Tomb Raider exclusivity fallout thread *spawn

[Nesh]

Yes The company responsible for the timed exclusive deal with Tomb Raider is evil!
Oh but it was fine when the "other guy" got the same deal with GTA for an entire gen.
Oh they also did the exact same thing with Tomb Raider 2 on there first console.
I could actually go on for quite a while listing non 1st or 2nd party games that where timed exclusives or true exclusives to the "other guy" you know the company that is apparently immune to criticism for using this exact same tactic to get a foothold in console gaming.
Seriously though you have a preferred platform and thats fine. Is it really that big of a deal that you would wish the competition to go out of business? Actually if we want to make things truly fair why dont we get them to outlaw any sort of exclusive software period.

Did he excuse the other company? Because I dont see it. What is the point you are trying to make? That its ok for company A to do it because company B probably did it many years ago?
And yes it is a big deal especially when for decades consumers have been experiencing a product (software or hardware) and later out of nowhere they are deprived of it. TR has been multiplatform for multiple generations

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Oh but it was fine when the "other guy" got the same deal with GTA for an entire gen.

http://www.vg247.com/2010/11/25/reeves-gta-iii-ps2-exclusivity-deal-was-remarkably-cheap/

 

[Deleted member 11852]

http://www.vg247.com/2010/11/25/reeves-gta-iii-ps2-exclusivity-deal-was-remarkably-cheap/

Wow and LOL and Wow again.

“We picked up something called State of Emergency, which I don’t think would have been on Xbox anyway. Then I said, ‘What else have you got?’

“And they [Rockstar] said, ‘Well, we’ve got this Grand Theft Auto game… I suppose we could do a deal on that.’

Yeah, because it's not like it's game changing or anything

 

[MrFox]

So, I guess you don't want any of the consoles then since Sony, MS, and Nintendo have all done exactly that over the course of their console history.

This false equivalence fallacy is becoming a really boring argument. Repeating "the other guy did it too in 1997" is pointless in 2014, the most important time is now. These companies are not people. The landscape changes a lot at the corporate level, the situations change under different leadership, different generations, learning from past mistakes. The vendetta about a brand name is ridiculous.

I never bought a PS2, I didn't like the predatory attitude of Sony during that generation. The PS3 ended up fine, it started with a lot of incompetent decisions but it wasn't predatory. PS4 so far makes Sony look good all around with their brutal honesty, they did almost everything right from a consumer standpoint. So trying to tie up the PS4 era to the PS2 era is completely stupid. I can love the Sony of today while hating the Sony of 1997, there's no double standard.

 

[djskribbles]

This false equivalence fallacy is becoming a really boring argument. Repeating "the other guy did it too in 1997" is pointless in 2014, the most important time is now. These companies are not people. The landscape changes a lot at the corporate level, the situations change under different leadership, different generations, learning from past mistakes. The vendetta about a brand name is ridiculous.

I never bought a PS2, I didn't like the predatory attitude of Sony during that generation. The PS3 ended up fine, it started with a lot of incompetent decisions but it wasn't predatory. PS4 so far makes Sony look good all around with their brutal honesty, they did almost everything right from a consumer standpoint. So trying to tie up the PS4 era to the PS2 era is completely stupid. I can love the Sony of today while hating the Sony of 1997, there's no double standard.

Agreed.

 

[joker454]

http://www.vg247.com/2010/11/25/reeves-gta-iii-ps2-exclusivity-deal-was-remarkably-cheap/

Hah, go figure. I guess it goes to show how hard it can be to predict what becomes a monster and what doesn't catch on.

 

[shredenvain]

Did he excuse the other company? Because I dont see it. What is the point you are trying to make? That its ok for company A to do it because company B probably did it many years ago?
And yes it is a big deal especially when for decades consumers have been experiencing a product (software or hardware) and later out of nowhere they are deprived of it. TR has been multiplatform for multiple generations

Wouldnt not mentioning the other company and the the situation where they have done the same in his death to the evil corporation post be excusing them. They way your acting is that just because the "other guy" hasnt done the same with a big title this gen makes the past go away. I dont want to get banned by mods or have my post deleted over this issue.
Bottom line any Ps only gamer has every right to be pissed about the TR situation.
I dont blame people for being a little upset they have to wait to play TR.
I do have a problem with people calling for the death of an "EVIL" console and it's owner for doing something that is common practice. It is being taken past a case of venting anger into
a vindictive case of Over reaction. I dont remember anyone going that far about PVZ garden warfare or Beyonetta 2. Hell noone that I know of reacted even close to that way about Titanfall. I am pretty sure both current gen consoles already and will have their fare share of timed exclusives.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

reaction. I dont remember anyone going that far about PVZ garden warfare... Hell noone that I know of reacted even close to that way about Titanfall. I am pretty sure both current gen consoles already and will have their fare share of timed exclusives.

These were new IPs that were announced as exclusive, not timed exclusive. The difference in people's reactions illustrates the difference in the conditions. 1) TR is a known franchise with some millions of fans. 2) These fans expected it to be cross platform and suddenly were led to believe it was now platform exclusive, not timed exclusive.

Most importantly, had Harrison said, "coming first to XB1," there'd have been no uproar. There may have been some annoyed commentators at having an IP delayed for their platform, but that would have been business as usual with the same public response. The references to Sony doing the same with GTA3 have ended up being misplaced because GTA was a valued IP as the quote shows. Apparently, according to unsubstantiated Google facts, GTA2 sold 0.2 million. GTA was a two-bit franchise no-one cared about. Sony securing it was no different to securing PvZ or No Man's Space. (Not to say Sony didn't employ heavy-handed content securing policies to give themselves a games advantage, but GTA itself isn't an example of such tactics)

Look at the load of timed exclusives. Everyone's comfortable with that. It makes sense. People aren't that annoyed with Tomb Raider being a timed exclusive either, once that info was finally [strike]squeezed out of[/strike] released by MS.

 

[shredenvain]

Gta was a two bit franchise noone cared about?
Maybe on consoles, but GTA 1 and 2 where pretty popular on PC.
Maybe not huge money makers but piracy had a little to do with that.
My point has less to do with games being timed exclusive and more to do with certain posters responses to the whole TR situation. I dont see how it could possibly ever be ok for anyone to post such a negative comment like the one from earlier. It is just my opinion and I will just learn to deal with it.

 

[temesgen]

An exclusive deal for the platform holder who sold the most last time (PS1) and has just wiped the floor with one of the biggest rivals (Sega) and appears to be about to repeat their fortunes shouldn't be too expensive. Add in the complexity of development for PS2 and it probably made a lot of sense.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Gta was a two bit franchise noone cared about?

It's not like Sony approached TT pleading for GTA and waving lots of money around because they knew it would catapult sales for their system. According to the internets, only 200k GTA2's were sold, so it doesn't appear to have been a huge franchise and a huge coup. Contrast that with 7 million TR sales and it's quite clear how the vastly larger number of customers will produce a collective gestalt response that's more negatively emotionally charged. Same with other exclusives like Bayonetta 2. The outcry is proportional to how important the IP was to its players.

My point has less to do with games being timed exclusive and more to do with certain posters responses to the whole TR situation. I dont see how it could possibly ever be ok for anyone to post such a negative comment like the one from earlier. It is just my opinion and I will just learn to deal with it.

I don't know if that post was talking about timed exclusives or perpetual exclusives. It was a hypothetical response more than a direct reference to MS, in my interpretation, and also focussed on locking out existing significant cross-platform IPs.

If we introduce a hypothetical player, let's say Samsung release a console an buy up FIFA, Madden, GTA, and a host of other long lived cross-plat games people bought their PS4s and XB1s expecting to play these on, there'll be an uproar. Whereas if Samsung buys a load of new IPs or smaller IPs most people aren't aware of, the response will be the norm. I think there's a clear difference between the two behaviours, even if just on scale, such that the practices of Samsung in this hypothetical case couldn't be equated to the actions of MS and Sony in the past.

 

[Prophecy2k]

So, I guess you don't want any of the consoles then since Sony, MS, and Nintendo have all done exactly that over the course of their console history.

Regards,
SB

It was a hypothetical statement, but if you must, like MrFox said, what a company did or didn't do 10-15 years ago is irrelevant to me. It's all about what they are doing in this present time.

I don't hold grudges. If a company was to change their ways and stop using asshole practices to block gamer's access to existing established third party content, in a poor attempt to make their own platform seem like it has more value, then I would be quick to overlook the past.

For me as a consumer it comes down to this (and for the benefit of those who are easily confused, please take note of the tense); is a gaming platform holder making moves to add to the industry as a whole, by developing worthwhile products and services, or are they looking to make use of predatory practices to punish rival platform customers and reduce access to established games franchises in order to try to compete in the gaming sphere? If the latter then as a gamer I'm better off without them in this industry, whether they be Sony, MS, Nintendo or Valve... I don't care. As long as what you are doing now is additive to the industry, you have my support.

 

[Prophecy2k]

Wouldnt not mentioning the other company and the the situation where they have done the same in his death to the evil corporation post be excusing them. They way your acting is that just because the "other guy" hasnt done the same with a big title this gen makes the past go away. I dont want to get banned by mods or have my post deleted over this issue.
Bottom line any Ps only gamer has every right to be pissed about the TR situation.
I dont blame people for being a little upset they have to wait to play TR.
I do have a problem with people calling for the death of an "EVIL" console and it's owner for doing something that is common practice. It is being taken past a case of venting anger into
a vindictive case of Over reaction. I dont remember anyone going that far about PVZ garden warfare or Beyonetta 2. Hell noone that I know of reacted even close to that way about Titanfall. I am pretty sure both current gen consoles already and will have their fare share of timed exclusives.

First off, chill out dude. It seems you're getting more worked up and emotional over my statement, than my statement was about hypothetical companies that use predatory practices to the detriment of gamers and the industry.

Second, nowhere did I even mention the word "evil". Since my argument was not about the morality of such practices, rather the REALITY of their effects on gamers and the industry as a whole. I was being entirely objective, making a clearly valid statement about the value of companies that use predatory practices that hurt consumers, to compete in an industry, over the value of competition as a whole. There was nothing emotional or angry about my post, neither was I calling for the death of any company as it stands. Since "stating that an industry would be better off without a predatory company in it" =/= "calling for the death of Microsoft". Your response on the other hand, (no offence) unfortunately reeks of a persecution complex for MS; when in my post nowhere did I reference MS directly. You're projecting and building strawmen galore, dude. Totally mis-representing both my post and my intent.

I would kindly ask you to a) breathe, and b) go back and read exactly what I wrote in its context. Instead of projecting a whole host of internet platform warrior posts in your mind onto mine.

 

[Prophecy2k]

I don't know if that post was talking about timed exclusives or perpetual exclusives. It was a hypothetical response more than a direct reference to MS, in my interpretation, and also focussed on locking out existing significant cross-platform IPs.

If we introduce a hypothetical player, let's say Samsung release a console an buy up FIFA, Madden, GTA, and a host of other long lived cross-plat games people bought their PS4s and XB1s expecting to play these on, there'll be an uproar. Whereas if Samsung buys a load of new IPs or smaller IPs most people aren't aware of, the response will be the norm. I think there's a clear difference between the two behaviours, even if just on scale, such that the practices of Samsung in this hypothetical case couldn't be equated to the actions of MS and Sony in the past.

Thanks Shifty. Your interpretation of my post was spot on.

 

[Prophecy2k]

This false equivalence fallacy is becoming a really boring argument. Repeating "the other guy did it too in 1997" is pointless in 2014, the most important time is now. These companies are not people. The landscape changes a lot at the corporate level, the situations change under different leadership, different generations, learning from past mistakes. The vendetta about a brand name is ridiculous.

I never bought a PS2, I didn't like the predatory attitude of Sony during that generation. The PS3 ended up fine, it started with a lot of incompetent decisions but it wasn't predatory. PS4 so far makes Sony look good all around with their brutal honesty, they did almost everything right from a consumer standpoint. So trying to tie up the PS4 era to the PS2 era is completely stupid. I can love the Sony of today while hating the Sony of 1997, there's no double standard.

Absolutely agreed.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

It's not like Sony approached TT pleading for GTA and waving lots of money around because they knew it would catapult sales for their system. According to the internets, only 200k GTA2's were sold, so it doesn't appear to have been a huge franchise and a huge coup.

While true, it's hard to believe that somebody from Sony, having played even an early build of GTA III, wouldn't have realised that in terms of scope and meshing of different types of gameplay, GTA III was something special.

Having played earlier GTA games GTA III wasn't on my radar but 60 seconds with it in store had me sold.

Sent from my iPhone using Forum Runner.

 

[specwarGP2]

Yes The company responsible for the timed exclusive deal with Tomb Raider is evil!
Oh but it was fine when the "other guy" got the same deal with GTA for an entire gen.
Oh they also did the exact same thing with Tomb Raider 2 on there first console.

If that's the case, wouldn't MS be "more evil" because it chose to ignore history and repeat the bad behavior of its competitor?

 

[Billy Idol]

It is really annoying that TR is only a timed exclusive...a dick move by MS imo.

Now I know that only a few month later a vastly superior TR game (PS4 or PC) will release, which means I have to wait to play the game.

I ask MS, as a X1 owner supporting their struggling console...what exactly is this deal worth for me? No X1 specific optimization, as it is a standard multiplat game! I need to wait now to play the game as every non X1 owner! Boo.

MS better next spends their money for either full exclusives or even better: new own IPs to please their supporters.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

It is really annoying that TR is only a timed exclusive...a dick move by MS imo.

The expense of a full exclusive has already been discussed. Unless MS want to throw away all their money pleasing XB fans, the timed exclusive was the most intelligent option they had with TR.

 

[Billy Idol]

The expense of a full exclusive has already been discussed. Unless MS want to throw away all their money pleasing XB fans, the timed exclusive was the most intelligent option they had with TR.

Why is it intelligent? Does anyone really think that this provides even one single extra X1 owner?? The money is blown in the dust and generated even negative PR.

Most intelligent option: take that money to fund a indie studio to let them make a kinect game.