500°

Rise of The Tomb Raider Xbox Exclusive - Angry Rant

Angry Joe's reaction to rise of the tomb raider exclusivity.

nicksetzer13541d ago (Edited 3541d ago )

This alone nullifies any argument you could make.

Tomb raider Originally (in '96) was on multiple platforms. Sony then bought console exclusivity for the sequel. What MS has done is EXACTLY the same, and ironically involving the exact same franchise also.

randomass1713541d ago

Fans have a right to feel upset, but this is just companies making business happen. This is the industry we are in so we either make a fuss or deal.

Godmars2903541d ago

Then we just have to let business happen. People buy the game, and an XB1, if they want.

But then if this doesn't go well, if people don't buy the game or system or enough of it, then that same business is going to suffer for it. Meaning Crystal Dynamics. MS will likely keep on going, Square will likely keep on going. But CD an very likely the TR IP will suffer for choices business made and consumers complained about.

An IP will go away because the wrong choice was made in the face of a known response; namely that choice being wrong.

nicksetzer13541d ago (Edited 3541d ago )

http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...

See I don't really think so, when Sony was swimming in money financially, they also took 3rd party exclusives off the table. Like the original tomb raider's sequel and The entire GTA series for YEARS. (which PC, dreamcast and gameboy player had played plenty)

Yet now people want us to feel sorry when someone else does it? It is business, get over it. If Sony had bought a 3rd party exclusive that I like, guess what? I have a PS4 and would buy the game too...

@Foxtrot I have never seen someone be so wrong in my life. Tomb raider was on PS1 and Sega saturn, Sony bought CONSOLE EXCLUSIVITY for the sequel and it was only on PS1. Same with GTA and probably a few others, just those come to my mind without doing any research.

@trickster CONSOLE EXCLUSIVITY! Rise of the tomb raider will most likely come to PC as well, if it does are we all squared away then?

XBLSkull3541d ago (Edited 3541d ago )

This clown acts like he isn't allowed to play the game. The game is still being made dude, and you are completely allowed to play it if you want to.

@4:30
Yes, you just have to grab an X1 too, you can't just lie like that.

elmaton983541d ago

Yeah but then you have to factor in that, back in 1996, the game was only available in one system or more I don't know(never care about tomb raider since 1996 or millions of other people). But now, a lot more people know about the game and more platforms supported it, and they come out with an exclusive and the leasser selling console to boot. It just a slap in the face to ps4 and PC fans who supported the game in the first place.

morganfell3541d ago

Nick, you are forgetting something.

MS has a right to buy this franchise exclusivity and CD and SE have a right to sell.

Fair.

But you act like fans aren't allowed to protest and vote with their wallets and in that you are totally, completely, and absolutely wrong. Wrong, wrong, wrong, and did I mention wrong? Yes you are wrong.

darthv723541d ago (Edited 3541d ago )

@morgan, sure fans can vote with their wallets. Its the protesting that is petty.

Whats the point about protesting over a game that probably doesnt stand a chance on the same platform as uncharted? MS is at least letting the game have a chance to grow on a system with no direct competition.

And yes I said petty because that is all this protest is. It would be different if the protest was about the quality of the game released vs what is initially shown. Then they would have a legit claim.

As it is, its gamers butt hurt over a game not coming to their platform. If anything they make the rest of us look bad because they cant just let it go and move on.

@below, no...dont buy the xb1 for this game. You buy it for other games as well.

BattleAxe3541d ago (Edited 3541d ago )

I admit that I am super unhappy about this since I really liked the Tomb Raider re-boot, and I was planning on playing Rise of the Tomb Raider on PC.

This might be a good money situation for Crystal Dynamics, but it's a poor decision for the franchise. I don't mind exclusive games, but usually you know what games are exclusive, such as Halo, Super Mario and Killzone, but this was a total surprise and a disappointment.

Bottom line is that I will not be buying an Xbox One to play this game. If Microsoft stops charging for online play, then I'm on board, but that really doesn't seem likely. This is really crappy news during a time that I was hoping to hear some positive news.

The real slap in the face is saying that people on PC and PS4 will still be able to play Lara Croft and the Temple of Osiris.......are you f***ing kidding me????

thorstein3541d ago

No. The real mistake here is that Sony just announced that over 10 million people have PS4s in their homes.

If you want to sell a product you need to release it for the top selling platform or multiple platforms.

Dee_913541d ago (Edited 3541d ago )

@nicksetzer1
Yes Sony also took an established multiplat franchise and made it an exclusive.. oh wait.. Tomb Raider wasn't an established multiplat franchise? it was actually a brand new IP at the time? Oh okay.. so its not the same aside from it being the same franchise ?
Boy some people really love having blinders on... that or they copy and paste comments they see else where.

@darthv72 That literally made no sense at all..

The point of protesting this game would be to show displeasure of this decision.
You think it will sell more on xbox alone than PS4, pc and Xbox because of uncharted? What kind of logic is that? Assuming that Uncharted would affect the sales of tomb raider, (which you have no proof of this imaginary competition) It would still sale way more on PC PS4 and Xbox than on xbox alone.

Whats petty about being mad at a studio for making a game that could easily be multiplat, exclusive or for the people that bought a ps4 or upgraded their PC believing they would be able to play this? Nothing petty about that protest at all.
You show your true maturity by calling people with a genuine complaint "butt hurt" because your too ignorant to put yourself in someone else's position.Just because you are okay with it doesn't mean everyone else should be.

darthv723541d ago

dmarc, yes it is petty because its all over a game and the system its being released on.

If you are going to protest then at least make it about something substantial. Like not getting the same quality of game that you were led to believe.

Exclusivity is nothing to get in a twist over. There have been 3rd party exclusives that date all the way back to the 2600. People either bought the systems to play those games or they didnt. Nothing about that scenario has changed over the last 30 years.

Except the entitled nature of the "butt hurt" younger generation. Yes...they are butt hurt over the weakest of arguments.

Dont like the game...dont play it but dont tell me or others who hold our own gaming loyalty over that of a platform, that we are in the wrong.

solidjun53541d ago (Edited 3541d ago )

@Darthv what are you talking about? I swear...

"If you are going to protest then at least make it about something substantial. Like not getting the same quality of game that you were led to believe."

So the fact that the previous iteration was released on the opposite console just 5 months ago and it's sequel is not being released because a company paid to keep it off said opposite console is not "substantial?" And who are you define what's substantial?

"Whats the point about protesting over a game that probably doesnt stand a chance on the same platform as uncharted? MS is at least letting the game have a chance to grow on a system with no direct competition. "

That's not even a good argument. So because it's an exclusive it has a chance to grow? No. I think it would "grow" if it's released on more than one console, especially since since it's third party title where it's previous iteration was released 5 months ago on multiple platforms.

"Dont like the game...dont play it but dont tell me or others who hold our own gaming loyalty over that of a platform, that we are in the wrong."

Okay, I won't. But don't tell me or others who expected this game to be on all platforms that we are wrong for "protesting."

iamnsuperman3541d ago

Though it is business the business doesn't make sense. Also angry Joe is right. The blog post is just insulting to their fans. It is basically the slapping you with a wet fish. They said don't worry about this games exclusivity the older game is still on the PS4. How bad is that. It is like they don't care for their fans

Dee_913541d ago (Edited 3541d ago )

@darthv72
Great, I see your the type that keeps saying the same thing over and over in an argument because you have no real argument..
You can try to simplify it all you want, it doesn't change the fact that making this game exclusive is a big middle finger to literally a majority of its fans.

Please name me one multiplatform game as major as Tomb Raider that went exclusive with its next iteration.Ignoring all of the key factors or elements to try to make the point that its simply just a game on a platform is an ignorant stance to make.Then to call people "butt hurt" and "entitled" because of your ignorance makes you look even worse.
I can't even reply to the last part, you are just grasping at straws.
I also love how you gave up on your weak 'its better over there because of less competition' argument.

rainslacker3541d ago

@darth

If you haven't figured it out yet, the argument isn't really about which system it's being released on, it's about which systems IT'S NOT being released on.

No one cared that it was being released on the X1 before. People don't really care that it's being released on the X1 now either, as it doesn't change the fact that it's not being released on the PS4/PC. Now they care that it isn't being released on the consoles on which people supported it with the first installment, or throughout their platform of choice for the past 20 years for that matter. Given that it had many choices over the last 20 years, a sudden console exclusive is just alienating a huge number of people.

Truth is, Xbox just isn't a system a lot of people want compared to other options. So many people saying, "I wouldn't buy an X1 just to play this game", is indicative of that fact, and the fact that TR just isn't a system seller. In fact, TR hasn't been a system seller since TRII.

Even now, the only people that care it's being released on the Xbox platform, are the Xbox fan boys who want to call everyone butt hurt or hypocrites, yet can not show one single shred of empathy towards their fellow gamers over the situation.

I'm sure if something like this happened with say Mass Effect or Gears of War, or whatever franchise became established through Xbox/PC last gen, you'd be as upset as people are now over this situation. But I guess looking at hypothetical scenarios to see how others feel is just a bit too much in the way of rational thinking.

morganfell3541d ago (Edited 3541d ago )

darth,

You act as if PS gamers can't buy two games in the same year. You act as if they couldn't buy U4 and TR2. And the gap between the PS4 and the X1 is growing. By launch there will be a massive difference in sales.

SE threw that away because they won't get many of those back by crawling back to PC and PS fansannouncing a summer 2016 version for the largest part of the community. They have also lost sales of Temple of Osiris, Sleeping Dogs remastered and several other SE games where gamers have EXERCISED THEIR RIGHT AND PROTESTED BY CANCELLING PREORDERS. It is their right to exercise their displeasure at they see fit, not as Darth sees fit. Its called freedom of choice and freedom of speech.

Christopher3541d ago

***Then we just have to let business happen. People buy the game, and an XB1, if they want. ***

Disagree. If you have a problem with something a business is doing, speak out and let them know.

+ Show (13) more repliesLast reply 3541d ago
MCTJim3541d ago

Angry Joe is too young to remember that. Its exclusive to the XBox platform. Thats it..simple as that. Maybe the real reason is back in April..when Square Enix was hurting bad...some company dumped their stock..wonder what company that was?

Godmars2903541d ago

The key point is the E3 announcement. If it was going to happen, it either should have happened then, if not before with the first, recent, title.

There was TR1(2013) which was multi, now there's TR2(2015) which is exclusive. That is his point.

This is a rebooted universe. A retelling of the TR story.

adonis1833541d ago

Guys vote with ur wallets. Don't buy this shitty game. Well is probably gonna be good. But these developers gotta learn!!

HappyWithOneBubble3541d ago

Oh man I forgot Sony sold Square Enix stock in April. Maybe Square is doing this for what Sony did. Who knows.

Cueil3541d ago

That may have been the megaton people where hinting at that didn't happen... probably T's not crossed and I's not dotted in time for E3

darthv723541d ago

@god, there is no rule that says if an exclusive is to be announced then it has to be done at (insert game trade show here).

Things change from day to day. If tomorrow it is revealed that sony has bought the devs of no mans sky, I doubt it would be as big of a deal as this is today.

Business is business and it follows no particular time frame.

Dee_913541d ago (Edited 3541d ago )

@darthv72
Well considering No mans sky is a new IP owned by a relatively young studio, Ofcouse it wouldn't have the same amount of attention..

Kenshin_BATT0USAI3541d ago

They dumped their stock to help SE. You obviously don't know how stocks work.

Christopher3541d ago

Umm... dumping the stock helped SE... They gained more control, lost any control another publisher had. They weren't even financially affected since buying the stock was done at a low point when they were claiming that they were in dire straights since Tomb Raider made no money for them.

DoubleM703541d ago

Uhmm you sound like a very rational person. Everything you are saying is very true.

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 3541d ago
MrSwankSinatra3541d ago (Edited 3541d ago )

Sony did not buy exclusivity, they just had the cards in their favor.

- Nintendo decided to use cartridges which was more expensive than CDs, but also had less space also.

- SEGA Saturn was very hard to develop for and it didn't make sense financially to even make Saturn games due to the fact that it was a floundering in sales.

PlayStation was easier to develop for, had the biggest install base and had the CD format.

BTW it wasn't really exclusive since it came out on PC alongside the PS version.

SoapShoes3541d ago

Exactly by the time TR2 came out the Saturn was failing and Nintendo was using cartridges. People saying TR2 was secured by Sony are just making stuff up. TR2 wasn't bought by Sony, it was the only viable console for them to put it on. TR3 and Last Revelation were on Dreamcast. The only one Sony paid for exclusivity was the first PS2 one that ended up sucking really badly. It is synonymous with PS but it has ALWAYS been multiplatform aside from two titles.

Cueil3541d ago

news flash... came out on Saturn first

darthv723541d ago

Actually, there was a saturn version of TR2 in the works before it was canceled. And yes...sony bought the exclusivity. That was the way they did things their first time out.

They paid $$ to get support because they had the ability to do so. That is how they also bought studios to call their own.

When sony made the claim of "we dont pay for exclusivity" last gen, it made me laugh when I heard that because those of us who have been around...know the truth.

rainslacker3541d ago (Edited 3541d ago )

It was cancelled because Sega dropped the Saturn really fast in favor of the DC. There were a couple TR multi-plats made for the DC/PS2/PC/MAC however. One of which got included into a remaster for the PS3/360.

And that's the point, TR has traditionally been a multi-plat franchise. Almost every title has been on many platforms. Never has a main installment in the franchise been exclusive to one platform, even when the PS1 or PS2 were reigning supreme for their generations, it was still on PC or the lower selling console. TR, in some form, has appeared on every console, in every generation since it's release except for the N64(likely due to cartridge limitations/costs).

It has a wide sweeping fan base that isn't exclusive to one platform. And now one of the most anticipated TR games since TRII they go and shaft a vast majority of it's fan base, both new and old.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 3541d ago
truefan13541d ago ShowReplies(5)
-Foxtrot3541d ago (Edited 3541d ago )

<Sigh>

It's not the same

When Tomb Raider launched on other consoles before the PS1 it was a brand new game, a total new IP which introduced the world to Lara Croft. It wasn't until the PS1 where it became the most popualr, like how Metal Gear became popular on the PS1 with Metal Gear Solid despite it origingally being a Nintendo franchise. Even then the PS1 version came out roughly the same time as the other versions, hell I think in some territories it came out the same day.

When it became more popular on the PS1 this is where the majority of Tomb Raider fans were born, this is where it built an audience and gained a much loved reception.

The fanbase has grown since 1996 when it first released, that's 18 years of the Playstation audiece the franchise built up.

People who bought it on the PS1 bought TR2 and TR3 for example on the PS1 then other Tomb Raider games on the PS2 years later, with people even sticking with Tomb Raider which came out on the PS3.

That's a long time so obviously when a game is announced that it's not coming to the console brand you've been playing the game on for years it's going to tick you off.

So no I don't agree....this isn't the same

When it came to the PS1 Sony never bought it as an exclusive it was still multiplatform and despite this it still gained a bigger audience on the PS1. Hell by the time the PS2 came out the Sega Saturn was long gone.

GordonKnight3541d ago

I remember a lot of the original Tomb Raider fans thought the reboot was a horrible idea after E3. Everyone thought it was just a uncharted rip off. The game turned out to be ground breaking and better than uncharted IMO. First they talk ed smack before it was released and now they're mad because it's a X1 exclusive. Maybe if people didn't talk smack before it was released it would have sold better. Now they're guaranteed to made money up front because of Microsoft.

How many entitled games would jump at hundreds of millions of dallors if they were offered chance to selling out like CD & SE?

rainslacker3541d ago

@Gordon

And yet it still sold more on the PS platform. Both the original PS release, and the definitive edition. Can't speak for PC, as no sales numbers there.

Those early fans had a right to think it was a horrible idea. The game is not really a tomb raider game. The only connection it has to the original concept of the series is the main character, Lara.

Given that it's a reboot, and possibly an new origin story, I could see why that might be OK, as it did bring a nice new pacing to the series, which could be rather dull at times.

But then you look at the fact that CD said they were going to bring the tombs back to TR, and you can see why that might even upset those people complaining in the first place, as it was going to be moving back to it's more traditional style, with the new more exciting presentation thrown in as well. It's a recipe for a great game IMO.

The fact that the reboot was so well received by the fans, despite not really being TR, just speaks to how good the game is. It's not really TR, but it's worth playing, and for my part, I was very interested in seeing where they took the series, because I found it refreshing.

TricksterArrow3541d ago

Yet, Tomb Raider II was available on PC as early as 1997. So much for exclusivity, huh?

miyamoto3541d ago (Edited 3541d ago )

Don't spread lies, my friend. That is bad.

Tomb Raider II was not exclusive to PlayStation.
It was released for Microsoft Windows and PlayStation in 1997 and Mac OS in 1998.

The Sega Saturn can not handle the game sequel & it wasn't selling well that is why it eventually was a console exclusive on PSOne.

The exclusivity deal with Sony went on after.

"While the original Tomb Raider was released on both the PlayStation and Sega Saturn game consoles, Tomb Raider II was no longer designed for the Sega Saturn despite having been confirmed as a target platform for the game in the first place. Following the cancellation announcement, Adrian Smith cited technical limitations of the console to program an adequate conversion.[8] In September 1997, Sony Computer Entertainment America signed a deal with Eidos to make console releases for the Tomb Raider franchise exclusive to the PlayStation, preventing the Sega Saturn or the Nintendo 64 from having any Tomb Raider game released for it until 2000, a deal that would prove very beneficial to Sony both in terms of revenue dollars and also in further cementing the PlayStation's growing reputation as the go-to system for must-have exclusive titles.[9]"

This is why gamers don't take you extremist xobxers seriously.

-Foxtrot3541d ago

Someone gets it...

Why sell a game on a console which at the time was dying.

wannabe gamer3541d ago

who cares. the past is the past. if we base all decisions and deals in the future on what was done in the past then we will never move forward or grow.
i mean this was 18 years ago you are talking about. times have changed and things like this do nothing but hurt the gaming scene overall. Timed exclusives i can understand cause M$ wants to get some market back, but this is just greedy.
In the long run it wont save the Xbone and M$ will inevitably exit the console market just as all its shareholders want so badly. It will be better for gaming industry without M$ there to murky the waters with their BS and strongarm policies that just hold back progress and creativity.

gamerfan09093541d ago

" It will be better for the gaming ndustry without M$" People were saying the same thing after the PS3 and then that PS3 press conference came..... Be careful what you wish for.

OrangePowerz3541d ago (Edited 3541d ago )

Nope they didn't Tomb Raider 2 was released for PS and PC. While the first one also came out on the Saturn that console was pretty much dead by the time the sequel released and there wouldn't have been any point in spending money on it.

@Truefan

Learn your gaming history. The Saturn was dead and as much as I like Sega the Saturn was a failure and there was no point in spending money developing the game for it. When the DC released and they had the confidence that it could do well they made the next TR for it.

starchild3541d ago (Edited 3541d ago )

If that's true, Sony was wrong then too. I can't support this kind of business practice.

Battlefieldlover3541d ago

I kind of chuckle at those supporting this bull. Instead of getting a new IP all of MS's making, all gamers from all camps lose something. MS f*$^ing legs to actually stand on and everyone else what looks like a great sequal to a suprisingly good reboot.

This isn't making me want to buy an X1 not at all. I'm just waiting for another good price drop or two if MS don't come down enough. Master Chief collection alone has secured a console buy for me at some point. Guess what game i won't be buying. My life/wallet will move on just fine without Lara, way to many good games out/coming.

I've gotten alot of consoles im my day and will continue to. Next Gen so far PS4 and Wii U. X1 is gunna be a long last and with PS4 Averaging 2-1 with Q1 of this year being 3-1, I don't think i'm alone of those who support all. What i'm trying to say is those who went to PS4 from X360 don't need more reasons to hate on MS. Gamer backlash=bad something MS can't get through it's head.

Had hoped Phil would be better and he stared off promising...

x_RadicalAura_x3541d ago

Let's cut the B.S. though and get real here. How many die-hard fans of the '96 TR do you think there were on DOS/Sega Saturn compared to the PS fanbase that's accumulated over the last decade?

Ozmoses3541d ago

I heard they announced a new Geometry Wars 3 is coming and Sierra Games is back..

I dunno if it is an Xbox exclusive like the previous Geometry Wars titles... but I will tell you this.. I would buy an Xbox One for Geometry Wars 3 before I bought one for the new Tomb Raider game.

k-dillinger3541d ago ShowReplies(3)
lelo3541d ago

"This alone nullifies any argument you could make.
Tomb raider Originally (in '96) was on multiple platforms. Sony then bought console exclusivity for the sequel. What MS has done is EXACTLY the same, and ironically involving the exact same franchise also. "

^^

THIS!

LeCreuset3541d ago

@nicksetzer1 and co.

Others have already debunked your spin, so I just want to know one thing. Where were you guys during the pre-E3 hype when Xbox loyalists were giddy, believing that MS would money-hat games to their platform? Where were you during all the times MS loyalists would crow about the profits of Xbox's parent company allowing them to money-hat games?

Some of you I remember belonging to those camps celebrating MS' money-hatting as an advantage, while the others I don't recall calling out those in the former camp. Now that MS has done exactly what MS loyalists have been crowing about you want to pull the "Sony does it too" canard.

schlanz3541d ago

Joe here is upset with the corporate messaging, like he said in the beginning of the video his initial reaction was sadness, he didn't get angry until reading the insulting open letter to the "tomb raider community"

ShinMaster3541d ago (Edited 3541d ago )

It doesn't nullify anything.
You're just trying to justify it by bringing up something from almost 2 decades ago (before it even had an established fanbase.)

Besides, the original games released on the Saturn, PC and PlayStation. They continued to be released on PC and PlayStation after the Saturn died. Then the games released on the Dreamcast, followed by PS2, GC and Xbox.
Tomb Raider has always been multiplatform.

asmith23063541d ago

What the f**k does the original Tomb Raider have to do with this. This is a REBOOT, whose first entry was multiplat. Turning the sequel of the reboot into an exclusive is such a shitty move by CD to the fans who made the reboot successful in the first place.

+ Show (18) more repliesLast reply 3541d ago
antbolton893541d ago

The Gamer should always come first

XiMasterChief3541d ago

Well money come first of anything.

#DealWithIt

antbolton893541d ago

Spoken like a true Microsoft employee

nicksetzer13541d ago

@ant totally had to LOL at that response to master, well played.

Aces173541d ago (Edited 3541d ago )

@ant I can see Sony has you completely fooled as if they unlike every other company in the world do not care about money and profit first.

gootimes3541d ago (Edited 3541d ago )

Man that's greedy talk right there.

Boody-Bandit3541d ago (Edited 3541d ago )

This nailed it in a nutshell:
"Do you really think we are that Fn stupid? Yet you say this with a straight face."

MS backed the truck up. Why? I have absolutely no idea. TR is not a system selling game. MS screwed up this generation so poorly they are literally reeling and throwing whatever they can at the wall hoping something, anything, sticks.

MS it's crap like this as to why I wanted to pass on your new offering this generation. But my kids just had to have at least one new MS console in the home. Not anymore. Our one and only X1 is going up for auction this week to the highest bidder (trust me. I will link it here).

MS you're a joke. Pack it in and start over. Sony has this generation on lock, period, full stop, deal with it.

Oh and to those that think I'm full of sh!t? Check my profile, check my XBL, (all included in my profile). MS is done. At least for this generation and they only have themselves to blame.

They have practically ruined this industry and personally, like Angry Joe, I've had enough. PS4 / PC from here on out.

Christopher3541d ago

The only thing I will say is that Sony is honest with how they spend their money. During their conference, there was no question about what games were exclusive, what games were timed exclusive, and what games were just multiplatform titles.

Yes, they are both businesses and both about profit. But, how you treat your customers says a lot about the company, their goals, and what they think of their customers.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 3541d ago
OpieWinston3541d ago

True but I'd rather have a game made then the game be left for dead.... We all know Square Enix probably lost a lot of faith in Tomb Raider.

It took a year for the game to break even, and the definitive edition didn't sell as well as they hoped.

If MS walks in and helps fund the game, or helps cover heavy marketing costs...You're going to take it.

End of the day, I rather see the franchise have a future than none at all.

Kenshin_BATT0USAI3541d ago

Of course the definitive edition sold like shit. Who was the market for that game? No one. If you wanted the best looking version there was pc ver(still is the best version lol). If you just wanted to play the game you could get it on any console anyway. That was a cash grab and people knew that. That's why it sold like shit.

bleedsoe9mm3541d ago (Edited 3541d ago )

tell sony that , no man's sky , bloodborne and not to mention like 4 or 5 games revealed today may be exactly like tomb raider

Big_Game_Hunters3541d ago

LMAO, oh boy.....
you think Sony or Nintendo wouldn't buy out a big game like tomb raider if they could? its all business. if these companies were " for the gamer" then they would put all there games on all platforms so everyone could enjoy them.

Christopher3541d ago

Actually, they might not. The amount of money it would cost to do that versus what they could otherwise do with it is something they would consider. Nintendo could probably make 3 games with that money instead of buying an exclusive third party IP. Sony could make at least one game.

Personally, I'm annoyed that MS spent so much money on just this when they've been telling us they're all about bringing the gamers the games they want. They didn't do this here, since the gamers would get the game already. I'd rather they have used that money to develop a new IP.

fermcr3541d ago

"The Gamer should always come first"

Tell that to Sony. They do the exact same thing.

They don't do that with big 3rd party games like Tomb Raider (because they can't $$$), but they do it with smaller 3rd party games. How many smaller 3rd games are exclusive to the PS4?

LeCreuset3541d ago

Yeah. Let's not even talk about that Sony parity clause which leverages Playstation's market share to strong-arm small developers into... Oh, wait.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 3541d ago
Nine_Thousaaandd3541d ago ShowReplies(1)
MorePowerOfGreen3541d ago (Edited 3541d ago )

Based on the reactions from this news and this very video I can understand the way devs and MSFT choose to talk about this game. It wouldn't have mattered how the devs and MSFT told gamers about this, the outcome would have been the same(or worse, if seen as boasting or talking about it too much)

I have a gut feeling the deal was made not only for money but what they wan't to do with the game, with Azure and DX12 etc and MSFT's experience with solid social features.

Could you imagine if the devs and MSFT came out saying *we made this deal for money and design choices* related to topics that anger PS4 fanboys even more than exclusivity?(Cloud and DX12)

Media are now going to punish the game in reviews as it is but doing what I said above would be all out war with S.D.F.

MSFT and Devs tried to hint at what I said above when they said they wanted to make the best TR ever with MSFT's help. What the fuc do you think they meant when they said that. Folks paying attention know exactly what was being said yet it was vague enough to pass right over folks in denial heads.

Why is he so mad when he owns all consoles? This is the first time he's heard corporate language and 3rd party exclusives?

Obviously these things will start happening when a company offers next gen solutions that are new, this is the real reason Sony fans attack and hate on Cloud and DX12.

I get a feeling Pro Sony folks are now hoping and praying it was 100% about the money LOL.

This damn clown is funny. "on a console not even selling that well" XB1 isn't even being sold in the same markets as the other consoles but will by the time TR comes out along with Halo 5, QB and only God know what else.

xHeavYx3541d ago

You think that they made a deal because of Azure and DX12? Wow, talk about living in a cloud

ziggurcat3541d ago

@MPOG:

"I get a feeling Pro Sony folks are now hoping and praying it was 100% about the money LOL."

because it obviously *was* all about the money - not because of the cloud or DX12. do you honestly think that they sided with MS (for now) because of the platform or install base? PS4 is arguably way easier to develop for, and TR on PS4 outsold the xbone version 2:1. the only reason SE would make any kind of decision to abandon a larger, more receptive audience for their game is because MS threw a buttload of money at them.

the evidence is staring you right in your delusional face, yet you refuse to see/believe what drives people to make these kinds of decisions.

"XB1 isn't even being sold in the same markets as the other consoles..."

as it's been pointed out *numerous times* - the 13 countries currently selling the xbone are MS's *strongest markets*.

rainslacker3541d ago

Right. Tomb Raider.

A game traditionally about exploring tombs alone(which is the direction CD said they were taking the sequel), would greatly benefit from solid social features.

Because Lara's character, who according the trailers is at odds with who she is, what's she's done, and who she will become, thus causing a bunch of internal strife, would benefit from great social features.

Where you're friends could pop in and do whatever while you happen to be killing a rather large and aggressive alligator with a pistol, 10 floors down in a watery tomb which no one has stepped in for hundreds of years, would greatly benefit from enhanced social features.

What exactly can the cloud offer ROTTR which couldn't be done locally? Better AI? Right...because crystal dynamics has proven to be masters at AI programming. /s

Better graphics? Dunno, TR:DE is a great looking game, pretty sure that they could do that on the PS4/PC without the help of the cloud.

Better physics? What physics? TR isn't a physics heavy game. It's all pre-scripted animations to drive the character models. Don't need advanced physics. People don't care if the grass and trees can blow in the wind. They'd rather play the game.

Huge destructible environments? Yeah, TR, a linear game with heavily scripted action sequences would benefit from that greatly. Do you even understand the basics of game design, and why some things are the way they are in certain kinds of games?

You reading between the lines is just seeing what you want to see. If they were using the cloud, if that was the kind of support that MS was giving them, then they would have made that very clear, as it would have been something MS would have asked for.

In any case, that doesn't explain the decision to exclude PC players, as TF used Azure for the PC version as well.

I expect a retraction from you when the cloud is not used in any way beyond dedicated servers for whatever half-assed MP they add into this version of the game.

Christopher3541d ago

***I have a gut feeling the deal was made not only for money but what they wan't to do with the game, with Azure and DX12 etc and MSFT's experience with solid social features. ***

They would have said as much if this was true. That would have moved thoughts away from it being all about money.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 3541d ago
Show all comments (184)
70°

It’ll Be Fine, Right? Five Games With Unfortunate Release Strategies

Mark from WellPlayed writes about five game launches that were impacted by unfortunate scheduling.

Read Full Story >>
well-played.com.au
jznrpg352d ago (Edited 352d ago )

Zero Dawn sold really well so I’m not sure this belongs. The second game released next to a big game again and it hurt it some I forget what it was though, oh yeah Elden Ring .
But a good game is a good game to me I don’t care when they release personally but they do have to think about it when you want to get more people to buy it.

250°

The Tomb Raider Survivor Trilogy's Take on Lara Croft Deserved More Recognition

The Survivor Trilogy was a drastic reimagining of Lara Croft and Tomb Raider, and it provokes changes for the character that are truly fantastic.

Read Full Story >>
gamerant.com
isarai465d ago (Edited 465d ago )

Deserves less IMO, i think the 1st in the new trilogy was a perfect 1st step for the new direction. The next 2 games were half steps at best. Not only that, every character in the series including Lara is just annoying and doesn't make sense in terms of motive, like yes they have a motive, but none of it seems proportional to the lengths they are willing to go through for it. The most annoying thing is every one of the games say "become the Tomb Raider" yet 3 games later and we're still not there? No thanks. Then there's the mess of the 3rd game, massive skill tree that serves almost no purpose as there's literally only like 3-4 short encounters in the whole game, and they took till the 3rd game to finally manage some decent puzzles even remotely close to previous games in the series. Nah, the trilogy infuriated me to no end as a long time fan of the series, i hope we get better going forward cause that crap sucked.

Army_of_Darkness464d ago

The first in the trilogy was my favorite. I thought they were going into the right direction with that one until the second one came out and seemed like a graphical downgrade but the gameplay was okay. As for the Third, Graphics were really nice but it was kinda boring me to death with its non-stop platforming and exploring with not enough action! Well, for me anyway...

DeathTouch464d ago

Graphics on the 3rd one were abysmal. It’s more colorful and has more variety, but everything else was a noticeable downgrade.

The more open world with NPC quests was also handled very poorly, to the point I missed Angel of Darkness.

thesoftware730464d ago

I know it is your opinion, but she did progress as a character in each game, she even got more muscular and seasoned.

That is the thing, people first complained that there was not enough platforming and actual tomb raiding in the first and second games. Shadow remedied that and kept the combat elements.

3-4 encounters? huh? did we play the same game? there was plenty of combat and, the skill tree did matter, like being able to hang enemies from trees, set explosives traps on bodies, being able to counter, and that are just a few of the combat skills. The skill tree also had things like being able to hold your breath underwater longer, crafting upgrades, zipline upgrade, and climbing upgrades that all changed how you can approach situations.

Not knocking your opinion, but we definitely had different experiences. I had 98% completion on the shadow.

SoulWarrior464d ago (Edited 464d ago )

Sorry but i'm with him about the low number of encounters, the game throws loads of weapons and skills you're way with a comparatively low amount of places to actually use them, so they felt under utilised.

-Foxtrot465d ago

Yeah...no

It was awful, for THREE GAMES it was "become the Tomb Raider" where she went back to square one after each game. Not to mention after a huge reaction of killing someone for the first time she then becomes Rambo straight after and goes on a slaughter spree without a single other reaction. Her development was all over the place.

She was whiney, weak and in later game a little arrogant and selfish

Oh and the voice actress compared to the previous ones was not as good

Lara Croft deserved better and while they are decent games as they are, we deserved actual Tomb Raider games, we could have had better survival games if they just stuck with the original Lara Crofts origin about her plane going down. Surviving 2 weeks in the Himalayas...I'd have liked to seen that, who knows what mystical threat she could have faced in the mountains or underground some secret concealed cave.

Tacoboto464d ago

I thought Shadow of the Tomb Raider had better gameplay than Rise, but it annoyed me the most of the trilogy when I stopped to think about the story.

It's like they deliberately decided to make her unlikeable and did nothing to make the character you're playing as likeable or have even one sign of humility.

SoulWarrior465d ago

2013 I thought was a fine entry, but Rise and especially Shadow were painfully mediocre follow ups imo, I really didn't like how selfish and angry her character was in those two.

Terry_B464d ago

No. Please forget the crap completely.

northpaws464d ago

First one was decent, played through it twice.
Second one was okay, played through it once.
Third one was really bad, tried twice a year apart, still can't get through the first two hours, it is just really bad.

thesoftware730464d ago

Honest question, what did you find bad about it? the opening 2 hrs of Shadow were fantastic imo.

The opening was very similar to the first 2, what did you find really bad?

Not looking for an argument, just an honest question.

Starman69464d ago

3rd one just didn't feel like a tomb raider game. Possibly because the development was passed to another development team. Big mistake! Microsoft killed tomb raider making the first game a timed exclusive. Never recovered after that.

Show all comments (45)
200°

Get three Tomb Raider games free at Epic Games Store

Starting today, Tomb Raider, Shadow of the Tomb Raider, and Rise of the Tomb Raider are free at Epic Games Store. The free game offers run until January 6 at 11 AM Eastern. Once you claim them, they’re yours to keep.

Read Full Story >>
gamefreaks365.com
CrimsonWing69844d ago (Edited 844d ago )

They're all solid games, but nothing quite matched the epicness of the first one for me. I think the 3rd one started off strong but once you got to that Peruvian area it took a massive nose dive for me.

lelo2play844d ago (Edited 844d ago )

You got to be kidding!
The first one was great at the time... but this latest trilogy of Tomb Raider games are also great.

LiViNgLeGaCY844d ago

I think he means the first one in the new trilogy.

CrimsonWing69844d ago

I meant the first of the new trilogy.

Furesis844d ago

yeah i remember liking the first one when it came out, so i tried the second one sometime after release and i just could not get into it, i couldn't finish it. So i might try the 3rd now that i got it for free but ehh. But i do remember enjoying the first one, i wonder if i'd feel the same way if i played it today? Better not taint those memories lol

ANIALATOR136844d ago

I was the same for some reason. Never finished the second one. I got like half way through maybe.

ActualWhiteMan844d ago (Edited 844d ago )

The first one of the latest trilogy is a masterpiece

Fishy Fingers844d ago

I'll take a copy of Shadow... Cheers.

Profchaos844d ago

Great games I've played them all on ps4 but it'll be good to finally try shadow on my rtx card.

Double_O_Revan844d ago

Trying to claim them and the store keeps crashing. lol.

gamefreaks365844d ago

EGS has been having issues all day.

RedDevils844d ago

Weird I don't has that issue.

Double_O_Revan844d ago

I finally got it after a while. But it was real bad for a while.

PeeShuter844d ago (Edited 844d ago )

Claim games by going to the website and login using ur credentials. I did the same as i couldnt use epic launcher. Also try reinstalling Epic Launcher I did it and it worked.

Double_O_Revan844d ago

I always go through the website. It was all just down for a while yesterday it seems.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 844d ago
Show all comments (19)