Tomb Raider exclusivity fallout thread *spawn

[London Geezer]

It's not 'wrong' or 'unethical' at all. Good for them!

But let's not group this kind of exclusive deal to all other exclusive games and first/second party studios which are nurtured and financed in order to have a library of exclusive games to differentiate one platform from another.

Everyone else will just wait or not play the game at all, with whatever implication for CD and Square/Enix, and life goes on.

 

[pjbliverpool]

Gamers who want Tomb Raider in 2015 would have a full year to save up $400 for an xbox one or at that time it may be even less

Awesome idea, wish I'd have thought of that earlier. I'll just go out and buy a £350 console that I don't want and have no space for + a £50 game that will look and play worse than the one I wanted to get for £20 on my current platform. What on Earth was I worrying about!

As for the moral and ethical issues associated with this decision, I'd say it's certanly morally questionable, or at least very poor form for Microsoft to claim it supports PC gaming while simultaneously paying SE to ensure it's Windows customers are unable to play one of the systems longest running and most successful franchises.

And from SE point of view, again very bad form to effectively abandon the bulk of the users who've supported them for the last several years. The only reason the franchise is even desirable to MS to purchase in this way is in large part due to the support those users gave them, the same users they are now turning their backs on. It's hardly suprising that people are going to feel let down by the company, especially people who were actively vocal supporters for the last few games like myself.

Note my comments above only really stand if this is a full exclusive and not a timed exclusive. If timed then it's just a bit annoying, at least to me as I don't really care how long I have to wait for a game as long as I get to play it. Others may feel differently and they've every right to do so without being insulted.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Fair enough, but if you have a thread of emotional responses with zero substance behind them, what's the point?

honestly, what's the pooint in most of what comes out of people's mouths? People just like telling the world how it is. Of course, in a discussion forum we prefer debate that can have logically argued points.

If they're not allowed to articulate why, how is that discussion going to work?

They are as long as they don't try making their point in terms of what's ethical or moral.

I'm basically asking people to explain their feelings which is considered an acceptable contribution. When you start throwing things like "corrupt practices" around, it should probably have some justification.

Sure, as long as it doesn't into ethics or morals. You can ask in terms of business ethics. But I see the arguments against MS coming from a sense of wrong that is derived from the individual's personal values, which can't really discussed.

Or in short, you wonder what the point of those post contribute to this thread are, and I say, "none." It's not a real debate. The ethics of MS's business practices don't belong here.

I might just do something about it. Back of my brain is designing my game. Waiting for my subconscious to get a nice solution to the current requirement, maybe some time pruning will help?

 

[-tkf-]

Because gamers *always* say that Microsoft threw a bag of money for anything, everywhere, everytime, any case. If gamers are to be believed then the entire planet apparently is on the Microsoft payroll. In this case it's likely true but nonetheless it gets kinda silly hearing the same money bag reason time and time and time again. Something happens, "They were paid by Microsoft", rinse and repeat. Eventually it makes it hard to take gamers seriously.

I can't imagine what it would have cost to buy Tomb Raider outright. I don't think it would even be worth it really.

Microsoft did throw money at this, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with it. It's annoying for single platform holders, it's pretty bad for the fans of TR but it's one of the best weapons Microsoft have, moneyz. And it's absolutely one of the ways Microsoft makes things work.

What I questioned was how much it would be if it was a real exclusive. Since it would more than half the market and make the next installments less attractive for everyone outside Microsofts world.

To me it's clear that this exclusive is well played by SE, timed exclusive that avoids major ps4 games, release on other platforms when the big titles have blown over. Win win.

And, we get to see a game with one as the lead platform that gets a release on the ps4, now that will be interesting.

Best part is, if it's a great game I can just buy it when it's out

 

[fbomber]

I never got tired of promoting the new Tomb Raider as one of the best games of the past 5 years.

If this is a timed exclusive, I'm good.
If microsoft actually paid their way to get all the titles of the reboot into their hands, then I'm not playing any of the next Tomb Raider titles.

It's a shame that microsoft is resorting to anti-consumer tactics to try to force people to buy their consoles, instead of spending the same money into new and refreshing IPs that could bring up their brand popularity. After all the crap they put themselves through this year, it seems they still don't get it.
It's another shame that Crystal Dynamics doesn't value this IP and their fans enough to avoid this sellout.

Agreed. This thing done by MS cannot be compared to the exclusives sony makes at its first party studios. Uncharted, God of War and Gran Turismo are sony´s games, as much as Halo and Forza are MS´s. Tomb Raider has always been a multiplat title. I own both the PS4 and the Xbox One, but I´m not buying the game just because of this.

 

[Cyan]

Reply to a comment from joker454 on certain youtuber -I can't find joker454's post anywhere-.... I agree with you. Plus it's obvious he argues 'cos of arguing, it's not heartfelt. Demagogy at its best when he creates youtube videos to make money.

Not to mention his total lack of education and manners. That's the society we are promoting it seems... sigh.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2...b-raider-xbox-exclusivity-deal-has-a-duration
Technically, taking the quote verbatim, he's talking about the TR franchise and not RotTR. But this bit is pretty explicit -
That fits in with what we expect from this business, both by sheer cost of full-time exclusivity and by traditions of the market. The only real difference seems to be phrasing. Ordinarily timed exclusives are announced as "play it first on this platform".

As a timed exclusive, TR wouldn't really come into this thread which is about content that can only be played by buying a particular box.

I just hope that it is a long term exclusive, a la Mass Effect 1.

We learnt to know what people are up to after this...

If this was a Sony or Nintendo thing they would be called the saviours of the industry. :/

 

[Inuhanyou]

^ I'm finding it funny how this disgusting victim attitude shows up every time something Microsoft does is called out.

Nintendo got shit too for Bayonetta 2, incase you lived under a rock and forgot that whole kerfuffle. But everyone calmed down when they eventually realized the sequel itself would not exist without Nintendo!

This has nothing to do with MS, or who it is who is doing it, and the practice itself of locking down a sequel in a multi-platform franchise with no discernible upside outside of helping the publisher involved.


I'm finding it funny how people blame all anger on 'PS fanboys' even though there are other audiences for the game that were also denied it. There's more to the industry than the Xbox brand and the people who care about that ecosystem

I'd be curious to know how many sequels to popular games were locked down as exclusives after explicitly being multiplatform in which the publisher is not footing the bill or in any way making the game better through the exclusivity deal which was made

 

[function]

Apparently, Sony put down dollar to get the Saturn version of Tomb Raider 2 cancelled.

(Saturn being the original platform for Tomb Raider).

Lara Croft just likes using platforms and dumping them when she gets a better offer. If she were a man, we would all be calling her a stud. Double standards innit.

 

[Inuhanyou]

Apparently, Sony put down dollar to get the Saturn version of Tomb Raider 2 cancelled.

(Saturn being the original platform for Tomb Raider).

Lara Croft just likes using platforms and dumping them when she gets a better offer. If she were a man, we would all be calling her a stud. Double standards innit.

And yet there was a PC port? You got any information on that? I really doubt that considering how all the others were on PC or dreamcast including tomb raider 2. I expect it was just saturn being a failure which pushed Eidos away from them and into Sony's arms. They were just the people to go to back then.

 

[pjbliverpool]

If this was a Sony or Nintendo thing they would be called the saviours of the industry. :/

This isn't some big conspiracy against xbox, I'd feel exactly the same way had it been Sony, Nintendo or even Valve for the steam box. And so would you for matter (if XBO was the platform being cut off from the game).

Anyway this whole discussion is academic now. Its only a times exclusive so who cares? I'll still get to play the game as I'd hoped. I don't really care about when.

 

[function]

And yet there was a PC port? You got any information on that? I really doubt that considering how all the others were on PC or dreamcast including tomb raider 2. I expect it was just saturn being a failure which pushed Eidos away from them and into Sony's arms. They were just the people to go to back then.

Nope, no information. I remember that being the story at the time, didn't know if it was true, several here have stated it was the case again with all the hoo-haa about ROTTR (rotter?).

Saturn was still hanging on okay during 1997, so it could be either. Canning a game well into development for a platform that could certainly handle it due to sales projections wouldn't be a first though. Bernie Stollar's comments about the Saturn during E3 97 wouldn't have helped though.

Tomb Raider 2 didn't come to DC btw. That was Tomb Raider 3. And an incredibly awful port it was too. Sega Europe put tons of money behind advertising it, ignoring the awesome Code Veronica. Madness.

If there wasn't an exclusisivity deal I expect that TR would have come to N64. The platform could certainly have handled it.

 

[Daozang]

I'm known for my lack of enthusiasm in anything related to the xbox brand.
In fact I have stated many times in this forum, that I consider buying an xbox, a waste of money, since, most of the things I like eventually end up on windows anyway and I own a gaming pc.

But I cannot blame them if they at least try to change a perception that many people share about their product, that being, that with a playstation and a pc you can play almost everything there is on the market with very few exceptions.
I'll say it again, my 360 experience was horrendous, and I vowed never to buy any hardware from MS ever again.
But I'm with Scott_Arm on this one.
You cannot accuse a company of being corrupt or unethical because they hurt your feelings.

 

[function]

Oh, here we go, from wikipedia:

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.

So there you go.

Sony getting done unto them as they did unto Sega. Except Saturn Tomb Raider 2 got canned well into development, and Sony were stamping on a crippled Sega at the time.

I think it's probably time for PS4 owners to stop crying foul at MS. The choice of Tomb Raider (reboot) 2 is almost ... poetic?

 

[Inuhanyou]

^ If i had known about that then as a kid, i would have been just as pissed. Even though its never happened since then, i have to imagine that people are thinking about now in regards to buying into this shit.

Hurting people's feelings has nothing to do with it. A lot of us think artificially walling a game behind a publisher with no other reason other than they just payed out the ass to be in bad taste and will more likely alienate players than the intended effect, which would be to get them interested.

I actually had an xbox one on my list to buy along with a several games after another pricedrop, because MS seemed like they were atleast making an effort to fix their outward projection, but then this happened, and so i shelved those plans. I just don't want to support practices like this in the industry regardless of who does them.

 

[function]

I was a Sega fanboy, for sure. I loved the way that their arcade hardware pushed boundaries every single year, and even now I think the combination of hardware and software made the Dreamcast the most ambitious, exciting and forward looking console ever.

So when I saw Sony coming in, using vast sums of cash to advertise with an effectiveness never seen before, loss leading massively on hardware, buying games studios outright instead of building them, and paying to stop others getting games I saw Sony as ... well ... as being like a lot of people see MS now.

In truth, Sony were just doing business, taking advantage of their strengths and positioning their console so it best served their goals. Like MS are trying to do. I don't think locking other platforms out of third party games is particularly good for industry in the long run, but MS have done it, Sony have done it, and Nintendo were doing it back in the 1980s and 1990s (except using threats instead of inducements).

Nothing new under the sun ...

 

[joker454]

Oh, here we go, from wikipedia:

So there you go.

Sony getting done unto them as they did unto Sega. Except Saturn Tomb Raider 2 got canned well into development, and Sony were stamping on a crippled Sega at the time.

I think it's probably time for PS4 owners to stop crying foul at MS. The choice of Tomb Raider (reboot) 2 is almost ... poetic?

I'm Outraged! (tm)

Anyway this whole discussion is academic now. Its only a times exclusive so who cares? I'll still get to play the game as I'd hoped. I don't really care about when.

Same here. I'll still feign Outrage! (tm) to fit in with the crowd though.

 

[Inuhanyou]

So because one understands the business decision of the company that's for their(the companies) own benefit, they should not be angry about it as a fan?

What do i care that MS is trying to get some exclusives they don't seem to want to invest in themselves with their own studios, by taking a game away from me? Yeah it helps them, but it hurts me, so i'm going to be pissed about that.

Maybe i should be lucky that Sony is going bankrupt right now and don't have the arrogance they once had about these things, or else i would have to probably turn to PC gaming at that point. I already didn't buy a PS3 until the slim came out just because i was so angry with how they tried to take the customer for granted at the beginning of the 7th gen

 

[temesgen]

Reply to a comment from joker454 on certain youtuber -I can't find joker454's post anywhere-.... I agree with you. Plus it's obvious he argues 'cos of arguing, it's not heartfelt. Demagogy at its best when he creates youtube videos to make money.

Not to mention his total lack of education and manners. That's the society we are promoting it seems... sigh.


I just hope that it is a long term exclusive, a la Mass Effect 1.

We learnt to know what people are up to after this...

If this was a Sony or Nintendo thing they would be called the saviours of the industry. :/

There are people in this very discussion who still blame Sony for Sega's failure with the Dreamcast and yet praise MS for the same tactics they hate Sony for using a decade ago.

For what its worth Sony got called out for much of the PS3/360 era by the press, the public, Gamestop employees, etc and they learned from it. MS seemed to have fallen into the same bit of hubris but the past year shows they are quickly trying to correct it. Not sure why we keep revisiting the over played bias meme.

 

[Malo]

Oh, here we go, from wikipedia:



So there you go.

Sony getting done unto them as they did unto Sega. Except Saturn Tomb Raider 2 got canned well into development, and Sony were stamping on a crippled Sega at the time.

I think it's probably time for PS4 owners to stop crying foul at MS. The choice of Tomb Raider (reboot) 2 is almost ... poetic?

Didn't it get released on the PC though?

 

[DavidGraham]

Why are people still reacting like the game is an XO only exclusive? the game is a timed-exclusive, just like Plants Vs Zombies Garden Warfare was. We live in a different time now than before, big AAA games like that can't risk picking one side over the other.