PDA

View Full Version : Xbox exclusive?



BlackThor
10th Jun 2014, 19:54
I've been looking around the internet trying to find a complete list of consoles for this game. All I've seen is Xbox1, so I figured I'd come to the source and ask you all if this is coming to any other platforms, specifically PS4 since I've all but given up on a nintendo version. Seriously, XB1 is the only console I am not interested in buying at all. Really hope they didn't buy exclusivity rights...although it seems like exactly something they would do. :(

AdobeArtist
10th Jun 2014, 19:57
Just because the game was shown at the Xbox presentation, doesn't make it "exclusive" to that platform.

Any more than Destiny shown in Sony's presentation makes it PS4 exclusive.

BlackThor
10th Jun 2014, 20:04
I was also stating that every site I checked only lists it for XB1. Usually some press would have listed other platforms by this point like game informer did with Destiny...

RybatGrimes
10th Jun 2014, 20:18
If it were exclusive it probably would have said so when they showed the trailer at the conference. But all it said was "world premiere". After the super dramatic upset there was over the Underworld DLC, I really highly doubt they'd make the sequel exclusive. That'd just be a really bad choice.

Valenka
10th Jun 2014, 20:34
Just because the game was shown at the Xbox presentation, doesn't make it "exclusive" to that platform. Any more than Destiny shown in Sony's presentation makes it PS4 exclusive.

Indeed. Just because ROTTR was presented parallel to the Xbox One doesn't mean it's exclusive to the Xbox One; it's only listed on websites as the Xbox One because it's only been shown so far at the Xbox presentation. No one's going to list it for any other console until it's definite or officially confirmed, that way they don't have to back pedal on information.

When Square Enix announces the consoles or if ROTTR is presented at another panel, say PlayStation 4 for instance, it'll be listed as available on PS4 as well. Otherwise, we'll just have to wait and see.

For the OP to jump to conclusions and say that console exclusivity is "something they would do" is just immature and uncalled for. Just because a game is exclusive to one console doesn't necessarily make it a bad thing; there are many console exclusives for many different reasons and if ROTTR was exclusive to the Xbox One, it certainly wouldn't be for monetary purposes, as the developer would make a lot more money making it available to other platforms.

Lastly, if we could just take a moment to rub a couple of brain cells together, Tomb Raider was released on the Xbox 360, PlayStation 3 and PC and then it was ported to the Xbox One and PlayStation 4 with the Definitive Edition. It's well past safe to say that Rise of the Tomb Raider will be on both the Xbox One and PlayStation 4 since they did incorrectly mention "next-gen" even though Xbox One and PS4 is now the current generation consoles. It might even be safe to say that ROTTR could be on the PS3 and Xbox 360 as well.

Time will tell.

Driber
10th Jun 2014, 21:24
[not official info]

Don't worry, guys. PS4/XB1/PC in the very least. Mark my words :cool:

Gitb97
10th Jun 2014, 21:40
What about x360 and ps3? :/

Valenka
10th Jun 2014, 21:58
What about x360 and ps3? :/

It's a 50/50 shot. I honestly don't expect them to concern themselves with the Xbox 360 and PS3; people are going to upgrade to an Xbox One or PS4 sooner or later. If they don't have one yet, they won't be able to play ROTTR when it's released. They'll just have to wait.

Telekill
11th Jun 2014, 03:26
I was able to preorder it for PS4 just yesterday, so I'm pretty sure that the PS4 version is happening. Making it an X1 exclusive would be the equivalent of Square shooting themselves in the foot. I don't see it happening especially as they put the first game on PS4.

Murphdawg1
11th Jun 2014, 03:32
I was able to preorder it for PS4 just yesterday, so I'm pretty sure that the PS4 version is happening. Making it an X1 exclusive would be the equivalent of Square shooting themselves in the foot. I don't see it happening especially as they put the first game on PS4.

A year and a half(basically) is a long time to pre-order something. As for the topic, Sony has Uncharted so that's probably why anything Tomb Raider related gets announced during Microsoft's event. Just on the consoles though the bigger Tomb Raider fan base does seem to be on the Sony side.

RybatGrimes
11th Jun 2014, 04:33
[not official info]

Don't worry, guys. PS4/XB1/PC in the very least. Mark my words :cool:
lol, suuuuure Driber. Very subtle. :p

A year and a half(basically) is a long time to pre-order something.

I had the reboot pre-ordered like 2 years before it came out. :p

AdobeArtist
11th Jun 2014, 05:03
What about x360 and ps3? :/

It would be really hindered on vastly outdated hardware, which would make it a waste of time and resources to trying to condense all those assets to such confined architecture.

BridgetFisher
11th Jun 2014, 08:23
I was able to preorder it for PS4 just yesterday, so I'm pretty sure that the PS4 version is happening. Making it an X1 exclusive would be the equivalent of Square shooting themselves in the foot. I don't see it happening especially as they put the first game on PS4.

isnt that what they do with every final fantasy game? those have been PS only games so far Im pretty sure. Glad to hear its coming to consoles I was worried it was PC only and then Crystal Dynamics wouldnt get enough money to make another TR game. Its exciting that its coming to consoles, at E3 the console companies show off general games and when things are exclusive they make a big deal out of it saying it explicitly. Thats why they showed alot of general games, from ummm COD to uhhh that division game, or mirrors edge 2. Not that they showed anything but what their building but meh its something which is cool I guess. I enjoyed that postal 2 has a presence at E3.

ElieHalo
11th Jun 2014, 09:45
I don't think it is only for the Xbox One just because you saw it that at the Xbox One presentation does not make it exclusive to that platform!

Driber
11th Jun 2014, 09:48
Yeah, CD has a long history of showing off the TR games during Microsoft events at E3. It says absolutely nothing about platform exclusiveness.


isnt that what they do with every final fantasy game? those have been PS only games so far Im pretty sure.

CD is not SE Japan, though :)

Tallantis
11th Jun 2014, 09:50
It will come for every strong platform. But it could be like Destiny for Sony that there is a special treatment for One, exclusive DLCs, early access or something like in Underworld.

Gitb97
11th Jun 2014, 15:42
It would be really hindered on vastly outdated hardware, which would make it a waste of time and resources to trying to condense all those assets to such confined architecture.

I disagree tbh, if they put Underworld on the wii no problem, ROTTR will sure as hell have no issues staying on the x360 or ps3. Besides, most people don't have a ps4 or x1 yet so it'd affect sales hard. Its okay to be a child in love with your new toy but you cant neglect the others. If that made sense at all. I will eventually upgrade tho but not many people can as fast.

Lycantendencies
11th Jun 2014, 17:12
Besides, most people don't have a ps4 or x1 yet so it'd affect sales hard. This is very true, but by the end of next year the new gen will have been out two years, prices may be more agreeable and the number who have one or the other is likely to be much higher.
That doesn't mean I think they should neglect PS3/360, just that the impact on sales would be considerably less by then if they did make it new gen only.

Driber
11th Jun 2014, 17:41
I disagree tbh, if they put Underworld on the wii no problem, ROTTR will sure as hell have no issues staying on the x360 or ps3. Besides, most people don't have a ps4 or x1 yet so it'd affect sales hard. Its okay to be a child in love with your new toy but you cant neglect the others. If that made sense at all. I will eventually upgrade tho but not many people can as fast.

This.


This is very true, but by the end of next year the new gen will have been out two years, prices may be more agreeable and the number who have one or the other is likely to be much higher.
That doesn't mean I think they should neglect PS3/360, just that the impact on sales would be considerably less by then if they did make it new gen only.

But the counterargument to this is that because current gen will be out for 2 years by then it means that Sony and MS will continue to lower the prices of their last gen consoles, which means significant increase in people having last gen consoles.

Think about it - especially in our current economical state, forking over a lot of cash for the latest greatest consoles is something a lot of families just aren't going to be able to afford, so if those parents see a sweet deal for a PS3 or 360, they will be more likely to go for that.

Ellie92
11th Jun 2014, 17:51
What if TR10 won't be possible on current gen?

The devs of The Witcher 3 said, current gen could never handle what they wanted to achive with that game. I mean, sure you can downgrade everything theoretically but will it still be what the devs wanted it to be? It might suck in the end.

Lycantendencies
11th Jun 2014, 17:58
But the counterargument to this is that because current gen will be out for 2 years by then it means that Sony and MS will continue to lower the prices of their last gen consoles, which means significant increase in people having last gen consoles.

Think about it - especially in our current economical state, forking over a lot of cash for the latest greatest consoles is something a lot of families just aren't going to be able to afford, so if those parents see a sweet deal for a PS3 or 360, they will be more likely to go for that.
All true, and as I said I don't think they should neglect the older gen. I even said in another thread that I might pick them up if they are made, as I had with Underworld, Legend and Anniversary.

However, if the game does end up utilizing the new gen tech to the point the old couldn't handle it properly, and they decided not to release it on old gen, I don't think the hit to sales would be anywhere near as bad as it would be if it was released now or even in 6 months.
But yeah, I certainly don't want them to be new gen only unless it would mean the game is somehow compromised by older console's limitations.

Valenka
11th Jun 2014, 19:01
What if TR10 won't be possible on current gen?

The devs of The Witcher 3 said, current gen could never handle what they wanted to achive with that game. I mean, sure you can downgrade everything theoretically but will it still be what the devs wanted it to be? It might suck in the end.

Do you mean last gen? I don't see how TR10 won't be possible on the Xbox One or PS4. :scratch:

a_big_house
11th Jun 2014, 19:17
^ I think it's more a case of old / new gen, since they are both still current. But yes, that's what she meant :lol:

Driber
11th Jun 2014, 19:21
What if TR10 won't be possible on [last] gen?

The devs of The Witcher 3 said, current gen could never handle what they wanted to achive with that game. I mean, sure you can downgrade everything theoretically but will it still be what the devs wanted it to be? It might suck in the end.

What other devs say about their games is their business. I don't see any reason why a PS3/360 port would "suck". CD knows what they are doing.


All true, and as I said I don't think they should neglect the older gen. I even said in another thread that I might pick them up if they are made, as I had with Underworld, Legend and Anniversary.

However, if the game does end up utilizing the new gen tech to the point the old couldn't handle it properly, and they decided not to release it on old gen, I don't think the hit to sales would be anywhere near as bad as it would be if it was released now or even in 6 months.

I don't know about that. 2 years really isn't that long if you think about all the support the previous to last gen got, waaaaay after the gen switch.


But yeah, I certainly don't want them to be new gen only unless it would mean the game is somehow compromised by older console's limitations.

I'm not worried about last gen support compromising the features of the current gen versions :)

LARALOVERnr1
11th Jun 2014, 22:17
I'm begging the gods that this will be on 360 or PC at least. Wont be getting any console other than Wii U for Bayonetta 2. Im sure it'll be out on PC at least, so no pressure.

Lycantendencies
11th Jun 2014, 22:38
I'm begging the gods that this will be on 360 or PC at least. Wont be getting any console other than Wii U for Bayonetta 2. Im sure it'll be out on PC at least, so no pressure.
TBH, the more I think it would be a risk to come out on PS3/360, the more I'd like to see them try.
I'd also guess the PC is a given. Never played it on PC myself, but they've always been PC and it would be odd to see them stop now.

Elessar78
11th Jun 2014, 22:44
I don't want it to be cross-gen, only next gen. You always have to make compromises if you are developing for both generations.

LARALOVERnr1
11th Jun 2014, 22:49
TBH, the more I think it would be a risk to come out on PS3/360, the more I'd like to see them try.
I'd also guess the PC is a given. Never played it on PC myself, but they've always been PC and it would be odd to see them stop now.

Why would it be a risk? A bigger market = more profit + the original was on 360 and ps3 as well. No way all previous 360 and ps3 owners have now bought a next gen console.

Murphdawg1
11th Jun 2014, 23:01
Why would it be a risk? A bigger market = more profit + the original was on 360 and ps3 as well. No way all previous 360 and ps3 owners have now bought a next gen console.

The reboot came out in early 2013, before the new consoles were out. Considering there's like 1.5 years(may be a bit longer if the game gets delayed) until the new game there very well cold be 20-25 million PS4 owners and 15-20 million Xbox One owners by Q4 2015.

LARALOVERnr1
11th Jun 2014, 23:19
The reboot came out in early 2013, before the new consoles were out. Considering there's like 1.5 years(may be a bit longer if the game gets delayed) until the new game there very well cold be 20-25 million PS4 owners and 15-20 million Xbox One owners by Q4 2015.

...which is still way less than the current 154 million ps3/360 owners. It's a huge group, don't know why you wouldn't offer ROTTR tot hem as well.

Murphdawg1
11th Jun 2014, 23:25
...which is still way less than the current 154 million ps3/360 owners. It's a huge group, don't know why you wouldn't offer ROTTR tot hem as well.

Maybe it's a similar situation as Batman Arkham Knight where the older consoles just can't handle a certain feature(in this case the Bat mobile) so the extra horsepower of the newer consoles is needed.

Lycantendencies
12th Jun 2014, 01:36
Why would it be a risk?
Because of this:

Maybe it's a similar situation as Batman Arkham Knight where the older consoles just can't handle a certain feature(in this case the Bat mobile) so the extra horsepower of the newer consoles is needed.
New gen owners expect new gen games, games that push the boundaries and do what the old consoles just weren't powerful enough to do.
PS4/XboxOne games are more expensive, and RotTR releases at a busy time when lots of genuinely new gen games are competing for their money.
That's going to look more appealing than paying the higher game price for a PS3/360 game with prettier graphics.

If they do make it truly new gen however, the PS3/360 won't be able to handle it properly because they're not as powerful, and the game will either run poorer or be an inferior version like Underworld on the PS2, again seeing it slated.

Murphdawg1
12th Jun 2014, 02:23
Because of this:

New gen owners expect new gen games, games that push the boundaries and do what the old consoles just weren't powerful enough to do.
PS4/XboxOne games are more expensive, and RotTR releases at a busy time when lots of genuinely new gen games are competing for their money.
That's going to look more appealing than paying the higher game price for a PS3/360 game with prettier graphics.

If they do make it truly new gen however, the PS3/360 won't be able to handle it properly because they're not as powerful, and the game will either run poorer or be an inferior version like Underworld on the PS2, again seeing it slated.

Games are the same price as they were for the PS3 and 360 here in the U.S. where do you live?

Lycantendencies
12th Jun 2014, 13:34
Games are the same price as they were for the PS3 and 360 here in the U.S. where do you live?

UK.

PS4/XboxOne games are usually 10-20% more than their PS3/360 counterparts. Initially that was seen in new gen games being higher priced than old gen, but as they are coming down to the price old gen games were, old gen games also drop in price, so a new PS4/XboxOne game will always cost more than the same title on PS3/360, even when released on the same day.

It's even the same in sales. For example, recently Sony Europe had a sale on Batman related titles, and Injustice: Ultimate Edition on PS4 was £12.79.
That's very cheap and I happily bought it, yet the exact same game (Ultimate Edition) was only £8 on PS3. That means I paid an additional 50%+ of the PS3 price just for slightly nicer graphics on a new gen console.

DamianGraham
12th Jun 2014, 16:52
What about x360 and ps3? :/

Personally, I don't think we will see it for last-gen. Look at *most* of the sequels announced at E3, Assassins Creed: Unity, Call of Duty Advanced Warfare, Halo 5, Uncharted 4 etc are only next-gen confirmed. I believe last year when it was announced the sequel was being made, didn't they say it was going to be a "next-gen sequel"? Not certain on this, but might be worth re-reading. At any rate, you have a year to start saving up, maybe trade in some things towards upgrading consoles... It's never fun but once a new gen is in, last gen slowly makes its way out the door.

Driber
12th Jun 2014, 17:19
I don't want it to be cross-gen, only next gen. You always have to make compromises if you are developing for both generations.

You're going to have to proof that bold statement before I believe it.


...which is still way less than the current 154 million ps3/360 owners. It's a huge group, don't know why you wouldn't offer ROTTR tot hem as well.

This.


Maybe it's a similar situation as Batman Arkham Knight where the older consoles just can't handle a certain feature(in this case the Bat mobile) so the extra horsepower of the newer consoles is needed.

Maybe, maybe not. We're still 1.5 years away from release, so it's pure speculation at this point.


New gen owners expect new gen games, games that push the boundaries and do what the old consoles just weren't powerful enough to do.

...which a cross gen release wouldn't necessarily hinder.


PS4/XboxOne games are more expensive, and RotTR releases at a busy time when lots of genuinely new gen games are competing for their money.

It's always a "busy time", though. At any given point in the year there are games from other devs competing for people's money.


If they do make it truly new gen however, the PS3/360 won't be able to handle it properly because they're not as powerful, and the game will either run poorer or be an inferior version like Underworld on the PS2, again seeing it slated.

The exact same argument could just as well be made for PC. All TR games for consoles were technically "inferior" to the PC versions.

It would make no sense for someone who only owns an outdated PC and a PS3/360 to say "eh, bugger, I don't have the latest greatest PC hardware, so I won't bother buying the latest TR game for the console I do have, because it'll look inferior to what it could look like if I had the right hardware".

That just does not happen.

People are going to buy a game they really want to play, for the best platform they own. If that's a last gen console, that's what they'll buy it for.


I believe last year when it was announced the sequel was being made, didn't they say it was going to be a "next-gen sequel"?

Yes, which doesn't exclude last gen.


It's never fun but once a new gen is in, last gen slowly makes its way out the door.

The key word being "slowly", heh.

DamianGraham
12th Jun 2014, 17:30
You're going to have to proof that bold statement before I believe it.



This.



Maybe, maybe not. We're still 1.5 years away from release, so it's pure speculation at this point.



...which a cross gen release wouldn't necessarily hinder.



It's always a "busy time", though. At any given point in the year there are games from other devs competing for people's money.



The exact same argument could just as well be made for PC. All TR games for consoles were technically "inferior" to the PC versions.

It would make no sense for someone who only owns an outdated PC and a PS3/360 to say "eh, bugger, I don't have the latest greatest PC hardware, so I won't bother buying the latest TR game for the console I do have, because it'll look inferior to what it could look like if I had the right hardware".

That just does not happen.

People are going to buy a game they really want to play, for the best platform they own. If that's a last gen console, that's what they'll buy it for.



Yes, which doesn't exclude last gen.



The key word being "slowly", heh.

Yeah it may not exclude last-gen, but if it's being developed specifically for ps4/xbone (i don't say pc cause it's all the same haha), then that would mean a last gen would require a port... And I'm not sure if you recall Tomb Raider: Underworld port on PS2, but it wasn't too pretty. Personally I'd rather save the money and play the game how it was made to play, but to each his own I suppose, and yeah, but this day and age technologically speaking, slowly means super fast. Haha I'm sure the PS5 and Xbox Two are already being planned :p

d1n0_xD
12th Jun 2014, 17:31
@Driber, Yeah, man, regarding PC, I can't tell you how many times I was just glad I could run a game on minimum settings xD

Elessar78
12th Jun 2014, 18:24
You're going to have to proof that bold statement before I believe it.

If you don't believe me, you might believe the developers of the Witcher 3 (http://www.gameinformer.com/b/news/archive/2013/04/04/cd-projekt-red-explains-why-the-witcher-3-will-be-next-gen-only.aspx).

Just one example, a huge world with no loading times. Games like Skyrim still resort to loading screens when you enter houses or some cities, even on the most powerful PCs, because it was made with old hardware in mind. But on next gen consoles it's very well possible to do away with it.

Tecstar70
12th Jun 2014, 20:23
What you could consider is that they have made an excellent last gen game and then the same game on new gen. If they can apply that knowledge effectively then there is no reason why they couldn't make a stunning new-gen game as well as an excellent last gen game. I think that even in 2015 it will make financial sense to release on last gen.

Driber
12th Jun 2014, 21:28
Yeah it may not exclude last-gen, but if it's being developed specifically for ps4/xbone (i don't say pc cause it's all the same haha), then that would mean a last gen would require a port... And I'm not sure if you recall Tomb Raider: Underworld port on PS2, but it wasn't too pretty. Personally I'd rather save the money and play the game how it was made to play, but to each his own I suppose

I kind of wish people would stop looking at the some of the previous not-so-perfect ports, and more focus on what CD has managed to achieve so far. I say give them a little more credit for that, rather than holding onto the past :)

And technically speaking, two versions of TR9 were ports. So yeah... there's that.


and yeah, but this day and age technologically speaking, slowly means super fast. Haha I'm sure the PS5 and Xbox Two are already being planned :p

Planned? Already well into development, my bet would be! :D


If you don't believe me, you might believe the developers of the Witcher 3 (http://www.gameinformer.com/b/news/archive/2013/04/04/cd-projekt-red-explains-why-the-witcher-3-will-be-next-gen-only.aspx).

Just one example, a huge world with no loading times. Games like Skyrim still resort to loading screens when you enter houses or some cities, even on the most powerful PCs, because it was made with old hardware in mind. But on next gen consoles it's very well possible to do away with it.

And right on cue - the gods of videogame development are quoted. Why am I not surprised.

Right, so all you provided as evidence is one dev's opinion. That's not gonna cut it for me. As I said, I need solid proof before I believe your claim "You always have to make compromises if you are developing for both generations."

That's a pretty bold statement, and requires much more evidence than the POV of one single dev. Give me proof that at least the majority of studios in the industry feel the exact same way.


What you could consider is that they have made an excellent last gen game and then the same game on new gen. If they can apply that knowledge effectively then there is no reason why they couldn't make a stunning new-gen game as well as an excellent last gen game. I think that even in 2015 it will make financial sense to release on last gen.

My thoughts exactly.

Telekill
12th Jun 2014, 23:29
A year and a half(basically) is a long time to pre-order something. As for the topic, Sony has Uncharted so that's probably why anything Tomb Raider related gets announced during Microsoft's event. Just on the consoles though the bigger Tomb Raider fan base does seem to be on the Sony side.

I like to put all of my ducks in a row as it were. I carefully pick and choose what I'll be buying each year and usually don't go above six titles annually.

My 2014 lineup for instance is and has been:
- Tomb Raider DE (PS4)
- Infamous SS (PS4)
- Deception 4 (PSV)
- Watch Dogs (PS4)
- Destiny (PS4) -- preordered
- LittleBigPlanet 3 (PS4)

LBP3 is actually for my daughter and I to play together as we had a blast playing through the first together.

My 2015 lineup is already being put together due to new announcements as well as delays:
- Rise of the Tomb Raider (PS4) -- preordered
- Uncharted 4: ATE (PS4) -- preordered
- The Order (PS4) -- preordered
- Walking Dead Season 2 (PSV) -- if they make a physical copy

That's it for the foreseeable future right now and Walking Dead Season 2 on PSV will probably be my last for the basically dead system.

Elessar78
12th Jun 2014, 23:35
And right on cue - the gods of videogame development are quoted. Why am I not surprised.

Not a fan of the Witcher, eh?

How about Assassin's Creed Unity "Can't Be Done" on Xbox 360, PS3 (http://www.gamespot.com/articles/e3-2014-assassin-s-creed-unity-can-t-be-done-on-xbox-360-ps3/1100-6420448/)?

I gave you developers' quotes and an example that... well... exemplify what next gen only makes possible. I dunno what do you expect from me, program code? You seemingly don't want to budge from your opinion.

As for me using the word "always", if you make Tetris, then no, you probably don't need to make compromises for last-gen or in other words, if you think small. But next gen opens up new possibilities.

And just from a visual standpoint, if you make an engine specifically for high(er) end hardware you usually get better visual results than something that is also supposed to run on low end machines.

Murphdawg1
12th Jun 2014, 23:35
I like to put all of my ducks in a row as it were. I carefully pick and choose what I'll be buying each year and usually don't go above six titles annually.

My 2014 lineup for instance is and has been:
- Tomb Raider DE (PS4)
- Infamous SS (PS4)
- Deception 4 (PSV)
- Watch Dogs (PS4)
- Destiny (PS4) -- preordered
- LittleBigPlanet 3 (PS4)

LBP3 is actually for my daughter and I to play together as we had a blast playing through the first together.

My 2015 lineup is already being put together due to new announcements as well as delays:
- Rise of the Tomb Raider (PS4) -- preordered
- Uncharted 4: ATE (PS4) -- preordered
- The Order (PS4) -- preordered
- Walking Dead Season 2 (PSV) -- if they make a physical copy

That's it for the foreseeable future right now and Walking Dead Season 2 on PSV will probably be my last for the basically dead system.

That's a good list but, no Batman or The Division?

Telekill
14th Jun 2014, 04:24
That's a good list but, no Batman or The Division?

I got board of Batman and until I see more and it's confirmed not to delay till 2016, The Division is a maybe at the moment.

Phaid_Min6Char_Sigh
14th Jun 2014, 17:41
Personally, I don't think we will see it for last-gen.

Well, it looks like we will, after all.
http://www.xbox.com/en-US/games/rise-of-the-tomb-raider#fbid=X_qqj6DcA1c
http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B00KJGYGZU/


Look at *most* of the sequels announced at E3, Assassins Creed: Unity, Call of Duty Advanced Warfare, Halo 5, Uncharted 4 etc are only next-gen confirmed.

And that's something to consider. You can only "pretty up" a x360/ps3 game so much. Visually, it will almost certainly look less impressive than proper games developed with newer hardware in mind, and that almost always leads to lower sales.
I mean, the new Uncharted is supposed to look like this:

If Crystal manage to achieve similar quality on PC/PS4/XboxOne and somewhat scale it down to x360/ps3, they'll be referred to as wizards, but I doubt it.

LARALOVERnr1
14th Jun 2014, 17:49
I highly doubt ROTTR will be that advanced, as development was started some time ago. Ofcourse the next-gen consoles are able to handle more goods, but the 360 and ps3 still have their potential. TR2013 looked fine on 360/ps3; even if CD has to scale down ROTTR a bit to make run it on 360/ps3, if they can make it look like current games on those consoles, people will hardly notice and they'd make a lot of gamers very happy as well as increase their provit.

Weemanply109
14th Jun 2014, 20:20
The confusion stems from the fact that the Xbox website clearly labelled this game as exclusive to their console, which is either a huge idiotic mistake or a seriously pathetic attempt to try and cash in on people who wanted to make their their decision to get a X1 or PS4 around the E3 hype. Sony wasn't really any better at this kind of thing this E3 either. Reason why I stick with PC >>>

All TR games have been on PC + major console platforms. The game was already confirmed ages ago as a next-gen exclusive, IIRC (we just never had a title and details til E3).

Also, tired of seeing Uncharted 4 trailer used as a graphic comparison to everything (not that I'm picking out on anyone, more so see it on TRF). That trailer most likely in-engine pre-rendered, just as 'The Last Of Us' trailers and cutscenes were. The difference between the game and the trailers weren't MASSIVE, but in comparison shots, you can see details overall that aren't as good and are noticable that obviously help lower the load on the GPU, hence why UC4 is @ 1080p 60FPS

a_big_house
14th Jun 2014, 20:55
^ I completely agree and you've also got to keep in mind that the trailer shown was of one small area and had one character model. It's like those ice cream adverts which are actually just mashed potato; looks good, but is clearly not the real thing

Phaid_Min6Char_Sigh
14th Jun 2014, 21:18
Also, tired of seeing Uncharted 4 trailer used as a graphic comparison to everything (not that I'm picking out on anyone, more so see it on TRF). That trailer most likely in-engine pre-rendered, just as 'The Last Of Us' trailers and cutscenes were. The difference between the game and the trailers weren't MASSIVE, but in comparison shots, you can see details overall that aren't as good and are noticable that obviously help lower the load on the GPU, hence why UC4 is @ 1080p 60FPS

Well, for what it's worth, Naughty Dog claim the trailer was captured "in engine".
The final game probably won't look that clean when it comes to image quality and the trailer was touched up a bit (plus, there wasn't much happening on the screen), but I've used it as an example to illustrate the point.
Releasing a cross-platform game in late 2015 seems somewhat suicidal, considering the influx of purely PC/PS4/XboxOne-oriented games, which are guaranteed to look more impressive than a game still made with x360/ps3 in mind.

P.S.
Kind of funny how far ahead of the curve Crysis games were in terms of character models, wow.
http://i.imgur.com/vU3td.jpg
http://img691.imageshack.us/img691/33/crysis22011062719103124.png
http://www.abload.de/img/crysis32013-02-2111-0cbcpl.png
http://www.lars-martinsson.com/images/portfolio/Rasch/rasch.jpg
http://www.abload.de/img/crysis3_psycho_24007irun3.png

Weemanply109
15th Jun 2014, 10:21
WELP. There goes my point about UC4. A thread on Neogaf has sources confirming that the trailer is rendered in realtime on PS4 hardware. :lol: Jesus.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=835985

@Phaid, Yep. It was amazing how advanced Crysis was, especially considering it was 2006/2007 (they shown it off at E3 2006). It was on the doorstep of the new generation at that time and pretty much put the consoles to shame. I wish we had a developer push boundaries like that again (some people argue it's CD Projekt - but I disagree, their visuals aren't THAT impressive and their games are unoptimized).

d1n0_xD
15th Jun 2014, 10:32
^ I don't know, man, Witcher 2 was the thing when it comes to graphics back in 2011, and I think Witcher 3 is graphically the best game shown at E3...

Edit: And wow, U4's trailer is in-engine :eek: Damn, that hair is fabulous :D Ok, U4 then Witcher 3... But again, Witcher 3 is open-world so that's gotta count for something xD

Weemanply109
15th Jun 2014, 10:35
I disagree. I just don't see it... Crysis 2 released back then and with the HD textures and DX11 it pretty much outdoes Witcher 2 (solely talking about realistic graphics).

Witcher 3 is arguable now that we have UC4. I haven't watched much gameplay and from what we've seen and heard of UC4, I think that title may end up in unexpected hands. :p

d1n0_xD
15th Jun 2014, 10:43
Well, I gotta say, I'm excited for what the future holds, imagine what games will look like in 3-4 years :eek: Not to mention what they would be capable of :eek:

Weemanply109
15th Jun 2014, 11:00
Agree. I worry for Xbone's future, though. By the end of the generation, I wonder what resolution the games will be running at compared to the current trend of 792p-ish. Will it all be but a few pixels? :lol: Let's hope the devs can bridge the gap between the consoles soon.

Driber
15th Jun 2014, 11:24
Not a fan of the Witcher, eh?

I'm not an anti-Witcher fan, if that's what you're implying. I just think it's silly to cherry-pick one or two games, or one or two game devs and using it as the "end-all" in all kinds of discussions.


How about Assassin's Creed Unity "Can't Be Done" on Xbox 360, PS3 (http://www.gamespot.com/articles/e3-2014-assassin-s-creed-unity-can-t-be-done-on-xbox-360-ps3/1100-6420448/)?

That's 2 devs out of what, thousands?

BTW, how ironic that you should use Ubisoft as an example with all the "lazy devs" accusations that is being slung at them these days. So wouldn't it be funny if I would say that the Ubisoft devs are too lazy for not supporting last gen :whistle:


I gave you developers' quotes and an example that... well... exemplify what next gen only makes possible. I dunno what do you expect from me, program code? You seemingly don't want to budge from your opinion.

I don't expect anything from you. I'm just saying that if you're going to make bold claims about something allegedly applying to ALL game devs, you better have more than 2 examples to make the claim convincing.


As for me using the word "always", if you make Tetris, then no, you probably don't need to make compromises for last-gen or in other words, if you think small. But next gen opens up new possibilities.

And just from a visual standpoint, if you make an engine specifically for high(er) end hardware you usually get better visual results than something that is also supposed to run on low end machines.

That is not true. It's perfectly possible to design something with the best hardware as your goal, and still make things compatible with less advanced hardware as well. This method has been used in the gaming industry for decades.


If Crystal manage to achieve similar quality on PC/PS4/XboxOne and somewhat scale it down to x360/ps3, they'll be referred to as wizards, but I doubt it.

Converting ultra high res textures (current gen) to high res textures (last gen) I would hardly call wizardry.


I highly doubt ROTTR will be that advanced, as development was started some time ago. Ofcourse the next-gen consoles are able to handle more goods, but the 360 and ps3 still have their potential. TR2013 looked fine on 360/ps3; even if CD has to scale down ROTTR a bit to make run it on 360/ps3, if they can make it look like current games on those consoles, people will hardly notice and they'd make a lot of gamers very happy as well as increase their provit.

Exactly :thumb:


All TR games have been on PC + major console platforms. The game was already confirmed ages ago as a next-gen exclusive, IIRC (we just never had a title and details til E3).

No, that is not true. There has been no confirmation that TR10 will be exclusively current gen whatsoever. That's merely an assumption some people have made from a vague statement from CD.

Phaid_Min6Char_Sigh
15th Jun 2014, 14:10
Converting ultra high res textures (current gen) to high res textures (last gen) I would hardly call wizardry.


It's not that simple. I don't think that last gen consoles can handle such complicated models, lighting, particle effect and so on... In late 2015, the competition is going to be severe, I don't want Rise of TR to look outdated on release.
Brian Horton and his team are awesome artists though (TR2013 was one gorgeous looking game for sure, despite the Crystal engine being less impressive than Crytek's or Naughty Dog's), so we'll see.

@Weemanply109
Yep, Crysis was a graphical BEAST. It still looks amazing, it was definitely ahead of its time in so many ways (C2&3 featured smaller levels and less interactivity, for example).

d1n0_xD
15th Jun 2014, 14:25
Yeah, it's not about just textures, there's polygons, and all sorts of effects. But I think if they can make it look like TR2013, why not bring the game to last-gen?

Driber
15th Jun 2014, 15:02
It's not that simple. I don't think that last gen consoles can handle such complicated models, lighting, particle effect and so on...

I'm not claiming it's that simple as just converting textures, but nothing you just named are things that would make it impossible to release a cross-gen title.

In fact, all of these things were exactly what made the difference between the console versions of TR9 and the PC version. So there's your proof right there that it can be done, without compromising the best possible results :whistle:


In late 2015, the competition is going to be severe, I don't want Rise of TR to look outdated on release.

What kind of argument is that? If come 2015 someone has, for example, a PS3 and a PS4, is that customer going to not buy the PS4 version because of the mere existence of the PS3 version which looks "outdated" compared to the PS4 version? :nut:


Yeah, it's not about just textures, there's polygons, and all sorts of effects.

So there would be less complex polygons on the last gen version, and some effects absent. Exact same thing happened with TR9 when you compare the console versions to the PC version.


But I think if they can make it look like TR2013, why not bring the game to last-gen?

Exactly :)

Phaid_Min6Char_Sigh
15th Jun 2014, 15:42
In fact, all of these things were exactly what made the difference between the console versions of TR9 and the PC version. So there's your proof right there that it can be done, without compromising the best possible results :whistle:

Yes, but while the PC version did look better, the difference wasn't significant in a "they look generation apart" sense due it being a console port (with some great improvements like tesselation, high res textures and hair physics, but still...).


What kind of argument is that? If come 2015 someone has, for example, a PS3 and a PS4, is that customer going to not buy the PS4 version because of the mere existence of the PS3 version which looks "outdated" compared to the PS4 version? :nut:

No, by the end of 2015 those interested in the AAA games market (TR franchise included) will have moved to PC/PS4/Xbox One already. It's always like that with each console generation.

Driber
15th Jun 2014, 15:56
Yes, but while the PC version did look better, the difference wasn't significant in a "they look generation apart" sense due it being a console port (with some great improvements like tesselation, high res textures and hair physics, but still...).

Ah so now you're shifting your argument to TR9 having been "developed on Xbox 360 dev kits". Alright, so let's say CD keeps up that tradition and their dev kit of choice is XB1 for TR10... then where does that leave your argument that their main focus isn't the latest gen? ;)


No, by the end of 2015 those interested in the AAA games market (TR franchise included) will have moved to PC/PS4/Xbox One already. It's always like that with each console generation.

Interesting how you're such a market analyst who knows exactly when people switch to new consoles, but conveniently ignore the fact that market penetration of last gen hardware has been historically proven to happen really slow. So slow in fact that AAA game devs still supported PS2 games many years after the introduction of the PS3. Some even up to 5-6 years :whistle:

So I'm pretty sure that PS3 and 360 owners will still be of great significance only 2 years after the last gen switch, from a publisher POV.

Phaid_Min6Char_Sigh
15th Jun 2014, 16:33
Ah so now you're shifting your argument to TR9 having been "developed on Xbox 360 dev kits". Alright, so let's say CD keeps up that tradition and their dev kit of choice is XB1 for TR10... then where does that leave your argument that their main focus isn't the latest gen? ;)

I'm not "shifting" my argument, my argument is: it's easier and less time consuming to make the game a bit more pretty (add PhysX, TressFX, high res textures) than it is to scale it down to work on outdated hardware (then you have to start REMOVING things).


Interesting how you're such a market analyst who knows exactly when people switch to new consoles, but conveniently ignore the fact that market penetration of last gen hardware has been historically proven to happen really slow. So slow in fact that AAA game devs still supported PS2 games many years after the introduction of the PS3. Some even up to 5-6 years :whistle:

So I'm pretty sure that PS3 and 360 owners will still be of great significance only 2 years after the last gen switch, from a publisher POV.

How did those cross-platform games sell compared to games created solely with the (then) latest generation in mind, that is my question. Last time I checked, Underworld did not break sales records (also, negative press surrounding PS2 and Wii ports didn't help...), but Uncharted and Gears of War sold very well on their respective platforms.
People like new, shiny things. Gears and Uncharted were much more "shiny" and they sold better.

Driber
15th Jun 2014, 17:06
I'm not "shifting" my argument, my argument is: it's easier and less time consuming to make the game a bit more pretty

It would also easier and less time consuming to make a game an XB1 exclusive. No time and resources "wasted on PS fanboys and highly demanding PC master race people", right? :whistle:

No, that's not really a good argument against cross-gen release if you ask me.


than it is to scale it down to work on outdated hardware (then you have to start REMOVING things).

From personal experience in game development I can tell you that it's really not that difficult to REMOVE things to make it compatible with older hardware.

Creating things is where the real man hours are spent on, not removing or downscaling.


How did those cross-platform games sell compared to games created solely with the (then) latest generation in mind, that is my question. Last time I checked, Underworld did not break sales records (also, negative press surrounding PS2 and Wii ports didn't help...), but Uncharted and Gears of War sold very well on their respective platforms.
People like new, shiny things. Gears and Uncharted were much more "shiny" and they sold better.

I wasn't referring to past TR games, actually, but more in general regarding AAA games.

Underworld did poorly because the game itself was poor (compared to the real gems in the TR series), not because of some not-so-perfect console ports.

If TR9 received some disappointing previous-to-last gen ports, it STILL would have done really financially well, because it was simply a quality game, and the PS3/360/PC sales would've still hit that 6M mark a few months ago for sure.

And you can't really compare sales figures of Uncharted and GOW with TR. Those are simply much more popular games.

Plus, they are platform exclusive games. ;)

namitokiwa
15th Jun 2014, 19:06
Ofcourse, there would be for PC and PS4. And about the exclusive content. I don't know. Maybe.
But look at the Tomb Raider reboot last year. I have seen no exclusive content. Or maybe have but don't really important.
But I am sure it would be on PC and PS4. Square Enix won't want it exclusive on Xbox One where there are a lot of money come from PC and PS4.

Murphdawg1
15th Jun 2014, 21:15
Ofcourse, there would be for PC and PS4. And about the exclusive content. I don't know. Maybe.
But look at the Tomb Raider reboot last year. I have seen no exclusive content. Or maybe have but don't really important.
But I am sure it would be on PC and PS4. Square Enix won't want it exclusive on Xbox One where there are a lot of money come from PC and PS4.

Just look at the poll asking which platform people would buy Rise of the Tomb Raider on. Even the PS3 beats the Xbox One. So yeah Square would be absolutely foolish to make it exclusive to the Xbox.

Elessar78
16th Jun 2014, 07:25
That is not true. It's perfectly possible to design something with the best hardware as your goal, and still make things compatible with less advanced hardware as well. This method has been used in the gaming industry for decades.

It is true. Skyrim could have had entering houses without loading screens and looking through windows and seeing the outside world but it didn't because of PS3 and Xbox 360. Plain and simple. It would require to develop two rather different codebases, almost like developing two games, to push next-gen and at the same time make it run on last-gen and in most cases that is just not feasible.

d1n0_xD
16th Jun 2014, 08:47
^ Yeah, but Skyrim is an open-world game and Tomb Raider isn't, you can't really compare them like that... Like I said, I don't see a problem where RotTR looks like TR2013 for last-gen... And that's IF RotTR is drastically improved when it comes to graphics.

Tihocan
16th Jun 2014, 09:13
And you can't really compare sales figures of Uncharted and GOW with TR. Those are simply much more popular games.


Sure you can, but you have to compare the demographics as well.
GoW was popular due to it's "hardcore" nature among those who like stupid brutal combat and multiplayer (myself included). I found a prevalence of kids, stoner and drongo types in the multiplayer - nothing like what I came across in TR MP.

Uncharted was basically the mascot game for PS3 - new IP which had basically everything previous Tomb Raiders did but to a better quality, with a very likeable protagonist, explosive set and enjoyable albeit cliche story. "It's Tomb Raider, but with a guy ermahgherd!"
Didn't Tomb Raider still beat Uncharted in sales?

Phaid_Min6Char_Sigh
16th Jun 2014, 09:49
It is true. Skyrim could have had entering houses without loading screens and looking through windows and seeing the outside world but it didn't because of PS3 and Xbox 360. Plain and simple.

Fun fact: Gothic games (or Risen) never suffered from this issue, and the first one came out in 2001. Granted,their worlds weren't as big as in Morrowind or Oblivion/Skyrim, but still much more lively and full of amazing little details or proper NPC schedules.
Piranha Bytes had really good programmers, I guess. ;)

Weemanply109
16th Jun 2014, 14:06
the fact that market penetration of last gen hardware has been historically proven to happen really slow. So slow in fact that AAA game devs still supported PS2 games many years after the introduction of the PS3. Some even up to 5-6 years :whistle:

So I'm pretty sure that PS3 and 360 owners will still be of great significance only 2 years after the last gen switch, from a publisher POV.

The gaming market is more popular than ever and the next-gen consoles are selling faster than 360/ps3 did in their earlier days. I think the adoption rate of the new consoles will be much more faster than last time due to how marketed and hyped it's been compared to PS3/360. I still agree about 360/ps3 still been hugly marketable, though, both consoles have sold 70-ish million each? It's not like those consoles are instantly thrown in the bin.

Driber
16th Jun 2014, 15:06
It is true. Skyrim could have had entering houses without loading screens and looking through windows and seeing the outside world but it didn't because of PS3 and Xbox 360. Plain and simple. It would require to develop two rather different codebases, almost like developing two games, to push next-gen and at the same time make it run on last-gen and in most cases that is just not feasible.

Like Dino said - TR isn't Skyrim.

Just because you're able to provide an example of a game where it wasn't possible, doesn't mean the same applies to each and every other game.


Sure you can, but you have to compare the demographics as well.
GoW was popular due to it's "hardcore" nature among those who like stupid brutal combat and multiplayer (myself included). I found a prevalence of kids, stoner and drongo types in the multiplayer - nothing like what I came across in TR MP.

Uncharted was basically the mascot game for PS3 - new IP which had basically everything previous Tomb Raiders did but to a better quality, with a very likeable protagonist, explosive set and enjoyable albeit cliche story. "It's Tomb Raider, but with a guy ermahgherd!"
Didn't Tomb Raider still beat Uncharted in sales?

Like you said, UC is (was?) a new franchise. I'm sure that UC8 may end up suffering from the exact same staleness as TRU suffered from :whistle:


The gaming market is more popular than ever and the next-gen consoles are selling faster than 360/ps3 did in their earlier days. I think the adoption rate of the new consoles will be much more faster than last time due to how marketed and hyped it's been compared to PS3/360. I still agree about 360/ps3 still been hugly marketable, though, both consoles have sold 70-ish million each? It's not like those consoles are instantly thrown in the bin.

Maybe we'll see a slightly faster adoption rate this time around, but I doubt it would make a huge impact on the number of PS3's/360's still in use by the end of next year.

Fun fact: only 2 years ago there were still more PS2's (!) than PS3's in American homes:

jtbcbf_nielsen.jpg

Weemanply109
16th Jun 2014, 15:39
Fun fact: only 2 years ago there were still more PS2's (!) than PS3's in American homes:

jtbcbf_nielsen.jpg

Interesting... Looks like PC stays winning.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v232/korn0818/ATRL_Smilies_All/random/mskt8j_zpsfb323382.gif


:p

Shocked at those stats, tho (especially for PS3 :o).

Driber
16th Jun 2014, 15:50
Interesting... Looks like PC stays winning.

Uhm no, you should read that stat more like "virtually everyone (already) owns a PC and replaces one PC with another PC", heh.

Weemanply109
16th Jun 2014, 15:56
Uhm no, you should read that stat more like "virtually everyone (already) owns a PC and replaces one PC with another PC", heh.

That's what I do read it as, though. Point is that ownership of PC's outrank consoles and I was just being facetious by pointing it out. :poke:

Driber
16th Jun 2014, 16:05
That's what I do read it as, though.

Then I think you're interpreting the data wrong, because consoles still "win" over PC when it comes to actually playing games.


Point is that ownership of PC's outrank consoles

And ownership of mobile phones outranks ownership of PC's...


and I was just being facetious by pointing it out. :poke:

Alright, and no harm done in pointing out a misinterpretation of the graph :)

Weemanply109
16th Jun 2014, 16:16
That's actually wrong. The worlds' biggest and most successful games are on PC (MMO's, MOBA's, RTS, etc) whereas console only has Call of Duty, really... and even the biggest PC title has a bigger playerbase. Also, if we're going to label mobile as a gaming platform then let's not make flash games exempt from "PC gaming", only adding to the number of people (casual gamers) play on PC (such as FB games, etc).

PC remains winning as a gaming platform. There is no misinterpretation. :)

Driber
16th Jun 2014, 16:34
Yes there is. Console gaming vastly outshadows PC gaming in terms of numbers.

"In 2012, there were 32 million units of software sold globally for PC, and there was only one PC game in the top 30 – Diablo III – which came in at number 14. By comparison, the combined PS3, Xbox 360, and Wii software sales topped 331 million."

http://www.digitaltrends.com/gaming/future-gaming-still-belongs-consoles/


Also, if we're going to label mobile as a gaming platform

We're not; I was only quoting that meaningless factoid to show you that your factoid was just as meaningless.

Weemanply109
16th Jun 2014, 16:45
It's hilarious that's all you see of PC gaming, lol. Cute COMBINED console statistic aswell, I wonder what each is separately, tho. :lol: It always seems that when speaking of consoles, people compare a GROUP of platforms to one platform, no wonder you guys think console is winning, an unfair comparison as always. 3 platforms vs 1. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v232/korn0818/ab6d3f1c.gif

You clearly saw I was speaking of playerbases. Sales only factor for so little in PC gaming now. We have Free to play and so many other variants. I'm aware that consoles sell more of the average game, but PC gaming is clearly a different demographic overall. It's obvious that a system aimed at the average joe is going to sell more, but you clearly seen my point about the biggest PC game excelling over the biggest console game (in terms of playerbase). There's a lot of MASSIVELY popular games on PC that are bigger than anything on console. Minecraft, World of Warcraft, League of Legends, DOTA 2, and other games of these kind are massive. Don't try and put them down.

My point remains. Seems your factoid is the only one meaningless.

Phaid_Min6Char_Sigh
16th Jun 2014, 16:49
It's hilarious that's all you see of PC gaming, lol. Cute COMBINED console statistic aswell, I wonder what each is separately, tho. :lol:

Also, the retail market no longer matters for the PC as a platform, so these numbers are totally meaningless. Countless retail channels stopped carrying boxed PC products ages ago, and it's only gotten worse since then.

Weemanply109
16th Jun 2014, 16:55
Also, the retail market no longer matters for the PC as a platform, so these numbers are totally meaningless. Countless retail channels stopped carrying boxed PC products ages ago, and it's only gotten worse since then.

Driber, looks like your factoid is indeed meaningless. :p (I'm not trying to be an ass, I swear. ;))

Exactly. Steam is pretty much the biggest distributor for PC games and because Valve is a private company, they don't not publish sales numbers or earnings willingly. So exact PC receipts aren't available and or accurate, seems like a dead end for those on the opposing side of this argument. :p

However, we do have a big concurrent playerbase on Steam that also isn't really far off from Xbox/Playstations from what I remember.

AdobeArtist
16th Jun 2014, 18:24
Also, tired of seeing Uncharted 4 trailer used as a graphic comparison to everything (not that I'm picking out on anyone, more so see it on TRF). That trailer most likely in-engine pre-rendered, just as 'The Last Of Us' trailers and cutscenes were. The difference between the game and the trailers weren't MASSIVE, but in comparison shots, you can see details overall that aren't as good and are noticable that obviously help lower the load on the GPU, hence why UC4 is @ 1080p 60FPS


Well, for what it's worth, Naughty Dog claim the trailer was captured "in engine".
The final game probably won't look that clean when it comes to image quality and the trailer was touched up a bit (plus, there wasn't much happening on the screen), but I've used it as an example to illustrate the point.
Releasing a cross-platform game in late 2015 seems somewhat suicidal, considering the influx of purely PC/PS4/XboxOne-oriented games, which are guaranteed to look more impressive than a game still made with x360/ps3 in mind.



WELP. There goes my point about UC4. A thread on Neogaf has sources confirming that the trailer is rendered in realtime on PS4 hardware. :lol: Jesus.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=835985

@Phaid, Yep. It was amazing how advanced Crysis was, especially considering it was 2006/2007 (they shown it off at E3 2006). It was on the doorstep of the new generation at that time and pretty much put the consoles to shame. I wish we had a developer push boundaries like that again (some people argue it's CD Projekt - but I disagree, their visuals aren't THAT impressive and their games are unoptimized).

There's something that needs to be understood about trailer footage vs real time game play footage. When any given trailer (his applies to all trailers, not just Uncharted) is in-engine, and even if running on the platform hardware, there's a reason it looks so much more crisp and at a higher fidelity than the gaming experience we get, hands on.

Fixed camera and action scripting.

Because all the action is controlled and scripted, the camera is set and the characters are all running through directed animations, the assets can all be perfectly tuned & optimized.

But when they code the game for disc (or consumer download), they have to make it flexible and adaptable to handle unpredictable conditions - namely the players input. Not knowing where they'll look in the environments, the direction they'll go, what actions they'll want to make the character do from one moment to the next, and who knows what else. So they have to find the best balance in resolution, texture, lighting, and the myriad of graphical factors to be able to handle all this in actual real time conditions.

It's the difference between controlled laboratory conditions and unpredictable real world conditions. So in-engine is not the same as in-game.

* * * *

Now to the matter of game releasing between generations;

The issue has already been raised that a game is forced to make sacrifices to be cross-gen developed, that the next gen isn't using its full potential in order to have a game of equal experience on it's predecessor. It's not always about adjusting different resolution and texture settings between systems.

Consider the other elements of design which rely on the level of technology, say the scale and interactivity of the world. Or the amount of NPCs. Just look at what AC Unity is doing with 5000 NPCs that populate the streets of Paris.

Some things you couldn't implement on older hardware even if you scaled down the resolution and texture. To alter the level design and other interactive elements to work on last gen isn't just a fidelity compromise, it's fundamentally sacrificing the game design as intended.

But here's the main issue I wanted to address; it goes without saying that at the beginning of a new gen, there's always a larger user population on the last gen systems. Marketing logic might dictate that the developer is short changing themselves by cutting off a much larger consumer revenue source.

But does that mean they really won't buy the game if it's not on the system they currently have? Because what is it that ultimately makes the push for consumers to make that transition into the next gen?

No, not the hardware with all it's chest thumping number bragging. IT'S THE SOFTWARE. When games are released for both gens as a bridge, the last gen crowd doesn't have the incentive to make the leap, not when they can get the game on what they already have.

But when the consumer sees all the titles that are only on the next gen systems, with all the promise of an experience they couldn't get on their old machines, that's when they feel compelled to invest. It's the "system seller" effect, the one that has them saying, "NOW I gotta buy it because that's the game I MUST have." This is the cycle we've seen before, why those last gen users went to it (X360 and PS3) in the first place, leaving behind that previous gen. And the gen before that.

So in truth, devs and publishers have nearly (emphasis on nearly) as much revenue potential if they make a game for the next gen only that shows WHY users should make the switch.

Now all this is principle. Not necessarily saying Rise of the Tomb Raider will be the game that drives the next gen system sales. It might be Arkham Knight, or Witcher 3, Halo 5, Metal Gear Phantom Pain, Destiny, the new Star Wars Battlefront, the next Elder Scrolls game, or any combination thereof.

But even so, I'd rather see ROTTR fully utilize this gen and offer us the ultimate next level experience :)

phew are my fingers tired after this :nut: :p

Elessar78
16th Jun 2014, 18:53
Fun fact: Gothic games (or Risen) never suffered from this issue, and the first one came out in 2001. Granted,their worlds weren't as big as in Morrowind or Oblivion/Skyrim, but still much more lively and full of amazing little details or proper NPC schedules.
Piranha Bytes had really good programmers, I guess. ;)

Like you said, the world is nor nearly as vast. Plus the houses are really plain, without many items. In contrast, Skyrim can have tons of stuff in houses. Like i have been saying, it's all compromises.

Driber
16th Jun 2014, 23:02
It's hilarious that's all you see of PC gaming, lol. Cute COMBINED console statistic aswell, I wonder what each is separately, tho. :lol: It always seems that when speaking of consoles, people compare a GROUP of platforms to one platform, no wonder you guys think console is winning, an unfair comparison as always. 3 platforms vs 1. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v232/korn0818/ab6d3f1c.gif

lol

Obvious PC fanboy makes vague and unsubstantial claim that "PC gaming wins over console gaming", then cries when provided a counter-argument that "unfairly" combines consoles, even though he made that implication from the start himself :p


You clearly saw I was speaking of playerbases.

Uhm, no. You weren't clear about that at all.

Don't go changing the way you phrase your argument with every new post and then try to push the fault onto the other party for "not seeing the obvious" :p

Okay, if your only argument is that some PC games have larger playerbases than console games, fine, I grant you that. So what? That in no way translates to "PC wins over consoles" :rasp:

There are console games which sales figures DWARF most PC games. And yes, that includes digital sales ;)


My point remains. Seems your factoid is the only one meaningless.

Nope.


Driber, looks like your factoid is indeed meaningless. :p (I'm not trying to be an ass, I swear. ;))

Exactly. Steam is pretty much the biggest distributor for PC games and because Valve is a private company, they don't not publish sales numbers or earnings willingly. So exact PC receipts aren't available and or accurate, seems like a dead end for those on the opposing side of this argument. :p

However, we do have a big concurrent playerbase on Steam that also isn't really far off from Xbox/Playstations from what I remember.

The only side who's at a dead end in their argument is the one claiming that "PC gaming wins over console gaming" because he self-admitted that his stats are unreliable because Steam doesn't publish sales figures, so all he can do to support his claim is making wild assumptions about the numbers :lol:

You see, I am not the one making any claims about who "wins". I actually couldn't care less, even if my platform of choice does "win", because I'm not a fanboy of ANY platform. You are the only one thumping your chest, as AA nicely put it :p

Murphdawg1
16th Jun 2014, 23:21
That's actually wrong. The worlds' biggest and most successful games are on PC (MMO's, MOBA's, RTS, etc) whereas console only has Call of Duty, really... and even the biggest PC title has a bigger playerbase. Also, if we're going to label mobile as a gaming platform then let's not make flash games exempt from "PC gaming", only adding to the number of people (casual gamers) play on PC (such as FB games, etc).

PC remains winning as a gaming platform. There is no misinterpretation. :)

Grand Theft Auto V sayshi:wave:

Weemanply109
16th Jun 2014, 23:24
Grand Theft Auto V sayshi:wave:

League of Legends says "hi" back :wave:

"Riot's 'League of Legends' Reveals Astonishing 27 Million Daily Players, 67 Million Monthly"

http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2014/01/27/riots-league-of-legends-reveals-astonishing-27-million-daily-players-67-million-monthly/

Not a game having a player base as almost as big as a console's individual lifetime sales (take your pick) and that's only a monthly gathered statistic. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v232/korn0818/ab6d3f1c.gif

As for Driber. Your post is indeed interesting, but has a few flaws. It's late here and I want to play TF2 before I head off, so I'll get back to you later. ;)

Driber
16th Jun 2014, 23:37
^ Why even bother? :p :D

Valenka
16th Jun 2014, 23:42
RISE OF THE TOMB RAIDER SUPPOSEDLY COMING TO XBOX 360, PS3

http://arcadesushi.com/rise-of-the-tomb-raider-supposedly-coming-to-xbox-360-ps3/


Crystal Dynamics’ and Square Enix’s E3 trailer for Rise of the Tomb Raider at E3 presented a beautifully rendered scene that viewers immediately recognized as new-gen footage. This led some to believe that the game would be exclusive to Xbox One and PlayStation 4, leaving 360 and PS3 owners without an opportunity to experience the next chapter in the life of Lara Croft. Two listings found online, however, reveal that the game will, in fact, come to Sony and Microsoft’s previous consoles.

The official Rise of the Tomb Raider trailer page on Xbox.com shows off the gripping trailer and gives a brief synopsis of the game’s premise. More importantly, though, it lists the platforms for the game as Xbox One and Xbox 360. Corroborating evidence of a last-gen release can be found on Amazon.co.uk, where Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 versions of the game are listed alongside the Xbox One, PlayStation 4 and PC editions.

2013’s Tomb Raider reboot first appeared on Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3, but received Xbox One and PlayStation 4 upgrades with January’s Tomb Raider: Definitive Edition. We’re assuming that the Rise of the Tomb Raider is being similarly developed for the less powerful systems, then up-scaled to the new consoles rather than two separate versions for the different console generations. Tomb Raider made the transition beautifully, and we’re hoping for the same results when Rise of the Tomb Raider launches next year.

Good news for those who haven't upgraded to an Xbox One or PS4 yet, providing this proves to be correct. :)

Tihocan
17th Jun 2014, 02:37
http://www.xbox.com/en-US/games/rise-of-the-tomb-raider

Platforms include XBox 360.
I'm interested to see how this pans out.

LARALOVERnr1
17th Jun 2014, 19:42
http://media.giphy.com/media/t7PPfFiM5dgVa/giphy.gif

Elessar78
18th Jun 2014, 19:58
E3 2014: HOW UBISOFT, ACTIVISION, AND EA ARE PREPARING FOR A NEXT-GEN-ONLY FUTURE (http://www.ign.com/articles/2014/06/18/e3-2014-how-ubisoft-activision-and-ea-are-preparing-for-a-next-gen-only-future)

d1n0_xD
18th Jun 2014, 20:14
^ Yeah, it kinda makes sense not to abandon last-gen yet, since the current-gen is still kinda new... A year, or maybe 2-3 from now the transition will be complete :) (I don't know how that stuff works, I'm a PC gamer :p )

Leon S. Kennedy
6th Jul 2014, 07:59
Sure you can, but you have to compare the demographics as well.
GoW was popular due to it's "hardcore" nature among those who like stupid brutal combat and multiplayer (myself included). I found a prevalence of kids, stoner and drongo types in the multiplayer - nothing like what I came across in TR MP.

Uncharted was basically the mascot game for PS3 - new IP which had basically everything previous Tomb Raiders did but to a better quality, with a very likeable protagonist, explosive set and enjoyable albeit cliche story. "It's Tomb Raider, but with a guy ermahgherd!"
Didn't Tomb Raider still beat Uncharted in sales?

I love both series, but Uncharted 2 and 3 both sold over 6 million on one platform. Tomb Raider hit 6 million on five platforms. Tomb Raider is most popular on PlayStation. The comparison between UC4 and ROTTR next Fall will be very interesting.

Leon S. Kennedy
6th Jul 2014, 08:02
Interesting... Looks like PC stays winning.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v232/korn0818/ATRL_Smilies_All/random/mskt8j_zpsfb323382.gif


:p

Shocked at those stats, tho (especially for PS3 :o).

Xbox 360 dominated the US. If you did stats for Europe PS3 would have similar lead. Now PS4 leads everywhere...

ARaider
18th Jul 2014, 01:35
RISE OF THE TOMB RAIDER SUPPOSEDLY COMING TO XBOX 360, PS3

http://arcadesushi.com/rise-of-the-tomb-raider-supposedly-coming-to-xbox-360-ps3/



Good news for those who haven't upgraded to an Xbox One or PS4 yet, providing this proves to be correct. :)


http://www.xbox.com/en-US/games/rise-of-the-tomb-raider

Platforms include XBox 360.
I'm interested to see how this pans out.


hmmmm interesting..... would this also means that it is coming for ps3?:)
if not....
then i'm screwed;)

CakeLuv
18th Jul 2014, 02:49
hmmmm interesting..... would this also means that it is coming for ps3?:)
if not....
then i'm screwed;)

I wanted this so bad, but now I got a PS4 and I'm like scared for our baby's looks http://i251.photobucket.com/albums/gg295/randomperson_2008/Emoticons/selener4_zps8a753056.png

RougeisSerina
18th Jul 2014, 04:17
Wow, what an amazing exclusive I've just be-withered. :D

Driber
18th Jul 2014, 07:56
I wanted this so bad, but now I got a PS4 and I'm like scared for our baby's looks http://i251.photobucket.com/albums/gg295/randomperson_2008/Emoticons/selener4_zps8a753056.png

Don't be, it'll be just fine :)

ARaider
18th Jul 2014, 11:10
I wanted this so bad, but now I got a PS4 and I'm like scared for our baby's looks http://i251.photobucket.com/albums/gg295/randomperson_2008/Emoticons/selener4_zps8a753056.png

lol, sounds kinda stupid but I don't get it. :scratch::nut: