.2 (Edited 541d ago ) | Agree(14) | Disagree(0) | Report
Ashlen  +   541d ago | Well said
For me it boils down to this: Microsoft can't sell more consoles than Sony with just their own hardware, games and reputation, so they're just going pay to hinder Sony as much as they can. Basically, they're sore losers.
#1.4 (Edited 541d ago ) | Agree(72) | Disagree(16) | Report | Reply
johndoe11211  +   541d ago | Well said
That basically sums it up. "Let's just try and stagnate the gaming industry a bit because we're getting our a$$es kicked".
BG11579  +   541d ago
At this point, I believe that Phil is showing is truth colors and nothing more. Those explanations are Don Matrick level. The move is Don Matrick level. The only thkng different is the reaction. It took them less than a day to react to the bad press.
k3rn3ll  +   541d ago
No SE can't sell enough games so they pitched to both platform holders this deal. And MS bit as they should have
cee773  +   541d ago
Don't forget PC as well Microsoft waged war against both of it platforms with rotr 🐸☕
#1.4.4 (Edited 541d ago ) | Agree(10) | Disagree(0) | Report
johndoe11211  +   541d ago

And exactly what proof do you have of that theory?
LiQuiZoN  +   541d ago
Genius Commment.

Completely sums it up.

Look at how Sony recovered last gen. They pushed Exclusives, In-house, Unique etc... They took the RISK in investment into new IP and it payed off. This isn't even a new concept. Sony has done this since PS1. Aquire 1st party devs, work closely with developers to produce games THEY FUND etc...

Microsoft is and always has been a parasite on the gaming industry. Nothing new here, but atleast lets all admit it.

For those who wish to support such business practices then by all means continue, but you aren't actually helping yourself. (although paying to play online XBL) should of told you that but since you payed for that you allowed a new anti-consumer industry standard to come in the place of free online as well.

You are only hurting yourselves.
HugoDrax  +   541d ago
For me this says it all, and clearly shows it will eventually be released on Windows PC, but not PS4. Look at this statement...

"I'm not trying to push gaming down on any other platform. Clearly, I'm not going to invest in something to make games great on other platforms. Windows stuff I will. But not on stuff on other consoles. That's 101."

It's business, and MONEY is what business is all about.
callahan09  +   541d ago
"Crystal has been investing in that game and Square has as well, in Tomb Raider as a franchise, and wanting to put it at the highest level, with the big triple-A franchises out there, but that's expensive."

Here's what I'm getting out of Spencer's long-winded explanation (don't take that wrong, I'm glad he gave so much about how this happened): Tomb Raider (reboot) was extremely expensive to produce to get it to "AAA caliber". The game didn't make as much money as is needed to justify that expense. They WANT to continue making Tomb Raider as a AAA experience, but they aren't confident that they'll get a return on their investment based on the first one. Therefore Microsoft is putting a lot of money towards the investment of this game.

This is how it's smart of Square-Enix. They don't need to invest as much into the game, so it doesn't matter that the sales will be smaller by being on just one platform. They already expected sales to not be big enough, apparently. By doing this, they actually get a higher return on investment, because their investment is smaller, and they'll sell more on XBox as an exclusive than they would as a multiplatform title. If later on it can come out on PlayStation and on PC, then it's a no-brainer.

Now, I'm not so sure it makes as much sense from Microsoft's perspective... I think they were banking on people being excited about it being exclusive to Xbox, maybe even making it a system seller. But they didn't think it through all the way.

This backlash should have been predictable. People perceive this as the worst kind of money-hatting, and PlayStation & PC fans who have been playing the franchise since game 1, they are upset about having their game removed from under their noses, and they are NOT planning to buy an Xbox to play it.

So it kind of backfires from a Microsoft publicity and system sales standpoint, but it definitely looks like this will be a net positive for Crystal Dynamics & Square-Enix from a return on investment point of view.
NewMonday  +   541d ago
so a game that will be coming to PS4 will be better now? thanks MS!

and also because of this Uncharted could make an extra 100 million for lack of competition, Sony owes them a big favor.
k3rn3ll  +   541d ago
It hasn't always been on pc. There was quite a few years where it wasn't because Sony did the same thing MS did. Honestly I wouldn't be surprised if Sony didn't buy it this time because SE and CD demanded a pc release later.
Imalwaysright  +   541d ago
It's the third time I'm gonna post this link. The game was profitable and met SE expectations.
whybag  +   541d ago
"By doing this, they actually get a higher return on investment, because their investment is smaller, and *they'll sell more on XBox as an exclusive than they would as a multiplatform title*."

How do you figure it will sell more as solely on XBox? Unless you meant that will EARN more because the MS money will offset the lost Playstation revenue, that's a discussion that could have merit.

But as has been mentioned, the new TR line sells convincingly better on Playstation. They also run the risk of poisoning the well when they do release on Playstation, because of gamers that may remember the timed delay.
come_bom  +   541d ago
"... one company pays to keep the game off other systems..."

You are completely full of crap. That's WHAT exclusive means. You can go around and around being offended and moaning, trying to justify that some companies do it differently then others, but basically exclusive means that a company pays a developer to keep their game out of other systems, and keep it exclusive to their system. Sony does it. Nintendo does it. If Microsoft does it you get offended?... simply because it's not your company of choice.

Fanboys!!! * facepalm and shakes head *

Microsoft where smart enough to get Tomb Raider timed exclusive... but dumb enough not to keep it a complete exclusive. Exclusive sell consoles, not timed exclusives.
#1.6 (Edited 541d ago ) | Agree(9) | Disagree(38) | Report | Reply
DragonKnight  +   541d ago
No one is paying $400 for one game unless they have more money than sense. Tomb Raider won't be a system seller.
Spotie  +   541d ago
The point you and other xbox fanboys are trying hard to ignore is that there's a MASSIVE difference between investing money into building your OWN exclusives, and buying exclusivity of a preexisting IP.

Bloodborne was never a multiplat. It's not the same. Destiny is only DLC. Not the same. The closest is Dreamfall Chapters, and even still, that game doesn't have the history or strength of a franchise like Tomb Raider (and I'm not certain what consoles it's been on in the past).

According to you guys, Microsoft has all this money that they can toss around, while Sony will be bankrupt in a year. Why is it, then, that Sony is taking all the risks, while Microsoft plays it safe?
HanzoHattori  +   541d ago
I completely agree with you...
The Xbox Division as a whole isn't doing very well...
Xbox studios are shutting down...
Not very many new, FIRST PARTY Xbox IP's coming down the pipeline...
This move reeks of desperation and attention whoring...
Quicktim3  +   541d ago
So what you're saying vishmarx, is microsoft should just help fund development for no reason and keep it on all platforms. ya that makes a lot of sense.

Square Enix has said they weren't happy with the return investment of Tomb Raider. They also said they didn't like how you make no profit while the game is in long development. No one was hardly talking about Tomb raider before this.

So tell me, what should Square Enix have done? They weren't making enough profit on the franchise. They could invest less money and make it into it a half baked game I guess?

Or they could partner with Microsoft, have them fund development and advertise the game. Microsoft gets a decent exclusive, SE gets better profits. Its a win win.

Yes you could argue the whole gamers lose out thing. But if you really want to get mad, get mad at the industry as a whole. Sony did the same thing to keep TR off Sega and Nintendo systems. They've also done it with various other titles.

Yes it sucks, but its the way it is now. And I understand why people are mad and they certainly should be. My problem is the people who are getting mad at just microsoft while supporting Sony being complete hypocrites.
vishmarx  +   541d ago | Well said
Microsoft brings nothing to this industry other than dump trucks of money. They're in the video game industry for all the wrong reasons. Making and selling video games is a secondary part of the business model and that has been the case from day one. Originally it was a Sony denial tactic. As Sony fell on hard times and the X360 emerged as a successful product they used XBL to turn it into a marketing push where their real customers were advertisers and games were just the gateway to get people in the door looking at all the ads.
The XB1's original concept took this to the next level planning to have Kinect effectively mining data from within our homes while we lived around the system. Obviously the blow back was too great to continue that little project, but that was the original intent and Microsoft stated as much during a conference for their advertising partners.

Instead of this (which probably cost them $50M or better), Titanfall (which also likely cost them $50M or better) the stated NFL deal at $400M, and buying the Gears IP from Epic (likely a solid $50-$100M price tag) Microsoft could have funded over a half dozen of the biggest, most expensive AAA exclusives EVER.
They gave the NFL more money for a fantasy football app than Take 2/Rockstar spent on Grand Theft Auto 5. LET THAT SINK INTO YOUR HEAD when you excuse their lack of first party studios as "doing business"
Sure you don't build a first party stable overnight, but in MS' case when they hell are they going to start?
Forza is the only new IP they've generated and maintained worth a s*** in their entire time as a console first party. Everything else was bought, mismanaged, and typically shuttered.
Buying their way into the industry with the Xbox with Bungie, Lionhead, etc. is one thing. Sure, you need meaningful exclusives and that was the fastest way to get them. They've been in the console business for nearly 13 years now though. The proof is in the pudding. Microsoft has never shown a commitment to developing their own legitimate first party stable. They closed much of what they did start with the Xbox during the X360 generation because Sony's failure to deliver with PS3 allowed them to pick off former exclusives and have a comparable 3rd party library at a lower price, so they weren't needed. The only significant reinvestment they've ever shown in software development was for Kinect, which they've now pulled back on nearly completely as well.
#1.7.1 (Edited 541d ago ) | Agree(16) | Disagree(5) | Report
Quicktim3  +   541d ago
@vishmarx "Microsoft brings nothing to this industry other than dump trucks of money. "

so what you're saying is they shouldn't have copied Sony? cause they're one of the first ones to start this buying exclusives thing.

I do agree with your next part though. They started to invest more on entertainment features then games the last couple years. But a lot of that has to do with Don Mattrick who was a bonehead. and that guys gone. So to continue to harp on them about that is unreasonable.

And again a lot of what you complain about was in the Don Mattrick era. True they could have probably put more effort into their first partys. But Phil has said that's what they're going to focus on now. However you still need to make partners in the industry. Both Sony and Microsoft are funding devs to make their games exclusive on their system. They're doing it all the time. What me to list all the games Sony has made exclusive from third party devs?

And again about this Tomb Raider deal. If you look at Microsoft first party exclusives they have.

Racing - Forza
FPS - Halo
Shooter - GOW
RPG - Fable
Fighting - Killer Instinct
Adventure - ??????

they're still missing that AAA adventure game. And Phil has said they've looked at trying to get one, but none have come up yet. So for now he worked out a deal with SE, keep in mind they wanted this, people shouldn't be blaming Microsoft at all. Sony would have done the same thing. For some reason SE didn't like their return investment on the game. Why they thought selling 7m copies of the game a failure is beyond me lol.
#1.7.2 (Edited 541d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(10) | Report
kenshiro100  +   541d ago
You seriously can't believe the crap you wrote there.
-Foxtrot  +   541d ago
Well Said

However he wants games like Uncharted which is why this has most likely happened

So instead of making it themselves they got a third party game as a timed exclusive instead

Phil is such a bullshit liar...honestly he's the best liar at Microsoft.
#1.8 (Edited 541d ago ) | Agree(16) | Disagree(5) | Report | Reply
Godmars290  +   541d ago
Which is why I've been so perplexed that he's been held as the savior of the Xbox.

Or rather, since he was there when all the bad choices were made, helped to defend and cover them up, how, at the very least, was he ever considered to be an instant improvement?
Azzanation  +   541d ago
Do you know Sony dont make Uncharted, they own the company that makes Uncharted which going back afew years weren't even called Naughty Dog and were a 3rd party PC developer. Nintendo are the only ones that actually make there huge AAA games. Sony and MS get other studios to make them. Its no different if you own them or hire them, its the same thing.
LeCreuset  +   541d ago
He's a better politician than others they've put in front of the public. But when you look at the substance of what he's saying he's just as full of it as the rest.

"This whole thing that, like we just somehow found something that Sony fans love and said hey, if we just drop millions of dollars then they can't go play the game, that's not how it played out."

But that's exactly what they did! He's so full of it. He's trying to make it like they just so happened to want to invest in the marketing of this game — could have been any game — and incidentally, as a result, PC and PS TR fans are denied the game. No! They deliberately targeted a game whose fanbase was composed overwhelmingly of PS and PC gamers to coerce them into buying an Xbox by holding hostage a franchise they had been playing for nearly two decades. That's the same reason they were not forthcoming about the extent of the exclusivity of the deal until the PR backlash forced Phil to tell the truth. This deal, for a game Xbox was already getting, is worth nothing to MS if they can't present the illusion of exclusivity to leverage it against non-Xbox TR fans.


Read the interview. Phil talks about Uncharted and makes it clear they aren't the same thing, which is why this deal is happening in the first place.
#1.8.3 (Edited 541d ago ) | Agree(11) | Disagree(0) | Report
-Foxtrot  +   541d ago

Because people want to believe that he is the saviour.

All the things he is being praised for are things ANY PERSON would be doing if they took over Don Mattrick

Hell even if Don managed to hang onto his position he would be doing exactly the same thing to try and turn the company around.

These decisions and 180s aren't being done just because it's Phil Spencer they are just logical business decisions to get Microsoft and the Xbox One back in the good books with the gamers which will then boost Xbox One sales. They are doing want they NEED to do, not doing it for us.

If people wern't so blind and actual understood business corporations such as Microsoft then they'll see that Phil is just a puppet while the higher ups at the core Microsoft company are the ones pulling the strings. They were in a huge shitstorm, they needed someone gamers could easily trust and Phil was the best man for the job since he is the only one who actual plays on games. He would of NEVER got that job under normal circumstances.

It's his job to go out there, take credit, put on a smile and make himself look like this saviour so people will trust in Microsoft again

It's all part of a plan.

If the roles were reversed and MS had 10 million consoles sold Phil wouldn't be making such a big thing about the companies "gamer focus". Hell he probably would of slowly adding the stuff they revealed last year, bit by bit.
#1.8.4 (Edited 541d ago ) | Agree(5) | Disagree(4) | Report
DragonKnight  +   541d ago
@LeCreuset: "PR backlash forced Phil to tell the truth."

Seems to be a trend with Microsoft lately doesn't it? They only come forward with the truth when PR backlash gives them no other choice.

@Azzanation: Are you serious? First of all, a "few years" actually equates to almost 20. Naughty Dog's first game on PS consoles was Crash Bandicoot and that was in 1996. Naughty Dog was Jam Software prior to changing their name in 1989. That's 25 years as Naughty Dog.

Second, Nintendo owns studios that make their games for them. It's not Nintendo making all of their games at Nintendo HQ themselves.

That's a list of studios that Nintendo bought to make games for them.

So to say that Nintendo doesn't do what Sony has done in buying studios is just plain wrong.
RAWSTA  +   541d ago
And then we have idiots like you crying.
imt558  +   541d ago

Disagree votes means NO
Agree votes means YES

poor_cus_of_games  +   541d ago
If only I could disagree more. Hate that lying, smirking tosser.
Azzanation  +   541d ago
If Sony wanted the game so badly then they had there chances just like Titanfall. If Sony want to be lazy and just expect 3rd party games to appear on there console well this is a lesson learnt. If you hate that your purchase isnt living up to your dreams because of competition then sell it or trade it. Dont be a hater because MS were smart and took the opportunitys. MS are hungry, maybe Sony need to be as well.
BlackTar187  +   541d ago
What a deluded way to think.
BG11579  +   541d ago
By the same logic, if Microsoft wanted to sell more Xbones, they should have purchased better parts to put in the console. Microsoft want to be lazy and just expected that clients that wanted to buy their console would appear. Well this is a lesson learned.
Back-to-Back  +   541d ago
PS4 is the platform with the biggest audience. If devs want to crippled their sales then sure stay xbox. When they go out of business, they only have one person to blame........themselves.
dudeOplenty  +   541d ago
@Azzanation: On behalf of planet Earth... Stop.
beerzombie  +   541d ago
I'm glad they are buying, helping or doing what ever it takes.
#1.11.5 (Edited 541d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(1) | Report
VforVideogames  +   541d ago
Well said Spencer well said. And I quote "This wasn't an attack against anybody else. It was an opportunity that came up for us that fit really well.
#1.12 (Edited 541d ago ) | Agree(4) | Disagree(12) | Report | Reply
TKCMuzzer  +   541d ago
As a line "they were so quick to think that they could they never stopped to think if they should".

If you can't fund your own IP's and give your customers your own new games to play then get out of the industry.

There is no reason for me to buy an Xbox One, all the so called 'exclusives' (Titanfall etc) will make their way over, why? because the PS4 install base has now become to big for publishers to ignore, it's getting to the point where not even Microsoft can plug the hole of lost earnings if the games released on the PS4.

I know Microsoft paid for Titanfall but look at the install base of the PS4, they have sold 2 million on Xbox One, that could mean that EA have lost out on maybe 3-4 million sales on PS4, at $60 per sale, that's a lot of money and has probably surpassed what Microsoft paid for the rights.

Third Party deals are good for no one, no one takes full responsibility from start to finish and all you do is alienate sales, not only for that game but you fail to build a user base for any sequels.
andydalum  +   541d ago
So what sony did with the destiny expansions one year exclusive isn't the same thing. . . it's not like sony is above this.
TKCMuzzer  +   541d ago
Their not the same thing. You are not alienating people from playing the game, Xbox owners still get to play Destiny day one. Sony are not preventing the Xbox audience enjoying a third party game.

Plus, anyone who decides to buy a console based on DLC advantages, needs to have a word with themselves.
andydalum  +   541d ago
They have already announced that this is a timed exclusive. So again whats your point you'll have to wait longer to play big deal. If and this is a big if it never comes to ps4 or PC i would be shocked but back when sony had loads of cash they did buy some IP's and make them exclusive. I couldn't care less if it was exclusive for my xbone but to call our microsoft is stupid it's business that's all it is look into it and it always comes down to business.
alb1899  +   541d ago
some people here even said that this games doesn't matter anymore so why so much BS?
You guys cry too much, don't buy the game or buy an XONE and have the opportunity to buy that simple!
It is just business stop the cry, you guys are looking so bad!
MS is dark, they are cancer for the industry, they are mean......WTF!!!

all big companies buy what they need to compete!
how many technology companies has Apple buy.......ufff!

another thing......get use o it cause it will keep happening.
#1.14 (Edited 541d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(7) | Report | Reply
Mystogan  +   541d ago
"leaving me one single choice" isn't that what all exclusives are all about?

Also Phil needs to stop trying to reason with the PSfanboys. It was nothing but an attack on the PSfanboys and he should be proud. J Allard would have been laughing in every single PSfanboys face!

"What gets me out of bed and into the office every day is the thought of Ken Kutaragi’s resignation letter, framed, hanging next to my desk
" - J Allard
#1.15 (Edited 541d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(9) | Report | Reply
ITPython  +   541d ago
This timed exclusive deal is yet another reason why MS needs to get out of the gaming business. This deal is nothing more than MS being childish and essentially saying "Ha ha, we get it first and you have to wait" while sticking out their tongues with their fingers in their ears. This doesn't help gaming in the least, it doesn't offer anything extra or new... it's simply MS being a snobby rich brat withholding the game from other platforms because they are spiteful and want to hurt the competition in any way possible.

Sony beats the competition by offering a higher quality product and giving the customers what they want.

MS beats the competition by paying millions to sabotage and undermine their competition with any tactic they can.

Anybody notice the difference?

Company A tries to win by offering a better product than Company B.

Company B tries to win by hurting Company's A's product so their subpar overpriced product looks better by comparison.

Also with the timed exclusive deal, I think it goes without saying that MS has probably also paid for parity, and the PS4 version is going to be significantly held back and gimped so it doesn't look any better than the XB1 version.

MS really needs to get the heck out and sell off the Xbox brand to a respectable company, they do nothing but hold the gaming industry back and divide the communities.
Potnoodle999  +   541d ago
I couldn't ever have said it better! Very well said mate :D bubbles all round
BX81  +   541d ago
Lmao! You mad? Sony should've paid them enough money to promote their game like it should be. Sony, Nin could've done the same thing. For what ever reason they chose not to. Ms saw an opportunity and made it happen. What's the big deal? If you choose not to be a multi console owner that's on you. Sony/nin both have great games I can't play on xb1. Should I pout about it? No if I wanna play those games I'll go buy that system. That's the break ladies and gents.
#1.18 (Edited 541d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(3) | Report | Reply
CaptainObvious878  +   541d ago
Very well said, vishmarx.

What I find funny is this simple concept is going completely over the detractors' heads, and they continue to make excuses for ms. It's quite agitating to be honest.

And they continually focus on 'teh sony fanboyz!' when PC gamers are just as angry.
Kavorklestein  +   541d ago
So people are mad that he made Tomb Raider a timed exclusive?
He wasn't the only one involved in the deal, funny how so many people seem to forget or ignore that fact.
And ultimately, it's MORE of a shame on Square Enix for "turning their backs on Sony fans" than it is Phil for doing what he thinks is best for the Company he represents.

I have read SO many comments saying : "He's pissing people off because the Xbox one was going to get this game anyway!"

Well, let's dance with that for a second.

People (mostly Sony fans) are getting THIS upset over a game THEY are going to get ANYWAY?

I'm at a loss for words.

Timed exclusivity- Whether it be a game, or DLC is NOTHING compared to fully exclusive games or DLC.

This isn't Armageddon folks.
Now go a ahead, line up single file, and I'll change all your diapers, AND give you tissue boxes and tampons for this life altering mid-life crisis you're all going through.

I care about you guys!
I don't wanna see hypocrites going to bed with so much irksome tribulations on your minds!

Oh my gosh, we should Impeach Phil Spencer, and have him crucified because he's worse than Hitler!
No, wait!
We should have Sony and the devs who make no Man's Sky be given Immortal life, and supply them with unlimited virgins- and THEN we'll crucify Phil Spencer!!!

My sarcasm machine just broke giving you all that piece of deliciousness.

Grow up! If It's REALLY that big of a deal to you guys, why don't you get your AK-47's and Sniper Rifles and launch a full blown Assault on

Are you prepared to do that over some freaking video games/consoles/brand of entertainment?

I didn't think so.

It must be nice to know that you and all your fellow PS4 owning friends are willing to stoop to the same level of entitlement, immaturity, hypocrisy, anarchy, and insanity over TOMB RAIDER.

The maturity level in this comment section, and on this whole website has been at -9000 since November 15, 2013.

You guys REALLY know how to attract positive attention to yourselves. You guys REALLY make people want to play games on the same system as you. Keep the 10 million sold, I'd rather play with people who know how to not contradict themselves every 2 seconds.
You REALLY paint such noble pictures of yourselves, and yet, 90% of the time, you guys are the ones who look like you're still in a highchair with a bib on, and applesauce dripping down your faces.

#1.20 (Edited 541d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(2) | Report | Reply
hano  +   541d ago
All I hear is whining.

this is totally fair competition
quenomamen  +   541d ago
MS anti consumer ? I will hear no such talk and a good day to you sir !!
mmcglasson  +   540d ago
Dammit... I hit disagree instead of agree. My bad. You will get a bubble instead.
cigi  +   540d ago
Jesus crist where to start. First of all Sony has been doong the exact same thing even with TR, MGS, FF etc. Also let be clear - Sqwuare needs this to be an AAA game and want MS to help them get the most out of this game. As the Xbox one is a complete different thing this time around with DX12 comming - the best way to get a 1 hand on this is by colabotating with MS.

This is a transfer of knowledge as well as money of course. DX12 will be a game changer - and obvioursly Square have seen this and wants to be on that boat.And in reality this will just ensure that they can use all the tricks for xbox one like RYSE, FORZA - this is a winn if you are a real gamer. Beacuse you would have the systems that give you access to the greatest games.

I have both systems and i guess some of you just need to go that route as well. AND PLEASE stop this whining it is just pure hypocrazy. SONY is dooin this as well with The witness, bloodborne, No mans sky... so please just grow up - this is just lame.
The_Infected  +   541d ago

"Phil Spencer: Yes, the deal has a duration. I didn't buy it. I don't own the franchise."

So you're basically paying to keep it off of other platforms for who knows how long. The game as a series has been around for a ages giving it a huge fanbase outside of Xbox. So now everyone will have to suffer or get a Xbox One to enjoy the game unless you want to play the waiting game.
#2 (Edited 541d ago ) | Agree(40) | Disagree(9) | Report | Reply
gjruk  +   541d ago
"Now, obviously if I'm going to partner on it, I'm a platform holder, I'm hardly going to invest to go make the PlayStation version of any game. It is a business. So when we go invest with a partner on a big franchise, we're going to come with certain needs we have out of the relationship." Doubt it's coming to PS... most likely PC though.

Infact, I might be wrong...

"I don't own them building Tomb Raider on other platforms, so I'm just not the person to talk to. I can't talk about the franchise that way. I can talk about the deal I have.

So exactly what is the deal you have?

Phil Spencer: I have Tomb Raider shipping next holiday exclusively on Xbox."

That makes me think its exclusive just in 2015. I don't know, even as an xbox fan this is so confusing lol.
#2.1 (Edited 541d ago ) | Agree(22) | Disagree(3) | Report | Reply
jackanderson1985  +   541d ago
not really... SE has unrealistic expectations (they called the reboot a failure because it didn't sell enough) most likely down to costs... MS is helping with these costs (most likely advertisement and what not)... MS wanted something back from the deal so they got timed exclusivity rather than DLC stuff... They didn't fund the IP directly or buy it outright so if SE want they can release on PS4, PS3, Atari whatever they want
#2.1.1 (Edited 541d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(14) | Report
TimeSkipLuffy  +   541d ago
If they have the money and can afford things like that it only makes their customers happy. They will be the first to be able to play that game.

I am a huge PS4 fan and for me it was quite a shock because I believed it was a full exclusive but I would be happy if Sony would get this game for PS4 before X1 as well.
Therefore I could only congratulate my friends with X1s for their achievement and hope UC4 will kick their asses back :D
The_Infected  +   541d ago
No one should've got Rise of the Tomb Raider first period. The Tomb Raider series was 3rd party with fans across multiple platforms. No all fans other than Xbox fans have to wait it out and there's no telling how long that will be.
#3.1 (Edited 541d ago ) | Agree(26) | Disagree(12) | Report | Reply
TimeSkipLuffy  +   541d ago
Yes. That is why I was saying that MS did make their customer base happy which is a good thing for a company to do. If they do all they can to get exclusive deals for their customer base then it is a way to show that they are dedicated.
If I were a X1 gamer I would be very happy. If Sony would have done the same for PS4 I would be ultra happy to be able to play this first on PS4.
MichaelLito79  +   541d ago
Its a partnership to help fund the game but also to have great content on Xbox One. Phil job is to make the Xbox one the best p!ace to play games but as you can see from the article he didn't do it with the intention to pump up PlayStation owners he also did to help Crystal dynamics its expensive to create big IP's. As you can see from his examples with Ryse, DeadRising and Titanfall we should stand by a company that wants to help other companies out instead of wanting to bash.

Note he mentioned others had the opportunity to do the same and they didn't.
The_Infected  +   541d ago
"Its a partnership to help fund the game"

I highly doubt the game needed help funding. All this is about is pushing people who love the game to get a Xbox One.
#3.1.3 (Edited 541d ago ) | Agree(16) | Disagree(7) | Report
Godmars290  +   541d ago
They shouldn't have claimed as a full exclusive when it was only limited. Bad enough that they ere petty enough to go for timed exclusivity on a sequel, but then they compounded on that error by trying to insist the deal made was something it wasn't. Now they've been exposed, forced to backtrack and do damage control, and are messing that up because they don't understand what was done wrong in the first place.
Alsybub  +   541d ago
Sony had exclusivity over Tomb Raider for years, even though it started out as a multi platform title. When that deal ended they pursued their own first party alternative in Uncharted. I'm sure that at the time Saturn and PC owners were a little disappointed that Tomb Raider 2 didn't come to their platform. No one ever held that against Sony and rightly so.
Kane22  +   541d ago
you shouldn't be happy they did this crap. nothing good came from this. keeping a game away from others is a horrible thing to do. im not spending an extra $400+ just to play tomb raider. and that's what micro is hoping for. and for the record, no i don't care for hardly any micro exclusive game so far.
mcstorm  +   541d ago
@TimeSkipLuffy you are spot on. Yes Microsoft have paid to get some timed exclusives to the xbox platform over the last 10 or so years but they have also had to spend big to get some of the big name games Like GTA to their platform and you have to give it to them for wanting to make their platform the best place for their games giving them the biggest and best IP's. Im sure that Sony would also do the same if it was the other way round.
nX  +   541d ago
Sony invests in own IP's and studios, THAT'S what gamers should prefer. Not moneyhatting 3rd parties like there's no tomorrow. It's not about Tomb Raider in particular, it's about the practise itself. People hated it last gen for a reason and that hasn't changed until today.
Silly Mammo  +   541d ago
Yet Sony was given the opportunity by SE and they declined.
mcstorm  +   541d ago
@Bloodborn I get what you are saying but Sony has been in the console business a lot longer and im sure sony paid a lot of 3rd party's when they brought the PSX out. People also forget Phil is a new head of the xbox division and it will take a little time to get the new IP's out for the xbox one and will need some games like this to help fill the void until then.

I see Microsoft making lots of IP's under Phil as he seems to be turning things around for the xbox one and yes if I was a PS or PC gamer I would be miffed it was not out on my console 1st but I am a multi console owner and to me its not an issue.
DragonKnight  +   541d ago
@Silly Mammo: Nowhere in the article does it say that.
LeCreuset  +   541d ago

It should be an issue to you as an Xbox owner. Let's assume Phil really is trying to do things different and turn it around. What you say in your first paragraph is true. You can't just pop out IP's overnight. However, this deal is a game of diminishing returns, at the cost of the future, for immediate satisfaction.

Xbox didn't have to spend big to get GTA on 360. They spent half the development budget of GTA to get timed exclusive dlc on 360. Every time a deal like this is struck Xbox gamers lose an Uncharted, a TLOU, a GoW, a KZ, a Drive Club, an Infamous, etc. Meanwhile, like a drug addict, the more MS relies on these deals for survival the more costly they become.
Silly Mammo  +   541d ago
@Dragon- I stand corrected. I thought that I read that in one of the other articles. My mistake.
Jdoki  +   541d ago
"If they have the money and can afford things like that it only makes their customers happy. They will be the first to be able to play that game. "

How does this make their customers happy?

Would Xbox 1 owners be unhappy (or less happy) if they got to play the game on the same day as PC / PS4 owners?

If so, that's just sad.

Are any Xbox 1 owners more happy now that a traditionally multi-plat game is exclusive to their platform?

If so, that's sad too.

Nothing about this deal is intended to make XB1 fans happier, it is purely intended to keep the title off the competitors platform, and hopefully drive a few more sales - neither of which impact me, as an existing customer.

As an owner of both XB1 and PS4, I'll get to play the game anyway - but given the choice between MS paying for exclusivity, or investing that money in to 1st party IP, I know which would make me a happier customer.
isa_scout  +   541d ago
Hit the nail on the head. My problem with the deal is the same as yours. Phil says it should make Xbox owners happy....Why? Were they in danger of not being able to play it? MS spent an untold amount of money on a game that was already guaranteed to release on their platform. They money hatted a developer to NOT release a game on other platforms. I would've actually been fine with this deal if it had started with the first Tomb Raider reboot, but to release on other platforms and have a defintive addition on PS4 makes this all the worse. I blame MS for coming up with such an anti consumer deal, and Square Enix for accepting such a preposterous deal.
If Phil thinks that Crystal Dynamics can compete with Naughty Dog he's in for a very rude awakening as well. Honestly, I don't game on the PC, but I feel that people on the PC have an even bigger right to be pissed than us PS fans. At least we'll have UC4 around the same time as Tomb Raider launches to ease the sour taste in our mouths.If I was all of you PC guys I'd say F@$! You to MS and Square next holiday season, and skip out on Tomb Raider entirely.
NewMonday  +   541d ago

how is MS making it's customer base happy? they were getting the game anyway, they gained absolutely nothing other than texting a few "lol's".
rmw2hot87  +   541d ago
No offense but it's people like you that are causing most of this confusion. By not reading the article in it's entirety you are completely oblivious to what is being said. Ps4 owners will not be playing RotTR.
DragonKnight  +   541d ago
@rmw2hot87: Actually you're not getting it. What about PS4 owners not being able to play the game benefits Xbox One gamers? People who already own an Xbox One were getting the game anyway, so how does it benefit them to have PS4 gamers not get a game that Xbox One gamers were always going to get in the first place?

Does it make the game a better game? Does it make it more enjoyable? Does it make the game cheaper? Those would be benefits, none of them are happening.
iamnsuperman  +   541d ago
"Our partnership with Capcom around Dead Rising has been good for Dead Rising. We've been able to invest and to raise - maybe it's a bit egotistical - the notoriety of that franchise"

It has helped so much that a PC version is coming. The reason for the notoriety increase is misplaced. It was a launch title. Tomb Raider will not only not be that but nor is it releasing without huge competition even from the platform choice (Halo is coming around that time)

Titanfall was also a bad example. It hasn't sold that well for a major cross generational military shooter. It sold well on the Xbox One (for one platform) but almost non existent on other platforms.

"They've seen what we've done with certain games out there that aren't ours. Ryse is another IP. I don't own the Ryse IP, but I was able to invest with Crytek to turn it into a franchise"

Ryse was a colossal failure for Crytek. So much so that they are releasing a PC version and the company is in dire straights (the game was part of a problem but it didn't help Crytek being exclusive)
#4 (Edited 541d ago ) | Agree(24) | Disagree(7) | Report | Reply
Godmars290  +   541d ago
DR3 was a launch title that underperformed on the hardware. Had frame rate and tearing issues. Likewise Ryse, while advertised as graphical powerhouse, turned out not to be "all that".

So by those examples Spencer isn't giving good examples for his consoles. Just rattling off titles.
Torque_CS_Lewith  +   541d ago
People will always want what they can't have. This is why timed exclusive games "work" for businesses. RotTR will sell on One because of its raised status due to being exclusive.
isa_scout  +   541d ago
Didn't work out to well for Ryse or Dead Rising 3 though... If they owned the I.P or studio I could understand, but to pay millions for a game that will still release on other platforms later seems idiotic. No wonder MS is losing... Quit making stupid ass decision that make no sense.. Let's be honest hear people are any of you actually going to run out and buy a $400.00 machine for Tomb Radier? Yeah, didn't think so.
Kavorklestein  +   541d ago
People can't just think they know everything just because they want to downplay everything.

What worked or didn't for _____________
may or may not work for ________________

Success isn't just cut and dried all the time, and sometimes risks have to be taken, and sometimes people just want to watch something BURN so badly, that decisions so many Hypocrites WISH were made for Playstation, are mad that it's happening for xbox.

Look at Ea Access for example, it's value is Undeniable in an industry where games cost 60 bucks and work their way down from there as time goes on.

30 bucks for a year of 4 games GUARANTEED, with a growing library, and early access is awesome.

Yet people didn't see the value in it for a assortment of false reasons.

The real reason people didn't see value in it is because they can't partake of the the good deal even if they WANTED to, because the only people upset OR ignorant to the value, (even 5 bucks to play 4 games for a month is a good deal) were playstation fans.

This is the same.

Xbox one=Bad.

There is NO other issue, and NOBODY else is crying about it.

The "PC gamers" who are "mad" are just PS4 owners posing as PC gamers. They also use this tactic to deflect the Xbox one's exclusives by claiming that they can conveniently whip out DUAL Nvidia GTX Titans to play games they HOPE are coming to PC.

Yet, those same liars bought Watchdogs on PS4, or countless other multiplats on PC that would smoke console versions, but remember!

"Graphics ONLY matter when it's a opportunity to make the Xbox One look bad."

It's never okay to diss the PS4 version of a game for being inferior to PC-
But's it's Crucial AND Required to mention it when it's time to discuss the xbox one.

Nevermind the fact that the xbox one is GAINING on the Wii U's sales even though it's been out MUCH longer, never mind that people have preferences of their OWN.

It's Sony or nothing, because their fans are so worried that Sony's financial situation is hinting that Sony will soon BE nothing if their loyal fans don't rescue them and buy 5 PS4's per person.

I'm joking of course, but is my ridiculous rant not similar to the slime Sony trolls sling around everywhere?

Notice how with Sony fans Everything (except Sony) is evil? Everything everyone does (except Sony) is a conspiracy?

Sounds like some people are just afraid of a little healthy competition.
And timed exclusivity is just another way of showing that the Xbox one is here to stay, and confirms to fans that they don't need to worry about Microsoft throwing in the towel.

Let's just stop this crap already.
I seriously don't even care about any of it anymore. Anymore.

I'm just about ready to delete my N4G account because it's so pointless and stupid.
#5.1.1 (Edited 541d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(4) | Report
iceman06  +   541d ago
@Kavorklestein...I agree that there are some hypocrites...but they exist on both sides of the fence. I also believe that success isn't something that you catch in a bottle. It takes time to cultivate. But, what you are not seeing is that this discussion has a lot MORE to do with MS than it has to do with Tomb Raider.
Your "undeniable" value of EA Access also comes with the stripping of features and items that were previously free being placed behind that paywall as value. Look at the fact that, for the first time in at least 8 years, there will be no demo for Madden. (might not be YOUR game, but it's a hint toward intentions.)
It's naive to think that comparisons should be made between the PC version and the console version of any game. When we all know that the PC will win every time just because it's completely scalable.
Lastly, your comment about competition is partially right. Competition is good and warranted. But, I don't see this as "healthy". What is it doing to promote "healthy" competition. Promoting a spend to win mentality? So, when MS forces the hand of Sony to actually get into this practice, how is THAT healthy? Is it the silly assumption that MS has an unlimited bank account to spend what they want so they will win in the end?
Look, I get your frustration with N4G. It can be a haven for the most extreme of fanboy comments. It was like that in the 360 days and that lasted for about 4 years. I am NOT saying that turnabout is fair play. I am saying that it is what it is. There are a vocal group that want to laud praises on one console and ignore the things on the other. Fanboys happen. But, at the end of the day, fanboy or not. This decision doesn't do too much for anybody. It gives SE and CD a temporary reprieve at the cost of the considerable goodwill that they built with the last TR title. It gives MS something to brag about...that they were going to get anyway. All the while wasting money that could have been used on development of something that could be theirs forever. We've seen that the spend to win mentality can't last an entire generation. At the end of the 360's cycle, how many new games were available? It stagnated into just 3 or 4 games...great games...but the same titles. This mentality doesn't prove that MS is "here to stay", IMO it shows that risk is not a priority for MS. They'd rather buy up games to stifle the competition, than to put up their own IP and go head to head. It's business, and maybe good for the short term, but it's the long term that needs to be looked at.
trywizardo  +   541d ago
own the game phil and shut the pie-holes of those sony-trolls xD
when sony announced the hellblade exclusivity and that is just timed exclusive . no one said anything , when sony announced silent hell as a timed exclusive no one said anything , when MS announced TR as a timed exclusive everyone panicked
so up yours sony-trolls
TimeSkipLuffy  +   541d ago
not everyone is a troll. I'm a PS4 fan (simply because started with PS1 :D). I appreciate the afford Spencer did to get some exclusivity for their customer base! MS does have deep pockets. They can afford it. It's not that Sony couldn't do it. They spent a lot of money in Morpheus or PS Now. They just don't want to do business like that.
And that is why me and all other PS fans should just shut up and live with the company we choose with our console. If Sony does not care to get EA access or timed exclusive for a whole game instead of some DLC then this is what Sony is doing for their customers.

Once we get UC4 I will have a big grin again :D

To all PS fans:
I am not happy with the exclusivity but everyone that disagrees with me just show that they are PS fan and want to play this game on their console.
This a console war!!! Have you forgotten? I would have been happy if TR would have been exclusive to PS4 instead of X1. At least you could admit you would be laughing at the competition if it were the other way around. I would be so happy and thankful to Sony that I will be the first to be able to play it....
#6.1 (Edited 541d ago ) | Agree(5) | Disagree(31) | Report | Reply
Kane22  +   541d ago
so many things wrong with what you said/ but by all mean praise micro for stopping a game from going to other consoles. in hope said gamers go spend $400+ to play it. lol
BlackTar187  +   541d ago
" I would have been happy if TR would have been exclusive to PS4 instead of X1"


It's a 3rd party game xbox would have got anyways. This childsih nanana a bobobo 3rd grade menatlity is what is wrong with this industry. You wuld be happy just to take a game away from them? WHY?

This is an established franchise that has been on Multiplatform since it's inception and you find happiness in depriving consumers of this for what reason exactly? Jesus man
Kane22  +   541d ago
hellbalde is a new game. so there isn't going to be much uproar. also Sony never said silent hill was exclusive which is good. TR was a multiplatform game turned exclusive which should've never happened.
MysticStrummer  +   541d ago
Hellblade is a brand new IP, and Sony didn't announce SH as a timed exclusive. When MS announced TR exclusivity a vocal minority panicked, and it wasn't just PS fans but PC fans also.
callahan09  +   541d ago
Just curious, what do you mean by "a vocal minority?" If you mean "Playstation & PC fan bases"... Wouldn't that be a majority? Those audiences are bigger than the Xbox fanbase.
NexGen  +   541d ago
@callahan: A minority within that fan base. Obviously the entire ps4 and pc fan base are not up in arms about this.
jollygoodchap8  +   541d ago

I call bullshit.

I don't how many times I read posts where people wrote "the tomb raider franchise is a playstation started brand!!...They betrayed fans!!!....boycott!"

Don't be that guy...."bu bu but no one said that!"

Edit: I have a X1 but I was planning to play it on PC, just like the first one. But I'm not blinded by the hatred from the backlash of the first days of the "announcement"
#6.3.3 (Edited 541d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(1) | Report
TKCMuzzer  +   541d ago
I think you need to step back from your comment and read it again. The issue is that Tombraider was NOT announced as a timed exclusive, it had to be drawn out of Microsoft, that's why everyone one moaned, because Microsoft made it look like a permanent deal.
Whitey2k  +   541d ago
shut up u pathetic troll @trywizard atleast sony has been the decent one and let them release the game on all consoles where phil spencer has been the undecent one that has to keep hes multiplat titles i wouldnt care if tomb raider had a duration on ingame content atleast i still get to play the game thats how selfish they are what 3rd party should do is stay neutral and release it on all platforms.. if they want exclusives they they should start considering purchusing game companys
#6.5 (Edited 541d ago ) | Agree(7) | Disagree(3) | Report | Reply
callahan09  +   541d ago
Sony didn't even announce Silent Hills. They announced a "now available" interactive teaser, which in turn announced the game, and nothing about exclusivity was ever said.

Hellblade was also not announced as exclusive. They did announce a bunch of games at the beginning of their conference, and at the end of that segment (during which they showed Hellblade) "The Tomorrow Children and Rime are full-exclusive, PlayStation Owned IPs, and all the rest of what we've just shown will be releasing on PlayStation first." They announced all of that other stuff as timed exclusive. That's why nobody called shenanigans on them... because there were no shenanigans!
Godmars290  +   541d ago
But then if it were to be announced as an exclusive, given that no one knew what they were playing till the very end of a "trailer" they got off PSN, it wouldn't be all *that* surprising.

It would still piss people off, more so given this mess, but that the overall reveal happened exclusively, rather than weeks later after a public announcement from a company known for multiplatform releases, at the very least it wouldn't be a wholly inconceivable shock.
z-cba  +   541d ago
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't this game originally marketed as multi-platform?
oneluckybullet  +   541d ago
it was shown at the e3 on ms stage. everyone just assumed it was multi plat. bc its tomb raider.
ThatOneRiggaNob  +   541d ago
it's still multiplatform... it will just come to other platforms at a later date.
Jdoki  +   541d ago
I did hear a rumour that some US retailers started to take pre-orders for a PS4 version - but no idea if there was any truth in that, and whether it was the retailer jumping the gun, or that MS did the deal at some point after E3.

Likely just opportunist retailers taking orders as it would have been safe to assume (post-E3) that a new TR game would be multi-plat.
kneon  +   541d ago
It's not a rumor, it's a fact. I have it pre-ordered.
Jdoki  +   541d ago
Thanks for the update kneon. I'd only heard through hearsay, so didn't want to state it as fact.

Is the retailer going to honour the order until the PS4 version does drop? Could be in for a long wait :)
kneon  +   541d ago
I don't see why not, I have several pre-orders with place holder dates of dec 31, 2015. I expect next time I get an email from them it will say dec 31, 2016.
bleedsoe9mm  +   541d ago
every game that the ip isn't owned by a console maker is potentially multiplatform
#7.4 (Edited 541d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(1) | Report | Reply
oneluckybullet  +   541d ago
sounds to me like another deal sony passed on. just like titanfall and the ea access. he pretty much said the other platform could have done the same deal. i think it comes down to what others on here have said, se is broke and needs money, they approached sony and ms with a deal, sony said nah we got uncharted. ms said hell yeah we need something to go against uncharted next year.
Kane22  +   541d ago
you are so wrong. im pretty sure sony had no involvement in this stupid deal. micro is hoping people spend $400 to play the new tomb raider.
oneluckybullet  +   541d ago
not sure im wrong. he basically hinted at it. not saying his word is gold. just looking at it from a different view. the amount of hate that titanfall got for being exclusive was crazy but then the truth came out that sony passed on it. same with the ea access, sony said its not a good deal for them. whos to say the same thing didnt happen here?
DragonKnight  +   541d ago
He didn't anything about Sony's involvement. The most you could get from his hint is that MS were approached by SE, and that they were approached first and said yes, but even that could be wrong.
rmw2hot87  +   541d ago
Like I said b4 they also did this with splinter cell conviction in 2010. This should be no surprise. I really don't like hurting people feelings but after reading this article Rise of the tomb raider is not going to release on ps4
rmw2hot87  +   541d ago
I can't remember such a sore reaction to Microsoft making splinter cell conviction exclusive? Which is a multiplatform game with tons of playstation fans. This is nothing new it happened before.
Manic2014  +   541d ago
Not only MS, Sony did this with SoulCalibur 3, making it a lifetime exclusive on PS2.
castillo  +   541d ago
Enough with the Explanations your in of a division of a bigger company looking to make a profit while providing the consumers of said products a reason to buy it or remain a consumer. No more explaining. Now you want to make this consumer happy, can you just outright buy IPS that catch the companies eye instead. These lame windows of exclusive time are a waste of funds and deprive internal studios of budgets and halt the creation of more internal studios.
Inzo  +   541d ago
So MS putting out fires......................aga in.
mrpsychoticstalker  +   541d ago
For those who didn't read the article.... READ IT! the devs came to Microsoft, Microsoft didn't go and say hey I will give you this much money. The devs came to Ms asking for help. Watch more devs in the future doing the same. Facts.
ziggurcat  +   541d ago
not facts. and you didn't read the article, either because nowhere does it say that SE/CD came crawling to MS for help.

MS didn't fund the game, they only secured exclusivity with the money that was thrown at them.
TKCMuzzer  +   541d ago
No offence, all Microsoft have done in the last 18 months is lie, lie and lie. Their reputation is not good amongst the gaming community, there is no way Phil Spencer is going to come out and say anything that will make Microsoft look bad.

I take anything Microsoft say with a pinch of salt.
ShowanW  +   541d ago

CD/SE just didn't have the loot to get RROTR where it needed to be.

When the well starts too run dry, you look for water elsewhere.. And MS happens to have a pretty deep well that's filled with water, while making it rain as well.
iamnsuperman  +   541d ago
You mean the game that has been in development for some time (it is coming out next year) and this deal being so recent that they didn't announce it at E3 (when they showed the first trailer). The claim doesn't match reality. What it shows is SE didn't have faith in the product and wanted someone else to foot the bill in some form (considering SE didn't thing 6 million units was a success)
ShowanW  +   541d ago
Did you not read what I said.

CD/SE did not have the $$$ to get ROTTR where it NEEDED to be.

Which means the game wasn't properly staffed to make a bigger hit than TR.

TR sold 6million. ROTTR they probably want to sell 12-15million units, but probably didn't have the staff to put towards the game.

You always want your sequel to be, bigger and better.
Jdoki  +   541d ago

So TR sold 6million... More than the current install base of the XB1!

And you predict they want to sell 12-15 million. That's speculative at best, and fairly ridiculous.

If SE didn't have the money to develop a new TR to the level of quality they needed (and all this crap about the previous title not being a success) then why did they bother investing in a better quality PC version - rather than a simple port of the 360/PS3 version. And why, if the game was not a success, invest more money in to a significantly better Ultimate Edition for a tiny (relatively) install base on PS4 / XB1?

Nothing adds up here.
ShowanW  +   541d ago

Good questions. To which none of us know the answer to.

I based my answers what came out of Phil's mouth.

"We don't have a action game like Uncharted with that level of quality" CD/SE were looking for a partner, anyone could have done this deal"

And CD/SE considered 6mil a flop.
That was there expectations not being met. It's still more $$$ than I can fathom.

Is Phil lying? Who knows, MS has lied before. And so has Sony, Nintendo, definitely EA, and the list goes on.
#12.2 (Edited 541d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(2) | Report | Reply
Godmars290  +   541d ago
"CD/SE did not have the $$$ to get ROTTR where it NEEDED to be."

And that's difficult to believe on face value given that the game was first announced at E3 with no indication of exclusivity, and given that its going to be on the 360 as well, that the same assets used in the last game are being used here.

If anything "where it needed to be" could have amounted to fewer or lower quality CG cutscenes.

I'm certain many a gamer would have been crying over the loss of those...
thecowsaysmoo  +   541d ago
Read the article everyone.

The future of the franchise can still be on playstation, but this game is going to be xbox and more than likely pc exclusive. Just like how Dead Rising 3 was an xbox one exclusive, but if Capcom were to make and fund a dead rising 4 it can be on ps4.
Edward75  +   541d ago
One great thing I admire about this guy, he quickly acknowledged that many were upset to a degree, and has spoken out about it, giving many details excluding the price of the deal.

I also like that he does his best to explain some of the business side.

He even went on to say that many might not understand it, and that maybe they didn't need to.
He is a gamer, and said things like a true gamer when wanting his side, the business side, to come out on top. This hate for this decision by SE to put timed exclusivity on MS systems is sooo unwarranted at the level it is at.

Keep doing what you are doin Phil. I think it is helping gaming as a whole. I also believe it will give SE more money on the front end to make a better game. Money that would otherwise be a gamble when going up against Uncharted.
christocolus  +   541d ago
You are damn right. Phil is a great exec. Really happy he is at the helm of xbox.

People need to read this article again cos going by his comment it seems this game may end up as an xbox and pc exclusive, first he says he wouldnt invest in a game which would be released on a rival platform then he compares it to deadrising 3 saying they had a deal with dr3 but he has no hold over dead rising 4 similarly to how he states that their current deal is with this specific version of TR and again CD was specific when they released that statement saying the game was 100% xbox exclusive. I may be wrong but everything seems to point to the game being xbx and pc exclusive(similar to ryse, titanfall and dr3).

Well I guess we will know more at TGS and e3 next year. Can't wait to see the game though..with uc4 launching around the same time i really want to see what CD can achieve when they harness the xbox ones full potential. I mean they are a lot bigger than remedy and see how amazing quantum break looks. This could also give them the chance to test run dX12 on pc and xbox.
#14.1 (Edited 541d ago ) | Agree(7) | Disagree(19) | Report | Reply
Clarence  +   541d ago
TR won't make a bit of difference in this console war. If a cheaper Xbone didn't make a difference 1 game sure won't. M$ needs to understand, its the company itself that people don't trust. Which is why the xbone is struggling.
HappyWithOneBubble  +   541d ago
Thank you. MS lost the gamers trust. No matter what games MS buys exclusively won't change that fact. Sony have proven to be more trustful and they not playing catch up doing 180's trying to get gamers back on their side. I hate for TR to fail but I don't see it doing well on XB1. If it does come to PS4 later, I can wait or I get it for PC.
Dlacy13g  +   541d ago
This comment thread is pretty comical to read. The over reactions and down right crazed ones are my favorites.
ThatOneRiggaNob  +   541d ago
It really is to be honest. I find it funny how people are downplaying tomb raider now saying it's no uncharted so they don't care about this game anymore. It's hilarious just how whiney gamers have becomepop nowadays. *popcorn*
BlackTar187  +   541d ago
Tomb raider isn't as good as uncharted. That's not down playing.
ThatOneRiggaNob  +   541d ago
You missed the whole point I was trying to make but whatever. Also that's your opinion too. Just don't go around pretending that just because Uncharted is here Tomb Raider is irrelevant.
Clarence  +   541d ago
TR has been irrelevant for a long time. M$ had to fork down a lot of money to make up what the game won't sale. EA learned the hard way with Titafail.

It's squares turn now.
#16.1.3 (Edited 541d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report
TomahawkX  +   541d ago
With so many great games coming out in the next couple of years not having 1 game is not a big deal.
Tedakin  +   541d ago
And here....we.......

Tedakin  +   541d ago
After reading this I have a feeling Rise of the Tomb Raider will be MS only. It will come to PC, Xbox 360 and Xbone.... Tomb Raider 3 can go wherever it wants. Sound to me like MS paid for a lot of the development of this game like they paid for a lot of the development of Dead Rising 3 and Titanfall. Spencer always says "The franchise..." never "This game..." I've noticed.
#19 (Edited 541d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(8) | Report | Reply
Illusive_Man  +   541d ago
Again if you're reading between the lines this game will be a Microsoft platform exclusive meaning first on Xbox One and later on Windows PC. Phil indicated they will help in development so we get the prettiest Tomb Raider ever to grace consoles and marketing. Essentially this game will be treated as a 1st party title. It is not coming to PS4.
Bennibop  +   541d ago
What surprises me more with this interview is his confirmation that games such as Ryse and DR3 that were touted as exclusives could be ported over to PS4 at any point, which would not be a surprise DR3 is definitely worth the time. I don't buy in to this relationship rubbish that he is going on about, this is purely money and SE trying to lower the risk following what they classed as disappointing sale of TR.
Manic2014  +   541d ago
I think he was referring to PC.
Bennibop  +   541d ago
He states that Capcom and Crytek own the ips and are free do what they like with them. Unless again that is not true and they are free to do with them what they like as long as they don't appear on PS or WiiU.
WitWolfy  +   541d ago
Thats the thing TR actually sold GREAT when it released back in 2013 it sold like 5 000 000 ish copies. It was just that SE was depending on this title alone to bring in the $$$ that they said it flopped IMO.

Stupid really, releasing stupid unnecessary sequels like XIII-2 and 3 where they lost money or broke even. Then expect games like TR and Hitman to make up for the losses.

*slow claps*
#21.2 (Edited 541d ago ) | Agree(5) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
Manic2014  +   541d ago
"I'll just put it this way: other people could have done this deal. There was nothing about us that said, we were the only people would could do this deal. If another publisher, another platform wanted to go do this deal, it's a business deal. There's nothing we did somebody else could not have done"

Is he indicating that, someone else was also bidding for the exclusivity?
Bennibop  +   541d ago
Not sure he is, think he is just being self righteous and defensive.
Manic2014  +   541d ago
I doubt that, reading through the whole interview, he was certainly being very open and honest about it. I'm getting a feeling Sony sort of were involved in this deal, as stated by Phil that SE came to MS with this offer, Could be Sony bidded for the exclusivity first and SE went to MS for a better offer. I would not been surprised if Sony did this, they did the same thing with SoulCalibur 3 for the PS2.

This is all speculation on y account but it sure seems like that to me.
#22.1.1 (Edited 541d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(10) | Report
ceedubya9  +   541d ago
Seems like SE wanted help or extra funds and MS was the only one that bit on it. On MS's end, they wanted to get something out of the deal by making it exclusive for their consoles for an unnanounced amount of time.
Npugz7  +   541d ago
Both Ps4 and PC players basically took a kick in the nuts because of this stupid deal! We won't forget this!!!
WitWolfy  +   541d ago
This will def hurt the franchise in the long run... hope it was worth it SE.
Manic2014  +   541d ago
So Square Enix gave them this opportunity and MS just went forward with it. It also seems like Sony may have been interested in the deal, as Phil stated that they were not the only ones who could of closed the deal.
isa_scout  +   541d ago
You're taking his comment out of context... Saying, "anyone could've closed the deal." is simply stating that anyone could've approached Square Enix, nothing more. I'm pretty sure Sony would've commented on it had they also approached Square. Just like they came right out and said they were approached about TitanFall and EA access.Also trying to buy something to compete with UC4 makes MS seem even more desperate. They paid a huge sum of money for a game that would've released on their platform anyway. He openly admits that they've tried to make games that could compete with UC, but they couldn't compete with the quality of the titles that ND makes. Seems sad and desperate more than a smart business move.
I liked the Tomb Raider reboot, and bought it twice(once on PS3 and PS4) but I just don't see it as a system seller. ND has earned its prestige by developing hit after critical hit, but the same cannot be said for Crystal Dynamics. Until they prove themselves as more than just a one trick pony this will continue to look like a silly deal. Especially when you look back at some of Crystals past titles. Some of them are all over the place on the scale of horrible games and good games.
Lukebb91  +   541d ago
Didnt he say they offered the deal to xbox?
gamertk421  +   541d ago
Monday morning saltfest! Ha, really helps kick the week off properly, lol
alexg587  +   541d ago
Wow he used ryse and dead rising as an example? The difference is that those games started as xbox exclusives ips. But tombraider started on PlayStation, and has been on the all major machines since then. However thruth is the only true exclusive ip xbox has is halo, fable, and quantum break.. the 360 was a 3rd party machine and its no different with xbox one, .....cheers
kurruptor  +   541d ago
He admits it had to do with Uncharted 4, but I simply don't get that.

I would think if anything, this could increase Uncharted 4 sales. If Tomb Raider came out on PS4. Gamer may have to choose between TR and UC. Now, there isn't a choice.

Only a die-hard TR fan is going to buy an Xbox if they don't have it already. And that has nothing to do with UC.
asmith2306  +   541d ago
And there are f*ck all die hard Tomb Raider fans. Don't get me wrong, I really enjoyed the first game on PS3, but I'd never buy a console for it. Also the argument that gamers would choose either UC or TR is bull. I know lots of people on PS3 who bought both because they were both worth it. People buy games if they are good, it doesn't matter if there is another good game in the genre.
bleedsoe9mm  +   541d ago
they are up against the fastest selling console in history expect more of this in the near future , got to do something to try and move the needle .
#30 (Edited 541d ago ) | Agree(9) | Disagree(2) | Report | Reply
« 1 2 »

Add comment

You need to be registered to add comments. Register here or login
New stories

Hatoful Boyfriend is One of the Best Dating Simulators Out There

6h ago - Weird and lovable, Hatoful Boyfriend is the dating sim for everyone. | hatoful boyfriend

XCOM 2 Review - PC Invasion

6h ago - PC Invasion has saved the world and watched it burn in XCOM 2. This is their verdict on XCOM 2 | PC

Track the Release Date for PlayStation VR

Now - Sony is yet to reveal the exact release date for PlayStation VR. Start tracking it now using | Promoted post

Why Star Trek Online is Perfect for Roleplaying

7h ago - It warms my heart that a sizable number of gamers still wish to roleplay within the virtual worl... | PC

3DS Exclusive Ace Attorney 6 Gets Direct Feed Screenshots Showing New Prosecutor and Courtroom

8h ago - Capcom just released a batch of direct feed screenshots and artwork of the upcoming 3DS Exclusive... | 3DS

Mirror’s Edge – How Fun Can a Run be?

8h ago - James Haxell from Gaming Respawn takes a look at Mirror's Edge and asks how fun Catalyst will be. | Culture