PDA

View Full Version : "Fall" of the Tomb Raider?



Valenka
13th Aug 2014, 22:36
Warning: this post contains a blunt opinion that may differ from the general consensus regarding the exclusivity surrounding Tomb Raider. Please read with caution and take any and all opinions expressed here with a grain of salt. Thank you.

First things first, I'm the realest.

Well, let me first preface this by expressing my relief that Rise of the Tomb Raider is not a permanent Xbox exclusive. Tomb Raider has always been a multi-platform experience and I'm so glad that the community as a whole will be able to experience it in the end without being essentially forced to purchase a console some may not want. That, and the fact that now I don't have to feel too guilty about picking up the game at launch.

I'll continue by addressing the fact that the whole exclusivity deal is a load of bollocks, regardless of the fact that it's only for a duration. It never should have happened in the first place and we as a community may have lost a tremendous amount of respect for the company for what amounts to basically "selling out" a franchise that we never would have thought would have to face such controversy.

I can only hope and pray that the potential compensation* from Microsoft is used to better the experience for everyone come launch on all platforms.

*I say 'potential' because it was not confirmed whether or not this was a non-profit agreement or if Microsoft paid for exclusive rights for the undisclosed duration. You may, of course, choose to believe either possibility without explanation or reasoning. I'm sure most of us can agree on the more likely scenario.

However, getting to the point of why I made this thread, when the news was shared regarding Tomb Raider's timed exclusivity, I expected a huge, shared feeling of relief and gratitude. Of course, paired with some speculation on what PC and Playstation gamers might receive as recompense for the games initial exclusivity. What I found instead was indeed the shared emotions of relief and gratitude, but a lot of slander toward the Xbox consoles and the Tomb Raider name itself. While I can understand the emotions hovering about, this should be a time for celebration and speculation, not slander and negative energy.

It's no secret that a majority of the community prefers Playstation over Xbox when it comes to Tomb Raider (and perhaps gaming in general) and several polls throughout the forums will confirm that statistic. Which, of course, clearly fuels the negative remarks about the console(s) and such. But I'm curious: would the backlash have been the same if it were exclusive to Playstation, as opposed to Xbox? I highly doubt it, considering that the Playstation is indeed the favoured platform from the majority.

What I find to be incredibly humorous is the fact that in the same breath, some people will speak ill about the Xbox and such, praising the Playstation and then complain about and question the validity of the console war...after just contributing to it. :scratch:

However, I'm not here to add fuel to the fire, as it were. Getting back on track...

Why is the community referring to Lara's next adventure as The Fall of the Tomb Raider? The franchise isn't falling whatsoever. Did you miss the press release clarifying that it is a timed exclusive? Or is it because it's not exclusive to the Playstation? I know, I'm getting off track again...sorry. Anyway, the franchise is not falling, despite what some may think. This isn't the first time Tomb Raider had exclusivity with Xbox - Beneath the Ashes and Lara's Shadow anyone? - but in the past, it hadn't garnered as much backlash and I don't understand why.

The community is still strong and hasn't separated now that we've learnt that the exclusivity isn't permanent. So why is Tomb Raider falling? Some people are acting as if ROTTR isn't coming to other platforms at all. Why are you still angry? You're still going to be able to experience the game regardless. Just because it's exclusive to Microsoft for a period of time...that means the franchise is damned? It's not!

I've even seen some members turn away completely and pretty much say, "Well whatever, Uncharted is going to be better anyway" when just a few years ago, at the announcement of the original Uncharted game, those same people were criticising it for being a Tomb Raider clone! :nut:

Honestly, if the Tomb Raider community is going to fall apart, it'll be because of attitudes like that, not because of monetary driven decisions from the corporate staff.

Stop trying to find something to be angry or upset with and simply rejoice and hug one another and look forward not to the day of Rise of the Tomb Raider's launch, but instead, its second launch when it'll be available for everyone, and not just those who own an Xbox.

Positive energy attracts positive energy. Remember that. :) :group_hug:

SofaJockey
13th Aug 2014, 22:49
I agree with much of what you say.

By all means people may be disappointed with the exclusivity decision. I think the decision was disappointing, though I don't have insight into the financials to understand its relative necessity.

But for many people then to argue that after all TR2013 sucked and they hope CD goes bust.
Or to argue that only PS/PC owners are proper fans,
or to abuse VAs, writers, CD employees (and ex employees) online
is no way to make a point.

I also note a very many civil, constructive and morally credible complaints but they have largely been drowned out by the more extreme posts.

Murphdawg1
13th Aug 2014, 22:54
Microsoft gets the bad reputation that they have from non Xbox fanboys because they always seem to do this kind of stuff and to outsiders it appears as though they can't make any other games not named Halo or Forza so what do they do? Throw a bunch of cash at 3rd party devs for timed exclusives and DLC a month earlier for their owners. Yes Sony is guility of the practice as well regarding DLC but it's not even on the same level as keeping whole games off a certain platform for an extended amount of time(Plants vs Zombies 2 Garden Warfare, also is there any particular reason Ryse and Dead Rising 3 couldn't be on the PS4?) Also the fact that Sony actually makes alot of their own exclusives so they have much more 1st party content.

Remember it's the day after alot of people felt like Crystal and Sqaure Enix were walking out on them due to the terrible blog post from Mr.Gallahger so can you blame anyone really for being still a bit pissed off at the situation? I know I am but i'm sure people will calm down especially when it's actually confirmed this game will be coming to PC and PS4.

d1n0_xD
13th Aug 2014, 23:04
But I'm curious: would the backlash have been the same if it were exclusive to Playstation, as opposed to Xbox? I highly doubt it, considering that the Playstation is indeed the favoured platform from the majority.

A very large majority stated that they would feel the same way were it a PS4 exclusive. It's not about being an XBox exclusive, it's about being an exclusive.



Why is the community referring to Lara's next adventure as The Fall of the Tomb Raider? The franchise isn't falling whatsoever. Did you miss the press release clarifying that it is a timed exclusive? Or is it because it's not exclusive to the Playstation? I know, I'm getting off track again...sorry. Anyway, the franchise is not falling, despite what some may think. This isn't the first time Tomb Raider had exclusivity with Xbox - Beneath the Ashes and Lara's Shadow anyone? - but in the past, it hadn't garnered as much backlash and I don't understand why.

The "Fall of the Tomb Raider" started as a joke before it was announced as a timed exclusive.


Why are you still angry?

We are angry because corporate BS is messing with our fav franchise. Just because it happened before, doesn't mean it's ok to happen again.



Stop trying to find something to be angry or upset with and simply rejoice and hug one another and look forward not to the day of Rise of the Tomb Raider's launch, but instead, its second launch when it'll be available for everyone, and not just those who own an Xbox.

Positive energy attracts positive energy. Remember that. :) :group_hug:

I think we're all happy it's coming out eventually, that still doesn't mean we can't be mad it isn't coming out when it should've been.

Valenka
13th Aug 2014, 23:09
A very large majority stated that they would feel the same way were it a PS4 exclusive. It's not about being an XBox exclusive, it's about being an exclusive.


Tomb Raider is still a multi-platform title, just not right away in this case. I understand why people are upset, but I think it's time to turn the sprinklers on.


The "Fall of the Tomb Raider" started as a joke before it was announced as a timed exclusive.

Well, it would be nice if people would knock it off already, since it's no longer relevant. :p


We are angry because corporate BS is messing with our fav franchise. Just because it happened before, doesn't mean it's ok to happen again.

Understandable. However, I don't think anyone wants to hear about it until the end of time. Arguing and debating with one another won't heal the wound. Concerns should be directed toward the parties responsible.


I think we're all happy it's coming out eventually, that still doesn't mean we can't be mad it isn't coming out when it should've been.

I understand that, but is that all anyone is going to talk about until the game is launched? I want to talk about Tomb Raider, not about which console it's being released for first.

pidipidi39
13th Aug 2014, 23:16
I actually agree with a bunch of things you said (especially at the beginning of the post), but I think I agree more with what Dino said.

You can't blame (although you don't seem to be doing it) people for being disappointed at what CD/SE/MS did. I am happy that the game will eventually come out on PC and PS4 too, but I am still disappointed and I still think that it's not fair to not have it out at the same time on all the three platforms.

And as I stated a lot of times, I would have reacted the same if the game was announced to be exclusive for PS4 or PC.


I understand that, but is that all anyone is going to talk about until the game is launched? I want to talk about Tomb Raider, not about which console it's being released for first.
Not everyone wants to talk about the same thing.

Valenka
13th Aug 2014, 23:18
Oh Lord, no. I don't blame anyone for anything regarding the situation. I think its quite justified, actually. I'm just tired of hearing about it now that we've heard it's not permanent. I want to go back to speculating about the game.


Not everyone wants to talk about the same thing.

True, sadly. I think we need a new subforum dedicated to rants and raves. :p

d1n0_xD
13th Aug 2014, 23:20
Tomb Raider is still a multi-platform title, just not right away in this case. I understand why people are upset, but I think it's time to turn the sprinklers on.

Well, we'll see how those sprinklers are going to affect people once it comes out on Xbox. People are gonna play it and talk about it, and others won't.




Well, it would be nice if people would knock it off already, since it's no longer relevant. :p

It is, tho. We're not gonna stand for it being a timed exclusive either. I'm not saying RotTR will come out on all plarforms equally if we're loud enough, I'm saying if we're loud enough, it won't happen again in the future.


Understandable. However, I don't think anyone wants to hear about it until the end of time. Arguing and debating with one another won't heal the wound. Concerns should be directed toward the parties responsible.

Maybe you don't want to hear it, but staying quiet won't change a thing. We're not arguing with each other, we're arguing with with CD/SE/whoever let this happen. And clearly by the way it's still going on, everyone wants to hear about it until it's fixed.


I understand that, but is that all anyone is going to talk about until the game is launched? I want to talk about Tomb Raider, not about which console it's being released for first.

We're gonna talk about what's relevent. If a screenshot or a trailer or a gameplay video comes out, we're gonna talk about it. Until then, and posssibly afterwards, we're gonna talk about it because this is what's going on and what's important.

Valenka
13th Aug 2014, 23:23
We're gonna talk about what's relevent. If a screenshot or a trailer or a gameplay video comes out, we're gonna talk about it. Until then, and posssibly afterwards, we're gonna talk about because this is what's going on and what's important.

In that case, I'm lobbying for the ability to filter threads, so that I can only read and contribute to discussions involving the game itself and not marketing choices. :lol:

pidipidi39
13th Aug 2014, 23:28
Oh Lord, no. I don't blame anyone for anything regarding the situation. I think its quite justified, actually. I'm just tired of hearing about it now that we've heard it's not permanent. I want to go back to speculating about the game.
But I do get this.

It's just that for some people knowing that's it's ''just a timed exclusive'' doesn't erase everything. It makes the situation better, but it does not repair it completely.

I am quite done ranting (I'm still not happy about the situation though), but some people aren't. And till they'll keep on ranting in a respectful way (I've not seen every post people have posted here since yesterday so I can't know if someone has insulted anyone or said insulting/disrespectful stuff) let them be.


True, sadly. I think we need a new subforum dedicated to rants and raves. :p
That would be sad. :p

d1n0_xD
13th Aug 2014, 23:29
@Valenka, No need for lobbying, just don't read the threads revolved around the exclusivity :p



It's just that for some people knowing that's it's ''just a timed exclusive'' doesn't erase everything. It makes the situation better, but it does not repair it completely.

Yeah, it's like having an incurable non-lethal disease with annoying symptoms. You feel grateful you're not gonna die, but you still want to be perfectly healthy.

Psychomorph
13th Aug 2014, 23:44
One of the very few upcoming games I was looking forward to. Oh well...

RybatGrimes
13th Aug 2014, 23:45
What else is there to talk about? There wasn't any other information released so the forum would just go back to being dead.

I mean come on, it's 1 day after all this happened. And what happened was pretty upsetting, you can't expect everyone to get over it and move on that quickly. And asking for sub forums and filters already is kind of dramatic. :p

Grim13
13th Aug 2014, 23:48
All that was really said was that the contract had "a duration"... if the duration is longer than one to several years... it may as well be a console exclusive, imho.

d1n0_xD
13th Aug 2014, 23:48
I don't know, man, if I had an Xbox ready, maybe I would ask them to shut up too :p

I'm just joking, Valenka, I know you're not like that :flowers:

Valenka
13th Aug 2014, 23:58
I don't know, man, if I had an Xbox ready, maybe I would ask them to shut up too :p I'm just joking, Valenka, I know you're not like that :flowers:

LOL you're damn skippy, I'm not. :p

If y'all want to talk about mad, I'm mad that no one caught and/or laughed at the joke I made:


First things first, I'm the realest.

https://33.media.tumblr.com/7556e8db50ffe6ab569303f635ffc80b/tumblr_n99xn0jQ341qkrrcio1_500.gif

pidipidi39
14th Aug 2014, 00:03
I actually was going to answer to you with a "Drop this and let the Whole world feel it", but I thought it would have made no sense, lol.

Rai
14th Aug 2014, 01:52
I don't think it's been confirmed that Rise is definitely coming to the PC and PS4 has it? I suppose it's hopeful now compared to yesterday.

Anyway, since the exclusivity was announced people have been using 'Fall' of the TR or Death of Tomb Raider, which is a knee jerk reaction, but still quite childish, imo. Hoping the game fails or the franchise ends is an extreme reaction. I've seen TRF members asking to be banned from the forums over this as they feel they can't support the franchise any more. Okay, fine, if you won't or can't buy the game and you're frustrated by that, it's understandable. But to give up on the franchise you love, to leave the TR community over this? Really?

Things are beginning to calm a little and the news it's timed has helped. I really do hope PS4 and PC gamers will get the chance to play the game. It would be a real shame for them to miss out. All of this has actually made me feel slightly uncomfortable about buying the game, if I can afford an Xbox One or if it comes to the 360, I'll still want to play the game. I still support it and even CD as I don't blame the developers, as they're making the game, not making the decisions on PR or marketing/sales. I still want TR to do well as a franchise and be competitive against its nearest rivals. I'm unhappy about this, but I'm not wishing TR ends either.

I was in two minds as well. I was hoping to see new footage as it may have helped as people could see the game and talk about it, but maybe it's too soon as people would get upset again as they know they'll be missing out, so maybe CD are right to hold back for a while on showing footage just yet :o. .

We haven't seen any real footage of the game yet. Some people are saying they'll boycott the game even if they have an Xbox (360 or One) or if the game will come to PS4 and PC once the 'duration' (length unknown) ends. I wonder if people will change their minds once they've seen something of the gameplay/another trailer.

CakeLuv
14th Aug 2014, 01:54
"A Tomb Raider's End"

"The rise of a thief"

fixed.

medievil
14th Aug 2014, 01:58
it has NOT been confirmed, CD response appeared, to me, to be a multi year/game thing as they look to the future with M$ as a partner...
if that is the case.. it IS death of the tomb raider cause e no one will buy a crappy Xbone just to lay one game, no matter the game...and since CD and SE rely on sales, which they won't be getting, the franchise will die


as for the outrage dying down.. I am not seeing that at all.. people are in a waiting period. awaiting confirmation of a PS4/PC release.. if that does not happen, the outrage will erupt... it is akin to the whole M$ E3 fumble



I don't think it's been confirmed that Rise is definitely coming to the PC and PS4 has it? I suppose it's hopeful now compared to yesterday.

Anyway, since the exclusivity was announced people have been using 'Fall' of the TR or Death of Tomb Raider, which is a knee jerk reaction, but still quite childish, imo. Hoping the game fails or the franchise ends is an extreme reaction. I've seen TRF members asking to be banned from the forums over this as they feel they can't support the franchise any more. Okay, fine, if you won't or can't buy the game and you're frustrated by that, it's understandable. But to give up on the franchise you love, to leave the TR community over this? Really?

Things are beginning to calm a little and the news it's timed has helped. I really do hope PS4 and PC gamers will get the chance to play the game. It would be a real shame for them to miss out. All of this has actually made me feel slightly uncomfortable about buying the game, if I can afford an Xbox One or if it comes to the 360, I'll still want to play the game. I still support it and even CD as I don't blame the developers, as they're making the game, not making the decisions on PR or marketing/sales. I still want TR to do well as a franchise and be competitive against its nearest rivals. I'm unhappy about this, but I'm not wishing TR ends either.

I was in two minds as well. I was hoping to see new footage as it may have helped as people could see the game and talk about it, but maybe it's too soon as people would get upset again as they know they'll be missing out, so maybe CD are right to hold back for a while on showing footage just yet :o. .

nodq24
14th Aug 2014, 02:03
I for one hope CD will be smart once this unneeded timed exclusive crap is over that they do release this game to the ps3, ps4, & pc so the people will not be forced to have to buy an x1 or a 360(if you only owned a ps3).

RybatGrimes
14th Aug 2014, 02:04
I don't think it's been confirmed that Rise is definitely coming to the PC and PS4 has it? I suppose it's hopeful now compared to yesterday.

Not.. really? I guess. D:

We know that it's a timed exclusive but who knows how long that could be. It could be 2 months, or 2 years. And I guess it's just a logical assumption that they would release it on other platforms after the duration is up, but I suppose that doesn't mean they will for sure. ;_;

Rai
14th Aug 2014, 02:10
Well the game was originally announced for both next gen consoles, right? So I assume that means that CD have at least some work done for the PS4, so in theory, if they continue to work on that platform (and the PC version), then they'll be able to release it as soon as possible once this duration is over. I hope CD will say something about this soon.

Murphdawg1
14th Aug 2014, 02:18
Well the game was originally announced for both next gen consoles, right? So I assume that means that CD have at least some work done for the PS4, so in theory, if they continue to work on that platform (and the PC version), then they'll be able to release it as soon as possible once this duration is over. I hope CD will say something about this soon.

Yeah you figured after the mess Darrell Gallagher left yesterday someone would have come back and been like "okay guys here is what's happening".

RybatGrimes
14th Aug 2014, 02:45
Well the game was originally announced for both next gen consoles, right? So I assume that means that CD have at least some work done for the PS4, so in theory, if they continue to work on that platform (and the PC version), then they'll be able to release it as soon as possible once this duration is over. I hope CD will say something about this soon.

I think this is the most frustrating thing about it. Being left in the dark, not knowing anything. And when they do tell us something it's practically all regurgitated PR crap, it's so obvious and belittling I can't stand it. I just want it straight up. Give us some concrete answers! ugh.

Valenka
14th Aug 2014, 12:27
I don't think it's been confirmed that Rise is definitely coming to the PC and PS4 has it? I suppose it's hopeful now compared to yesterday.

Still no official confirmation and that is the source of everyone's frustration. It was confirmed that the Xbox exclusivity isn't permanent, but no confirmation that it'll be coming to other platforms afterwards.

In my opinion, it's pretty obvious that it is coming to the Playstation and PC; if it wasn't, they wouldn't have said the exclusivity was timed. It would have been permanent.

But no one will be happy until they get an official word...as if common sense is a rarity. :p

kiss-bite
14th Aug 2014, 12:52
It's called damage control...

A PC/PS release should absolutely not be assumed until an official announcement is given, not before then. Because It seemed to me there was almost a SE/CD/MS trinity forming around the future of Tomb Raider. The language used suggested slightly more Microsoft involvement than just a one off deal. The Darrell Gallagher statement was beyond patronising and an insult to most Tomb Raider supporters!

A timed exclusive could possibly mean a very long time. I think it would be wise for PC/PS TR fans to not give a sigh of relief just yet...

If the worst happened, TR being exclusive on XBONE for quite some time say for a few games. It would be the fall of Tomb Raider because it's following would decrease immensely.

Tecstar70
14th Aug 2014, 12:57
A PC/PS release should absolutely not be assumed until an official announcement is given, not before then.

Agreed, but the probability is that it will and it would be highly stupid and irregular not to.



A timed exclusive could possibly mean a very long time. I think it would be wise for PC/PS TR fans to not give a sigh of relief just yet...

It could, but again it would be highly stupid and irregular.



If the worst happened, TR being exclusive on XBONE for quite some time say for a few games. It would be the fall of Tomb Raider because it's following would decrease immensely.

...and that would be very stupid, so the question is are SE THAT stupid?

Jurre
14th Aug 2014, 13:02
It's called damage control...

A PC/PS release should absolutely not be assumed until an official announcement is given, not before then. Because It seemed to me there was almost a SE/CD/MS trinity forming around the future of Tomb Raider.
Yes, this partnership between SE and Microsoft is definately something to be very, VERY worried about, but I do believe that it will come out on the other platforms. SE are not crazy, they know that even after taking Microsofts bribe there is a PS and PC market that they are not going to ignore.

Still, you're right: it doesn't hurt to be prepared...

Flintmelody
14th Aug 2014, 13:22
Still no official confirmation and that is the source of everyone's frustration. It was confirmed that the Xbox exclusivity isn't permanent, but no confirmation that it'll be coming to other platforms afterwards.

In my opinion, it's pretty obvious that it is coming to the Playstation and PC; if it wasn't, they wouldn't have said the exclusivity was timed. It would have been permanent.

But no one will be happy until they get an official word...as if common sense is a rarity. :p

CD are probably watching. They will want to see if fans get over it and then next time they can give microsoft a longer exclusivity (not that we even know how long this one will be). If we keep being very vocal especially round the X-box one release time and the hype they want to make about the game turns sour (until the PS/PC release) they will have to rethink. The statement released gives every indication that if we as fans don't really fight for this it's going to happen worse next time. Fully exclusive TR games is a nightmare that could come true.

Tecstar70
14th Aug 2014, 13:25
Fully exclusive TR games is a nightmare that could come true.

Do you really believe a 3rd part dev can afford to do this? Would one manufacturer be willing to stump up enough cash to do this?

I don't believe this is a viable outcome under normal circumstances. The only way this would happen would be if CD/SE went down the tubes and either MS or Sony bought up the IP.

a_big_house
14th Aug 2014, 13:27
Do you really believe a 3rd part dev can afford to do this? Would one manufacturer be willing to stump up enough cash to do this?

It's Microsoft, I'm sure if Phil Spencer cried enough, they'd get enough money to buy the IP

dark7angel
14th Aug 2014, 13:59
Well the game was originally announced for both next gen consoles, right? So I assume that means that CD have at least some work done for the PS4, so in theory, if they continue to work on that platform (and the PC version), then they'll be able to release it as soon as possible once this duration is over. I hope CD will say something about this soon.

But was it originally announced for both consoles? The trailer didn't mention it, the official announcement didn't either. And I remember ROTTR being featured on Xbox's site in their list of exclusive games. But of course it didn't cross anyone's mind that TR could actually be an exclusive, so everyone assumed it would be on both consoles. But as far as I remember, officially, that announcement was never made...

Jurre
14th Aug 2014, 14:04
The Playstation and PC ports of Crystal Dynamics games are made by Nixxes, very close to were I live. Now of course they haven't mentioned anything about their work on TR10 on their website, but I could grab one of their employees and interrogate him :D

Valenka
14th Aug 2014, 15:57
But was it originally announced for both consoles? The trailer didn't mention it, the official announcement didn't either.

There was never an official announcement for platforms. With the announcement trailer and text, it simply said 'Holiday 2015.' There were no logos or text present to allude to current-generation or last-generation platforms, or exclusivity rights for that matter.

Therefore, it is indeed a safe assumption that the whole exclusivity deal was in the talks since ROTTR's original announcement.

Weemanply109
14th Aug 2014, 15:59
but I could grab one of their employees and interrogate him :D

Well... I won't stop you :whistle:

dark7angel
14th Aug 2014, 16:51
There was never an official announcement for platforms. With the announcement trailer and text, it simply said 'Holiday 2015.' There were no logos or text present to allude to current-generation or last-generation platforms, or exclusivity rights for that matter.

Therefore, it is indeed a safe assumption that the whole exclusivity deal was in the talks since ROTTR's original announcement.

Thank you for confirming this.

Charlie.T.Raider
27th Sep 2014, 12:35
Warning: this post contains a blunt opinion that may differ from the general consensus regarding the exclusivity surrounding Tomb Raider. Please read with caution and take any and all opinions expressed here with a grain of salt. Thank you.

First things first, I'm the realest.

Well, let me first preface this by expressing my relief that Rise of the Tomb Raider is not a permanent Xbox exclusive. Tomb Raider has always been a multi-platform experience and I'm so glad that the community as a whole will be able to experience it in the end without being essentially forced to purchase a console some may not want. That, and the fact that now I don't have to feel too guilty about picking up the game at launch.



I'm so glad you had the honesty to post this. Let's just hope CD come on here and read all our posts.

Lord Martok
27th Sep 2014, 17:16
Hi, Valenka,

Speaking only for Myself, as someone who is not in any pressing need for a new Tomb Raider game in it's rebooted universe, the big deal is that for those who have been waiting for the next installment, a majority of them are now being forced to wait a lot longer than they'd planned....and it's being framed by some that the only way they'll actually get to play the game is if they buy an Xbox One, despite the mention of timed exclusivity. The bigger deal is that no matter how long the exclusivity deal lasts, for the majority, it's going to feel like an eternity....and given that apparently no solid numbers have been given on when the deal ends....that's going to be quite the eternity, and possibly enough that a lot of folks are simply going to shrug their shoulders and say: "Lara who?".

It is Microsoft's hubris and smug attitude from the start of the console pre-release press that blinded them to the notion that they need something to compete with Uncharted series on Sony...and since they squandered that time with first pissing off gamers with their strict drm policies, and then recanted, they did not take the time to develop their own first party IP...and now they're desperately trying to play catch up by greasing the palms of Squeenix and CD to turn their backs on the majority of folk who have played this title on PS or PC platforms. They're banking a lot on the notion that Tomb Raider could be a console seller. I, for one, honestly don't see it happening.

Microsoft has no interest in making a better, bigger, badder Tomb Raider for all to eventually enjoy. That would just be bad business for them as far as they are concerned. They are only interested in selling their failing and flailing console....and are taking desperate steps to do so, by eniticing a move that they know is going to piss off a majority of TR gamers.

People might think that MS is being benevolent by being the ones to announce that the exclusivity deal is limited duration....but unfortunately, all they're coming across as is the naughty little boy who keeps getting his hand caught in the cookie jar, and then looking all cute and winsome and saying: "oh, gee golly willikers, I swear, sir and/or ma'am, I'll never do that again.". And then everyome gets warm fuzzies, and everyone just wants to hug the little fella, while the little **** is grinning, figuring out simply how to get away with his transgressions next time.

That's the rub, I'd dare say, Valenka. And that's probably why the subject is not going to go away....for a long time.

Respectfully,
Lord Martok. :)

AdeleDazeem
27th Sep 2014, 18:48
Microsoft has no interest in making a better, bigger, badder Tomb Raider for all to eventually enjoy. That would just be bad business for them as far as they are concerned. They are only interested in selling their failing and flailing console....and are taking desperate steps to do so, by eniticing a move that they know is going to piss off a majority of TR gamers.

I'm pretty sure that's actually true. The battle between M$ and Sony is a game on it's own. And M$ is cheating.

Gemma_Darkmoon_
5th Oct 2014, 13:57
Microsoft has no interest in making a better, bigger, badder Tomb Raider for all to eventually enjoy. That would just be bad business for them as far as they are concerned. They are only interested in selling their failing and flailing console....and are taking desperate steps to do so, by eniticing a move that they know is going to piss off a majority of TR gamers.

People might think that MS is being benevolent by being the ones to announce that the exclusivity deal is limited duration....but unfortunately, all they're coming across as is the naughty little boy who keeps getting his hand caught in the cookie jar, and then looking all cute and winsome and saying: "oh, gee golly willikers, I swear, sir and/or ma'am, I'll never do that again.". And then everyome gets warm fuzzies, and everyone just wants to hug the little fella, while the little **** is grinning, figuring out simply how to get away with his transgressions next time.

That's the rub, I'd dare say, Valenka. And that's probably why the subject is not going to go away....for a long time.

Respectfully,
Lord Martok. :)

Microsoft have so many other projects and are so big that a bit of negative publicity isn't going to hurt them much if it shifts a few more consoles. They want to make it look they have TR exclusivity as a counter to Uncharted. That isn't what they have and they only told that wasn't true due to fan pressure.

CD are the ones who will get trapped in all of this. Having a big game release and telling 1/3 of the fanbase you are getting this game at Christmas and it looks so disrespectful to not tell everyone else when or even if their consoles' versions. The PS and PC are the consoles that really launched TR's success in the first place so that is where much of the fanbase is. I feel that the wonderfully passionate fans of the TR fanbase deserve better than the way Darrell Gallagher and CD have acted recently. We all want to get behind this game and even xbox gamers are going to want to be able to talk about a great game when they play it without giving away spoilers.

WinterSoldierLTE
5th Oct 2014, 14:29
Microsoft have so many other projects and are so big that a bit of negative publicity isn't going to hurt them much if it shifts a few more consoles. They want to make it look they have TR exclusivity as a counter to Uncharted. That isn't what they have and they only told that wasn't true due to fan pressure.

CD are the ones who will get trapped in all of this. Having a big game release and telling 1/3 of the fanbase you are getting this game at Christmas and it looks so disrespectful to not tell everyone else when or even if their consoles' versions. The PS and PC are the consoles that really launched TR's success in the first place so that is where much of the fanbase is. I feel that the wonderfully passionate fans of the TR fanbase deserve better than the way Darrell Gallagher and CD have acted recently. We all want to get behind this game and even xbox gamers are going to want to be able to talk about a great game when they play it without giving away spoilers.

:thumb:

Lord Martok
6th Oct 2014, 05:56
Microsoft have so many other projects and are so big that a bit of negative publicity isn't going to hurt them much if it shifts a few more consoles. They want to make it look they have TR exclusivity as a counter to Uncharted. That isn't what they have and they only told that wasn't true due to fan pressure.
Perhaps, but after their previous shenanigans, I'm not going to give them even that much credit.



CD are the ones who will get trapped in all of this. Having a big game release and telling 1/3 of the fanbase you are getting this game at Christmas and it looks so disrespectful to not tell everyone else when or even if their consoles' versions. The PS and PC are the consoles that really launched TR's success in the first place so that is where much of the fanbase is. I feel that the wonderfully passionate fans of the TR fanbase deserve better than the way Darrell Gallagher and CD have acted recently.
Agreed to that point.




even xbox gamers are going to want to be able to talk about a great game when they play it without giving away spoilers.
and sadly, I fear some of them will be just dickish enough to give away spoilers. Also, since the game is going to be out on Xbone for quite a while, spoilers will be inevitable on discussion forums, YouTube and other video service reviews, etc. PS and PC gamers are getting screwed in more ways than one,

Scion_Light
6th Dec 2014, 02:30
If CD are trying to pull over the fans eyes by being unclear what is happening with the console and treating the majority of us like they couldn't care less it is a very negative thing. That it appears to be coming out on other platforms is good but any deal even timed is not a positive direction to take. TR will bounce back from anything so is only a stumble of the Tomb Raider but it is badly damaging TR's and CD's reputation which is sad to see them make this mis-step.

Lycantendencies
6th Dec 2014, 21:39
Some people are acting as if ROTTR isn't coming to other platforms at all.
I'm not convinced it will.
I've seen a lot of exclusives announced, timed or otherwise, and all the talk around RotTR remains some of the most vague and non commital I've seen. In fact, the last time I saw similar language was with Titanfall.
There was a lot of talk about how it was exclusive at release, and that they were concentrating on making this version the best they could before thinking about other versions, all of which I've read with RotTR.
Then, not long after one Developer talked about porting it to the PS4, they announced that EA had just signed it as a permanent MS exclusive without their knowledge.

The reality was the vagueness was there because the nature of the exclusivity had yet to be finalised.
I get that exact same vibe here.

In addition, we now have confirmation that Street Fighter V will only be on PS4 and PC.
Imo, this changes the game, and if RotTR is not already a permanent exclusive, MS might be a lot more keen to secure it as such in response.

With the language used and the current climate towards exclusivity of previously multi platform games, anything short of an official confirmation is too uncertain for me to assume it is coming.

WinterSoldierLTE
6th Dec 2014, 23:15
I'm not convinced it will.
I've seen a lot of exclusives announced, timed or otherwise, and all the talk around RotTR remains some of the most vague and non commital I've seen. In fact, the last time I saw similar language was with Titanfall.
There was a lot of talk about how it was exclusive at release, and that they were concentrating on making this version the best they could before thinking about other versions, all of which I've read with RotTR.
Then, not long after one Developer talked about porting it to the PS4, they announced that EA had just signed it as a permanent MS exclusive without their knowledge.

The reality was the vagueness was there because the nature of the exclusivity had yet to be finalised.
I get that exact same vibe here.

In addition, we now have confirmation that Street Fighter V will only be on PS4 and PC.
Imo, this changes the game, and if RotTR is not already a permanent exclusive, MS might be a lot more keen to secure it as such in response.

With the language used and the current climate towards exclusivity of previously multi platform games, anything short of an official confirmation is too uncertain for me to assume it is coming.

A contract's a contract though. And those can be very costly and painful to get out of. Unless it's in fine print that it MUST remain an Xbone exclusive even after the "Timed release" date is past or else, I'm sure we'll be seeing it on other consoles at some point. It just may take awhile is all. Lke, maybe a long while.

Lycantendencies
7th Dec 2014, 03:01
A contract's a contract though.
Yep. And that contract may state a time period, but it doesn't rule out that the exact time period is not decided on, or the extending that time period if it has.

Since I last posted I read a little more about Street Fighter that could also have some bearing on Tomb Raider.
Apparently they've said it won't come to other consoles because Sony are helping develop it.
If this is true, can you really see MS, having said they're involved in RotTR development, taking the high ground and giving their work and money away when Sony won't do the same?

It's possible I suppose, but I wouldn't say it's all that likely.

If this happens, it doesn't bode well for Tomb Raider, even if the game after Rise comes to all consoles.
TR made a huge fuss of it being the birth of a Tomb Raider. Rise has made it clear that it's the continuing story of that Tomb Raider, it's the actual title. The whole hook is that it is an ongoing continual story, the evolution of a new realistic Lara Croft.
If Rise doesn't come to PS4, how many people will care about the next chapter?
It'd be like watching Star Wars, then Return and not seeing Empire. Or missing one of the books in the Harry Potter series, or coming back into a comic after a year away... you get the point.

Even if it takes what you call a very long time, it will suffer. Rise isn't even out for another year. If it would take another year after, that's two years from now.
How many will have tired of the waiting or uncertainty, or just moved on?
It'd be a budget title that the hardcore and completionists would buy, but it wouldn't be what it would this time next year.

It almost sounds like *Insert sarcastic gasp* it'd be financially better for the game to just stay with MS.

Of course, I could be wrong. It could come out soon after the Xbox release and do great on PS4, but until someone involved officially confirms it, it is imo, nothing more than wishful thinking.

Valenka
9th Dec 2014, 15:25
It's a load of rubbish, is what it is. EA said the same thing about The Sims 4 in regard to swimming pools, claiming the functionality wouldn't work with the way they designed the game and then two months later, they released an update that added swimming pools to the game. Talking out of their arse, it seems.

Microsoft however, well, seeing as how they're publishing it, unless another publisher comes along for the PS4 port...it doesn't seem likely to be anything more than an Xbox exclusive.

AdeleDazeem
9th Dec 2014, 15:29
Microsoft however, well, seeing as how they're publishing it, unless another publisher comes along for the PS4 port...it doesn't seem likely to be anything more than an Xbox exclusive.

That's what my mind is at too. However Driber pointed this out:


Well sure, why not. I remember the reverse happened with FF7 - originally published by SE for PS1, then later released on PC by Eidos. And this was back when Eidos wasn't part of SE yet, heh.

The chance of playing Rise on PS4/PC is getting smaller the more Uncharted 4 news comes out.

Tecstar70
9th Dec 2014, 16:01
The chance of playing Rise on PS4/PC is getting smaller the more Uncharted 4 news comes out.
Why?


Microsoft however, well, seeing as how they're publishing it, unless another publisher comes along for the PS4 port...it doesn't seem likely to be anything more than an Xbox exclusive.
Way to stoke the fire of hate! Why do they need another publisher. SE will do it themselves.

a_big_house
9th Dec 2014, 16:06
SE will do it themselves.

If they were going to publish it themselves they wouldn't have let MS take over. SE don't care about the franchise "it doesn't sell", remember?

But I'm sure FFXV which has drained their bank for the past 4 years will sell like hotcakes :rolleyes:

(That last part was sarcasm if you didn't catch it)

AdeleDazeem
9th Dec 2014, 16:07
Why?

Uncharted 4 trailer is out - Rise goes ''exclusive''
Uncharted 4 gameplay is out - M$ is now Rise' publisher.

Either it's a coincedence or they time it like that on purpose.

Tecstar70
9th Dec 2014, 16:19
Uncharted 4 trailer is out - Rise goes ''exclusive''
Uncharted 4 gameplay is out - M$ is now Rise' publisher.

Either it's a coincedence or they time it like that on purpose.

Not sure what you mean by "Rise goes ''exclusive'' " - what has changed?
"M$ is now Rise' publisher" - an offical confirmation, sure, but why does either of these alter the position of RotTR? It is clear that Uncharted and RotTR will go up against each other as games and platform exclusives next Christmas. Of course theres going to be soem tit-for-tat - that's called marketing, trying to prevent one opponent from getting all the limelight.

The only way I can see that RotTR becomes TOTALLY exclusive to MS is if they chuck a massive amount of more money at it, and I don't believe(at this moment) it's in their interests to do that. TR just isn't that bigger a franchise. Believe it or not, some peopel don't like Tomb Raider!

Driber
9th Dec 2014, 16:20
If they were going to publish it themselves they wouldn't have let MS take over.

That answer makes no sense.


SE don't care about the franchise "it doesn't sell", remember?

You're conflating 2 different things.


Uncharted 4 trailer is out - Rise goes ''exclusive''
Uncharted 4 gameplay is out - M$ is now Rise' publisher.

Either it's a coincedence or they time it like that on purpose.

Even if it's on purpose that doesn't prove anything either way.

a_big_house
9th Dec 2014, 16:25
That answer makes no sense.
Sure it does. If you don't want something, you sell it or give it to a friend. They're giving it to MS to publish, so to me that says they don't want to publish it...



You're conflating 2 different things.

In what sense?

Driber
9th Dec 2014, 16:43
Sure it does. If you don't want something, you sell it or give it to a friend.

It makes no sense to compare a calculated, corporate business deal with Mr. Joe Average who gives away his old couch to his neighbour because he bought himself a new couch.


They're giving it to MS to publish, so to me that says they don't want to publish it...

They are "giving" (weird way of putting it, but I get your point) the Xbox versions to MS to publish. That says nothing about other versions. See my FF7 analogy.


In what sense?

"TR9 didn't meet sales projections" != "We don't care about TR, we'll let MS have it and do with it what they want"

a_big_house
9th Dec 2014, 16:47
It makes no sense to compare a calculated, corporate business deal with Mr. Joe Average who gives away his old couch to his neighbour because he bought himself a new couch.
...
"TR9 didn't meet sales projections" != "We don't care about TR, we'll let MS have it and do with it what they want"

It doesn't no, but how calculated could it really be? They're going to lose money from the deal, not gain it :)
...
Would you care about a product that never met sales expectations? Would you keep funding it? Although we (fans) think it was great and sold amazingly (which it did), in their eyes it was a failure, so why would they care about it?

Tecstar70
9th Dec 2014, 16:51
It doesn't no, but how calculated could it really be? They're going to lose money from the deal, not gain it :)
Speculation. How much money did they lose on TR2013?


Would you care about a product that never met sales expectations? Would you keep funding it? Although we (fans) think it was great and sold amazingly (which it did), in their eyes it was a failure, so why would they care about it?
It's like when they announce that a big corporation profits are down. Oh, they still made £100 billion, but last year they made £102 bilion. How bad is that actually? If it was such a failure they wouldn't be doing it again.

a_big_house
9th Dec 2014, 16:56
Speculation. How much money did they lose on TR2013?

Not speculation, logic. If Rise is Xbox only then two thirds (if we equate them) of their customer base are out of the picture, unless everyone buys an Xbone or 360 (which most people won't). And how would I know, they never said?

And I don't know how rich you are but 2 billion is quite a lot of money :lol: And about 'doing it again' we currently only know they're doing it because MS pumped in some funds, for all we know, Rise wasn't going to happen until MS stepped in.

IvanaKC
9th Dec 2014, 17:02
And about 'doing it again' we currently only know they're doing it because MS pumped in some funds, for all we know, Rise wasn't going to happen until MS stepped in.

Wow, being said this way, it actually makes sense. :hmm:

Tecstar70
9th Dec 2014, 17:06
Not speculation, logic. If Rise is Xbox only then two thirds (if we equate them) of their customer base are out of the picture, unless everyone buys an Xbone or 360 (which most people won't). And how would I know, they never said?
But it is coming out on other platforms, and you can't demonstrate it will lose money until after the event.


And I don't know how rich you are but 2 billion is quite a lot of money :lol: And about 'doing it again' we currently only know they're doing it because MS pumped in some funds, for all we know, Rise wasn't going to happen until MS stepped in.
My point is that although a 2 billion loss seems a lot, the corporation still made 100 billion so didn't do too bad after all! Therefore there must be money in it or why else would SE be doing it again? You point about MS is valid, but there is no evidence that SE weren't going to do another with or without MS.

Driber
9th Dec 2014, 17:40
It doesn't no, but how calculated could it really be?

Enough for SE to see it as a profitable deal.


They're going to lose money from the deal, not gain it :)

Completely unsubstantiated speculation. You have zero knowledge on how this deal is going to pan out.


Would you care about a product that never met sales expectations?

Sure. If the game didn't sell as well as I hoped, but still made a hefty profit (which it did) then it would be foolish not to care about it.


Would you keep funding it?

As long as it's profitable (which, again, it is) then yes.


Although we (fans) think it was great and sold amazingly (which it did), in their eyes it was a failure, so why would they care about it?

You're wrong there. You're just parroting what you've heard other fans or gaming journalist (*cough*) say. SE never said that TR9 was a "failure".


Not speculation, logic.

Yes, speculation. And pretty grasping-facts-out-of-thin-air speculation at that.


If Rise is Xbox only then two thirds (if we equate them) of their customer base are out of the picture, unless everyone buys an Xbone or 360 (which most people won't).

You don't know if Rise is xb only, but even if it is, it doesn't mean that SE will necessarily lose out on the deal.


And I don't know how rich you are but 2 billion is quite a lot of money :vlol:

2 billion less profit != 2 billion loss on their investment.

I'm sure that SE would like to see a 10 trillion gazillion profit on their investment, as do all other corporations, however this consistent link that you are trying to draw between wanting more profit and a supposed "unhealthy franchise" is entirely flawed.


And about 'doing it again' we currently only know they're doing it because MS pumped in some funds, for all we know, Rise wasn't going to happen until MS stepped in.

Another prime example of what I referred to earlier by grabbing-facts-out-of-thin-air.

For all we know, this all is one giant prank, and CD will come around next April 1st saying that Rise will be released on all platforms next xmas, including the Atari 2600 and ZX Spectrum :p

a_big_house
9th Dec 2014, 17:55
I'm not gonna argue against all of that, but I will say I'm not "grasping facts" I'm theorizing, which is what everyone is doing because no one knows whats going on, you can't say I'm wrong and then say everyone else is correct cause they are stating the obvious, cause that's wrong

Driber
9th Dec 2014, 18:05
I'm not gonna argue against all of that, but I will say I'm not "grasping facts" I'm theorizing, which is what everyone is doing because no one knows whats going on, you can't say I'm wrong and then say everyone else is correct cause they are stating the obvious, cause that's wrong

Well, when you're making statements such as "SE will lose money on this deal" and "TR10 is only being made because MS pumped money into the project" then you are indeed grasping facts out of thin air.

Unless I missed something, in which case I would ask for source links, and then I'll retract what I said :)

As for telling you that you are wrong with your statement that SE considered TR9 a "failure"; I have debunked this one SO many times and no one has yet proven me wrong, so I stand by my assertion that you're wrong about it.

a_big_house
9th Dec 2014, 18:11
Well, when you're making statements such as "SE will lose money on this deal" and "TR10 is only being made because MS pumped money into the project" then you are indeed grasping facts out of thin air.

Unless I missed something, in which case I would ask for source links, and then I'll retract what I said :)

As for telling you that you are wrong with your statement that SE considered TR9 a "failure"; I have debunked this one SO many times and no one has yet proved me wrong, so I stand by my assertion that you're wrong about it.

Well, "TR10 is only being made because MS pumped money into the project" is taken out of context because I said "for all we know" and as for losing money, that's logic because as myself and many others have said, they're cutting off a huge chunk of their consumer base.

@Failure - Here's your source (http://www.hd.square-enix.com/eng/pdf/ar_2013_01en.pdf)
Page 4, Paragraph 5

In the HD games category, we delivered three major titles in the fiscal year
under review, primarily in Europe and North America. These titles—
“SLEEPING DOGS,” “Hitman: Absolution,” and “TOMB RAIDER”—failed to
reach their respective targets, and resulted in financially unsatisfactory
consequences

That's been posted and quoted before, there's no denying that they said it when it's right there

Driber
9th Dec 2014, 18:26
Well, "TR10 is only being made because MS pumped money into the project" is taken out of context because I said "for all we know"

You also said that we "KNOW" they're doing it because MS pumped in some funds. That sounds like a statement, rather than a theory.


and as for losing money, that's logic because as myself and many others have said, they're cutting off a huge chunk of their consumer base.

You don't know if they are cutting anything off. You're again speculating and presenting it as a "fact". If the game will be released on all 3 major platforms, SE may just cash in even more than they would have without the xbox deal.

And another point - they are also probbaly spending a lot less money because MS is supporting CD with marketing, dev, etc.

Unless you have the exact details of the contract, and an exact overview of the internal finances, and above all, psychic powers and already know beforehand how many copies are going to be sold, you simply cannot make the claim that SE will lose money on making TR10.


@Failure - Here's your source
Page 4, Paragraph 5


In the HD games category, we delivered three major titles in the fiscal year
under review, primarily in Europe and North America. These titles—
“SLEEPING DOGS,” “Hitman: Absolution,” and “TOMB RAIDER”—failed to
reach their respective targets, and resulted in financially unsatisfactory
consequences

That's been posted and quoted before, there's no denying that they said it when it's right there

Right, that quote basically translates to "we didn't make as much profit as we wanted to". Which is not the same as "TR9 is a failure".

a_big_house
9th Dec 2014, 18:32
You also said that we "KNOW" they're doing it because MS pumped in some funds. That sounds like a statement, rather than a theory.
Well we do know that! Why else would they be publishing it :lol: You've even agreed with it right there \/


And another point - they are also spending less money because MS is supporting CD with marketing, dev, etc.
---------------


Unless you have the exact details of the contract, and an exact overview of the internal finances, you simply cannot make the claim that SE will lose money on making TR10.
Yes, I can claim that, and you can keep claiming the opposite, neither of us are right and neither wrong



Right, that quote translates to "we didn't make as much profit as we wanted to". Which is not the same as "TR9 is a failure".

Well it translates to what it says; that it failed

Driber
9th Dec 2014, 18:51
Well we do know that! Why else would they be publishing it :lol: You've even agreed with it right there \/

Yes, I acknowledged that MS is pumping money into the making of TR10. So? How on earth does that relate to your statement/theory that if it wasn't for MS, TR10 would not have been made?


Yes, I can claim that

You know how I meant it :p


and you can keep claiming the opposite

No I didn't. When did I make the claim that SE will make a profit on TR10? Never.


neither of us are right and neither wrong

I for sure am not wrong, because I myself did not make any claims about the profitability of a yet-to-be-released game.

If I did, though, you would be wrong in saying that neither of us are right or wrong. One of us would have to be wrong, since we would be making a contradictory claim ;)


Well it translates to what it says; that it failed

Who's taking things out of context now? :p

It says that the game failed to meet sales expectations. It doesn't say that SE considers the game a flat-out failure.

a_big_house
9th Dec 2014, 18:57
Yes, I acknowledged that MS is pumping money into the making of TR10. So? How on earth does that relate to your statement/theory that if it wasn't for MS, TR10 would not have been made?

They were two unrelated statements that you connected, not me


No I didn't. When did I make the claim that SE will make a profit on TR10? Never.

I for sure am not wrong, because I didn't make the claim that SE will profit from TR10.

If I did, though, you would be wrong in saying that neither of us are right or wrong. One of us would have to be wrong, since we would be making a contradictory claim ;)

Fine, you didn't, but why argue against what I'm theorizing if you don't believe otherwise? It's pointless
(And no, I don't mean we're arguing in the sense that we're fighting)


Who's taking things out of context now? :p

It says that failed to meet sales expectations. It doesn't say that SE considers the game a flat-out failure.
And what would define a "flat-out failure"?

Driber
9th Dec 2014, 19:14
They were two unrelated statements that you connected, not me

They were? So what did you mean by "it" in "they're doing it because MS pumped in some funds"? :scratch:


Fine, you didn't, but why argue against what I'm theorizing if you don't believe otherwise? It's pointless

What I personally believe does not really matter. I argue against statements which are not true because I care about truth. Theorizing is fine, got no beef with that, but when people state something unproven as fact, I feel it should be corrected, that's all.


(And no, I don't mean we're arguing in the sense that we're fighting)

Didn't think we were :)


And what would define a "flat-out failure"?

My definition of a failed game would be:

- On average negative reception.
- Parties involved in making the game not getting a return on investment.

a_big_house
9th Dec 2014, 19:32
They were? So what did you mean by "it" in "they're doing it because MS pumped in some funds"? :scratch:


And I don't know how rich you are but 2 billion is quite a lot of money :lol: And about 'doing it again' we currently only know they're doing it because MS pumped in some funds, for all we know, Rise wasn't going to happen until MS stepped in.

From that post? God I have no idea, I see where this problem has occurred now :lol:



What I personally believe does not really matter. I argue against statements which are not true because I care about truth. Theorizing is fine, got no beef with that, but when people state something unproven as fact, I feel it should be corrected, that's all.
Of course it does, you're just as much a fan as anyone else and good, I apologize for what I said cause I don't even know why I said it :lol:


My definition of a failed game would be:

- On average negative reception.
- Parties involved in making the game not getting a return on investment.
So at least one of those two things could be true in terms of TR9, we still don't know, so it's possibly a half fail :D

WinterSoldierLTE
10th Dec 2014, 00:57
Of course, I could be wrong. It could come out soon after the Xbox release and do great on PS4, but until someone involved officially confirms it, it is imo, nothing more than wishful thinking.

Well, we both very well could be wrong. We (meaning everyone on these forums, not just you & I) don't know what the wording is in the contract and we probably never will. At this point all any of us can do is speculate and pursue a bit of wishful thinking. There's only one way we'll know for sure what it's fate is: wait and see what happens. Not a comfort, no, but I see no other way to look at it. Until then, we'll all speculate and some of us will vent frustrations. It's just the hand we've been dealt at this time.

a_big_house
10th Dec 2014, 00:59
There's only one way we'll know for sure what it's fate is: wait and see what happens.

We could always ask? :D

WinterSoldierLTE
10th Dec 2014, 01:03
We could always ask? :D

LoL yeah, we could I suppose. I'm sure some of us have tried already. I'm sure CD & Squenix are still in "No comment" mode about it tho at this point.

Tecstar70
10th Dec 2014, 09:53
Well, we both very well could be wrong. We (meaning everyone on these forums, not just you & I) don't know what the wording is in the contract and we probably never will. At this point all any of us can do is speculate and pursue a bit of wishful thinking. There's only one way we'll know for sure what it's fate is: wait and see what happens. Not a comfort, no, but I see no other way to look at it. Until then, we'll all speculate and some of us will vent frustrations. It's just the hand we've been dealt at this time.


and you can speculate based on what is most likely to happen based on reasoning and facts know about other similar exclusivity deals and this type of marketing strategy.

medievil1
10th Dec 2014, 12:18
and you can speculate based on what is most likely to happen based on reasoning and facts know about other similar exclusivity deals and this type of marketing strategy.
sure BUT their are factors, other deals have been for smaller franchises. The backlash alone on THIS deal, after SE threw a big FU to 3/4 of the fanbase will certainly hurt sales and certainly not lure gamers to buy xbone consoles. So based on history (Backlash of other franchises and xbox version sales of TR games).. speculation leads one to the obvious conclusion that ROTTR will not be a success. SE corp are not ignorant of that possible conclusion, so one can therefore extrapolate that SE doesn't really care if TR lives or dies, they got their bit of cash from M$....

Tecstar70
10th Dec 2014, 12:59
sure BUT their are factors, other deals have been for smaller franchises. The backlash alone on THIS deal, after SE threw a big FU to 3/4 of the fanbase will certainly hurt sales and certainly not lure gamers to buy xbone consoles. So based on history (Backlash of other franchises and xbox version sales of TR games).. speculation leads one to the obvious conclusion that ROTTR will not be a success. SE corp are not ignorant of that possible conclusion, so one can therefore extrapolate that SE doesn't really care if TR lives or dies, they got their bit of cash from M$....

But the deal isn't meant to attract gamers. Most gamers have made their next gen decision. Some may be swayed, but I believe its primarily to attract floating casual gamers or the general buying public.

You can't speculate on the outcome based on backlash of other franchises and xbox version sales of TR games alone. The whole deal runs a bit deeper than that, as explained in other threads on this forum.

If SE didn't care, MS wouldn't commit their cash and nor would SE.

AdeleDazeem
10th Dec 2014, 14:05
If I'm not mistaken they were already planning to make Rise long before M$ made the deal.

Rai
10th Dec 2014, 14:12
If I'm not mistaken they were already planning to make Rise long before M$ made the deal.

Well, exactly. This shows they care enough for TR to make the sequel, does it not? If they felt that TR'13 was too much of a failure, they wouldn't have okayed the sequel. They were already invested (presumably). Then the deal with MS happened with an injection of funds. It just means there's less financial risk for them with that backing. That's the way it comes across anyway. Perhaps the timing of it all didn't happen that way.

AdeleDazeem
10th Dec 2014, 14:21
Yep. Like I said earlier. M$ needed a quick solution for the upcoming 1st party PS4 games. Rise was probably well in developement at this point so M$ decided to take that one.

Tecstar70
10th Dec 2014, 16:06
Well, exactly. This shows they care enough for TR to make the sequel, does it not? If they felt that TR'13 was too much of a failure, they wouldn't have okayed the sequel. They were already invested (presumably). Then the deal with MS happened with an injection of funds. It just means there's less financial risk for them with that backing. That's the way it comes across anyway. Perhaps the timing of it all didn't happen that way.

In fact i'm pretty sure I read that the work done on the Definitive Edition of TR2013 formed the basis for the work on RotTR (although at the time we didn't know it was called that).

Driber
10th Dec 2014, 17:12
From that post? God I have no idea, I see where this problem has occurred now :lol:

That didn't answer my question, but nevermind, it's getting too tedious and it's not important anyway.


Of course it does, you're just as much a fan as anyone else

That's something different, lol. It doesn't matter in regards to my reasons for discussing a factual point.

So at least one of those two things could be true in terms of TR9, we still don't know, so it's possibly a half fail :D

Not sure if serious or not, but neither of those things are true. TR9 did receive critical acclaim, and it has been a profitable game.


sure BUT their are factors, other deals have been for smaller franchises. The backlash alone on THIS deal, after SE threw a big FU to 3/4 of the fanbase will certainly hurt sales and certainly not lure gamers to buy xbone consoles. So based on history (Backlash of other franchises and xbox version sales of TR games).. speculation leads one to the obvious conclusion that ROTTR will not be a success.

I don't think there is anything "obvious" about that asertment. You can't just throw some factors up in the air and declare the game a failure already before it has been released. Sure, the xbox deal has upset many fans, but how many of these fans will in the end not buy the game if it's released on all major platforms? And how many of those fans make up for the total of copies sold in the end, really? Remember, fans make up a tiny percentage of total sales; most copies are sold to casual gamers.


one can therefore extrapolate that SE doesn't really care if TR lives or dies, they got their bit of cash from M$....

I guess it depends on who exactly you're referring to when you say "SE", really.

Do shareholders care? Short term ones probably not. Long time ones probably will care what happens to the franchise.

Does the CEO of SE care? Depends on what he's in it for.

Do lower level employees care? Probably. One of the company's biggest franchises not doing well could hurt their job security.

See... it's not really such a black&white case of "caring" vs "not caring". It's much more complicated.

medievil1
11th Dec 2014, 01:10
But the deal isn't meant to attract gamers. Most gamers have made their next gen decision. Some may be swayed, but I believe its primarily to attract floating casual gamers or the general buying public.

You can't speculate on the outcome based on backlash of other franchises and xbox version sales of TR games alone. The whole deal runs a bit deeper than that, as explained in other threads on this forum.

If SE didn't care, MS wouldn't commit their cash and nor would SE.

actually the deal is exactly suppose to attract gamers otherwise it makes no sense on M$ part.. if they can't attract people to buy Xbone then throwing fists of cash at a franchise makes little sense
. And of course you can speculate based off of history/past reaction. Thats the whole basis for speculation

Murphdawg1
11th Dec 2014, 03:16
actually the deal is exactly suppose to attract gamers otherwise it makes no sense on M$ part.. if they can't attract people to buy Xbone then throwing fists of cash at a franchise makes little sense
. And of course you can speculate based off of history/past reaction. Thats the whole basis for speculation

Isn't that what 1st party titles are for? Does Microsoft not have enough confidence in Halo and Quantum Break? I seriously doubt this is anything like Bayonetta 2 where if not for Nintendo that game wouldn't have been made.

Bridgetkfisher
11th Dec 2014, 15:17
I think alot of people consider the reboot a failure because the creators got rid of everything that made Lara Croft Iconic including the tombs. Shes just an average girl, not rich, not even well educated, average looking, shes average now, very average. Not a bad thing, but ya know that would be like if Disney ditched mickey mouse or something or turned mickey mouse into grumpy cat because its whats trending. Fall is better than what I usually read online which is nothing, literally noone talks about tomb raider anymore on general video game sites sadly, its just become irrelevant I guess? Too many games do the COD style gameplay so noone wants to play an average looking person just killing everything specially with a bow, I mean its 2014 were they for real thinking that would sell?

Im excited for the game after the next one when she has her trademark guns back. Never cared much for origin stories myself, it would be like playing Duke Nukem as a teen in school or something with no guns or mighty foot stompin, meh noone would care same thing is same thing.

Tecstar70
11th Dec 2014, 15:26
Shes just an average girl, not rich, not even well educated, average looking, shes average now, very average.

ermmm....pardon? Care to qualify this statement?

d1n0_xD
11th Dec 2014, 15:31
just an average girl, not rich, not even well educated, average looking, shes average now, very average.

I couldn't take you seriously after this statement.

a_big_house
11th Dec 2014, 15:54
Really guys? I agree with her on that aspect, there's nothing 'Lara Croft' about the new Lara, she is meant to be an average girl who gets caught up in a whole load of mess :o

Tecstar70
11th Dec 2014, 15:58
Really guys? I agree with her on that aspect, there's nothing 'Lara Croft' about the new Lara, she is meant to be an average girl who gets caught up in a whole load of mess :o

Care to qualify that sentence then, ABH? "not rich, not even well educated, average looking"

Murphdawg1
11th Dec 2014, 15:59
I think alot of people consider the reboot a failure because the creators got rid of everything that made Lara Croft Iconic including the tombs. Shes just an average girl, not rich, not even well educated, average looking, shes average now, very average. Not a bad thing, but ya know that would be like if Disney ditched mickey mouse or something or turned mickey mouse into grumpy cat because its whats trending. Fall is better than what I usually read online which is nothing, literally noone talks about tomb raider anymore on general video game sites sadly, its just become irrelevant I guess? Too many games do the COD style gameplay so noone wants to play an average looking person just killing everything specially with a bow, I mean its 2014 were they for real thinking that would sell?

Im excited for the game after the next one when she has her trademark guns back. Never cared much for origin stories myself, it would be like playing Duke Nukem as a teen in school or something with no guns or mighty foot stompin, meh noone would care same thing is same thing.

The game did sell, the sequel will sell a lot less with the timed exclusivity.

Blacktron
11th Dec 2014, 16:02
Mickey Mouse has always been a boring children's role model, Donald Duck is the far more interesting fan favourite, but Disney will never admit that.

Anyway, not rich? That's good, I like it. Starting from humble beginnings and making your fortune yourself is a much better story than being born into money.
Not well educated? Apart from her knowledge on WOII planes she's pretty much a walking Wikipedia server; able to identify every ancient or modern day object she finds and is able to read medieval Japanese and German.
Average looking? Yeah, I WISH the average look for girls was like that.


Really guys? I agree with her on that aspect, there's nothing 'Lara Croft' about the new Lara, she is meant to be an average girl who gets caught up in a whole load of mess :o
Everything is relative: she's not the same as before but she's a lot more 'Lara Croft' than she is Postman Pat or Paddington Bear or Captain Rainbow or anyone else.

a_big_house
11th Dec 2014, 16:05
Care to qualify that sentence then, ABH? "not rich, not even well educated, average looking"

Okay...

Rich - She doesn't live off of her parents money or inheritance, she worked at the Nine Bells to pay for living in London, soon she'll be working at the British Museum, still earning her keep

Education - She went to a public school (even though public education is still decent, it's not as good at private), she went to UCL, not somewhere like Cambridge (or somewhere even more fanciful)

Looks - Well, old Lara's look were all about being flashy, with expensive tool and two large *coughs* new Lara doesn't have any of that, she wears trousers and tank tops, nothing special to make her stand out from the crowd

Good enough for ya? :D

IvanaKC
11th Dec 2014, 16:24
Okay...

Rich - She doesn't live off of her parents money or inheritance, she worked at the Nine Bells to pay for living in London, soon she'll be working at the British Museum, still earning her keep

Education - She went to a public school (even though public education is still decent, it's not as good at private), she went to UCL, not somewhere like Cambridge (or somewhere even more fanciful)

Looks - Well, old Lara's look were all about being flashy, with expensive tool and two large *coughs* new Lara doesn't have any of that, she wears trousers and tank tops, nothing special to make her stand out from the crowd

Good enough for ya? :D

Unfortunately, I agree. Lara became average despite the fact that the rest of the guys don't want to admit it.
They even gave her green eyes so she wouldn't be special-dominant-genes girl - she has to have something recessive. :p

Tecstar70
11th Dec 2014, 16:31
Okay...

Rich - She doesn't live off of her parents money or inheritance, she worked at the Nine Bells to pay for living in London, soon she'll be working at the British Museum, still earning her keep

Education - She went to a public school (even though public education is still decent, it's not as good at private), she went to UCL, not somewhere like Cambridge (or somewhere even more fanciful)

Looks - Well, old Lara's look were all about being flashy, with expensive tool and two large *coughs* new Lara doesn't have any of that, she wears trousers and tank tops, nothing special to make her stand out from the crowd

Good enough for ya? :D

That's fine, so to qualify BridgetKFishers statement then, "I think alot of people consider the reboot a failure because the creators got rid of everything that made Lara Croft Iconic"

not rich - well technically she is. She just chooses not to indulge in that fact. (unless I Missed that bit of her back story changing)

not even well educated - "UCL ranks highly in domestic and global league tables; it is 20th in the world (and 4th in Europe) in the 2014 Academic Ranking of World Universities, joint 5th in the world (and joint 3rd in Europe) in the 2014 QS World University Rankings and 22nd in the world (and 5th in Europe) in the 2014/15 Times Higher Education World University Rankings. For the period 1999 to 2009 it was the 13th most-cited university in the world (and most-cited in Europe). There are 32 Nobel Prize winners and three Fields Medalists amongst UCL's alumni and current and former staff. UCL alumni include the "Father of the Nation" of each of India, Kenya and Mauritius, the inventor of the telephone, and one of the co-discoverers of the structure of DNA. All five of the naturally-occurring noble gases were discovered at UCL by William Ramsay."

Not a bad place for an education, despite not being at an Oxbridge Uni.


average looking - not unattractive as far as I am concerned but beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Are we really saying without the big tits and tight shorts people consider the reboot a failure?

To be fair based on the OP's previous posts they have never liked the idea of a reboot and would rather SE brought out another fully formed TR game in continuation of the older games rather than reboot the character and I think until that happens they will not be happy. I just think that was a pretty wild statement to make. Whats the point of telling a characters story if they are already fully formed? Go play TR anniversary again! ;)

d1n0_xD
11th Dec 2014, 16:35
So, to clarify, public schools can't educate you at all, and big boobs and skin showing is the minimum when it comes to attractiveness? Nice :thumb:

a_big_house
11th Dec 2014, 16:46
That's fine, so to qualify BridgetKFishers statement then, "I think alot of people consider the reboot a failure because the creators got rid of everything that made Lara Croft Iconic"

not rich - well technically she is. She just chooses not to indulge in that fact.

not even well educated - bleh stats

Not a bad place for an education, despite not being at an Oxbridge Uni.

average looking - not unattractive as far as I am concerned but beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Are we really saying without the big tits and tight shorts people consider the reboot a failure?

To be fair based on the OP's previous posts they have never liked the idea of a reboot and would rather SE brought out another fully formed TR game in continuation of the older games rather than reboot the character and I think until that happens they will not be happy. I just think that was a pretty wild statement to make. Whats the point of telling a characters story if they are already fully formed? Go play TR anniversary again! ;)

Well if she chooses to ignore the money, she isn't rich, we're not talking about the class system here...
As I edited, bleh stats...
And no, "we're" not, I am saying that her looks were originally based on those aspects and now she doesn't have them, she looks like a generic woman.


So, to clarify, public schools can't educate you at all, and big boobs and skin showing is the minimum when it comes to attractiveness? Nice :thumb:

No, that's not what I said at all, I went to a public school and now am at Uni, so don't twist my words. And again, that's not what I said.

None of what I said had to do with classic Lara's "attractiveness", it's was the way she looked, it was iconic, everyone knew her for her big breasts, the new Lara doesn't have any aspect of her looks that is iconic. I'll expand...
Faith (Mirror's Edge) - Eye tattoo
Leon S Kennedy (Resi Evil) - Gay haircut
Johnny Gat (Saints Row) - Spiked hair and sun glasses
Classic Lara Croft - Big boobs and near-smutty clothing
New Lara Croft - Climbing axe and bow? <- Not iconic

Tecstar70
11th Dec 2014, 16:57
None of what I said had to do with classic Lara's "attractiveness", it's was the way she looked, it was iconic, everyone knew her for her big breasts, the new Lara doesn't have any aspect of her looks that is iconic. I'll expand...
Faith (Mirror's Edge) - Eye tattoo
Leon S Kennedy (Resi Evil) - Gay haircut
Johnny Gat (Saints Row) - Spiked hair and sun glasses
Classic Lara Croft - Big boobs and near-smutty clothing
New Lara Croft - Climbing axe and bow? <- Not iconic

I'll agree that her visual persona is not as iconic as her previous iteration. But why would it be? It's an origin story and I guess if anything this is where the failing may be for SOME people. If you just saw Star Wars Episode 1 would you perceive Darth Vader as iconic? Of course not! But the fact that Episode 4 makes him so means that Episode 1 (OK don't laugh I know Ep.1 is a bit pants!) carries some weight with that character. The fact that this is Lara Croft means that the character, although not iconic in appearance, still carries some weight. It would be easy to COD-churn yet another TR game out the door like the OP would like to see, another Anniversary/Underworld with better graphics, but the reboot gives an opportunity for more in the long run.

a_big_house
11th Dec 2014, 17:06
...It would be easy to COD-churn yet another TR game out the door like the OP would like to see, another Anniversary/Underworld with better graphics, but the reboot gives an opportunity for more in the long run.

Well Darth Vader wasn't Darth Vader in episode one, so yeah :p And I don't know what Mason wants, so I won't assume anything from his post but I have to disagree that this origins story will lead into more. Let's say at the end of Rise, Lara is the big bad tomb raider that we knew, what is going to happen after? Nothing, it'll be another generic story featuring Lara, like the LAU trilogy basically was. And if there's another 'becoming the raider' game after Rise, people are gonna get bored...

Tecstar70
11th Dec 2014, 17:08
Well Darth Vader wasn't Darth Vader in episode one, so yeah :p And I don't know what Mason wants, so I won't assume anything from his post but I have to disagree that this origins story will lead into more. Let's say at the end of Rise, Lara is the big bad tomb raider that we knew, what is going to happen after? Nothing, it'll be another generic story featuring Lara, like the LAU trilogy basically was. And if there's another 'becoming the raider' game after Rise, people are gonna get bored...

Ah well, that thankfully is not up to me to decide what comes next!

Rai
11th Dec 2014, 18:49
Public schools that teach rifle training, archery and gymnastics? I wanna go! Public schools are expensive, fee paying private schools in the UK. They're usually boarding schools for children of wealthy families. I don't know if a child can win a scholarship to get into one on educational merits, but your average joe/jane can't get into one. They're not like your regular secondary school with free education.

So, she chooses not to indulge in her inheritance and work for a living, making her own way in the world. I find that very interesting and indicates how independent Lara is: a trait she is known for from previous TR eras. Whether she realises she needs to cut into her inheritance to support her chosen path as a TR remains to be seen. There is a manor somewhere where she grew up, so chances are, she could go back there once in a while. With her parents missing, who looks after it? Who pays the bills? If Lara doesn't, there must be funds coming from somewhere for staff to maintain the place. Sure, class (Lara is titled as a Lady) and owning (or having acces to) a manor as a family home and having an inheritance tied up in trust funds doesn't make her 'rich' exactly, but she's not in the average young person's shoes now is she. Is there some sort of education snobbery going on in this thread? Uni education is still higher education, even if the Uni attended isn't of the top Unis out there or 'posh' in some way. Hardly makes Lara 'uneducated' and she seems very knowledgeable in Japanese culture/artefacts, her chosen course of study.

As for looks, I guess that's subjective and personal choice. I would say ReLara may not be stunningly 'model' beautiful, but she is 'above average' (imo) and I'd class her as having a sort of 'classic' beauty, not unlike Kate Middleton as a real life example of what I mean. To sum up, I would say that Lara Croft is far from 'average'. Iconic bad-ass attitude and abilities? Not yet, but we're still in Lara's early stages of her chosen path. Give her a chance :p.

Just my penny's worth of off topic-ness. http://www.tombraiderforums.com/images/smilies/pillow.gif

Danielsun_
11th Dec 2014, 19:29
I'll just add my part in

Lara always had Auburnish-brown hair (as in it was noticeable in light) I miss that and those brown eyes as well.

like it's been said before, it feels like we are missing some of the iconic features that were unnecessarily removed, I understand it is a reboot but no need to changed absolutely everything about the character down to hair and eye colour. I like the character story they are going with and I thoroughly enjoyed the reboot albiet some minor gripes.

For the next game maybe they could rectify the smaller points? hmm, and give her sun glasses :p

Blacktron
11th Dec 2014, 19:40
This is why I believe that Tr should have character customization; everyone can then choose their own bloody preferences - what haircut, what haircolour, what clothes and so on.

RybatGrimes
11th Dec 2014, 19:53
Leon S Kennedy (Resi Evil) - Gay haircut

Are you ******* serious?


Classic Lara Croft - Big boobs and near-smutty clothing

Ok first of all, reboot Lara still has fairly large breasts, but it's not accompanied by a twig thick waist so their not as accentuated. And second, so just because reboot Lara doesn't fit your ridiculous male fantasy so she's no longer acceptable? Well, along with homophobic I guess we can add misogynistic to that list. Not surprised...

IvanaKC
11th Dec 2014, 19:57
This is why I believe that Tr should have character customization; everyone can then choose their own bloody preferences - what haircut, what haircolour, what clothes and so on.

A person can change their appearance to some level, but we all have distinctive features which makes us who we are. The point of a main character in a game with a plot is to be recognizable.

a_big_house
11th Dec 2014, 20:02
Are you ******* serious?

Ok first of all, reboot Lara still has fairly large breasts, but it's not accompanied by a twig thick waist so their not as accentuated. And second, so just because reboot Lara doesn't fit your ridiculous male fantasy so she's no longer acceptable? Well, along with homophobic I guess we can add misogynistic to that list. Not surprised...

Yeah, I am serious...

"First of all" I'm gay myself, so I think it's fair enough for me to call a FICTIONAL characters haircut gay and if that offends you, you're probably a queen yourself :lol:

And no, it's not a male fantasy, my male fantasy is Firemen or lumberjacks, big breasted women with tiny waists are still just women, there's nothing misogynistic about it actually. And had you been bothered to pay attention to what I said, it was about the overall look, not the nit-picky pieces.

I'd quite like to know what you mean by 'Not surprised'? Cause, I've been a part of these forums and this particular community for 6 years, you've been here a month so I very much doubt you know a single damn thing about me :hmm:

Rai
11th Dec 2014, 20:03
I'll just add my part in

Lara always had Auburnish-brown hair (as in it was noticeable in light) I miss that and those brown eyes as well.

like it's been said before, it feels like we are missing some of the iconic features that were unnecessarily removed, I understand it is a reboot but no need to changed absolutely everything about the character down to hair and eye colour. I like the character story they are going with and I thoroughly enjoyed the reboot albiet some minor gripes.

For the next game maybe they could rectify the smaller points? hmm, and give her sun glasses :p

Yes, I always loved Lara's auburn brown hair and the darker shade hasn't got the same appeal, imo. ReLara's eyes are brown in the DE, I dunno what went wrong with the regular version, but apparently they were meant to be brown going by the concept/early screens and renders, which all featured brown eyes. I'm fairly certain RiseLara has brown eyes. These things contribute to what became of her iconic image, much like the dual pistols and backpack. However, I don't consider these essential for Lara to be recognisable as the Tomb Raider to be reckoned with. This is in attitude and personality more so, I think and of course in what she does. The image is a minor part of that as you say. Core/Lau Lara became iconic over time. Reboot Lara is starting fresh, the physical side isn't as important as the attitude or abilities, imo and we can only wait to see if she get's those things 'back' or recognisably similar to her past iterations.

I swear there was a 'Lara's looks' thread somewhere, perhaps these posts would be better off there. A nice friendly mod or admin might do it.

Blacktron
11th Dec 2014, 20:04
A person can change their appearance to some level, but we all have distinctive features which makes us who we are. The point of a main character in a game with a plot is to be recognizable.
Obviously it is not since there are so many games with completely customizable protagonists: Saints Row, South Park Stick of Truth, Mass Effect, those are the first three that come to my mind.
However, to clarify, what I would have in mind for TR is not a character customization as extensive as in those games, but for certain things that the community is devided over as to what Lara should look like. Such as: braid or ponytail (or hair down with stiff hairband?), eyeliner or no eyeliner, long trousers or short trousers. I really don't see what could possibly be the problem with that.

Danielsun_
11th Dec 2014, 20:06
This is why I believe that Tr should have character customization; everyone can then choose their own bloody preferences - what haircut, what haircolour, what clothes and so on.

I agree with this to some point, it needs to have a base character model that IS Lara Croft and then add clothing customisation and a switch up between the hairs, e.g ponytail to braid.


Ok first of all, reboot Lara still has fairly large breasts, but it's not accompanied by a twig thick waist so their not as accentuated. And second, so just because reboot Lara doesn't fit your ridiculous male fantasy so she's no longer acceptable? Well, along with homophobic I guess we can add misogynistic to that list. Not surprised...

Ok I think you may have jumped the gun here, it's not some male fantasy, ABH was just pointing out some iconic features of the last Lara Croft. This current incarnation of Lara Croft has had all of it's original features removed,, hair colour, eye colour, outfit, equipment almost everything bar the hair style (even though the original was a braid) and breast size, she is a more realistic proportion which I and I'm sure others appreciate. We all understand it's a reboot but how much can you change before Lara Croft becomes Sarah Harding or Jane Doe?

I don't think it was necessary however to say that ABH is misogynistic or homophobic that's hardly what he is getting at




Yes, I always loved Lara's auburn brown hair and the darker shade hasn't got the same appeal, imo. ReLara's eyes are brown in the DE, I dunno what went wrong with the regular version, but apparently they were meant to be brown going by the concept/early screens and renders, which all featured brown eyes. I'm fairly certain RiseLara has brown eyes. These things contribute to what became of her iconic image, much like the dual pistols and backpack. However, I don't consider these essential for Lara to be recognisable as the Tomb Raider to be reckoned with. This is in attitude and personality more so, I think and of course in what she does. The image is a minor part of that as you say. Core/Lau Lara became iconic over time. Reboot Lara is starting fresh, the physical side isn't as important as the attitude or abilities, imo and we can only wait to see if she get's those things 'back' or recognisably similar to her past iterations.


Ah that's fair enough regarding the eyes, I agree with you 100% on this post, I can only hope though that they add back the hair colour she originally had. Definitely needs that attitude as well

Blacktron
11th Dec 2014, 20:26
I agree with this to some point, it needs to have a base character model that IS Lara Croft and then add clothing customisation and a switch up between the hairs, e.g ponytail to braid.


Yes, that's what I meant as well. Breast size, or nose size for that matter, shouldn't be a part of it.

IvanaKC
11th Dec 2014, 20:32
ReLara's eyes are brown in the DE, I dunno what went wrong with the regular version, but apparently they were meant to be brown going by the concept/early screens and renders, which all featured brown eyes. I'm fairly certain RiseLara has brown eyes.


I beg to differ, her eyes were green in regular and are still green in DE.

http://i62.tinypic.com/jpv5np.jpg







Obviously it is not since there are so many games with completely customizable protagonists: Saints Row, South Park Stick of Truth, Mass Effect, those are the first three that come to my mind.
However, to clarify, what I would have in mind for TR is not a character customization as extensive as in those games, but for certain things that the community is devided over as to what Lara should look like. Such as: braid or ponytail (or hair down with stiff hairband?), eyeliner or no eyeliner, long trousers or short trousers. I really don't see what could possibly be the problem with that.


RPG and adventure are different genres. When the franchise is about a certain character, the story is personal and customization doesn't make sense. You took Mass Effect for example - does it matter what gender is the main character? No? There you go, it's not personal. Saints Row and South Park - the plot could happen to everyone and everywhere. Again, not very personal.

Now, you were talking about a smaller range of customization. I'm not against that. We did have a lot of outfits to choose in Legend. ;)

d1n0_xD
11th Dec 2014, 20:44
^ I don't know if I'm color-blind, but in those pictures, the eyes look brown to me XD And when I played the game, they were brown.

IvanaKC
11th Dec 2014, 20:50
^ I don't know if I'm color-blind, but in those pictures, the eyes look brown to me XD And when I played the game, they were brown.

Try making one of the pics brighter/darker, trust me, it's green.

a_big_house
11th Dec 2014, 20:51
Try making one of the pics brighter, trust me, it's green.

So, digitally edit the photo's and they'll look green? :rasp:

Blacktron
11th Dec 2014, 20:56
RPG and adventure are different genres. When the franchise is about a certain character, the story is personal and customization doesn't make sense. You took Mass Effect for example - does it matter what gender is the main character? No? There you go, it's not personal. Saints Row and South Park - the plot could happen to everyone and everywhere. Again, not very personal.

I find that logic rather flawed but that's not important now. The point is that if the player in TR is able to choose from classic -and new- TR haircuts, trousers, sunglasses, and whatnot, everybody is a winner. We seem to agree on that.

IvanaKC
11th Dec 2014, 20:59
So, digitally edit the photo's and they'll look green? :rasp:

I knew it would come to this, I wrote that because not everyone has the screen properties as I do. ;)


This is where I clicked with eyedropper tool:
http://i59.tinypic.com/addcap.png

And then I took a brush:
http://i60.tinypic.com/21jxjqb.png

You are all free to do it yourself...

Danielsun_
11th Dec 2014, 21:01
The point is that if the player in TR is able to choose from classic -and new- TR haircuts, trousers, sunglasses, and whatnot, everybody is a winner. We seem to agree on that.

This!

I think everyone here has the same idea we are just go a round about way of explaining it

I would wager a guess to say that we're all on the same track


yes?

a_big_house
11th Dec 2014, 21:09
You are all free to do it yourself...

Okay, I think I will! :D



Looks brown to me :p

Driber
11th Dec 2014, 21:12
Thread temp closed pending review of inappropriate posts. Check back in a while, folks.

Driber
11th Dec 2014, 22:54
Right, recent posts carefully reviewed and thread re-opened. Couple of things I would like everyone to be aware of, going forward:

- Personal attacks aimed at forum members will not be tolerated.

Blatantly calling fellow forum members "homophobes", "misogynists", etc is absolutely a no-go, and infractions/bans will be issued for this type of abusive language. If you object to certain content posted on these forums, your duty as a member of this community is to report the post and/or talk to a staff member about it via PM, not to start fights with other members on the public forum. We are not Tumblr or Twitter; these forums are a family-friendly and respectable community, and we want to keep it that way.

- Use this thread (http://forums.eu.square-enix.com/showthread.php?t=145007) for in-depth discussions on Lara's looks.

The last page of this thread seems to have diverted into an in-depth discussion about new Lara's looks, so I would like everyone to please continue that particular discussion in the dedicated thread linked above. The multi-quote feature can be used to easily continue the discussion in the other thread; just click "multi-quote" on the posts you want to reply here, then go to the other thread and click "go advanced" and then click "quote these posts as well".

Bridgetkfisher
13th Dec 2014, 16:08
ermmm....pardon? Care to qualify this statement?

Well I thought that was the goal to make her more average the devs talked about? I had this image someone made awhile back contatining the dev statements, I dont have it now, but I remember their overall goal being about making her more relatable to average people by making her more average. Pretty sure its on google Ill take a look around :D

d1n0_xD
14th Dec 2014, 12:41
Being relatable and being average isn't the same thing tho.

Tecstar70
15th Dec 2014, 09:32
Well I thought that was the goal to make her more average the devs talked about? I had this image someone made awhile back contatining the dev statements, I dont have it now, but I remember their overall goal being about making her more relatable to average people by making her more average. Pretty sure its on google Ill take a look around :D

You didn't qualify your statement which was "Shes just an average girl, not rich, not even well educated, average looking, shes average now, very average." This statement has been discussed in other posts in the last two pages, so I won't repeat my response but as you originally posted it I would interested in your explanation.

"Not rich" - ?

"Not even well educated" - ?

"Average looking" - ?


In terms of being more relatable, maybe there is an element of believeability in how such a woman as Lara Croft as we know and love her could have come into existence. If you are dealing with an origin story you can other go pure fantasy where a person is endowed with mystical or supernatural abilities or for realism where an "average(??)" relatable person evolves into a certain character. The second seems more appropriate for Lara does it not?

Scion_Light
15th Dec 2014, 15:20
Well I thought that was the goal to make her more average the devs talked about? I had this image someone made awhile back contatining the dev statements, I dont have it now, but I remember their overall goal being about making her more relatable to average people by making her more average. Pretty sure its on google Ill take a look around :D

I remember that. I havn't got a link but it was in an interview with Karl and Brian. Maybe it was game informer.


Being relatable and being average isn't the same thing tho.

They are very different things and Lara is certainly no average girl. Making her more reliable is good but not average. I like aspects such as her being smart, beautiful and having a manor to play around in. Those differences from what is average make Lara cool and shouldn't get lost to make her seem more average.

Charlie_T_Raider
17th Jan 2015, 10:47
TR has been my fav series for many years and this does feel like the 'falll o the Tomb Raider'.

Tihocan
17th Jan 2015, 21:19
I feel like it's more "Epic Fail of the Tomb Raider", than Fall of. :D

WinterSoldierLTE
17th Jan 2015, 22:36
I feel like it's more "Epic Fail of the Tomb Raider", than Fall of. :D

Yeah, I feel the same. 'Tomb Raider' and Lara will recover. The ball's just been fumbled for now is all. I haven't seen any signs of doom & gloom yet, at least.

IvanaKC
18th Jan 2015, 13:47
I feel like it's more "Epic Fail of the Tomb Raider", than Fall of. :D

Care to explain? We still don't know anything about the game and exclusives for a previously multiplatform title usually don't work...

Steel_Wing
28th Jan 2015, 11:07
It more a wobble than a fall for now but if MS got permanent exclusivity then Lara is taking a fall like from the top of the Atlantis room in the TR1 Torso boss fight.

Phasetastic
24th Feb 2015, 14:48
Everything about the design of this game looks really good. The only reason it goes wrong is if the exclusivity deal stops the potential audience from getting to play it. Doesn't matter how good a game is if the fans not get to find that out.

DamianGraham
25th Feb 2015, 21:35
"I think Microsoft needs to give Rise of The Tomb Raider to all consoles to respect video games and fans" - Kanye West 2015. Wow, he sure said it! :D

Seriously though, if the game is barred from Sony platforms I feel like it'll be Death of The Tomb Raider for many many fans. We know it's coming to PC (why wouldn't it? Microsoft basically monopolizes that as well). Hopefully Square wasn't so stupid as to sign this silly deal if it means keeping it away from Sony's fanbase. That's just my opinion though...

Tecstar70
25th Feb 2015, 21:44
"I think Microsoft needs to give Rise of The Tomb Raider to all consoles to respect video games and fans" - Kanye West 2015. Wow, he sure said it! :D

Seriously though, if the game is barred from Sony platforms I feel like it'll be Death of The Tomb Raider for many many fans. We know it's coming to PC (why wouldn't it? Microsoft basically monopolizes that as well). Hopefully Square wasn't so stupid as to sign this silly deal if it means keeping it away from Sony's fanbase. That's just my opinion though...

Exactly. Nail. Head.

DamianGraham
25th Feb 2015, 22:16
Exactly. Nail. Head.

:D I think hell froze over... We agreed?! :p jk jk. The more I pay attention to the wording, the more I see a window that the game is going to come to PS4 still. I'm not going to let the hope die until (Holiday 15 ends) and CD announces "RoTTR coming to PC this fall!" and not mention PS4 *shudders* beyond that- I will remain hopeful. I do think Kanye was right though. Respect the gamers Microsoft... Give your Tomb Raider to the fans. :p

Tihocan
25th Feb 2015, 22:42
Care to explain? We still don't know anything about the game and exclusives for a previously multiplatform title usually don't work...
Sorry, didn't even see this.
Could you give an example of such a title? I honestly couldn't think of one, and a Googling came up with Dead Rising 3 and Street Fighter 5, both of which haven't really made the news that much.

My comment was basically along the lines of Tomb Raider will live, but it will always have this cloud over it now.


"I think Microsoft needs to give Rise of The Tomb Raider to all consoles to respect video games and fans" - Kanye West 2015. Wow, he sure said it! :D
"You're a wizard, 'arry" - Gandalf, 1945

Error96_
25th Feb 2015, 23:06
My comment was basically along the lines of Tomb Raider will live, but it will always have this cloud over it now.

I agree. As long as CD/SE pursue this policy this cloud will never lift and it does bad for both the developer who not be truly respected and the fans who lose out. Lara always be strong and popular even if those who make her game are not.

DamianGraham
25th Feb 2015, 23:15
Sorry, didn't even see this.
Could you give an example of such a title? I honestly couldn't think of one, and a Googling came up with Dead Rising 3 and Street Fighter 5, both of which haven't really made the news that much.

My comment was basically along the lines of Tomb Raider will live, but it will always have this cloud over it now.


"You're a wizard, 'arry" - Gandalf, 1945

http://www.gamespot.com/articles/xbox-exec-vows-to-make-amends-for-street-fighter-5/1100-6424100/ I saw this today... I swear if Phil spencer's way of "making amends" is keeping Lara off Sony I will flip. One could say this was retaliation against what Xbox did with rise.. And in the end who does it hurt? Us.

WinterSoldierLTE
25th Feb 2015, 23:56
Well, I dunno about anyone else, but I will gladly and willingly trade 'Street Fighter' for 'Tomb Raider'.

DamianGraham
26th Feb 2015, 02:21
Well, I dunno about anyone else, but I will gladly and willingly trade 'Street Fighter' for 'Tomb Raider'.

Amen, I haven't the slightest interest in it when I have Mortal Kombat X to look forward to. Sony is stupid, they should've been the ones to nab Tomb Raider if anyone were going to do it at all- however that stands against what I believe for this franchise. Everyone should experience this game and enjoy it. The only way I would get an Xbox One for this game is if Micro$oft sent me a free one- and that's never happening. Micro$oft will never see one penny of my money. #sorrynotsorry

Murphdawg1
26th Feb 2015, 02:34
Amen, I haven't the slightest interest in it when I have Mortal Kombat X to look forward to. Sony is stupid, they should've been the ones to nab Tomb Raider if anyone were going to do it at all- however that stands against what I believe for this franchise. Everyone should experience this game and enjoy it. The only way I would get an Xbox One for this game is if Micro$oft sent me a free one- and that's never happening. Micro$oft will never see one penny of my money. #sorrynotsorry

Sony wouldn't nab up Tomb Raider when they've got Uncharted 4 slated for this year.

Tihocan
26th Feb 2015, 02:39
http://www.gamespot.com/articles/xbox-exec-vows-to-make-amends-for-street-fighter-5/1100-6424100/ I saw this today... I swear if Phil spencer's way of "making amends" is keeping Lara off Sony I will flip. One could say this was retaliation against what Xbox did with rise.. And in the end who does it hurt? Us.
Completely inadequate. You can't "make amends" for something like that, especially with franchise bartering.

"Hey, you get the next one!" reads as "We didn't give a plop about you before, but we do now!"
It's no different to Crystal/Squenix's "Don't worry, you can play Lara Croft Temple of Osiris!".


Well, I dunno about anyone else, but I will gladly and willingly trade 'Street Fighter' for 'Tomb Raider'.

Amen, I haven't the slightest interest in it when I have Mortal Kombat X to look forward to.

You guys (as I) would, but a solid portion of its ~8 million customers (going by SF4) would not. I dare say the people missing out on that due to this exclusivity nonsense would be greatly unimpressed.

DamianGraham
26th Feb 2015, 03:06
Completely inadequate. You can't "make amends" for something like that, especially with franchise bartering.

"Hey, you get the next one!" reads as "We didn't give a plop about you before, but we do now!"
It's no different to Crystal/Squenix's "Don't worry, you can play Lara Croft Temple of Osiris!".




You guys (as I) would, but a solid portion of its ~8 million customers (going by SF4) would not. I dare say the people missing out on that due to this exclusivity nonsense would be greatly unimpressed.

So you mean to say that 3rd party exclusives are just bad no matter what context they're under?? gasp! lol. Although I did read that had Sony not helped SFV would not have happened for a loooooooooong time. We now know that this however, wasn't the case for RoTTR.. and hey, that's what he tweeted not me- Not sure how he intends to make his amends but it's now becoming a tit-for-tat between Microsoft and Sony and the only ones that are in the crossfires are the consumers, because we're the ones that lose out.

Error96_
27th Feb 2015, 02:08
I don't get how the guy at MS can be mad when he play similar tricks himself - taste of own medicine. Really though only us gamers suffer for it, They should support their new/current IP's on both sides rather than using their energy to spite each other's fans by poaching multiplatformers. Try to sell consoles by buying the rights to deny others to play it. Makes me respect Nintendo more in the way they back their series like Mario and Pokémon rather than going after the multiplatform titles.

Tecstar70
27th Feb 2015, 09:28
I don't get how the guy at MS can be mad when he play similar tricks himself - taste of own medicine. Really though only us gamers suffer for it, They should support their new/current IP's on both sides rather than using their energy to spite each other's fans by poaching multiplatformers. Try to sell consoles by buying the rights to deny others to play it. Makes me respect Nintendo more in the way they back their series like Mario and Pokémon rather than going after the multiplatform titles.

SFV wouldn't not have existed so quickly without Sony. I'm not sure how much of their motive was about denying other gamers.

RotTR is a timed exclusive deal to sell more consoles and raise TR's profile on the Xbox platform, basically a marketing ploy, and it is highly likely to come out on other platforms despite all the naysayers. Again I don't think a great motivation was about denying other gamers.

I understand why people take it personally but I really believe at the core there is no-one sitting there going "this'll screw those <insert platform here> users, they are dirt on my shoe ya ha ha haaaahhhhh!"....

http://cdn.chud.com/b/b5/900x900px-LL-b551abad_excellent-mr-burns.gif

DamianGraham
28th Feb 2015, 00:53
SFV wouldn't not have existed so quickly without Sony. I'm not sure how much of their motive was about denying other gamers.

RotTR is a timed exclusive deal to sell more consoles and raise TR's profile on the Xbox platform, basically a marketing ploy, and it is highly likely to come out on other platforms despite all the naysayers. Again I don't think a great motivation was about denying other gamers.

I understand why people take it personally but I really believe at the core there is no-one sitting there going "this'll screw those <insert platform here> users, they are dirt on my shoe ya ha ha haaaahhhhh!"....

http://cdn.chud.com/b/b5/900x900px-LL-b551abad_excellent-mr-burns.gif


They don't really need to- the fact of the matter is they DID do that by agreeing to silly exclusivity deals in the first place. I get it business business capitalism blah blah blah. But a disregard to the community and how they'd be affected does show a level of apathy and dare I say malevolence on the publishers (and Microsofts) parts. Phil spencer parades himself to the public as a gamer- and yet throws money at every chance he can to deny gamers games they love lol. It's a little bit silly to believe anyone at these companies gives a Scheiße about anyone but themselves and cashing in despite knowingly upsetting people. It's not cool.

And you're quite adamant that playstation will see this release... Wanna bet on it?? :p hehe

Tecstar70
28th Feb 2015, 01:16
But a disregard to the community and how they'd be affected does show a level of apathy and dare I say malevolence on the publishers (and Microsofts) parts.
Not sure about apathy. Malevolence? I don't think so. Poor judgement? Maybe.



Phil spencer parades himself to the public as a gamer- and yet throws money at every chance he can to deny gamers games they love lol.
But is that a reason for The Deal(tm) being made? To blatantly deny the game to people? I don't think so. Its a result, but not the direct intent. If they wanted to do that they would have chucked more money at it and made it completely exclusive or bought the IP.



And you're quite adamant that playstation will see this release... Wanna bet on it?? :p hehe
I am 99.9% certain that it will come to PS4. Its that 0.1% that bothers me... :D

Gemma_Darkmoon_
28th Feb 2015, 03:38
Not sure about apathy. Malevolence? I don't think so. Poor judgement? Maybe.

But is that a reason for The Deal(tm) being made? To blatantly deny the game to people? I don't think so. Its a result, but not the direct intent. If they wanted to do that they would have chucked more money at it and made it completely exclusive or bought the IP.

The tit-for-tat that goes on seem so immature and does bad for what the gaming community gets. With the TR deal MS showed rather ruthless streak and it was CD/Darrell that showed the real apathy. The honest answer if MS could buy TR they probably would have but SE know that alot of it's value is in sales to the PS and PC markets.

Charlie_T_Raider
28th Feb 2015, 10:06
^Very true. If they did go perminant exclusive they would say goodbye to half their sales as sold more TR2013 on PS/PC than xbox. I would not buy new console for one game.

Tecstar70
28th Feb 2015, 10:15
^Very true. If they did go perminant exclusive they would say goodbye to half their sales as sold more TR2013 on PS/PC than xbox. I would not buy new console for one game.

Precisely!

Tihocan
28th Feb 2015, 11:22
But is that a reason for The Deal(tm) being made? To blatantly deny the game to people? I don't think so. Its a result, but not the direct intent. If they wanted to do that they would have chucked more money at it and made it completely exclusive or bought the IP.

Actually, that is the reason. Denying to a portion of gamers has the effect of that portion of gamers shifting or making decisions based on personal need.

i.e. what console am I going to buy? That one has Tomb Raider now, the other does not, I'll buy an XBox One then.
Like aaaaaallllll those people standing in line for an iPhone 6 on day one. Could they have waited a month? Physically, yes. Mentally...?

d1n0_xD
28th Feb 2015, 11:28
Yeah, I agree with people who say that this is just a temporary deal. Of course CD can't say that the game is going to be on PC and PS later on, that would defeat the purpose of the deal, which is to buy XBox. Once the dust settles after release (depends on the contract), they will reveal when the other versions will come out, or maybe they'll even come out momentarily. :)

Tecstar70
28th Feb 2015, 14:10
Yeah, I agree with people who say that this is just a temporary deal. Of course CD can't say that the game is going to be on PC and PS later on, that would defeat the purpose of the deal, which is to buy XBox. Once the dust settles after release (depends on the contract), they will reveal when the other versions will come out, or maybe they'll even come out momentarily. :)

We're winning you over one at a time..lol... :D

Charlie_T_Raider
25th Apr 2015, 13:04
Even if you fall you can still get up and I hope TR will do this. Keep falling and maybe you pick up a worse injury and hope CD realise how wrong signing this deal was or signing a future deal is before they undermine their own community.