Those gamers are guys like me who spent god only knows how much money on the 360 and your suggestion is to just have them shrug it off?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Rise of the Tomb Raider timed Xbox exclusive for Holiday 2015 (No PS/PC, SE publish)
- Thread starter fluffydelusions
- Start date
Those gamers are guys like me who spent god only knows how much money on the 360 and your suggestion is to just have them shrug it off?
Rats Off To Ya
Banned
I see Drek's post went completely over your head. It's not that the first party studios started somewhere else. It's that they continually flounder under the Xbox management with sub-par releases and endless sequels.
BlazingDarkness
Member
For the most crucial period of time.
Lilalaunebaer
Member
Honestly to me personally the cross-generation is worse than a exclusive window. So we are probably looking at another year of games being gimped for new generation. This is by far the most frustrating new generation ever.
Portugeezer
Gold Member
Why is he acting like people thought they bought the Tomb Raider IP indefinitely?
TheRagnCajun
Member
Woa I didn't expect GAF's reaction to be this big. I guess some people care more about TR than I do.
For sure buying exclusives is MS's strategy. It worked well for them last gen, at least for this first couple years. I remember Sony being asked about this when they weren't doing well. Their response (Kaz, I think) was that they would prefer to invest in their own first party studios. Ultimately, I think Sony have been proven right. Game development is getting too expensive. Consoles are becoming more like PCs, and therefore more like eachother. Its getting harder and harder to secure exclusives. All I hear about this gen now is 'exclusive content' which usually amounts to some special model skins and mabye a mission. Frankly, I don't think Titanfall or TR are as big of a deal as Gears of War, Bioshock or Elderscrolls IV. For that reason, I think MS is continuing to follow a loosing strategy.
For sure buying exclusives is MS's strategy. It worked well for them last gen, at least for this first couple years. I remember Sony being asked about this when they weren't doing well. Their response (Kaz, I think) was that they would prefer to invest in their own first party studios. Ultimately, I think Sony have been proven right. Game development is getting too expensive. Consoles are becoming more like PCs, and therefore more like eachother. Its getting harder and harder to secure exclusives. All I hear about this gen now is 'exclusive content' which usually amounts to some special model skins and mabye a mission. Frankly, I don't think Titanfall or TR are as big of a deal as Gears of War, Bioshock or Elderscrolls IV. For that reason, I think MS is continuing to follow a loosing strategy.
Excellent post.
I Wanna Be The Guy
U-S-A! U-S-A! U-S-A!
Yeah that's what I took from it. The only disappointing part of this whole thing.
Do you agree with what he said or excellent as in terribly bad joke post?
Melchiah
Member
I bought the PS4 version the day it was released, and was looking forward to the next one, as I enjoyed it more than Uncharted 2+3. That's why these kind of business practises piss me off. There better be some compensation, be it a cheaper price or more content, when/if it hits the other platforms later on.
StarBlazers1
Member
Really? I understand full well what I am talking about. Sony closed many, MANY studios that started out with them as well. Remember Psygnosis, Zipper Interactive, Incognito Games, BigBig Studios and many others? Which, by the way, were all internal studios mostly acquired by Sony. Not started.
I understand the angst toward Microsoft and some of it's practices, but let's not pretend it's exclusive to them. If all of Sony's other divisions weren't failing so much, I guarantee that the Video game division wouldn't be as important to them, similar to Microsoft's position.
As far as the two studios I listed as still prominent, I meant them as examples of AAA studios started by Sony. I also should have included Polyphony as well.
kinoki
Illness is the doctor to whom we pay most heed; to kindness, to knowledge, we make promise only; pain we obey.
Thanks for missing the point.
Sony has a history of taking good studios that want to be a part of their 1st party and making them better. Just the opposite of Microsoft. Sony, also unlike Microsoft, don't aquire studios that don't want to be a part of their 1st party (see: Insomniac, ThatGameCompany, etc) and let them remain 2nd party. Subcontracting, if you want. And it is true that they've closed studios but that's sometimes a hard choice you have to make when an aspect of your business doesn't work out. No company ever in history hasn't been put in a situation where you had to make a decision like that. There's a difference between Sony and Microsoft, however, and that's what Drek tried to highlight.
I'm not clear on why Microsoft is in this game, to be honest. If I had to guess it's to carve out a market where they can sit back and make money from advertising, subscriptions and hosting a store where they take a cut from the sales while putting in as little effort as possible. Microsoft is pretty happy without Sony and don't like the competition. It'd probably just be cheaper to buy Sony and shut it down than continue the console war.
StarBlazers1
Member
You mean endless sequels like Killzone, Ratchet and Clank, Jak and Daxter, Uncharted, God of War, Infamous, Little Big Planet, Gran Turismo, etc???
massivekettle
Member
Let's not pretend that Sony's first party line-up is solely made up of GOTYs.
AFAIK, Killzone 3 and Infamous SS both got pretty lukewarm-to-averageish reviews.
Are you sure?
Are you sure it wasn't the PR statement afterward that insulted your intelligence that didn't piss you off?
TheCanisDirus
Member
Completely agree. There is less and less of a reason to own a "current gen" console with the prolonged death of previous gen.
And woosh, the point went way over this persons head ....
You've suggested a bunch of games from developers who are off working on new IPs or have come from different ones in the past.
The exceptions being Gran Turismo (although I'd argue sporting games are exempt from iteration) and God Of War (which needs to either be canned or rebooted with brand new mythology - it's old now).
As such, you've re-enforced that Sony are continually looking to refresh their catalogue and diversify internally.
And that's that.
True. But if Uncharted 4 is hitting PS4 holiday 2015 that evens things out. In my opinion that is the whole reason why this deal was done - Sony has Uncharted for holiday 2015, Microsoft wanted a comparable exclusive, Square probably saw Uncharted as competition on PS4, so the price was right.
Xenon
Member
This contains far too much logic and reason to be in this thread.
AmethystEnd
Member
Wow, you just listed a bunch of successful franchises; some from developers who have moved onto new IPs (which in Naughty Dog's case, quite successfully). Sony's first/second party sure is great.
Whereas Microsoft's first party has been successful with Forza and-
Well, you're good at listing stuff. I'll let you handle this one.
If there is one thing that is certain in this industry, it's that Square Enix will play every side, pissing off all their fans for every franchise in one way or another. I doubt it has anything to do with selling shares (in fact, pretty sure Square said that happened just because Sony was in a tight spot at that moment), it's just Square Enix being Square Enix.
kinoki
Illness is the doctor to whom we pay most heed; to kindness, to knowledge, we make promise only; pain we obey.
Okay, so Sony's studios have created original IPs and sequels, several of which have sold really well. This has been under Sony's supervision. Halo was Bungie, Gears of War was Epic, Call of Duty was Infinity Ward, Titanfall was Respawn, Mass Effect was Bioware, etc.
Drek's point was that out of all the games released by Microsoft under their supervision the only really succesful IP has been Turn10's Forza. Every other IP has had its origins outside of Microsoft and was only sequelised by them.
Not sure if serious...
Ratchet & Clank isn't a first party title.
Killzone, God of War or inFamous don't have more than two titles per console... And Guerilla Games are on a new licence, while Santa Monica has been involved in a shit load of other different games.
Naughty Dog output is to most people mind the best way to handle a game studio, many new ambitious licence every generation... Hell people were begging for more Crash & Jak, and they went on with a new licence. And when we expected a new Uncharted, they did TLOU...
There were only two Little Big Planet before Mm started doing other things.
Maybe your post went over my head and was ironic I don't know.
massivekettle
Member
Thanks for missing the point.
Sony has a history of taking good studios that want to be a part of their 1st party and making them better. Just the opposite of Microsoft. Sony, also unlike Microsoft, don't aquire studios that don't want to be a part of their 1st party (see: Insomniac, ThatGameCompany, etc) and let them remain 2nd party. Subcontracting, if you want. And it is true that they've closed studios but that's sometimes a hard choice you have to make when an aspect of your business doesn't work out. No company ever in history hasn't been put in a situation where you had to make a decision like that. There's a difference between Sony and Microsoft, however, and that's what Drek tried to highlight.
I'm not clear on why Microsoft is in this game, to be honest. If I had to guess it's to carve out a market where they can sit back and make money from advertising, subscriptions and hosting a store where they take a cut from the sales while putting in as little effort as possible. Microsoft is pretty happy without Sony and don't like the competition. It'd probably just be cheaper to buy Sony and shut it down than continue the console war.
That would probably rank as the worst business decision ever.
Also, no corporation likes competition, yep, not even Sony.
This thread has officially run its course, in light of the recent announcement by Phil Spencer.
Agreed. We don't see the full potential of next gen if we keep having to water down developers time making adjustments to have the game run on 360.
ShodanMAN
Member
"Yes, the deal has a duration. I didn't buy it. I don't own the franchise." -Phil Spencer
Well there you go. Like I said, I'm really p*ssed off that MS spent money so they can get a little one up on the competition for a limited amount of time. As a consumer I want to see investment through in house development, rather than futile marketing ploys
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2...b-raider-xbox-exclusivity-deal-has-a-duration
Well there you go. Like I said, I'm really p*ssed off that MS spent money so they can get a little one up on the competition for a limited amount of time. As a consumer I want to see investment through in house development, rather than futile marketing ploys
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2...b-raider-xbox-exclusivity-deal-has-a-duration
massivekettle
Member
Microsoft published Halo, Gears of War and the first Mass Effect. That would count as "their supervision" as well.
StarBlazers1
Member
ummm...no. I understand full well what the point of the post was. What I am saying is that the case can be made for Sony as well. Microsoft has funded many new IP's that have or are going to be successful. Just because they weren't as successful doesn't make them any less important to the industry. They've funded Alan Wake and Quantum Break from Remedy(not owned by MS). Sunset Overdrive from Insomniac(Not owned by MS) Dance Central Games from Harmonix(Not owned by MS) etc. They've had some issues, no question, but to just say they shouldn't be in the business and they have brought nothing to the table is naive and just plain ridiculous,
Cross-gen through the end of the first holiday season is one thing and sucks, but is understandable. Cross-gen for a big holiday 2015 title sucks balls and it's easy to see why someone would be upset. Yay gotta design the game with the X360 & PS3's shittastic shitty-ass RAM (and everything else) in mind!
Fornaximus
Member
Microsoft's PR word salads are the worst. They love to play around with the word "exclusive". Without the shitstorm, they would have just let the game's questionable status linger.
Still bitter about this whole thing. If I ever get the game, it will be used. I'm also now passing on the sequel for GoL that's coming out this year. Legit salty.
TheCanisDirus
Member
Rats Off To Ya
Banned
Let's go down the list, shall we?
Guerrilla: Working on a new IP
Insomniac: Developed three separate IPs for Sony platforms
Naughty Dog: Ditto (+1)
Sucker Punch: One less IP than Insomniac, but to be fair they started on PlayStation a generation late
Media Molecule: Three games from two different IPs
SSM: Working with Ready at Dawn on The Order
Polyphony: One IP, but I think that's forgivable at this point.
More GOTY contenders than Microsoft's first party, that's for sure.
I have been there for every generation change. Care to point out all these generation changes that involved cross-generation for the first 3 holiday seasons. I would be challenged to find one that lasted more than 1 holiday season. The only exception would be yearly sports titles basically getting roster updates for the old generation.
ROBOKITTYZILLA
Member
Does not phase me.
Definitive Edition coming to PC/PS4 in 2016! I'll wait and buy it on sale for PC and then actually play it months (possibly years) after it's relevant anyway.
Definitive Edition coming to PC/PS4 in 2016! I'll wait and buy it on sale for PC and then actually play it months (possibly years) after it's relevant anyway.
Other - people care about the franchise you label as "mediocre"
Graphics Horse
Member
I had to search to see if someone had posted this :lol
JetBlackPanda
Member
The way Microsoft and CD is playing this is bullshit.
The fact that they won't let us know how long the timing is and want to just play us for idiots makes me want to avoid this game forever.
Nice job guys.
The fact that they won't let us know how long the timing is and want to just play us for idiots makes me want to avoid this game forever.
Nice job guys.
Are you new to video games? The way Microsoft and CD Handled it, is literally the way every platform holder in existence has handled it.
StarBlazers1
Member
look, I'm not saying that Sony doesn't handle their properties better than MS. They obviously do. The point is that they both have their strengths and weaknesses and should be in the business. Their first and second party game philosophies are different, but that doesn't make any difference, when we get games like the ones mentioned above from Sony, or games like Halo, Gears, Forza, Alan Wake, etc from MS. I have purchased both systems from Sony and MS this gen and the 2 previous gens. I play games to have fun and both Sony and MS have fostered properties I play and love. I understand why this type of tactic gets under your skin, but they both are guilty of it now and in the past.
Yes all of these studios are successful with multiple IPs and a number of them have gotten money to create lossleading but experimental new games. GG Sony I'd say.
The difference in outlook is that MS doesn't stimulate indie because they are interested in experimental games that shake up game design conventions. MS doesn't give a shit about those kinds of things. Self-publishing on their marketplace just means they get a bigger cut. MS doesn't care about games.
Nintendo has a vision about games. Digital play, healthy lifestyles, bringing families together. Sony stimulates artsy games, funds thatgamecompany to make games that break outside of regular game conventions. What vision MS had on games is long gone. They make safe stabs at greatest common denominator genres because they're only interested in quantities of people; they're not interested in games but in advertisements, licensing and subscriptions.
I'd rather competition was between gaming philosophies, e.g. Sony and Nintendo.
Not sure if posted but this should be added to the IP.
Rise of the Tomb Raider Exclusivity Deal 'has a duration'
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2014-08-13-microsoft-confirms-rise-of-the-tomb-raider-xbox-exclusivity-deal-has-a-duration
Rise of the Tomb Raider Exclusivity Deal 'has a duration'
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2014-08-13-microsoft-confirms-rise-of-the-tomb-raider-xbox-exclusivity-deal-has-a-duration
People on the internet, including GAF, tend to jump to the (usually negative) conclusion and overreact. People should really learn to read between the lines, marketing speak has been used for ages in the gaming industry.