Support NeoGAF

[Melchiah]

To be fair, you seem to be asking something that simply never really happens anyway. At no point on stage was Dead Rising 3 announced as something that was exclusive due to a lack of funds, neither was Titanfall, neither was Street Fighter V etc.

Anything along those lines usually only gets talked about more candidly in things like tweets and BTS footage or whatever. Outside of Shenmue III, I honestly can't think of any times where a project was presented on stages as cash-strapped.

Both DR3 and TF were officially announced at Microsoft's E3 2013 event, and SFV at Sony's PS Experience 2014 event, and all of them were revealed to be exclusive at those events. Whereas TR was officially announced in August 1, 2013 on their website, almost a year before the exclusivity deal was revealed. That's the difference here.

 

[benny_a]

The only thing that I see as being significantly clearer with games like Titanfall or Street Fighter are the terms of exclusivity, in that there were known to be exclusive (or perceived timed exclusive) at the time of announcement. Hell, the Titanfall stuff only surfaced long after the fact, with the initial reaction being very similar to Rise of the Tomb Raider today.

I guess we just have to agree to disagree. Titanfall started as a regular multiplatform title until it allegedly convinced EA to not continue funding, where Microsoft stepped to make it a timed exclusive in exchange for funding.
After the reception at E3 it was re-negotiated as a full exclusive, as per statements from Respawn and Yusuf Mehdi.

Edit: Corrected the full timeline for Titanfall.

 

[Eila]

They are working on the Xbox 360 version, which is getting a simultaneous release with the Xbox One version.

They are also clearly working on the PC version, which will be released a few months later.

I think you're way off base, here.

360 port is being outsourced for sure, and we don't know about the PC version. Hope it's being worked by Crystal Dinamics and it ends up being good.

 

[Gestault]

And where in the announcement time frame would you place this loss of confidence based on the available information posted in this thread a few posts up?

My point is that the information you expected to be shown at the reveal isn't the sort of thing that's normally discussed openly. They want as little risk as possible for big-budget projects, but they also don't want to telegraph that since investors and general mindshare benefits from a strong appearance.

 

[benny_a]

My point is that the information you expected to be shown at the reveal isn't the sort of thing that's normally discussed openly. They want as little risk as possible for big-budget projects, but they also don't want to telegraph that since investors and general mindshare benefits from a strong appearance.

I wasn't being precise enough in my statement. I don't mean that this had to be as the introduction or part of the trailer.
The press release or interviews, like they always happen at E3 would have been enough as an information source.

And let's not forget: The timed exclusive reveal was on a live-streamed Gamescom press conference. There was no new footage when this was announced so 100% of the talk about the game was about the platform it was coming to.
If their plan was to not have spotlight shined on that particular aspect then they choose a very poor route.

 

[MrCaliaztec]

I loved Parody Kaz's tweet and it really does ring true with how AAA games are now!


"I am pleased to announce that the PS4 version of Rise Of The Tomb Raider will be beta tested on Xbox One. Iron out those bugs, Microsoft!"

 

[Inuhanyou]

360 port is being outsourced for sure, and we don't know about the PC version. Hope it's being worked by Crystal Dinamics and it ends up being good.

I actualy hope the PS4 and pc versions end up being worked on by Nixxes like the 360 version. No disrespect to CD, but Nixxes has produced better results of Tomb Raider on PS3/PC than CD did on the original 360 TR version. And the PS4 remaster done by them was also superior

 

[Crimsonclaw111]

That tweet says a Steam and Windows 10 release. Possible crossbuy or am I just hoping too much?

 

[Synth]

Both DR3 and TF were officially announced at Microsoft's E3 2013 event, and SFV at Sony's PS Experience 2014 event, and all of them were revealed to be exclusive at those events. Whereas TR was officially announced in August 1, 2013 on their website, almost a year before the exclusivity deal was revealed. That's the difference here.

I believe I covered that difference in my post (it being presented as exclusive immediately). That's not my point here.

I guess we just have to agree to disagree. Titanfall started as a regular multiplatform title until it allegedly convinced EA to not continue funding, where Microsoft stepped to make it a timed exclusive in exchange for funding.
After the reception at E3 it was re-negotiated as a full exclusive, as per statements from Respawn and Yusuf Mehdi.

Edit: Corrected the full timeline for Titanfall.

Yea, but I don't think the timeline here is of much importance to the game requiring additional funding help. I don't think anyone looked at Titanfall the day it got revealed and thought "now there's a game that needs some outside assistance". It was simply seen as standard purchased exclusivity. "We need help" is never the subject of any announcement outside of something like Kickstarter... or Bayonetta 2 where the game was previously known to have been killed as a result of funding. And even in Bayonetta 2's case, it's not something that was part of any official announcements.

EDIT: I should be clear here... I don't actually believe Rise of the Tomb Raider actually did need any of MS' money to happen. I think that's a ridiculous idea. I do however think it's similarly ridiculous to assume that Street Fighter V did either.

 

[jackdoe]

I actualy hope the PS4 and pc versions end up being worked on by Nixxes like the 360 version. No disrespect to CD, but Nixxes has produced better results of Tomb Raider on PS3/PC than CD did on the original 360 TR version. And the PS4 remaster done by them was also superior

Crystal Dynamics has been essentially a Xbox 360/Xbox One exclusive developer ever since Tomb Raider Underworld. The PC, PS3, and PS4 versions of their titles since have all been handled by Nixxes and I don't see that changing any time soon.

 

[benny_a]

Yea, but I don't think the timeline here is of much importance to the game requiring additional funding help. I don't think anyone looked at Titanfall the day it got revealed and thought "now there's a game that needs some outside assistance". It was simply seen as standard purchased exclusivity. "We need help" is never the subject of any announcement outside of something like Kickstarter... or Bayonetta 2 where the game was previously known to have been killed as a result of funding. And even in Bayonetta 2's case, it's not something that was part of any official announcements.

I think there is way too much emphasis on the "We needed help"-aspect. That wasn't supposed to be the main takeaway from my post..

If we believe that they needed help and that without Microsoft the game wouldn't exist, then when the game was announced or or debuted with the first associated media for it, the platforms it's coming out for would have been made clear.

Nobody was confused when Bayonetta 2 was announced whether or not it was coming to the Wii U.

 

[shinnn]

Both DR3 and TF were officially announced at Microsoft's E3 2013 event, and SFV at Sony's PS Experience 2014 event, and all of them were revealed to be exclusive at those events. Whereas TR was officially announced in August 1, 2013 on their website, almost a year before the exclusivity deal was revealed. That's the difference here.

In 2013 they just said the sequel was in development, that was not an official game announcement. RoTR was officially revealed at MS E3 2014 conference (without platforms). It was announced Holiday 2015 exclusive at Gamescom 2014.

The difference is that MS can use the term "holiday exclusive", and they used.

 

[Synth]

I think there is way too much emphasis on the "We needed help"-aspect. That wasn't supposed to be the main takeaway from my post..

If we believe that they needed help and that without Microsoft the game wouldn't exist, then when the game was announced or debuted with the very first games media the platforms this game we're announcing or rebuting are made clear.

Nobody was confused when Bayonetta 2 was announced whether or not it was coming to the Wii U.

Perhaps I'm getting lost somewhere in this convo then...

All I gathered was that someone suggested that Tomb Raider may have timed exclusivity as a result of requiring funding from outside. Your posts responding to it seemed to be focused on the funding aspect, and not the exclusivity aspect. It seemed as though you were suggesting the funding aspect of a game were something that's typically made known when it's announced.

 

[Hawk269]

They are working on the Xbox 360 version, which is getting a simultaneous release with the Xbox One version.

They are also clearly working on the PC version, which will be released a few months later.

I think you're way off base, here.

I thought I remember reading something that the main team is soley working on the Xbox One version and another dev is handling the 360 version. I can't find the link for it but I do remember reading that.

 

[DeepEnigma]

This thread man, lol.

So much spinning I am dizzy, or maybe it's the alcohol.

Which one is it people? I keep hearing that the game will do so well this holiday because it's "TOMB RAIDER", a well known franchise... Yet it needed rescuing?!

Can't have it both ways, guys.

 

[gtj1092]

I understand some people have a need to defend whatever company they choose but nothing points to MS saving TR. From the horses mouth....



http://www.gamespot.com/articles/rise-of-the-tomb-raider-dev-talks-xbox-exclusivity/1100-6425471/

The interviewer went on to ask Gallagher if he thought that Crystal Dynamics' partnership with Microsoft was so deep that Rise of the Tomb Raider could not exist without it. Gallagher said he doesn't think that's the case.

"I wouldn't say that," he said. "If you look at Tomb Raider, it's been around for 20 years, so I do think that Tomb Raider would still be around [without Microsoft]."

 

[etta]

This thread man, lol.

So much spinning I am dizzy, or maybe it's the alcohol.

Which one is it people? I keep hearing that the game will do so well this holiday because it's "TOMB RAIDER", a well known franchise... Yet it needed rescuing?!

Can't have it both ways, guys.

No, that's not what Synth is saying.

 

[DeepEnigma]

No, that's not what Synth is saying.

I don't recall quoting anyone specifically.

 

[benny_a]

Perhaps I'm getting lost somewhere in this convo then...

All I gathered was that someone suggested that Tomb Raider may have timed exclusivity as a result of requiring funding from outside. Your posts responding to it seemed to be focused on the funding aspect, and not the exclusivity aspect. It seemed as though you were suggesting the funding aspect of a game were something that's typically made known when it's announced.

I responded to a post that said Microsoft saved Tomb Raider. Or in their words "a Tomb Raider followup not being possible without Microsoft's assistance"

And I still think it's clear that if you fund a game or provide such assistance that it otherwise wouldn't be made (= canceled) then upon the debut of said title you know what platforms it's coming to.

 

[Gestault]

http://www.gamespot.com/articles/rise-of-the-tomb-raider-dev-talks-xbox-exclusivity/1100-6425471/

The interviewer went on to ask Gallagher if he thought that Crystal Dynamics' partnership with Microsoft was so deep that Rise of the Tomb Raider could not exist without it. Gallagher said he doesn't think that's the case.

"I wouldn't say that," he said. "If you look at Tomb Raider, it's been around for 20 years, so I do think that Tomb Raider would still be around [without Microsoft]."

Ding-ding-ding

 

[etta]

I don't recall quoting anyone specifically.

Oh, well most of the conversation in the past two pages was between Synth and Benny, so I assumed you were referring to that part of the conversation.

 

[DeepEnigma]

*Looks above your post*

 

[Gestault]

*Looks above your post*

What?

 

[Synth]

I responded to a post that said Microsoft saved Tomb Raider. Or in their words "a Tomb Raider followup not being possible without Microsoft's assistance"

And I still think it's clear that if you fund a game or provide such assistance that it otherwise wouldn't be made (= canceled) then upon the debut of said title you know what platforms it's coming to.

Yea, that's true I guess, but in the situation of not requiring outside funding, you typically will know what platforms it'll be releasing on too. So at reveal we should logically have known it was headed to PS4, only for that version to then go awol once the deal was made.

 

[MatrixMan.EXE]

So wait, there are people here that think this is the same situation as Street Fighter V and Titanfall? Lawwwwl. Nah. It isn't even close to the same. It was a moneyhat, pure and simple. This game would be coming out Holiday 2015 on everything without Microsoft interference.

Street Fighter V would likely have been a 2018 title or later without Sony assisting in the development and Titanfall may have never made it out of the gate full stop if Microsoft cash wasn't involved.

 

[Elandyll]

...

EDIT: I should be clear here... I don't actually believe Rise of the Tomb Raider actually did need any of MS' money to happen. I think that's a ridiculous idea. I do however think it's similarly ridiculous to assume that Street Fighter V did either.

And yet we have it from the horse's mouth on both sides (Capcom and CD) that it was the case.
SF V would likely not exist without Sony, and SE did not need MS to help with Tomb Raider.

Can we stop now with the pointless comparison?

A much more valid one is the Destiny DLC. Equally shitty, even if "just" for DLC.

 

[shinnn]

Some people are acting like Cystal Dynamics is some small indie game company that don't have the resources to develop on multiple consoles.

They are not small indie, and nobody is saying that. But they don't have internal resources to develop on multiple consoles, since they need to contract external developers to do the ports. The Definitive Edition was handled by two different external studios for XB1 and PS4.

 

[Skeff]

They are not small indie, and nobody is saying that. But they don't have internal resources to develop on multiple consoles, since they need to contract external developers to do the ports. The Definitive Edition was handled by two different external studios for XB1 and PS4.

You say this as if the ps4 port is going to be handled in house, when it has likely already been given to nixxes. It's clear CD will be moving directly onto the sequel.

 

[Trup1aya]

There's no reason to put the word polished within paragraphs, as this is what was reported back then.

http://news.softpedia.com/news/Phil...in-1080p-on-Xbox-One-Bungie-Says-455943.shtml


And that was possible , eventhough the game was released on both platfforms simultaneousy, in addition to the last gen versions.

There's no evidence now, that TR on PS4 would benefit in any way from the delay, apart from the usual framerate/resolution increase, which most likely would have been there anyway, even if it was released on the same day.

The quotation marks were because the questions is about potential. Not polish...

The existence of last gen versions kept destiny from reaching its potential. The devs have admitted as much. And the extra attention needed to get the xb1 version up to snuff could have gone to making the ps4 version even better...

The argument is that developing for multiple platforms dilutes the resources that COULD go to making one version reach its potential...

In th case of TR, MS is ensuring that the xb1 version reaches its potential.... No ones arguing that this is good for Ps4 owners...

 

[Infernostew]

They are not small indie, and nobody is saying that. But they don't have internal resources to develop on multiple consoles, since they need to contract external developers to do the ports. The Definitive Edition was handled by two different external studios for XB1 and PS4.

Never said anyone said CD is indie. I also find it hard to believe they don't have resources to develop on multiple consoles at one.

 

[etta]

And yet we have it from the horse's mouth on both sides (Capcom and CD) that it was the case.
SF V would likely not exist without Sony, and SE did not need MS to help with Tomb Raider.

Can we stop now with the pointless comparison?

A much more valid one is the Destiny DLC. Equally shitty, even if "just" for DLC.

So basically this whole thing boils down to Sony/Microsoft benefiting from these deals because they are forcing consumers into buying their console, right? They do these deals specifically to coerce people to buy their platform.

 

[shinnn]

And yet we have it from the horse's mouth on both sides (Capcom and CD) that it was the case.
SF V would likely not exist without Sony, and SE did not need MS to help with Tomb Raider.

Can we stop now with the pointless comparison?

A much more valid one is the Destiny DLC. Equally shitty, even if "just" for DLC.

Can we stop with the constant shitposting about MS relationship?

Someone posted the TR situation few posts earlier:

Overall, Microsoft working on the project helps Crystal Dynamics "achieve what we want with Rise of the Tomb Raider; to deliver the best game that we can," Gallagher said."

relationship didn't happen overnight. In fact, it's "been a long partnership" that actually began, in a way, back in 2008

 

[jackdoe]

You say this as if the ps4 port is going to be handled in house, when it has likely already been given to nixxes. It's clear CD will be moving directly onto the sequel.

Yeah, I mean this deal pretty much does nothing towards ensuring Crystal Dynamics focuses solely on the Xbox One version as that was what they were going to do anyway. They only develop for one console, previously the Xbox 360, and now the Xbox One. All this one year exclusivity deal does is to delay Nixxes PC and PS4 ports.

 

[Makoto Yuki]

Can we stop with the constant shitposting about MS relationship?

Someone posted the TR situation few posts earlier:

It's not shittposting about MS relationship if it's true. SE didn't need MS to make RotR.

 

[Synth]

And yet we have it from the horse's mouth on both sides (Capcom and CD) that it was the case.
SF V would likely not exist without Sony, and SE did not need MS to help with Tomb Raider.

Can we stop now with the pointless comparison?

A much more valid one is the Destiny DLC. Equally shitty, even if "just" for DLC.

Can you show me evidence of the former? I genuinely haven't ever seen it.

 

[Melchiah]

In 2013 they just said the sequel was in development, that was not an official game announcement. RoTR was officially revealed at MS E3 2014 conference (without platforms). It was announced Holiday 2015 exclusive at Gamescom 2014.

The difference is that MS can use the term "holiday exclusive", and they used.

You don't consider this an official announcement?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rise_of_the_Tomb_Raider

On August 1, 2013, Phil Rogers, Square Enix' Western CEO, confirmed in a blog post on the company's official website that a "next-generation Tomb Raider sequel" is "well into development".

"Well into development", without any word about Microsoft's funding.

The interviewer went on to ask Gallagher if he thought that Crystal Dynamics' partnership with Microsoft was so deep that Rise of the Tomb Raider could not exist without it. Gallagher said he doesn't think that's the case.

"I wouldn't say that," he said. "If you look at Tomb Raider, it's been around for 20 years, so I do think that Tomb Raider would still be around [without Microsoft]."

Ding-ding-ding

Well, there it is.

 

[Tygamr]

Well I guess I'll prolly just get it for PC then. Or wait for it to be cheap on PS4.

 

[-MD-]

Can we stop with the constant shitposting about MS relationship?

Someone posted the TR situation few posts earlier:

Nowhere in anything that you quoted does it say that SE needed MS to make Tomb Raider.

 

[Melchiah]

The quotation marks were because the questions is about potential. Not polish...

The existence of last ten versions kept destiny from reaching its potential. The devs have admitted as much. And the extra attention needed to get the xb1 version up to stuff could have gone to making the ps4 version even better...

The argument is that developing for multiple platforms dilutes the resources that COULD go to making one version reach its potential...

In th case of TR, MS is ensuring that the xb1 version reaches its potential.... No ones arguing that this is good for Ps4 owners...

The extra attention the XBO version of Destiny received certainly didn't benefit the PS4 version, considering they run and look the same.

As for the bolded, well...

The quality of the PC and PS4 optimizations will probably "benefit" from this one-at-a-time approach as well, but at the cost of having waiting 6mo to a year to play an anticipated title.

 

[Steroyd]

Can we stop with the constant shitposting about MS relationship?

Someone posted the TR situation few posts earlier:

Your own quote says they've had a relationship since 2008, where they've released Tomb Raider Underworld and the Reboot simultaneously on multiple systems already.

 

[shinnn]

It's not shittposting about MS relationship if it's true. SE didn't need MS to make RotR.

Its shitposting saying that CD didn't need HELP of MS when they said that MS HELPED.

People act like MS did nothing for the franchise. Just throwed money and that's it, like a DLC.

 

[Synth]

Its shitposting saying that CD didn't need HELP of MS when they said that MS HELPED.

Well, it's entirely possible to help someone who doesn't need it. I do that all the time.

 

[etta]

Its shitposting saying that CD didn't need HELP of MS when they said that MS HELPED.

People act like MS did nothing for the franchise. Just throwed money and that's it, like a DLC.

At the very least, Microsoft pays the entire bill for marketing and publishing, right? I assume this is the case for the PC version as well. Will Square Enix publish the PS4 version?
This gets me thinking, does Minecraft on PS4 now have a "Microsoft Studios" splash screen when it boots up?

 

[shinnn]

You don't consider this an official announcement?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rise_of_the_Tomb_Raider


"Well into development", without any word about Microsoft's funding.

No? Can you read the next paragraph of your own link?

"On June 9, 2014, Rise of the Tomb Raider was formally announced"

Maybe your idea of official announcement of a game is different than mine.

 

[Makoto Yuki]

Its shitposting saying that CD didn't need HELP of MS when they said that MS HELPED.

People act like MS did nothing for the franchise. Just throwed money and that's it, like a DLC.

Again, they didn't need help, the game was gonna get made one way or another. With or without MS' help. If MS "helped" to the extent you are suggesting I think this game would be MORE than Timed Exclusive. If MS put that much money and time helping develop the game than it would be considered (at least partly) THEIR project, and it wouldn't even be on the PS4 in the future.

Well, it's entirely possible to help someone who doesn't need it. I do that all the time.

Pretty much.

I find it hilarious how people make it sound like MS was critical to the development of RotR. Sure they are helping, I'm not arguing against that. The amount people think they are helping is misunderstood. Again, if they are really helping develop THAT MUCH of the game, then it would never be on a PS4 in the future.

 

[Melchiah]

No? Can you read the next paragraph of your own link?

"On June 9, 2014, Rise of the Tomb Raider was formally announced"

Maybe your idea of official announcement of a game is different than mine.

Official or less official, it was "well into development" without any word about needing help from a platform holder.

 

[Purest 78]

EDIT: I should be clear here... I don't actually believe Rise of the Tomb Raider actually did need any of MS' money to happen. I think that's a ridiculous idea. I do however think it's similarly ridiculous to assume that Street Fighter V did either.

I just checked as of may Capcoms assets was 65 million. You and others are seriously underestimating Capcoms financial problems. There's simple no way SfV was being made without backing.

 

[AgentP]

Its shitposting saying that CD didn't need HELP of MS when they said that MS HELPED.

People act like MS did nothing for the franchise. Just throwed money and that's it, like a DLC.

They helped, helped keep it off other systems. They are a business, stop trying to justify their actions.

 

[Falchion]

That sucks PS4 peeps have to wait a whole year for it, I hate these timed exclusivity agreements.

 

[Kayant]

Its shitposting saying that CD didn't need HELP of MS when they said that MS HELPED.

People act like MS did nothing for the franchise. Just throwed money and that's it, like a DLC.

No one has said MS didn't help or isn't helping what people are saying is that CD didn't need help for the game to be made because it was already being made about 6+ months before it's formal announcement on stage keeping in mind this was the same franchise which Square Enix where not completely happy about previously as per the financial reports yet the sequel was still approved months later to be in development. Even at it's formal announcement no signs point to help being needed.