Rise of the Tomb Raider [XO, XOX, X360, PS4, P4Pro]

I'm sure they counted those. But since all publishers love to spin numbers equally, I'm quite sure SE did the exact same thing with the TR reboot.
It would be an extremely dishonest number, because Plus titles aren't purchases. They're rentals.
 
Wait, Uncharted was a plus title on the PS3? :oops:

I wouldn't think Tomb Raider was one nor will it ever be; it's not a 1st or 2nd party game. Haven't plus games been historically in-house published games?
 
Uncharted 3 was PS3's IGC for one year and Vita's Golden Abyss was on the IGC for a year and a half.

2013's Tomb Raider was actually in the IGC for a month in 2014.

The Plus games are far from 1st party only. In fact 99% of the games the PS4 has been getting is indie 2D sidescrollers..

One would think after EA Access,Plus games would never get EA games again, but this December the PS3 has Mass Effect 2.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Wait, Uncharted was a plus title on the PS3? :oops:

I wouldn't think Tomb Raider was one nor will it ever be; it's not a 1st or 2nd party game. Haven't plus games been historically in-house published games?
UC3 was free on Plus for ages round about the time I got my ps4, that's for sure.
 
If you follow the path of Uncharted's success, I think Tomb Raider could have been on a great path to similar success too. Makes the whole exclusivity deal even more baffling. What a way to build an obstacle...
I agree but I think Square Enix were wanting and expecting a quick buck. Their finances are clearly bad but I hope they see that Tomb Raider as a big franchise has a potential but that they can't bank on old cache because even those of us who played the originals also probably played, or at least vividly remember, the shit games that killed the franchise.

They've no franchise cache in the bank, they need to rebuilt the franchise and that takes time. The handling of Rise certainly didn't get but all is not lost. It's not like Rise bombed critically, so when they launch it for PC and PS4, they're still launch what very much looks like a very good game. Focus on that rather than dwell on the poor sales to date.
 
Much later in the game now, and I'm enjoying it, but it has to be said that fights late in the game start to suck. The aim in the game is weird at the best of times, and I'm now at a fight with enough enemies that the frame rate starts to drop frequent enough that it's very hard to hit anything. I'm stuck using the shotgun, because it's the only thing I can reliability hit targets with. On top of that, enemies are heavily armoured. This fight is incredibly annoying. I'm playing on one of the harder difficulties, so that is not helping.
 
Dude, you cannot complain that harder difficulties are harder. That's nuts!!
 
They've no franchise cache in the bank

You mean besides Final Fantasy, Star Ocean, Dungeon Siege, Kingdom Hearts, Hitman, Deus Ex, Just Cause, Legacy of Kain and Thief?
 
You mean besides Final Fantasy, Star Ocean, Dungeon Siege, Kingdom Hearts, Hitman, Deus Ex, Just Cause, Legacy of Kain and Thief?

I was talking about Tomb Raider's lack of cache. Going wider I'm not sure recent Hitman games have done well and the new game being episodic doesn't seem to have pleased fans. The last Thief game was awful and The Legacy of Kain is not exactly relevant in today's market. We'll have to see with Final Fantasy but the KH 2.8 HD Remaster seems to have caused almost no interest. I think real issues with FF and KH is the franchises are heavily mired in background plot and lore that makes it difficult to new folks to get in to. Never good for growth - just look at MGS V sales.
 
Dude, you cannot complain that harder difficulties are harder. That's nuts!!

It's like you didn't read my entire post except for the last sentence. I always play games on the hard settings. It's more enjoyable. In this case, it's not, because the aiming is broken. I want the game to be hard, but not because I'm fighting with poor controls.
 
Yeah, Scott's the only one actually talking about the game itself. The rest of you butthurt console warriors should go whine someplace else.

MODs, can we split all the non-game play talk into another thread?
 
It's like you didn't read my entire post except for the last sentence. I always play games on the hard settings. It's more enjoyable. In this case, it's not, because the aiming is broken. I want the game to be hard, but not because I'm fighting with poor controls.
No I read he whole post but can't comment on the aiming because I've not played it yet. Yours is the comment on the aiming being problematic I've read.
 
Digital Foundry reported significant input lag in the X1 version, maybe that's the problem?

Edit: @7:25

Input lag can significantly change the "feel" of the shooting mechanics.
 
I think it's only partially the problem. I think it also has a weird acceleration curve. I got used to it, but then I got to this spot where the framerate dips and it's kind of horrible.
 
During 2014 it went as low as 5€ and in 2015 it was even part of a Humble Bundle.
I wonder how much Square-Enix is making per copy by selling the game at 4€. 1€ or less?

At 4 euro sales, it'd be making 2.8 euro per sale on steam. This isn't physical distribution. The only cost associated with the sale for Square Enix is the 30% that Valve takes. If it was physical distribution they'd be losing money per sale.

Regards,
SB
 
I think it's only partially the problem. I think it also has a weird acceleration curve. I got used to it, but then I got to this spot where the framerate dips and it's kind of horrible.

I have not played the game, but apperently the internal latency (game latency?) is quite high in the game. I can't remember where I read it though....
 
Maybe they are using a high render queue? Thats the only thing I can think of as to why the input latency is that bad when framerate goes to hell.
 
Back
Top