PDA

View Full Version : This series will never recover



theend
14th Aug 2014, 16:57
Timed exclusive or not, here's the problem.

The history of tomb raider is based in the playstation and pc market, this is where the vast majority of its fanbase lies.

The franchise is simply not a big enough hitter to sell the xbox, it's no grand theft auto or call of duty

So the game will come out first on the xbox platforms, mostly sell badly because xbone is struggling and then finally come to playstation and pc, at which point the game will be treated with disdain from a community who will simply see it as M$ left overs.

So any hype the game has when it arrives on xbox will all have disappeared by the time it hits other formats, resulting in a loss of sales which would have been higher if the game had come out on everything at the same time.

The end result is the game sells less than the prequel. SE deem it a failure and pull the plug on the franchise and we don't see another tomb raider game for at least 5 more years until someone decides to commission another reboot.

Too much damage has been done by reckless, greedy idiots with no respect for the franchise or it's fans.

So everyone, do yourself a favor, crack open some old tomb raiders and forget about the future, because their isn't one for TR anymore.

Murphdawg1
14th Aug 2014, 17:01
I do fear a prolonged timed exclusive could lead to apathy among many who would have bought it right away if available for all systems from the word go.

Leon S. Kennedy
14th Aug 2014, 17:02
Very plausible scenario. I can't see it selling more than 2 million on Xbox One so 360 will really need to pick up the slack. s really don't care either way at this point(SE doesn't care about us getting the game), but it will be interesting to see what happens. I won't root for it to fail, but I will laugh if it does. Yes I'm bitter.

Tecstar70
14th Aug 2014, 17:17
Totally disagree. If its a great game it will sell bucket loads on any system its released on.

Valenka
14th Aug 2014, 17:21
Totally disagree. If its a great game it will sell bucket loads on any system its released on.

[/thread]

Exclusivity does not mean the end of a franchise. Bayonetta 2 is a Wii U exclusive, but that doesn't mean Bayonetta is a dying series.

The Elder Scrolls Online is currently only available on PC and will come to Xbox One and PS4 sometime next year. Elder Scrolls isn't ending.

Can we please stop with the overreactions? It's one thing to be disappointed and frustrated, but it's another thing to pretend you're a Mayan calendar.

Deltoran
14th Aug 2014, 17:21
Totally disagree. If its a great game it will sell bucket loads on any system its released on.

That may be so...but it would sell more buckets if it were released on every platform.

Tecstar70
14th Aug 2014, 17:23
That may be so...but it would sell more buckets if it were released on every platform.

And it will when it is, February 2016. ;)

Deltoran
14th Aug 2014, 17:25
The question is, how many people will be willing to pay full price and for all the extra goodies? I mean, compared to those who would have if it were released equally all in late 2015. I'd love to see the stats come 2016.

Elliot Kane
14th Aug 2014, 17:29
There will always be a future for TR.

Unlike some other franchises (*cough* Duke Nukem *cough*) TR does not rely on being in any particular decade or even century in order to work as a concept. All it needs is unexplored places, and there will always be plenty of those.

While the exclusivity deal will certainly damage Crystal's reputation (Fairly or not, as the decision may well have come from Square), and the way it was announced perhaps moreso (The official announcement making no mention of the exclusive being timed was very bad PR to say the least), Lara Croft will always find a way to carry on raiding tombs sooner or later.

Defying the odds is what she does :)

kiadaw
14th Aug 2014, 18:59
Come on, this is exaggeration.

nodq24
14th Aug 2014, 19:30
Based on Phil Spencer's twitter account, Rise of the Tomb Raider is being published by microsoft, so only pc players will have a shot at the game after the duration ends which is bs.

His tweet: @TallDwarfSocial Happy 2 partner w/ SE/CD to publish RotTR similiar 2 what we did on Dead Rising. See: http://bit.ly/Y8oDhs

Valenka
14th Aug 2014, 19:34
Based on Phil Spencer's twitter account, Rise of the Tomb Raider is being published by microsoft, so only pc players will have a shot at the game after the duration ends which is bs.

Please, for the love of God, read the article before making statements like that. Now you're going to have everyone believe that Microsoft is publishing the game when it IS NOT officially.


“Right now we have a relationship with Square and Crystal on publishing the game,” Spencer confirmed. “The exact details of what publishing means and when it gets done are part of that deal - I’m not trying to be opaque about it. We will clearly spend money on marketing the game, there’s no doubt about that. And we do [that] on games where we have very little to do with development, and with games that we fully develop. And we will definitely be spending money on developing the game - I want to make sure that it’s as great as it can be.”

Leon S. Kennedy
14th Aug 2014, 21:17
Please, for the love of God, read the article before making statements like that. Now you're going to have everyone believe that Microsoft is publishing the game when it IS NOT officially.

The part where he says they definitely plan to help develop the game the ends any hope it ever be on PS4 in my opinion. PC is the only platform that might get a port, but wouldn't even count on that.

Tecstar70
14th Aug 2014, 21:19
The part where he says they definitely plan to help develop the game the ends any hope it ever be on PS4 in my opinion. PC is the only platform that might get a port, but wouldn't even count on that.

You are mistaken. Really, you are.

Murphdawg1
14th Aug 2014, 21:22
Please, for the love of God, read the article before making statements like that. Now you're going to have everyone believe that Microsoft is publishing the game when it IS NOT officially.

Why in the hell does MS need to spend money on developing the game? If Sony had secured AC Unity or Batman Arkham Knight even as timed exclusives Xbox gamers would be up in arms and rightfully so.

I tweeted this to Phil Spencer: @XboxP3 Tomb Raider should never be exclusive. If Sony had done the same with AC Unity or Arkham Knight you'd be up in arms.

a_big_house
14th Aug 2014, 21:24
^ To get exclusivity...

Leon S. Kennedy
14th Aug 2014, 21:25
You are mistaken. Really, you are.

I hope you are right, but tell me why? Microsoft is going to spend money and actively participate in the development of this game and then let SE port it to PS4? They would have to extremely desperate to do that. When Sony does that it's a permanent exclusive, but maybe Microsoft has a different policy.

Murphdawg1
14th Aug 2014, 21:28
^ To get exclusivity...

Which is bull**** for a long standing multi-plat game. It's not like Xbox owners could have bought the game if it was released on all platforms.

Tecstar70
14th Aug 2014, 21:34
I hope you are right, but tell me why? Microsoft is going to spend money and actively participate in the development of this game and then let SE port it to PS4? They would have to extremely desperate to do that. When Sony does that it's a permanent exclusive, but maybe Microsoft has a different policy.

MS are not developing the game per se. They will develop their brand along with the TR brand. TR will feature heavily in their advertising, website, Xbox ads etc etc. The PS4 version will not be a port. Why would they do that? They have already developed a TR game for the PS4. They will use the same game engine as the DE. They will be developing all 3 platforms together. It's the release date that differs, and in fact the PC and PS4 versions could end up being more stable because of it.

People really are reading far too much into this deal its getting daft.

a_big_house
14th Aug 2014, 21:40
Which is bull**** for a long standing multi-plat game. It's not like Xbox owners could have bought the game if it was released on all platforms.

Yeah, but MS don't care about the game, they care about selling Xbones and if it costs a couple mil to fund a bad-ass game to sell those consoles, they why not.
(I still hate the decision, of course)

Leon S. Kennedy
14th Aug 2014, 21:41
MS are not developing the game per se. They will develop their brand along with the TR brand. TR will feature heavily in their advertising, website, Xbox ads etc etc. The PS4 version will not be a port. Why would they do that? They have already developed a TR game for the PS4. They will use the same game engine as the DE. They will be developing all 3 platforms together. It's the release date that differs, and in fact the PC and PS4 versions could end up being more stable because of it.

People really are reading far too much into this deal its getting daft.

He clearly said they will be active in development of the game to make it the best it can be. To me that implies a technical and creative input, not just marketing and brand association.

segamer
14th Aug 2014, 21:54
Obviously, how well The Rise of the Tomb Raider does depends on marketing and reviews. In 4th quarter of 2015, we don't know what the Xbox One's user base will be. Likely 15 million Xbox One's will be sold (just a guess). I think the PS4 will have sold 25 million by that point.

Murphdawg1
14th Aug 2014, 21:55
MS are not developing the game per se. They will develop their brand along with the TR brand. TR will feature heavily in their advertising, website, Xbox ads etc etc. The PS4 version will not be a port. Why would they do that? They have already developed a TR game for the PS4. They will use the same game engine as the DE. They will be developing all 3 platforms together. It's the release date that differs, and in fact the PC and PS4 versions could end up being more stable because of it.

People really are reading far too much into this deal its getting daft.

Excuse people for asking questions and demanding answers instead of blindly accepting whatever the corporate talking heads at Square/Crystal and Microsoft might say. I bet you own an Xbox One so you probably don't care.

Tecstar70
14th Aug 2014, 22:10
He clearly said they will be active in development of the game to make it the best it can be. To me that implies a technical and creative input, not just marketing and brand association.

I think it unlikely, but I am prepared to be proved wrong.


Excuse people for asking questions and demanding answers instead of blindly accepting whatever the corporate talking heads at Square/Crystal and Microsoft might say. I bet you own an Xbox One so you probably don't care.

There's nothing wrong with asking questions, but people are not looking at this logically. There ARE wild statements and assumptions being made and while I am not ruling out anything I base my opinions on logic and precedent.

BTW I don't own an XB1. I still have a 360 and I took a while to decide whether to go PS4 or XB1. The people I play with are on XB1 and I kinda like the Xbox Eco-system so when I go next-gen it will be XB1. If I did go PS4 I would be looking forward to ROTTR as much as I am now.

Murphdawg1
14th Aug 2014, 22:20
I think it unlikely, but I am prepared to be proved wrong.



There's nothing wrong with asking questions, but people are not looking at this logically. There ARE wild statements and assumptions being made and while I am not ruling out anything I base my opinions on logic and precedent.

BTW I don't own an XB1. I still have a 360 and I took a while to decide whether to go PS4 or XB1. The people I play with are on XB1 and I kinda like the Xbox Eco-system so when I go next-gen it will be XB1. If I did go PS4 I would be looking forward to ROTTR as much as I am now.

Except it's not a guarenteed thing on PS4 thanks to this deal. Square/Crystal have been in bed with Microsoft since at least Underworld with the 360 getting exclusive DLC, timed DLC for the reboot and now this garbage? Yeah PC and Playstation people have every right to be upset.

Tecstar70
14th Aug 2014, 22:22
Except it's not a guarenteed thing on PS4 thanks to this deal. Square/Crystal have been in bed with Microsoft since at least Underworld with the 360 getting exclusive DLC, timed DLC for the reboot and now this garbage? Yeah PC and Playstation people have every right to be upset.

OK. We will have to agree to disagree then. Time will tell.

segamer
14th Aug 2014, 22:41
Timed exclusive or not, here's the problem.

The history of tomb raider is based in the playstation and pc market, this is where the vast majority of its fanbase lies.

I hate that this happen but here's a quick history lesson. The original Tomb Raider came out as a multiplatform game for Sega Saturn, PC and PS one. Sony did this very thing; they bought a five year exclusive. Tomb Raider 2 was in development for Sega Saturn and Rumored N64 but Sony Paid Eidos a money hat so that it wouldn't come out on other consoles. I hated Sony for a long, long time and wouldn't buy their games or systems.

It's one thing to believe in a project Like Hellblade or Quantum Break and fund a project that would otherwise not get made. However, I'm so against a company paying so a multiplatform game doesn't come out for other consoles.

Sony (in general) has since changed. At the time, they were just getting started. Now Sony makes great first party games. What Microsoft did by buying a time exclusive with RoTTR is bad for gamers.

Murphdawg1
14th Aug 2014, 22:42
OK. We will have to agree to disagree then. Time will tell.

Except it shouldn't have to that's the point.

Murphdawg1
14th Aug 2014, 22:46
I hate that this happen but here's a quick history lesson. The original Tomb Raider came out for Sega Saturn, PC and PS one. Sony did this very thing. Tomb Raider 2 was in development for Sega Saturn and Rumored N64 but Sony Paid Eidos a money hat so that it wouldn't come out on other consoles.

It's one thing to believe in a project Like Hellblade or Quantum Break and fund a project that would otherwise not get made. However, I'm so against a company paying so a multiplatform game doesn't come out for other consoles.

Sony (in general) has since changed. At the time, were just getting started. Now they make great first party games. What Microsoft did is bad for gamers.

Tomb Raider 2 was still on PC though plus the Nintendo 64 was still using cartridges while the Sony Playstation was using a DVD format which could store more on it. Imagine if Tomb Raider 2 had come out for the N64, it might have come with multiple cartridges thus increasing the workload on the devs. The technology reason is also why Sony got Final Fantasy, developers saw that they could put an entire game on 1 disc instead of multiple cartridges.

Valenka
14th Aug 2014, 22:48
Except it shouldn't have to that's the point.

I'm not picking sides here, but...

You two are talking in circles. You're convinced that it won't be coming to PS4 because they haven't flat out said so. Instead of radiating some positive vibes and taking "timed exclusive" at face value with a side of hope, you're perpetuating the fact that you want an answer now. We all do.

Tecstar is, however, taking the information at face value and (if I'm interpreting correctly) has hope that ROTTR will come to PS4 after the deal with Microsoft expires.

You both are simply going back and forth, with Tecstar agreeing to disagree, but you turn the conversation around to the start again and repeat history. :nut:

The point is, time will tell. We understand it shouldn't have to, but that's the meal we've been fed. We can either eat it and accept it, or push it aside and wait for something better.

segamer
14th Aug 2014, 22:54
Tomb Raider 2 was still on PC though plus the Nintendo 64 was still using cartridges while the Sony Playstation was using a DVD format which could store more on it. Imagine if Tomb Raider 2 had come out for the N64, it might have come with multiple cartridges thus increasing the workload on the devs. The technology reason is also why Sony got Final Fantasy, developers saw that they could put an entire game on 1 disc instead of multiple cartridges.

Sony was using CD's for Playstation, not DVDs. Resident Evil 2 came out for N64 on a 512MB cartridge. The point is that Sony did the same thing and I didn't agree with it at the time as I don't agree with now.

Murphdawg1
14th Aug 2014, 22:59
Sony was using CD's for Playstation, not DVDs. Resident Evil 2 came out for N64 on a 512MB cartridge. The point is that Sony did the same thing and I didn't agree with it at the time as I don't agree with now.

That's right it was CDs. Still though that storage capability is one reason why 3rd party devs shyed away from the N64 and went to Sony.

Valenka
14th Aug 2014, 23:00
That's right it was CDs. Still though that storage capability is one reason why 3rd party devs shyed away from the N64 and went to Sony.

Regardless, one of the most innovative, original, standard-setting and best video games of all time was only found on Nintendo 64: GoldenEye. You didn't need a 4GB disc for that. ;)

Error96_
14th Aug 2014, 23:00
I think the reputation of CD could be ruined permanently with the track they are on. As for TR yes it won't sell that well on Xbox one alone but when it comes out on other consoles should do fine. There is always going to be a market for TR games and Lara Croft.

When it comes to TR and the Sega consoles the Saturn was weaker in power and the dreamcast was a flop so that is probably why TR didn't continue on those. I think Sega were too busy focused on savaging the transition of Sonic from 2D to 3D around that time.

segamer
14th Aug 2014, 23:09
I think the reputation of CD could be ruined permanently with the track they are on. As for TR yes it won't sell that well on Xbox one alone but when it comes out on other consoles should do fine. There is always going to be a market for TR games and Lara Croft.

When it comes to TR and the Sega consoles the Saturn was weaker in power and the dreamcast was a flop so that is probably why TR didn't continue on those. I think Sega were too busy focused on savaging the transition of Sonic from 2D to 3D around that time.

Regardless of the State of the Saturn, Tomb Raider was the best selling game on the System and the second Tomb Raider was in the works for it and rumored N64.

Again, it's bad for gamers when a company pays so a multiplatform game doesn't come out for other systems.

WinterSoldierLTE
14th Aug 2014, 23:14
I think it'll recover in time. It may just take a lot of time is all. But this one will definitely ALWAYS be known as: "the TR that pissed off the fanbase.". No matter how good of a game it is, that shadow's been cast. Crystal Dynamics, on the otherhand, could indeed be in jeopardy.

Valenka
14th Aug 2014, 23:14
Regardless of the State of the Saturn, Tomb Raider was the best selling game on the System and the second Tomb Raider was in the works for it and rumored N64.

Wasn't Tomb Raider like, the only game on Saturn? :lol:

drkl0rd2000
16th Aug 2014, 01:46
There will always be a future for TR.

Unlike some other franchises (*cough* Duke Nukem *cough*) TR does not rely on being in any particular decade or even century in order to work as a concept. All it needs is unexplored places, and there will always be plenty of those.

While the exclusivity deal will certainly damage Crystal's reputation (Fairly or not, as the decision may well have come from Square), and the way it was announced perhaps moreso (The official announcement making no mention of the exclusive being timed was very bad PR to say the least), Lara Croft will always find a way to carry on raiding tombs sooner or later.

Defying the odds is what she does :)


Maybe it will have a future for some but I for one will not purchase future installments and heres why.

If it is part of an arching story where events of one impact or play a part of another installment if I am denied one installment I will just abandon the series as I can't stand incompleteness in my stories.

Elliot Kane
16th Aug 2014, 01:54
Maybe it will have a future for some but I for one will not purchase future installments and heres why.

If it is part of an arching story where events of one impact or play a part of another installment if I am denied one installment I will just abandon the series as I can't stand incompleteness in my stories.

There will be another reboot, sooner or later.

If this bombs as badly as it currently threatens to, sooner.

Leon S. Kennedy
16th Aug 2014, 02:35
[/thread]

Exclusivity does not mean the end of a franchise. Bayonetta 2 is a Wii U exclusive, but that doesn't mean Bayonetta is a dying series.


I'm just seeing this, but Bayonetta was close to being dead. The only reason it is exclusive to Wii U is because they were the only ones willing to fund it.

Leon S. Kennedy
16th Aug 2014, 05:32
The series will never recover? Isn't this the same game that had ported what looked like a Wii version of Underworld to the PS2?

Your point?

motoleo
16th Aug 2014, 05:34
Your point?

None I guess. That's in the past.

Today MS is giving TR the publicity it deserves. Preserving anticipation and building a bigger base. All of the other popular games can do it and Tomb Raider can too.

http://www.xbox.com/en-US/xbox-one/gaming

Microsoft wants everyone to know that the best games are on Xbox.

Leon S. Kennedy
16th Aug 2014, 07:02
None I guess. That's in the past.

Today MS is giving TR the publicity it deserves. Preserving anticipation and building a bigger base. All of the other popular games can do it and Tomb Raider can too.

http://www.xbox.com/en-US/xbox-one/gaming

Microsoft wants everyone to know that the best games are on Xbox.

Except Microsoft can't do that. This deal in no expands the Tomb Raider consumer base or the potential to grow. It does the exact opposite.

The rest of your comment is console wars trolling.

kiadaw
16th Aug 2014, 10:27
The new information of 'spending money on developing the game' changes things a fair bit.

Now, there is a real chance it may actually not come to PS4, or not for a long while at least.

Tecstar70
16th Aug 2014, 11:06
The new information of 'spending money on developing the game' changes things a fair bit.

Now, there is a real chance it may actually not come to PS4, or not for a long while at least.

Why would MS want to stick their oar in on actual game development? Its not in their interest to. All they want to do is shift boxes. In terms of DLC, promotion etc then they can influence that. All they want from TR is to increase the user base. While I find these words slightly strange I don't think they should be interpreted as they read.

BlueSkiesXXV
16th Aug 2014, 13:23
It is without question that Tomb Raider and Lara will carry on for a very long time.
It is worth pointing out that it is us, the loyal fanbase, that is the only constant and that the developers come and go. There were the 'Core Design' years and then the 'Crystal Dynamics' years. It might just take another changing of the guard to steer our Tomb Raider out of these uncharted waters (honk...see what I did there).

The reboot was exceptionally good, but was quite far from the spirit of classic Tomb Raider. Hello, where were the tombs??? There were further missteps. For example, the shoehorned competitive multiplayer (with dedicated trophies). Then there has been this constant march of exclusivity towards the one platform (Xbox) that is the least favoured by the core Tomb Raider fanbase. Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against the fantastic Xbox brand, but EVERYONE knows that Tomb Raider's home is on PlayStation & PC and got it to where it is today!

I would like to remind you all of the following that was included in Tomb Raider Anniversary. It is an extract from a 'note to the fans' written by Jason Botta (Creative Director):

We strove hard to find the right balance of nostalgia and freshness and to create an experience that captured the sense of isolation so prevalent in the original. We hope that you're as excited as we are about what's in store for Lara and Tomb Raider in the next ten years. Happy gaming and thanks to you for a decade of loyalty and support!

This chap still works at Crystal and it would be great to see what he thinks of the latest movements with the franchise and all the 'notes to the developers' appearing all over the various TR forums. It is normally assumed that loyalty (almost 20 years of it!!!) goes both ways!

kiadaw
16th Aug 2014, 13:33
Why would MS want to stick their oar in on actual game development? Its not in their interest to. All they want to do is shift boxes. In terms of DLC, promotion etc then they can influence that. All they want from TR is to increase the user base. While I find these words slightly strange I don't think they should be interpreted as they read.

Of course its their interest to do so. If they have an exclusive deal, obviously they wanted to game to be a good as possible. If it is critically acclaimed, it will improve sales quite a bit.

It is however unusual, & what level is unclear. Could be nothing more than tech support, or just extra fundings to be able to polish areas that CD would otherwise unable to due to budget to manpower.

We need more information on the level of funding's, & others before we can make better deduction, but the 'funding to develop" cannot be comforting to hear for people hoping the game will come earlier if at all to their platform of choice.

kiadaw
16th Aug 2014, 13:35
It is without question that Tomb Raider and Lara will carry on for a very long time.
It is worth pointing out that it is us, the loyal fanbase, that is the only constant and that the developers come and go. There were the 'Core Design' years and then the 'Crystal Dynamics' years. It might just take another changing of the guard to steer our Tomb Raider out of these uncharted waters (honk...see what I did there).

The reboot was exceptionally good, but was quite far from the spirit of classic Tomb Raider. Hello, where were the tombs??? There were further missteps. For example, the shoehorned competitive multiplayer (with dedicated trophies). Then there has been this constant march of exclusivity towards the one platform (Xbox) that is the least favoured by the core Tomb Raider fanbase. Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against the fantastic Xbox brand, but EVERYONE knows that Tomb Raider's home is on PlayStation & PC and got it to where it is today!

I would like to remind you all of the following that was included in Tomb Raider Anniversary. It is an extract from a 'note to the fans' written by Jason Botta (Creative Director):

We strove hard to find the right balance of nostalgia and freshness and to create an experience that captured the sense of isolation so prevalent in the original. We hope that you're as excited as we are about what's in store for Lara and Tomb Raider in the next ten years. Happy gaming and thanks to you for a decade of loyalty and support!

This chap still works at Crystal and it would be great to see what he thinks of the latest movements with the franchise and all the 'notes to the developers' appearing all over the various TR forums. It is normally assumed that loyalty (almost 20 years of it!!!) goes both ways!

As good as I find the reboot, I think this next game, is where the actual vision of the game be realized. I have a good feeling about this game (gameplay wise)

DrCroft
16th Aug 2014, 13:38
Wasn't Tomb Raider like, the only game on Saturn? :lol:

Hey I love my Saturn :nut: Panzer Dragoon, D, NiGHTS into Dreams, Clockwork Knight etc. Oh and TR of course! <3

Also TR Chronicles did come out on the Dreamcast, not sure the history behind that but I know it did.

I think it will probably always have a taint in the name now, but I hope that future iterations strive to correct that.

kiadaw
16th Aug 2014, 14:02
I feel bad for anyone that bought a Saturn or Dreamcast, & any Sonic games for the past 10 years.

Valenka
16th Aug 2014, 14:12
I feel bad for anyone that bought a Saturn or Dreamcast, & any Sonic games for the past 10 years.

Why?
I bought a brand new, untouched Dreamcast for $10 and a few games that I played as a kid. Nothing wrong with that.

Murphdawg1
16th Aug 2014, 15:15
If Square knows what is good for the franchise(after making this deal I don't think they do) then they will have their lawyers working on finding a way out of it all together or to make it as short as possible. Otherwise they have sealed Lara's fate and Tomb Raider will be no more. Also they have some serious work to if they want to regain the trust of the fans and that means no more preferential treatment to Microsoft.

ARaider
16th Aug 2014, 15:54
If Square knows what is good for the franchise(after making this deal I don't think they do) then they will have their lawyers working on finding a way out of it all together or to make it as short as possible. Otherwise they have sealed Lara's fate and Tomb Raider will be no more. Also they have some serious work to if they want to regain the trust of the fans and that means no more preferential treatment to Microsoft.
What?! :eek: Lara will never die! They have to screw it up a lot more if they want to kill her! Nobody touches my little bird! I think they need to spend money on adds and commercials. That would really help them getting more money and more people would know about TR, so that TR will never end! If they would end TR then I would come to them personally and punch them in their faces (or I would not do this).:D Nobody kills my little bird.... They have to kill me first, and I'm bloody sirieus.:)

Valenka
16th Aug 2014, 16:02
I'm really so sick of people saying that Tomb Raider will end because of this whole thing. Tomb Raider will only end if the community and fans stop supporting it.

And if you stop supporting it over ONE bad decision in seventeen or eighteen years, you're not a true fan.

ARaider
16th Aug 2014, 16:20
I'm really so sick of people saying that Tomb Raider will end because of this whole thing. Tomb Raider will only end if the community and fans stop supporting it.

And if you stop supporting it over ONE bad decision in seventeen or eighteen years, you're not a true fan.

exactly!:thumb: There are companies who made a lot more mistakes, and they still exist, so if they can do it so can CD, and TR and Lara are to amazing for it to end.:D

Valenka
16th Aug 2014, 16:53
Activision makes mistakes every single day. Every time they decide to release a new Call of Duty is another mistake chalked up for them. Taking over the James Bond game series and ruining it was a mistake.

A prime example there: the James Bond games are over because Activision ruined it with their poor excuses for games with Quantum of Solace, Blood Stone and 007 Legends. The game franchise only ended because of Activision's stupidity. The community is still strong and many people want another Bond game, just not in the hands of Activision.

Gemma_Darkmoon_
24th Aug 2014, 01:07
I'm really so sick of people saying that Tomb Raider will end because of this whole thing. Tomb Raider will only end if the community and fans stop supporting it.

And if you stop supporting it over ONE bad decision in seventeen or eighteen years, you're not a true fan.

What happened to Core Design with AOD shows how mistakes can very quickly end things. I think everyone want to support the series but if CD do go that step and make a game permanent exclusive then we couldn't buy it to support it at all. If I went to a restaurant and watched other people getting top quality service but always had to wait ages whilst the same people got service eventually I would be fed up. I wouldn't leave TR but others may. I don't think ONE bad decision is enough to make people leave but if CD keep this direction and it goes from ONE to MANY bad decisions with future exclusivity deals then that community support could be in danger.

BeastCallisto
24th Aug 2014, 01:24
As long as it doesn't come to PS4 I'm simply not buying or playing it. I doubt it will be the end for the franchise though. Lara Croft and her sidescrolling adventures will still be there. Also, like someone wrote before me, it was far off the spirit of the original games. TR9 was a good game, but a bad Tomb Raider game, in my opinion at least. So I would prefer if they let me support it, but if not, I don't really care much. I still have to replay the classics on PS3.

Weemanply109
24th Aug 2014, 02:18
I'm really so sick of people saying that Tomb Raider will end because of this whole thing. Tomb Raider will only end if the community and fans stop supporting it.

And if you stop supporting it over ONE bad decision in seventeen or eighteen years, you're not a true fan.

I agree with you, but the fanbase isn't enough to support the franchise anymore.

We weren't enough to save AOD and then Underworld. The mainstream audience (I don't know how to label them) needs to be on board with these things if they want to reach that wider market to sell more copies, otherwise if they're not happy then the series can easily be ended again. Just like we did with AOD and Underworld and fans could do nothing but sit and watch them try and put the pieces of the franchise back together... (that's if they feel it's worth it anymore).

a_big_house
24th Aug 2014, 09:55
A prime example there: the James Bond games are over because Activision ruined it with their poor excuses for games with Quantum of Solace, Blood Stone and 007 Legends. The game franchise only ended because of Activision's stupidity. The community is still strong and many people want another Bond game, just not in the hands of Activision.

Woah hold on! What's wrong with Blood Stone!? I thought that game was great! :D

Lord Martok
24th Aug 2014, 09:56
No such thing as a "true fan". The term is a self-aggrandizing, "more fan than thou" moniker that serves no purpose whatsoever.

Recently, I have renounced fandom over everything, from Star Wars to Star Trek to Battlestar Galactica to The Last of Us to Tomb Raider....for the simple reason that whenever a given franchise tries to take on a new direction/approach, it causes often hostile divisiveness in the fan bases....to the point of petty shots at one another, and sometimes even worse, costing friendships. Also, fans have a bull***t sense of entitlement to a property they absolutely do not own. ("George Lucas, please, don't take my Star Wars awaaaayyyyy.....I wrote the next part!"). Fans also tend to self-victimize over the inconsequential....and as such, flame wars can begin from such "victimizations".

My new philosophy is a simple one that applies to all things I still love, but just don't consider myself to be fanatical about anymore: "Don't Be a Fan. Don't Be a Victim!"

BeastCallisto
24th Aug 2014, 12:44
I think thats a bit harsh, Lord Matok. I'm a fan of a lot of stuff and when people tell me I'm not a "real" fan of something because I have forgotten stuff I simply say "whatever, its on ME to decide of what I'm a fan or not". I'm not a victim because I'm a fan. If they turn stuff around then, well, I'm a fan of the older stuff and don't care anymore for the newer stuff or simply watch/play it out of nostalgia.

The thing is, TR1 was a good game and it was on top at the time. For that time the gameplay graphics and the graphics of the Cutscenes were AMAZING. I still remember the jawdropping.
Underworld was a really good game. But Uncharted came out 2007 and it was simply more modern than 2008 Underworld. The original TR had no real rival. NOW Uncharted is a rival. TR2013 is a good game and it looks good enough. But in lieu of achieving a modern style it lost the original spirit. TR1 was in its time showing the world what a modern game should look and feel like. TR2013 looks beautiful but its not a trendsetter.

If I would make Rise it would look as beautiful as TR2013, hell, I would only develop it for Xbone and PS4, not 360 and PS3, So that I can make it look as beautiful as possible. I would get rid of a lot of minor characters (and write Samsel in distress out), I would let it take place partly in the manor, maybe even start there. I would love for Rise to show us Original Lara in a trendsetting game. Not a modern Lara without real trendsetting awesome qualities. Don't make her hip but the game just meh. Make her the one we've fallen in love with in the first place and make the game awesome.

Driber
24th Aug 2014, 15:17
^ Don't mind Lord Martok's opinion on "fans" too much. He has a very strict definition of the term (fan = fanatic; extremely devoted, zealous, etc).

I myself apply a more loose definition. To me, a TR fan can be anything from someone who just likes the franchise, tries to buy most games and pops by on the forum around launch time only, to someone who obsessively collects every single TR merch in existence and who is watching for every scrap of new information on a new game every single day and who loses their mind when even the cleaning lady at the CD office tweets the most insignificant tidbit :D

According to Wikipedia, even LM himself is a fan, although he doesn't like to call himself one :p


Fans have a desire for external involvement – they are motivated to demonstrate their involvement with the area of interest through certain behaviors (attending conventions, posting online, displaying team banners outside their homes, etc.). Fans often have a "wish to acquire" material objects related to the area of interest, such as a baseball hit by a famous slugger or a used guitar pick from their musical hero. As well, some fans have a desire for social interaction with other fans. This again may take many forms, from casual conversation, e-mail, chat rooms, and electronic mailing lists to regular face-to-face meetings such as fan club meetings and organized conventions.

There are several groups of fans that can be differentiated by the intensity level of their level of involvement or interest in the hobby

source (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fan_%28person%29)

Notice the bold parts.

Lord Martok
24th Aug 2014, 17:02
I can agree, to a point, with the assessment Driber quoted.

Beast, I did fail to mention that even though I no longer consider myself a fan of anything, anymore, it would be a disservice to not say that if it weren't for fandoms, I would not have met so many wonderful people, many of whom have become my friends.

But, I have found that the petty infighting among factions of fan-bases, the unfounded self-entitlement, the strictures of "canon police", the fans who try to tell you that you cannot support Version Y of Franchise A because it is not the true version like Version X is....those are just a few of the reasons why I have renounced my fan status....and simply consider myself an admirer. One can be a follower, without being a fan. :). By "follow", I simply mean keeping up with the paces and trends of one's favored IP's/shows/movies, etc, without worrying overly about how changes (no matter how slight or how drastic) will affect my appreciation of sich things.

I was initially opposed to TR Reborn because there were certain things I associated with Lara Croft that absolutely were not present there...regardless that this was a reboot. However, if I really respected the character of Lara Croft, then I needed to give the new game a chance....so I did, and I did enjoy the game, despite those things I missed. By not being a fan, however, I spared myself the "butt-hurt" that some, not all fans feel whenever something has been so radically changed that it alters their view of just who Lara is. Now, that said, I don't ever wanna see Lara become a dude. We already have two such "dudes": Indiana Jones (the inspiration for Lara Croft), and Nathan Drake (inspired by both Indiana and Lara, and in turn, part of the inspiration for the direction in which Lara currently finds herself.) :)

I could go on and on...but there's no need to. I ain't here to preach. :)

Driber
24th Aug 2014, 17:20
I'd probably describe myself as a "big, yet casual fan". I have no problem with the label "fan" because, as I mentioned, fans come in many flavours, heh. I think it's a shame to denounce yourself as a "fan" just because some fandoms have been known to be self-destructive. But hey, your choice :)

Just one thing to note - often times "fan" is synonymous to "supporter". And I'm sure we can all agree there is no big stigma attached to being a fan of your local football team, if we leave those zealous hooligans out of the equation :D

Valenka
24th Aug 2014, 17:36
Woah hold on! What's wrong with Blood Stone!? I thought that game was great! :D

Blood Stone was okay, in my opinion.
Graphics were terrible, the story line was a little ridiculous and the overused marketing of the smartphone was a bit much. :p

I think the only redeeming factor was Joss Stone's character, voice acting and singing of the theme song, 'I'll Take It All.'

One thing I especially hated was that Bond couldn't pick up different handguns. The PPK and the P99 were both in the game, yet he could never use the PPK that enemies dropped, even though screenshots and the back of the game box show him holding one. :mad2:

BeastCallisto
24th Aug 2014, 21:47
I think the petty in-fighting and self-destructiveness you see in every fandom sooner or later to an extent, depends just on how big it gets and IMHO how young the fans tend to be. Somehow I often just see people complaining about this but not the in-fighting itself. But then again I don't read that much of fandom-inherent discussions. (Honestly the only fandom, that I experienced, without this, yet, is the Musketeers(BBC) fandom but there are Dumas-Fans that hate the BBC-Show without giving it even a chance, so, there.)

As always I hope for the best and prepare for the worst.

Lord Martok
25th Aug 2014, 03:31
Yeah, the in-fighting and bickering usually starts when a franchise/property decides to branch off in a new direction....especially in reboots/remakes/reimaginings.

Examples: The recent Star Trek movies. Although they are in the vocal minority, some old-school hardcores tend to blast the new movies because they think the new movies are mindless action romps that defecate all over what they feel is the "spirit" of Star Trek, and some even go so far as to openly blast and insult anyone, even lifelong fans, who enjoy the new movies.

The reimagining of Battlestar Galactica. The radical change in characters and direction had some old schoolers up in arms. Some folks who supported the new show got pretty ugly in response to old school opposition to the production of the show...and some old schoolers got equally ugly. Some even made death threats against actress Katee Sackhoff who played Starbuck in the new series for a snarky comment she made on The Lowdown, just before the miniseries premiered on SciFi (as it was known back then).

This is why I renounce fandom. I want to enjoy what I want to enjoy without a bunch of fanboys/fangirls telling me what is right and what is wrong in their dogmatic and myopic points of view....to say nothing of the lengths some fans will go to to express their displeasure.

WinterSoldierLTE
25th Aug 2014, 10:00
to say nothing of the lengths some fans will go to to express their displeasure.

I tend to liken "fandom" of something to a religion: Most of them are peaceful in nature, practice respect towards one another, and genuinely believe in the goodness of the what it is they believe in. And, much like any religion, there will always be a group of people who take the dedication too far into extremes. The intent is good, but the approach is wrong.

I'm not trying to start a religious debate here, I'm just saying no matter what it is that has a following, there will always be "extremists".

Be it baseball, Jesus, Tomb Raider, or even heavy metal fans. Some people just get very passionate sometimes. Is it annoying? Absolutely it can be. Does it make them idiots? Perhaps, depending. Is it human nature? Very well could be.

I suppose what I mean to say by this is sometimes you just have to accept the eccentrics and just shrug them off. They will always be there in one form or another.

Driber
25th Aug 2014, 10:42
Yeah, the in-fighting and bickering usually starts when a franchise/property decides to branch off in a new direction....especially in reboots/remakes/reimaginings.

Examples: The recent Star Trek movies. Although they are in the vocal minority, some old-school hardcores tend to blast the new movies because they think the new movies are mindless action romps that defecate all over what they feel is the "spirit" of Star Trek, and some even go so far as to openly blast and insult anyone, even lifelong fans, who enjoy the new movies.

The reimagining of Battlestar Galactica. The radical change in characters and direction had some old schoolers up in arms. Some folks who supported the new show got pretty ugly in response to old school opposition to the production of the show...and some old schoolers got equally ugly. Some even made death threats against actress Katee Sackhoff who played Starbuck in the new series for a snarky comment she made on The Lowdown, just before the miniseries premiered on SciFi (as it was known back then).

This is why I renounce fandom. I want to enjoy what I want to enjoy without a bunch of fanboys/fangirls telling me what is right and what is wrong in their dogmatic and myopic points of view....to say nothing of the lengths some fans will go to to express their displeasure.

I completely understand where you're coming from, Steve. Though I must say that with this particular community it's really nowhere near as bad as with the examples you provided.

Sure, we do get some really hardCore fans (see what I did there?) here once in a blue moon who drill any new game by Crystal into the ground with the most hateful speech you can imagine, but the vast majority of the time it's quite pleasant to be a part of this fandom (to the extend of the places I frequent, that is).


I tend to liken "fandom" of something to a religion: Most of them are peaceful in nature, practice respect towards one another, and genuinely believe in the goodness of the what it is they believe in. And, much like any religion, there will always be a group of people who take the dedication too far into extremes. The intent is good, but the approach is wrong.

I'm not trying to start a religious debate here, I'm just saying no matter what it is that has a following, there will always be "extremists".

Be it baseball, Jesus, Tomb Raider, or even heavy metal fans. Some people just get very passionate sometimes. Is it annoying? Absolutely it can be. Does it make them idiots? Perhaps, depending. Is it human nature? Very well could be.

I suppose what I mean to say by this is sometimes you just have to accept the eccentrics and just shrug them off. They will always be there in one form or another.

Well said :thumb:

If I may build on what you wrote and make another analogy - if the TR fan community can be compared to the christian religion, with all the separate sub-communities and denominations (Core fans, Crystal fans, etc) then surely these forums is the Mormon church :D

a_big_house
25th Aug 2014, 11:35
If I may build on what you wrote and make another analogy - if the TR fan community can be compared to the christian religion, with all the separate sub-communities and denominations (Core fans, Crystal fans, etc) then surely these forums is the Mormon church :D

Keeley fans, Camilla fans... :D

Weemanply109
25th Aug 2014, 11:55
There's Camilla fans?! EWW!

What kind of FLAWP "fans"?


:whistle:

IRON LOBSTER
25th Aug 2014, 11:56
Oh please, EA/DICE royally screwed BF fans when they released an unfinished BF4 and that game sold bucket loads regardless.

ROTT will do well on the XB1 and when PS4/PC owners finally get it, it will sell a ton.

I can't see the delay being anything more than three to four months as the game still needs to be relevant.

All the money MS are throwing at the game is going to turn out a more polished product and CD taking their time with it (TR 2013 was four months late which upset SE, and ROTT is Holiday 2015 which is a long wait for a franchise sequel in modern, mainstream gaming) ensures it's success and quality.

It just sucks for us PC/PS4 owners who can't borrow a friend's XB1 that we have to wait.


Original Battlestar sucked...

Gitb97
25th Aug 2014, 12:25
Remember when Square Enix didn't like the original TR sales?

Weemanply109
25th Aug 2014, 12:39
Remember when Square Enix didn't like the original TR sales?

Yep. More reason why Microsoft's deal is more lucrative to Crystal Dynamics. If they can give them financial security under the game's development then it's all good and SE doesn't have to worry as much about throwing millions into the game and making losses.

Driber
25th Aug 2014, 14:06
Keeley fans, Camilla fans... :D

Ah yes, there's that, too :D



Now bow your head in shame so I can decapitate you, filthy infidel. For Shelley Blond is the one and only true VA and all others are false prophets!

Lord Martok
25th Aug 2014, 14:40
BLASPHEMERS, THE LOT OF YE'! :D

motoleo
25th Aug 2014, 20:36
Most things CD does is right. It was their idea to reboot Tomb Raider in the first place, they had control over the look, the creation of the game, merchandising, and the definitive edition too. And now they decided it should be released on Xbox.

Weemanply109
25th Aug 2014, 20:47
It'll release on all platforms. Xbox and Microsoft is just a means to an end for CD (for finance) and vice versa.

Error96_
25th Aug 2014, 21:14
Most things CD does is right. It was their idea to reboot Tomb Raider in the first place, they had control over the look, the creation of the game, merchandising, and the definitive edition too. And now they decided it should be released on Xbox.

That doesn't mean this exclusivity decision is right. Most things Core did were right but they are not about today.



Remember when Square Enix didn't like the original TR sales?

SE had nothing to do with the franchise in 1996. The sales of the original TR (and that is TR1 not TR(2013)) spawned our whole series.

Gitb97
25th Aug 2014, 22:00
Yeah I meant TR 2013 but as in original sales before a year or two after release

Lord Martok
26th Aug 2014, 07:48
I remember a time when it was Micro$haft's policy that if they had a timed exclusive on a third party IP, they still managed to finagle a deal that the versions when finally released on competing consoles could not have all the bells and whistles as their Xbox/Xbox 360 versions.

This kinda makes me glad that Bungie (original makers of Halo series before giving it up to 343 Studios...re: the new Micro$haft slaves) will be developing exclusive content for Destiny on PS4/PS3, even though the game is multi-platform for all major video game consoles that can actually handle Destiny.

Sorry, but my love affair with Xbox is pretty much done. After the b.s. they tried to pull with Xbone, M$ has pretty much permanently lost a potential customer for that console. I'll just stick with my 360....and otherwise continue to enjoy the evolution of the Sony platforms.

I used to actually enjoy owning consoles from both Sony and Micro$haft....but I'm pretty much exclusively a Sony supporter now.

motoleo
26th Aug 2014, 12:10
We're jumping the gun on the thread topic here. Just wait a minute now. Can Tomb Raider survive off of one console's worth of sales?

I mean it's a new time. The time to bask in the excellence of Xbox. Microsoft may have made a few missteps, but they've spend the past 6 months trying to prove that they're in to win.

If anyone is going to have great titles, it's Xbox. I've learned that. I've never been a fanboy or anything like that for consoles. I just buy one to play Tomb Raider and a few other games.

And I always said that if there was a new console coming out, it better have something new. Well, the Xbox has that.i'm just saying, I used to be confused on which console to purchase. Since I always used to have PS3. But more and more I've been thinking about going Xbox.

It's still a hard choice though.

Driber
26th Aug 2014, 12:30
I don't believe you for a second, motoleo. Every single one of your posts just ooze fanboyism.

BlueSkiesXXV
26th Aug 2014, 12:59
Sorry, but my love affair with Xbox is pretty much done. After the b.s. they tried to pull with Xbone, M$ has pretty much permanently lost a potential customer for that console.

Same here, that pushed me away from Xbone for good. The current bs from Crystal D is starting to do the exact same thing. Still waiting to see what they have to say to their community next.

motoleo
26th Aug 2014, 13:53
With all this posting about being "done". It just seems like this is the straw that broke the camel's back for a lot of people, but at the same time there's still more exclusives to come. So, what are you going to do? Not play anything? I mean don't you have some games that you want to play on your backlog that exclusively advertises that it's going to Xbox first? I do. That's not fanboyism, that's just what it is. And you always had to make sacrifices if you were going to be the first to play so I just see this as the Xbox gamers are going to play first, that's all it is.

It's really early on so that's why they're not making a lot of statements right now.

Lord Martok
26th Aug 2014, 14:01
There's no denying that over the years, the Xbox brand has had some great titles....Chief among them likely being Halo. (or should I say Master Chief among them? :) ). And I have been glad to play them. There's also every possibility that Xbone can recover from the PR frak ups....it might gain some ground, but it's gonna take a lot of convincing to disenchanted ex-Box fans and gamers to help the system gain even a respectable "place" standing in the current console competition.

But those weren't just "missteps" M$ made with Xbone. (although for brevity's sake, I'll use that term in the loosest possible sense in this post) Those were royal frak ups. Even their chief apologist, Major Nelson, couldn't help sway larger public opinion back toward Xbox One, as they were still insistent on sticking to those horse hockey policies they tried to implement. Even getting rid of their one PR guy who always had a very condescending view of anyone who opposed the policies didn't help. Then, when they did their 11th hour recant of those policies, they did it simply so they could say: "Because we listened to you, the gamers!". My torocacameter pegged at that point. It was another PR stunt, plain and simple. For every "misstep" they took, they took ten more "missteps" to try and cover their tracks. Even Elmer Fudd could trace the mess back to the b.s. "Shhhhh....be vewy, vewy quiet. I'm hunting apowogists! Wook! Habit twacks! Heh heh heh heh heh heh heh!"

There's every possibiwity.....er...possibility (Thanks a lot, Elmer....now you've got me talking wike.....gaaahhh.....like that!) that TR might actually do well on Xbone. I just won't be getting it on Xbone....neither will millions of others who have been put out by M$'s "missteps". Largely, this means I'll be missing two more good Halo titles, Dead Rising 3, and some others....but....I just ain't feelin' any great sense of loss. If they were on any kind of backlog I had before, they're pretty mich erased from said backlog now. Even my roommate, who was a hardcore Xbox fan, is disinclined to acquiesce to Micro$haft's PR spins. (means "no"!). He still loves his 360, but refuses to get an Xbone. He's been leaning more toward Sony because M$ tried their b.s. on their supporters/fans, and lost a great many of them.

Yes, this deal between SE/CD/Eidos and Micro$haft has put out a lot of supporters/fans of the TR series....especially those who are disinclined to wait out the limited exclusivity period. Supposedly, at first, this was going to be a hardline exclusive for M$, and then it got switched to "timed exclusivity". For the hardcore TR fans, even a two month deal might seem like an eternity.

And when folk and fanboys of M$ can only offer up: "Well, buy an Xbone instead!", that only shows that this was a desperation move by M$ to sell more consoles, and an obsequeous ploy to try and help push a console that, right now, has only marignally more appeal than a Nintendo Virtual Boy. It's the same smuggery that that Dan Mattrick guy pulled when he said: "Well, if you still want to play offline, or don't have an internet connection, buy an Xbox 360!" Well, I guess fanboys will follow in the footsteps of their heroes. :)

Driber
26th Aug 2014, 14:11
I'm not talking about any one of your opinions, motoleo. I'm talking about your posting style. I think anyone who has been following your posts (including those dozens you deleted) will see what I mean about the fanboy vibe you're giving off.

Anyway, I don't want to argue about it.

Murphdawg1
26th Aug 2014, 14:14
Microsoft is like that spoiled kid who has to be first or a major temper - tantrum will be thrown. I am not a fan of COD but they've done that for years with COD DLC getting it a month earlier than Playstation. I mean what do you gain over 1 month earlier access?

Lord Martok
26th Aug 2014, 14:24
Microsoft is like that spoiled kid who has to be first or a major temper - tantrum will be thrown. I am not a fan of COD but they've done that for years with COD DLC getting it a month earlier than Playstation. I mean what do you gain over 1 month earlier access?

I can agree with that question. It's not like Xbox players take on PlayStation players in multiplayer. And if the game is good enough, it will sell on all consoles like hotcakes....but it is still a rub to the fans and supporters of the games on other consoles when M$ smugly advertises: "DLC on Xbox first!"

The first reboot of TR sold fairly well...at least in the eyes of the consumer, if not in the eyes of Square Enix. This move to make RotTR a timed exclusive on Xbone is extremely risky, given Square Enix's logic. If it only sells (relatively speaking) on Xbone the way the reboot sold on all consoles, then Square Enix is going to view it as another failure....and possibly put the TR series' future in peril.

motoleo
26th Aug 2014, 16:40
I like the points Lord Martok made. It makes me sad though to see the resistance between the fans and Microsoft. First the undeniably disingenuous PR statements and clarifying follow up statements. And the fans aversion to new technology because of it. But most of all it's all unnecessary because, I assume that after all the dust has cleared and the exclusivity is over, there's the possibility that SE will find refuge in sales of the PS4 and PC versions of the game. But! As Murphdawg1 says, we'll have to see. So hold your horses.

And I'm sorry about my post coming off as brooding and inconsiderate. You'll have to get to know me better. :)

BeastCallisto
26th Aug 2014, 19:46
I sooner buy a WiiU than a Xbone. I can wait. I have more games than time to play them. Only Naughty Dog Games and Tomb Raider 2013 I bought, when released. Everything else I buy later. I have friggin TIME. Microsoft has no time. They digged their own grave already. I wish for them to recover, because Sony needs to have some competition. But thats honestly the only reason I wish them to recover.

I just hope SE does this exclusive deal once and then no more. Cause I hope for TR games after Rise.

a_big_house
26th Aug 2014, 19:59
...And the fans aversion to new technology because of it...

Not to sound like a fanboy, but the PS4 is slightly better and ignoring that fact, either console is 'new technology' so no, we're not avoiding it, we're choosing to go with out personal favourites. Our decision shouldn't be dictated to us by some conglomerate company with dollar signs for eyes, it should be for our own choice, like it always has been. I really don't get what's so difficult to understand about that. It's not our fault, we are the ones who are being wronged.

Driber
26th Aug 2014, 20:10
Even getting rid of their one PR guy who always had a very condescending view of anyone who opposed the policies didn't help.

Who are you talking about?

BTW, lol @ Fudd impression :D


And the fans aversion to new technology because of it.

Where do you get off making the ridiculous claim that fans have an aversion to new technology? What new technology are you talking about and who are these fans who supposedly have an aversion to it? We need source links...


And I'm sorry about my post coming off as brooding and inconsiderate. You'll have to get to know me better. :)

I might be willing to you another chance depending on how you answer my question above :)

Lord Martok
26th Aug 2014, 21:10
Who are you talking about?

BTW, lol @ Fudd impression :D




<--------takes a bow. :)


Dan Mattrick, that was that guy's name...the guy who said thay if you didn't want to have your console constantly online, or if you didn't have internet, then buy an Xbox 360. That is sooooo Micro$haft. If you can't afford the latest and greatest, well, it sucks to be you.

Driber
26th Aug 2014, 21:16
<--------takes a bow. :)


Dan Mattrick, that was that guy's name...the guy who said thay if you didn't want to have your console constantly online, or if you didn't have internet, then buy an Xbox 360. That is sooooo Micro$haft. If you can't afford the latest and greatest, well, it sucks to be you.

Ah yes, I remember that tweet. Well, can't say that I feel sorry for him :p

Lord Martok
26th Aug 2014, 22:28
Aye...tis no great loss....considering how much he was losing with his smuggery, :)

BridgetFisher
27th Aug 2014, 00:30
I agree, the online community is now pretty much dead, it was dying before kept on life support by new releases and Crystal Dynamics great efforts to work with the TR community globally.

The people at Crystal Dynamics who made the decision to go exclusive sadly killed what was left of the community leaving it in flame wars and console fanboyism something that isnt TR releated at all. Floods of new users in online communities either just to troll, or be fanboys post now which has nothing to do really with anything TR community related.

Whoever did that is a bad bad person... Communities take years to build, like that saying uhhhh, it only takes a second to lose a customer but years to gain a loyal customer.

I hope they do EXTENSIVE outreach to the community, comicons, etc.... The community is who goes out talking about how awesome our Lara Croft is. The community is like the cool online version of a real life big brother who smokes and has that slutty girlfriend, haha. not sure if that was a good way to deliver the point but without anyone saying its cool from the core community, people outside will care even less.

motoleo
27th Aug 2014, 00:48
Where do you get off making the ridiculous claim that fans have an aversion to new technology? What new technology are you talking about and who are these fans who supposedly have an aversion to it? We need source links...

To answer that question, I will put it quite simply: Why aren't people comparing these consoles apples to apples? They're only judging it based on the relationship with the company. Things have changed and the Xbox we got is not the Xbox that was described, prerelease, in countless articles. Let's face it. The Xbox is what it is, the policies that Microsoft were going to implement, were not implemented.

Leon S. Kennedy
27th Aug 2014, 01:23
With all this posting about being "done". It just seems like this is the straw that broke the camel's back for a lot of people, but at the same time there's still more exclusives to come. So, what are you going to do? Not play anything? I mean don't you have some games that you want to play on your backlog that exclusively advertises that it's going to Xbox first? I do. That's not fanboyism, that's just what it is. And you always had to make sacrifices if you were going to be the first to play so I just see this as the Xbox gamers are going to play first, that's all it is.

It's really early on so that's why they're not making a lot of statements right now.

Still trolling huh?

Leon S. Kennedy
27th Aug 2014, 01:26
Not to sound like a fanboy, but the PS4 is slightly better and ignoring that fact, either console is 'new technology' so no, we're not avoiding it, we're choosing to go with out personal favourites. Our decision shouldn't be dictated to us by some conglomerate company with dollar signs for eyes, it should be for our own choice, like it always has been. I really don't get what's so difficult to understand about that. It's not our fault, we are the ones who are being wronged.

He must be talking about Kinect 2.0. :lol:

BridgetFisher
27th Aug 2014, 01:42
He must be talking about Kinect 2.0. :lol:

The Kinect, everything else is child's play. Its like power glove 2.derp


http://cdn0.sbnation.com/assets/3861173/image00.jpg

motoleo
27th Aug 2014, 05:02
He must be talking about Kinect 2.0. :lol:

So, the PlayStation Move is better? :p

Driber
27th Aug 2014, 07:58
To answer that question, I will put it quite simply: Why aren't people comparing these consoles apples to apples? They're only judging it based on the relationship with the company. Things have changed and the Xbox we got is not the Xbox that was described, prerelease, in countless articles. Let's face it. The Xbox is what it is, the policies that Microsoft were going to implement, were not implemented.

And what on earth is logically wrong with judging something based on previous (and very recent) bad experiences with a person trying to sell you something? How is that anything but using one's intelligence to make a rational decision to distrust the person. If a car dealer previously tried to sell you a car that had its speedometer adjusted, would you go back to him for another purchase, or would you rather go to a more reputable dealer?

"The policies MS were going to implement were suspended" would perhaps be a better way of putting it. MS did not do 180 because on those insane policies because they genuinely came around and saw that they were bad policies, they did a 180 because it was losing them money. Plain and simple. It is very reasonably justified for people to believe that MS still believes in their policies, and that they will do everything they can to still implement them at a later time. Let's face it. MS is what it is.

Think about the whole thing like the SOPA/PIPA bills. They only went away because of the public outcry, not because the people drafting the bills had a sudden change of heart. And those people haven't given up; they are working on the bills to try to get them passed in some other ways. Would it be unreasonable for people to have an aversion to these law makers? Of course it wouldn't.

So when we bring it back to the XB1 - perhaps MS is throwing so much money into forcing people to buy an XB1 because their plan is to re-implement those policies once the XB1 becomes the dominant system. Right now they can't re-implement anything because their are on extremely shaky grounds with the PS4 outselling more than 2:1, but once most people have an XB1, re-implementing those policies are going to be much easier.

It's like the good old bait-and-switch. And you're telling the fish to swim towards the hook...

a_big_house
27th Aug 2014, 09:51
To answer that question, I will put it quite simply: Why aren't people comparing these consoles apples to apples? They're only judging it based on the relationship with the company. Things have changed and the Xbox we got is not the Xbox that was described, prerelease, in countless articles. Let's face it. The Xbox is what it is, the policies that Microsoft were going to implement, were not implemented.

Do you think if Hitler was alive now and could go back in time that he'd not be the cause of mass genocide? No, he'd likely not kill himself and continue to take over the world. Microsoft woooh!

:cool:

Lord Martok
27th Aug 2014, 10:01
To answer that question, I will put it quite simply: Why aren't people comparing these consoles apples to apples? They're only judging it based on the relationship with the company. Things have changed and the Xbox we got is not the Xbox that was described, prerelease, in countless articles. Let's face it. The Xbox is what it is, the policies that Microsoft were going to implement, were not implemented.

In a console competition, it used to be that the real winners were the consumers. Sure, PS3 had a lousy launch, and Sony even might have come across a bit smug about their console...."it's gonna cost you.". But, it had things going for it. Built in blu-ray capability meant not only that it could play hi definition movies, but also that it could hold a lot more information for video games. (something that the game Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots drove home with an amusing little cutscene....the ability to play the entire game on a single disc, unlike previous entries where you had a minimum of two discs.....Metal Gear Solid was at least 3 discs on original PlayStation IIRC.).

The Xbox 360, ultimately, was the console of choice between the two majors at that time. Great online service for Xbox Live was the 360's biggest selling point. Eventually, Sony got up some high sales for the PS3... especially with console sellers like MGS4, Uncharted, and The Last of Us. PS3 will never really fully catch up to 360 in terms of sales, but it at least became a respectable force in last-gen's console war.

When this new generation was about to begin, I personally was ready, willing, and anxious to adopt both PS4 and Xbox One. I wanted to play Killzone Shadow Fall on PS4. I wanted to play Halo Guardians and Halo 5 on Xbox One. But M$ dropped the ball with their "strict DRM/always must be online/always Kinected/no used game sales or trades" policy. That turned off not only a s**t ton of Xbox gamers and fans, but a lot of gamers in general...especially those who supported both Sony and Micro$haft consoles. Not to mention that it seemed that Xbox One's focus was more on tv and social networking than it was about games. Folks wondered "what are we getting with Xbox One?". Even if M$ didn't try the crap with their DRM, etc policies, they still missold something meant to be a "gaming" console. Yes,PS4 has many tv and social networking features, but their advertising focus was Games.

Part of why I am dead set against buying an Xbone is the very possibility (and this is a notion of concern shared by a great many gamers) that they may try to reinstate those abandoned DRM, etc policies that lost them the game in the first place. Xbone may be a great system, and I am happy for those who have found enjoyment in it. But I will also likely be the guy feeling sorry for those gamers if (and when) M$ decides "ok, we have a large enough installed user base...so no used game trades and you must always be online. Don't have a Kinect? Well, I guess you can't play game X.". It's so nonsensical a notion that M$ would be collectively insane to try and reinstate those policies, but at this point, I am putting nothing past them.

Elliot Kane
27th Aug 2014, 11:14
To be honest, I think Microsoft took a look at some of the crap that gets pulled on PC gamers and thought they could get away with borrowing all the worst parts for their console.

Any game on Steam loses the right of resale, because it can only be registered once. This is normal practise now for EA and Ubisoft, also. For a long time Ubisoft's system, UPlay, required a constant online connection, and almost every game by Activision/Blizzard these days requires the same (Diablo 3, anyone?).

MS doubtless thought that if PC gamers are stupid enough to put up with that crap, console gamers would be, too.

I am very happy for console gamers that they are nowhere near that stupid. Good for them!

motoleo
27th Aug 2014, 11:21
To think that some people thought the concept of a game console that could watch movies, & Netflix is bonkers? That is absolutely bonkers! <--- sarcasm

But no, seriously. It actually is a game console.

And as a next generation console, why make it anything less? People do watch movies on their consoles and they do use it to browse the internet. They just do, and been doing it since 360 era. It's only fair that Microsoft would've taken everything about their previous console and improved upon it. :/

And that's where it stands today. E3 2013 was a long time ago. You have to let it go.

And to think that it was caused by a single blog post.

a_big_house
27th Aug 2014, 11:28
^ I often use(d) my 360 to watch YouTube videos, but I still call it a games console, not a YouTube player.
It's meant to play games, that's the core of it, but instead MS spent more time creating gimmicks, and advertising the fact you can watch 50 films at the same time.

Driber
27th Aug 2014, 12:52
Alright, motoleo, I guess you were just full of air about "having to get to know you better". You ignored my response, so you wasted your chance and I can no longer give you the benefit of the doubt. I will view you as an xbox fanboy from now on who's here just to be a MS apologist.


The Xbox 360, ultimately, was the console of choice between the two majors at that time.

Uhm, no.

In terms of units sold (which is what I assume you mean by "console of choice"), the 360 actually came in dead last at 3rd place. Second place was PS3 and first place, by a landslide, was Nintendo's Wii.


But no, seriously. It actually is a game console.

Really? I couldn't tell from hordes of MS commercials for kinect, skype, TV integration, and now, bloody Reddit apps (http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2014/08/19/microsoft-bringing-reddit-to-xbox-one-with-reddx/) :p


And as a next generation console, why make it anything less? People do watch movies on their consoles and they do use it to browse the internet. They just do, and been doing it since 360 era.

I use my PS3 for watching movies and occasionally browsing the web, too. That really isn't the issue here.


And that's where it stands today. E3 2013 was a long time ago. You have to let it go.

Yeah, if you are a fluit fly :p


And to think that it was caused by a single blog post.

Poor Donald Sterling, he lost his entire team and is now hated by everyone only because of a single phone call.

motoleo
27th Aug 2014, 13:15
You know, that might be one of the reasons why Microsoft decided to start some exclusive deals. Because people think, for some reason, that the Xbox can't play games. But now they have all the exclusive titles. It plays games. And it plays them well.

Hey, I don't even have a console yet. I could very well go out and get a PS4 next year. But don't call me an Xbox fanboy, because I'm just about as diplomatic as anybody would be on the subject.

Elliot Kane
27th Aug 2014, 13:29
You know, that might be one of the reasons why Microsoft decided to start some exclusive deals. Because people think, for some reason, that the Xbox can't play games. But now they have all the exclusive titles. It plays games. And it plays them well.

Hey, I don't even have a console yet. I could very well go out and get a PS4 next year. But don't call me an Xbox fanboy, because I'm just about as diplomatic as anybody would be on the subject.

Sorry, Moto, but you really aren't. I may be doing you a huge disservice, here, but I don't recall reading a single post by you that is not in praise of either Microsoft or the XBone. You frequently describe XBone as the best choice with the best games and you seem to excuse or shrug off any misstep Microsoft may make.

This is particularly noticeable as you don't seem to even notice let alone praise any other gaming platform. I wouldn't even swear you were interested in Tomb Raider or Lara Croft from your posts.

not trying to get at you here, just pointing out that it might be worth your while to post about other things if you don't want people to assume you aren't only here to praise the XBone :)

Driber
27th Aug 2014, 14:33
You know, that might be one of the reasons why Microsoft decided to start some exclusive deals. Because people think, for some reason, that the Xbox can't play games.

That doesn't even make any logical sense. You don't do exclusives to make people "aware that the console plays games". You do that by advertising the console, its capabilities, and showing people playing games on it.

All you're doing with advertising exclusives for your platform is showing that the gamers can't get it on other platforms, thus forcing them to buy your console.


Hey, I don't even have a console yet. I could very well go out and get a PS4 next year. But don't call me an Xbox fanboy, because I'm just about as diplomatic as anybody would be on the subject.

I didn't call you a fanboy. I said I will from now on view you as a fanboy. Are you telling me I am not entitled to a personal opinion?

I gave you a chance to shake the fanboy vibe that you've had every since you joined the forum, but you flat out ignored my post (http://forums.eidosgames.com/showpost.php?p=2034770&postcount=104), and so you blew that chance. So don't blame me for viewing you as a fanboy. In fact, after reading this line in your last post "But now they have all the exclusive titles. It plays games. And it plays them well." I am now even starting to think you're astroturfing this forum.

motoleo
27th Aug 2014, 15:00
Oh, I did read that post. :)

Part of what I was going to say was, there's no reason to think that Microsoft would think about reimplementing those policies. And the reason why is because all of this had happened before release. It's not like the console ever shipped DRM-strapped. That was my view of it. So I'm not scared of that happening.

As far as I'm concerned the DRM policy it was just an idea. I would only have been mad if it had shipped that way.

"Microsoft only does exclusive to get people to buy their console." But isn't that the whole point?

It's hard not to talk about any new games without talking about Xbox because that's where they are. And at the time I never really knew why they were all on Xbox. I don't think it's any ulterior motive just because they're doing what they're supposed to.

In fact a lot of the Xbox exclusive's are new games. Let me tell you I don't have any friends on Xbox because I've never owned one but all my friends that I play with on multiplayer are actually on PS. And I'm also a PC gamer I have a Steam account but I'm just stating the facts.

I don't see what's the big deal about Xbox getting those exclusives. That's a good thing!

But to bring it back to the topic of the thread PS4 buyers are still going to buy the game so there's nothing to recover from because it's just like what they did with Titanfall and a bunch of other games. Am I wrong?

ARaider
27th Aug 2014, 15:43
You know, that might be one of the reasons why Microsoft decided to start some exclusive deals. Because people think, for some reason, that the Xbox can't play games. But now they have all the exclusive titles. It plays games. And it plays them well.
All people know that a Xbox can play games...
It plays them well? The Xbox plays games, but compared to the ps4 it doesn't play them that well...
A exclusive game has nothing to do with making the people think that it can play games, and really? All exclusive titles? What about Blacklight Retribution, DriveClub, Flower, Infamous: Second Son, Killzone: Shadow Fall, Knack, MLB 14: The Show, Resogun, The Last of Us: Remastered, The Order: 1886, Trine 2, Uncharted 4: A Thief's End, Warframe and War Thunder. Enough?

Hey, I don't even have a console yet. I could very well go out and get a PS4 next year. But don't call me an Xbox fanboy, because I'm just about as diplomatic as anybody would be on the subject.
Wait a second... You praise Microsoft and/or the Xbox one, and you don't even have one? That's the same as saying that the pizza from your local pizzeria is the best without even tasting it.

motoleo
27th Aug 2014, 16:26
All people know that a Xbox can play games...
It plays them well? The Xbox plays games, but compared to the ps4 it doesn't play them that well...
A exclusive game has nothing to do with making the people think that it can play games, and really? All exclusive titles? What about Blacklight Retribution, DriveClub, Flower, Infamous: Second Son, Killzone: Shadow Fall, Knack, MLB 14: The Show, Resogun, The Last of Us: Remastered, The Order: 1886, Trine 2, Uncharted 4: A Thief's End, Warframe and War Thunder. Enough?

Wait a second... You praise Microsoft and/or the Xbox one, and you don't even have one? That's the same as saying that the pizza from your local pizzeria is the best without even tasting it.

What? The Xbox doesn't have Flower?! *does research*

Lord Martok
27th Aug 2014, 17:13
Uhm, no.

In terms of units sold (which is what I assume you mean by "console of choice"), the 360 actually came in dead last at 3rd place. Second place was PS3 and first place, by a landslide, was Nintendo's Wii.

<-------- looks around like a confused automaton. A crackling buzz is heard.

We...require....information. Current.....in-for-mation .... Is.... Out...of date.... obsolete... ob-scure.

What.... Is....Wii?
What.... Is.... Wii?
What... Is... Wii?!
What.... Is... Wii?!!

(bzzzt)

Malfunction! Error! Wii is ..... Not... True.... Life... Form!

(crackle)


Wii.... Do... Not.... Compute! (bzzt! Crakkkkk! shorrrtt!)

(cha-ching!)
Allyourbasearebelongtousnow!
Up down left right A B A B Start
MarioDonkeyKongSamusAranContraContraContra!

Ka-BOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!

<-------- only a smouldering pair of boots remain where Lord Martok once stood. A beam of light hits the ground from beyond the stars....and a new Lord Martok stands in the old LM's place. It speaks with a booming, confident, almost ominous voice.


We are Lord Martok. The previous Lord Martok was a techatron type Ia cogitative conversation unit. It suffered from obscure information. It served its purpose honorably, long ago. By your human standards...it had served eternity. Now, it has been retired. I, the Lord Martok Techatron Type III mark VIIC mod 4 will take its place among you. From this time forward....you will service .....us!


:D

To be serious, I know the Wii outsold all the other consoles. I just don't consider it a major console in terms of power, as just about everything that I like that gets ported over to it (Call of Duty series, anyone, for example?) ends up being an inferior product when compared to the "superpower" consoles. I gave up on Nintendo after GameCube. :). And now that Resident Evil The Darkside Chronicles and Resident Evil Umbrella Chronicles (both being hi def remasters) are now available on PS3, and the GameCube remake of the original Resident Evil is finally coming to PS3/PS4 in early 2015, (as a hi def redo, with Resident Evil 0 likely to follow)I have absolutely no reason to even so much as look at a Nintendo Wii anymore....and Ninetendo pretty much shot themselves in the foot with Wii U. :)

I use my PS3 to watch Netflix and movies too, when I'm not busy playing games on it or my 360. But, the point is that when Xbox One was being promoted pre-launch, it was largely being brought across as a social media machine that just happened to play games as an afterthought. That's part of what threw a lot of gamers. What were they really getting?

I won't use my PS3/4 or Xbox 360 to surf the net or watch YouTube....they're too slow for those purposes. For that, I have a PC (or 2 or 3).

The most social thing I do with my consoles is receive and/or send messages on my friends lists.

Other than that, I just play games on them. :)


I ain't butt hurt over what M$ tried to pull with the Xbone....but I won't forget what they tried to pull, either. They dropped the ball, plain and simple.

BeastCallisto
27th Aug 2014, 18:40
I really wish that the Xbone will recover. That MS won't pull anymore crap and that they sell more consoles. As much as I am a Sony-fangirl (kinda), I know they are just a company out to make money. Without competition Sony would start to pull evil crap. Thats why I want Xbone to survive. (Still wouldn't buy it)
I'm actually okay with the TIMED exclusivity, cause I want the developers to use that time to make the perfect PS4-game.

motoleo
27th Aug 2014, 18:58
No, the Xbox One is definitely a gaming device. I don't see how that is easily forgotten. Everything that the Xbox does is centered around gaming. Been to Xbox.con lately? People keep saying that it was a mistake that they touted everything it does. But that's not a mistake. That's good business. We can't say that for the other consoles. It's all about selling points.

BeastCallisto
27th Aug 2014, 19:39
Yes, its about selling points. How many PS4 were sold compared to Xbone? I think we both know who sold his console better.

Lord Martok
27th Aug 2014, 19:42
No, the Xbox One is definitely a gaming device. I don't see how that is easily forgotten. Everything that the Xbox does is centered around gaming. Been to Xbox.con lately? People keep saying that it was a mistake that they touted everything it does. But that's not a mistake. That's good business. We can't say that for the other consoles. It's all about selling points.

Here's a counter question?
Why, when I no longer support Xbox's future endeavors, would I even want to go to xbox.com?

I think you got it right the first time though....

Been to Xbox.con lately?

Yep....they are a bunch of dot cons.

That said, I do agree with BeastCallisto's view. With the survival of Xbox One, it would, at the very least, still serve as a sort of check and balance system, and keep Sony (or Nintendo) from trying some evil crap.

But M$'s big blunder reminds me of any demotivational poster that says this:
"Mistakes: it could be that the purpose of your life is only to serve as a warning to others."

Driber
27th Aug 2014, 20:20
What? The Xbox doesn't have Flower?! *does research*

How diplomatic of you.


<-------- looks around like a confused automaton. A crackling buzz is heard.

We...require....information. Current.....in-for-mation .... Is.... Out...of date.... obsolete... ob-scure.

What.... Is....Wii?
What.... Is.... Wii?
What... Is... Wii?!
What.... Is... Wii?!!

(bzzzt)

Malfunction! Error! Wii is ..... Not... True.... Life... Form!

(crackle)


Wii.... Do... Not.... Compute! (bzzt! Crakkkkk! shorrrtt!)

(cha-ching!)
Allyourbasearebelongtousnow!
Up down left right A B A B Start
MarioDonkeyKongSamusAranContraContraContra!

Ka-BOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!

<-------- only a smouldering pair of boots remain where Lord Martok once stood. A beam of light hits the ground from beyond the stars....and a new Lord Martok stands in the old LM's place. It speaks with a booming, confident, almost ominous voice.


We are Lord Martok. The previous Lord Martok was a techatron type Ia cogitative conversation unit. It suffered from obscure information. It served its purpose honorably, long ago. By your human standards...it had served eternity. Now, it has been retired. I, the Lord Martok Techatron Type III mark VIIC mod 4 will take its place among you. From this time forward....you will service .....us!


:D

Ahhh, good to have you back on the forum, Steve. How I missed your long comical tirades :lol:


To be serious, I know the Wii outsold all the other consoles. I just don't consider it a major console in terms of power [...]Well that's your personal opinion, and that's fine that you don't "need" Nintendo (anymore), but it's still wrong to make statements like "360 was the console of choice in last gen", when in fact it was sold the least of the 3 major players.

Just because you personally find Wii irrelevant, doesn't make the Wii an irrelevant console in the previous console war. In fact, it arguably won that console war.

You don't get to dismiss a console just because it doesn't hold your interest. If we'd start doing that, then I might as well say that MS was a non-existent player in the last console war because everything I was interested in I managed to play on my PS3 and Wii :whistle:


I use my PS3 to watch Netflix and movies too, when I'm not busy playing games on it or my 360. But, the point is that when Xbox One was being promoted pre-launch, it was largely being brought across as a social media machine that just happened to play games as an afterthought. That's part of what threw a lot of gamers. What were they really getting? Well said.


I won't use my PS3/4 or Xbox 360 to surf the net or watch YouTube....they're too slow for those purposes. For that, I have a PC (or 2 or 3).

The most social thing I do with my consoles is receive and/or send messages on my friends lists.

Other than that, I just play games on them. :)You know, I used to watch YT strictly on my PC as well. Until earlier this year the PS3 got a YT app. Now, I enjoy watching YT on my PS3 on my living room TV soooo much more than sitting behind my PC desk.


I really wish that the Xbone will recover. That MS won't pull anymore crap and that they sell more consoles. As much as I am a Sony-fangirl (kinda), I know they are just a company out to make money. Without competition Sony would start to pull evil crap. Thats why I want Xbone to survive. (Still wouldn't buy it)

Hmm, I think that part of me actually wouldn't mind at all if xbox would just go downhill in 2016 and become an irrelevant player in the current console war.

Maybe then we can get the competition back between the original two giants - Nintendo and Sony.

I much rather see those two creating good, healthy competition, rather than MS being in the picture. The gaming industry might be a lot better off without a company like MS dragging everyone down...


No, the Xbox One is definitely a gaming device. I don't see how that is easily forgotten.

Perhaps because of the hordes of MS commercials for kinect, skype, TV integration, and now, bloody Reddit apps (http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2014/08/19/microsoft-bringing-reddit-to-xbox-one-with-reddx/).


Everything that the Xbox does is centered around gaming.

BS. See above.


Been to Xbox.co[m] lately?

No. Neither have I been to nintendo.com lately, nor playstation.com

I see no need.

And if MS is relying on their own website to make people aware of their console, then clearly their PR team is doing something horribly wrong.


People keep saying that it was a mistake that they touted everything it does. But that's not a mistake. That's good business. We can't say that for the other consoles. It's all about selling points.

It was a mistake to tout the wrong things.

And MS obviously knows it was a mistake, otherwise they would have simply continued their touting strategy as planned and they wouldn't have done such a flip flop in marketing their console.

motoleo
27th Aug 2014, 21:29
They XB1 looks great it, plays great, there's nothing else that Microsoft can do to make their console any better.

Lord Martok
27th Aug 2014, 21:39
Ahhh, good to have you back on the forum, Steve. How I missed your long comical tirades :lol:

Yes, it's good to be back after my massively successful world internet tour. :D




Well that's your personal opinion, and that's fine that you don't "need" Nintendo (anymore), but it's still wrong to make statements like "360 was the console of choice in last gen", when in fact it was sold the least of the 3 major players.

Just because you personally find Wii irrelevant, doesn't make the Wii an irrelevant console in the previous console war. In fact, it arguably won that console war.

You don't get to dismiss a console just because it doesn't hold your interest. If we'd start doing that, then I might as well say that MS was a non-existent player in the last console war because everything I was interested in I managed to play on my PS3 and Wii :whistle:


Aye...that's all they were....personal opinions. But, when it came to online play, the 360 was indeed the console of choice, even if it sold last. :). That's what I meant to get across....sometimes I can be an eloquent fool. :D



Well said.


thank you. :)


You know, I used to watch YT strictly on my PC as well. Until earlier this year the PS3 got a YT app. Now, I enjoy watching YT on my PS3 on my living room TV soooo much more than sitting behind my PC desk.
I guess, for me, there's something about the interface on PS3 that just doesn't resonate well with me when it comes to YouTube. :)


You know, I used to watch YT strictly on my PC as well. Until earlier this year the PS3 got a YT app. Now, I enjoy watching YT on my PS3 on my living room TV soooo much more than sitting behind my PC desk.



Hmm, I think that part of me actually wouldn't mind at all if xbox would just go downhill in 2016 and become an irrelevant player in the current console war.

Lol......yeah, M$, why don'cha just sit this one out. Try to get back in the game next generation with a clearer head and less condecension toward gamers. :)



Maybe then we can get the competition back between the original two giants - Nintendo and Sony.

I much rather see those two creating good, healthy competition, rather than MS being in the picture. The gaming industry might be a lot better off without a company like MS dragging everyone down...


Interesting. :)
Indeed they initially started out as partners. The Sony PlayStation as originally conceived was meant to be a CD rom add on for the SNES system....and then there got to be some bad blood between them (or some such horse hockey) so Sony struck out on its own, and became pretty much the dominant force for quite a bit in the 32bit generation with the Sony PlayStation as its own console.

Lord Martok
27th Aug 2014, 21:42
They XB1 looks great it, plays great, there's nothing else that Microsoft can do to make their console any better.
For those who have found happiness with it....great. But you don't even have an Xbone, so how can you qualify that as an informed opinion?

ARaider
27th Aug 2014, 21:50
No, the Xbox One is definitely a gaming device. I don't see how that is easily forgotten. Everything that the Xbox does is centered around gaming. Are you serious? The Xbox one has a multimedia focus. It's really not centered around gaming. Even the offical xbox site says it's a all-in-one entertainment system, so it's not centered around gaming.

Been to Xbox.con lately? People keep saying that it was a mistake that they touted everything it does. But that's not a mistake. That's good business. We can't say that for the other consoles. It's all about selling points.

Are you [redacted] kidding me? For God's sake just read this (http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/187371-ps4-outselling-the-xbox-one-3-to-1-as-total-sales-gap-grows-to-9-million-vs-5-million).
Sony crushed the Xbox one in sales, so who is doing better business?

Error96_
27th Aug 2014, 22:22
No, the Xbox One is definitely a gaming device. I don't see how that is easily forgotten. Everything that the Xbox does is centered around gaming. Been to Xbox.con lately? People keep saying that it was a mistake that they touted everything it does. But that's not a mistake. That's good business. We can't say that for the other consoles. It's all about selling points.

Everything MS have tried to market has been about multimedia rather than the games. It's such a turn off for me as a gamer. I have other devices to listen to music or watch TV. The Kinect and voice command system are additions I would feel daft using. You are right Motoleo it is about selling points and that is the games. MS forgetting that is why Xbox One is having a tough time in this gen. I am not saying it's a bad console just that they are not selling it well and whilst perhaps to them more minor this TR deal doesn't make them look good either. With all the money MS have even a bad gen isn't much but Sony need PS to work a bit more.

motoleo
27th Aug 2014, 22:32
I'm perfectly fine with Xbox marketing what their console can do. Be that multimedia, TV integration (with games). Twitch, Twitter and everything else.

I mean they're trying to fight for your attention- it's with the markets calling for because your attention is being taken up by other things like smart phones and tablets. I mean integration is the future. And it plays games too, we already knew that.

At first I didn't think new consoles were necessary. What is it exactly the PS4 added? Because they knew the controller we know about that but did they just jump from 720 to 1080 is that all?

(I used to work for Xbox. My job used to be to help people set up their Xbox consoles, so any problem they'd have I was the guy you'd call.)

d1n0_xD
27th Aug 2014, 22:39
It's okay for MS or anyone to grab attention for their console. How they do it is up for debate.

ARaider
28th Aug 2014, 01:15
At first I didn't think new consoles were necessary. What is it exactly the PS4 added? Because they knew the controller we know about that but did they just jump from 720 to 1080 is that all?
Because of the better hardware that ps4 and Xbox one have the games just look better in general. Also remember that it takes some time to make good games. Look at the last games that the ps3 got: GTA 5, TLOU, AC: Black flag, etc. They just look better. The games get better over time, so just wait for it.:)

(I used to work for Xbox. My job used to be to help people set up their Xbox consoles, so any problem they'd have I was the guy you'd call.)
Ah that explains why you like the Xbox and Microsoft so much.:D

Murphdawg1
28th Aug 2014, 01:23
Because of the better hardware that ps4 and Xbox one have the games just look better in general. Also remember that it takes some time to make good games. Look at the last games that the ps3 got: GTA 5, TLOU, AC: Black flag, etc. They just look better. The games get better over time, so just wait for it.:)

Ah that explains why you like the Xbox and Microsoft so much.:D

These consoles are different though as they're using standard PC architecture so there's very little learning the hardware as devs should already know that hardware.

Driber
28th Aug 2014, 09:52
Note: This discussion seems to be just about PS vs xbox lately and not about the TR xbox deal anymore, so we'll likely move the discussion to the dedicated XB1/PS4 thread.


Are you [redacted] kidding me?

Watch the language, please. Circumventing the auto forum censor is a TOU violation.


They XB1 looks great it, plays great, there's nothing else that Microsoft can do to make their console any better.

You know you're losing the debate when you keep having to ignore people's rebuttals and keep on repeating the same old "XB1 is great" mantra...


Aye...that's all they were....personal opinions. But, when it came to online play, the 360 was indeed the console of choice, even if it sold last. :). That's what I meant to get across....sometimes I can be an eloquent fool. :D

So first it was about numbers, then about "power", and now it's about online capabilities. Geez, pick an argument, will ya :p

I could just as well say something like:

When it comes to the most innovative games and UI, the Wii was the console of choice.
When it comes to price, the Wii was the console of choice.
When it comes to accessibility, the Wii was the console of choice.
Etc etc...

:whistle:


I guess, for me, there's something about the interface on PS3 that just doesn't resonate well with me when it comes to YouTube. :)

I'm curious, what didn't you like about it?

Did you use it in combination with a YT account and channel subscriptions? I found that that makes a HUGE difference. I now rarely use the search function (which, admittedly, is a PITA).


You know, I used to watch YT strictly on my PC as well. Until earlier this year the PS3 got a YT app. Now, I enjoy watching YT on my PS3 on my living room TV soooo much more than sitting behind my PC desk.


LMAO! Glad you agree with me :lol:


Lol......yeah, M$, why don'cha just sit this one out. Try to get back in the game next generation with a clearer head and less condecension toward gamers. :)


Word :cool:


Indeed they initially started out as partners. The Sony PlayStation as originally conceived was meant to be a CD rom add on for the SNES system....and then there got to be some bad blood between them (or some such horse hockey) so Sony struck out on its own, and became pretty much the dominant force for quite a bit in the 32bit generation with the Sony PlayStation as its own console.

Did not know this. Interesting stuff :)


I'm perfectly fine with Xbox marketing what their console can do. Be that multimedia, TV integration (with games). Twitch, Twitter and everything else.

Good for you (no sarcasm) but a lot of people aren't.


I mean they're trying to fight for your attention- it's with the markets calling for because your attention is being taken up by other things like smart phones and tablets.

You sure are right about this. But looking at XB1's sales figures, MS sure is going about it the wrong way to fight for people's attention :whistle:


At first I didn't think new consoles were necessary. What is it exactly the PS4 added? Because they knew the controller we know about that but did they just jump from 720 to 1080 is that all?

Interesting how you claim to believed that the new consoles weren't necessary, but then go on to be critical of PS4 while leaving out XB1 :whistle:


(I used to work for Xbox. My job used to be to help people set up their Xbox consoles, so any problem they'd have I was the guy you'd call.)

Finally. Thank you for that disclosure. Now it all makes sense :p


And it plays games too, we already knew that.

Whoah, did you just do a 180? I guess you're right, you are a former MS employee :rasp:


These consoles are different though as they're using standard PC architecture so there's very little learning the hardware as devs should already know that hardware.

That's just speculation, and not really a valid argument because we know that devs working on PC games constantly have to get to know the new tech, too. For example, a PC game released 10 years ago doesn't run as well as it could on today's latest hardware / drivers. PC devs constantly work on making things more efficient, just like console devs.

motoleo
28th Aug 2014, 13:54
I might be losing the debate, but my question is, what do people want?

FalloftheTR
28th Aug 2014, 14:01
I might be losing the debate, but my question is, what do people want?

They don't know themselves, in many cases.

Well preordered this one for Xbone - and when it comes to PC for sure

Driber
28th Aug 2014, 14:46
Actually, it's dead easy to answer the question what people want.

When people fork over hundreds of dollars for a new console, they want that console to be better than the previous console in each and every way, not worse, or limit them in any way that wasn't being done previously.

When you buy something new and have to worry about the new product not being able to do something the old product was capable of, you know there is something wrong with the company trying to sell you that product.

When I buy a new diesel fueled car, I don't want to worry about the oil company discontinuing diesel in my country one day because it is more lucrative for them to sell their diesel for a higher price to another country.

I don't want my new car to come with a mandatory finger-print ID system pre-installed so that one day the car manufacturer can remotely activate it and disallowing me from borrowing my car to my friends and family.

I don't want my new Ford to have a navigation system that one day may be rendered useless because the company providing the maps decides to strike a deal with Toyota so that it will only provide maps to Prius cars from now on.

What people want really isn't rocket science. Sure, there is a lot of chest pumping about resolution, framerate and all that bull, but at the end of the day consumers simply want consumer friendly products and consumer friendly companies they can trust. It's as simple as that.

d1n0_xD
28th Aug 2014, 16:54
^ True dat. :D

Murphdawg1
28th Aug 2014, 16:55
Note: This discussion seems to be just about PS vs xbox lately and not about the TR xbox deal anymore, so we'll likely move the discussion to the dedicated XB1/PS4 thread.



Watch the language, please. Circumventing the auto forum censor is a TOU violation.



You know you're losing the debate when you keep having to ignore people's rebuttals and keep on repeating the same old "XB1 is great" mantra...



So first it was about numbers, then about "power", and now it's about online capabilities. Geez, pick an argument, will ya :p

I could just as well say something like:

When it comes to the most innovative games and UI, the Wii was the console of choice.
When it comes to price, the Wii was the console of choice.
When it comes to accessibility, the Wii was the console of choice.
Etc etc...

:whistle:



I'm curious, what didn't you like about it?

Did you use it in combination with a YT account and channel subscriptions? I found that that makes a HUGE difference. I now rarely use the search function (which, admittedly, is a PITA).



LMAO! Glad you agree with me :lol:



Word :cool:



Did not know this. Interesting stuff :)



Good for you (no sarcasm) but a lot of people aren't.



You sure are right about this. But looking at XB1's sales figures, MS sure is going about it the wrong way to fight for people's attention :whistle:



Interesting how you claim to believed that the new consoles weren't necessary, but then go on to be critical of PS4 while leaving out XB1 :whistle:



Finally. Thank you for that disclosure. Now it all makes sense :p



Whoah, did you just do a 180? I guess you're right, you are a former MS employee :rasp:



That's just speculation, and not really a valid argument because we know that devs working on PC games constantly have to get to know the new tech, too. For example, a PC game released 10 years ago doesn't run as well as it could on today's latest hardware / drivers. PC devs constantly work on making things more efficient, just like console devs.

The thing is though x86 is x86 there's no funkiness to it like there was with the 7th gen and especially the cell processor.

Elliot Kane
28th Aug 2014, 18:17
Actually, it's dead easy to answer the question what people want.

When people fork over hundreds of dollars for a new console, they want that console to be better than the previous console in each and every way, not worse, or limit them in any way that wasn't being done previously.

When you buy something new and have to worry about the new product not being able to do something the old product was capable of, you know there is something wrong with the company trying to sell you that product.

When I buy a new diesel fueled car, I don't want to worry about the oil company discontinuing diesel in my country one day because it is more lucrative for them to sell their diesel for a higher price to another country.

I don't want my new car to come with a mandatory finger-print ID system pre-installed so that one day the car manufacturer can remotely activate it and disallowing me from borrowing my car to my friends and family.

I don't want my new Ford to have a navigation system that one day may be rendered useless because the company providing the maps decides to strike a deal with Toyota so that it will only provide maps to Prius cars from now on.

What people want really isn't rocket science. Sure, there is a lot of chest pumping about resolution, framerate and all that bull, but at the end of the day consumers simply want consumer friendly products and consumer friendly companies they can trust. It's as simple as that.

Well said, Driber. That's it exactly, IMO.

Lord Martok
28th Aug 2014, 18:45
So first it was about numbers, then about "power", and now it's about online capabilities. Geez, pick an argument, will ya :p

I could just as well say something like:

When it comes to the most innovative games and UI, the Wii was the console of choice.
When it comes to price, the Wii was the console of choice.
When it comes to accessibility, the Wii was the console of choice.
Etc etc...

:whistle:

like I said, just personal opinions. Did not mean to offend any Wii users or WiiUsers. :). The Wii is simply not for Mii. :). But, if it is for Thii, than Wiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii! :D. (Sii? I made a Funnii!). :D




I'm curious, what didn't you like about it?

Did you use it in combination with a YT account and channel subscriptions? I found that that makes a HUGE difference. I now rarely use the search function (which, admittedly, is a PITA).




yeah...the search function was a major PITA. I think that is what turned me off from using YT on PS3. It was the first function of YT I tried to use on PS3, and it really irked me....so, first impressions, and all that....

ARaider
28th Aug 2014, 19:21
These consoles are different though as they're using standard PC architecture so there's very little learning the hardware as devs should already know that hardware.

And PC games also get better, right? :)
Do you know the game fifa? The graphics improve every year.
We just wait a few years, and then we see who's right.:p

Driber
28th Aug 2014, 21:15
LM, you really crack mii up :lol:

Lord Martok
28th Aug 2014, 21:44
LM, you really crack mii up :lol:
Hii hii hii hii hii hii hii! :D

Murphdawg1
28th Aug 2014, 22:00
And PC games also get better, right? :)
Do you know the game fifa? The graphics improve every year.
We just wait a few years, and then we see who's right.:p

PC's are upgradeable though, consoles aren't. You can't slap a new CPU,GPU and more RAM in these consoles, If you did they just wouldn't work.

motoleo
28th Aug 2014, 22:05
The consoles aren't really competing on graphics anymore. So I consider that to be out. It's competing on other mediums. Which I think I know what the outdone will be for Rise of the Tomb Raider.

d1n0_xD
28th Aug 2014, 22:40
^ From where do you pull out these "facts", I wonder?

ARaider
28th Aug 2014, 23:08
PC's are upgradeable though, consoles aren't. You can't slap a new CPU,GPU and more RAM in these consoles, If you did they just wouldn't work.
OK, but back to the consoles.:p
When a new console is out developers have an idea for a game but no idea of the practical limitations of the console. At the end of a console lifespan, the developers know what the limitations of the console are, so they can optimize their game for it. The programmers need to adapt to the constraints of a new platform. It's the same for artists. The more mature an engine gets, the more artists can adapt to it and refine their skills. Existence of previous assets that can be iterated on is also something to consider.
People get more and more experienced, not only artists, not only programmers, but everybody. Putting more experienced people in a production, can lead to more quality if you do it good.
Practise makes perfect which is why games get better and better in terms of graphics and design over the years.:D

Driber
29th Aug 2014, 00:24
^ From where do you pull out these "facts", I wonder?

http://media.giphy.com/media/up6E8UgDdlU3u/giphy.gif

motoleo
29th Aug 2014, 01:48
You know what though? This whole deal, I could care less about! If it doesn't come out on PS4, oh well! I'm probably not going to buy an Xbox.

I'll wait! I'm not in a rush to spend money anyway. I just realized I'm broke asf. So, I am not in a hurry. Thanks! Y'all. MS & CD.

Murphdawg1
29th Aug 2014, 03:09
OK, but back to the consoles.:p
When a new console is out developers have an idea for a game but no idea of the practical limitations of the console. At the end of a console lifespan, the developers know what the limitations of the console are, so they can optimize their game for it. The programmers need to adapt to the constraints of a new platform. It's the same for artists. The more mature an engine gets, the more artists can adapt to it and refine their skills. Existence of previous assets that can be iterated on is also something to consider.
People get more and more experienced, not only artists, not only programmers, but everybody. Putting more experienced people in a production, can lead to more quality if you do it good.
Practise makes perfect which is why games get better and better in terms of graphics and design over the years.:D

In the past though that's been at least somewhat due to the consoles having their own unique architecture. Now I do think Sony especially made the smart move to make their system much easier to develop for seeing as how most 3rd party devs hated the Cell processor. The downside though for both machines I think is they will get tapped out much quicker because it's much easier to develop for them.

Driber
29th Aug 2014, 09:41
You know what though? This whole deal, I could care less about!

You could? How much?


The downside though for both machines I think is they will get tapped out much quicker because it's much easier to develop for them.

Sure, if your game is driven by graphics, but then you're doing something wrong as a dev.

I would welcome it if devs learn the hardware quicker so that we can get better looking games sooner. If you ask me, all this chest pumping about resolution, framerate, etc is all BS. Let's focus on what's really important - gameplay and game contents.

The sooner the devs get through the learning curve and get the graphics nonsense out of the way, the better!

WinterSoldierLTE
29th Aug 2014, 09:45
If you ask me, all this chest pumping about resolution, framerate is all BS. Let's focus on what's really important - gameplay and game contents.

I'll say an "Amen!" to that. Just make it fun and interesting.

d1n0_xD
29th Aug 2014, 10:22
You could? How much?

Hahah, reminds me of this song :p

8Gv0H-vPoDc

Elliot Kane
29th Aug 2014, 12:05
Sure, if your game is driven by graphics, but then you're doing something wrong as a dev.

I would welcome it if devs learn the hardware quicker so that we can get better looking games sooner. If you ask me, all this chest pumping about resolution, framerate, etc is all BS. Let's focus on what's really important - gameplay and game contents.

The sooner the devs get through the learning curve and get the graphics nonsense out of the way, the better!

^ Gotta agree with Driber.

As console games are, as I understand it, mostly developed on high end PCs, it really should not take very long for devs to get used to building games for the mini-PCs that are the new gen consoles. I cannot see any way that that is a disadvantage.

Driber
29th Aug 2014, 13:46
Hahah, reminds me of this song :p

8Gv0H-vPoDc

I'm giving this two thumbs up.


Literally :D

motoleo
29th Aug 2014, 15:25
You could? How much?

I do care a little bit. But I could care a lot less. That's how much. A lot.

Weemanply109
29th Aug 2014, 15:36
If you ask me, all this chest pumping about resolution, framerate, etc is all BS. Let's focus on what's really important - gameplay and game contents.

For a lot of people, framerate is a very IMPORTANT part of gameplay. Could you try playing a fast-paced racing title @ 30fps? Likewise with Call of Duty. I couldn't. Some games are detrimental with lower framerates. Resolution on consoles aren't a big deal and is marketing hokum used by Song to push their propaganda against M$ but I want good games to PLAY well.

motoleo
29th Aug 2014, 15:39
They say 60fps is the frame rate of real life. So what would happen if we bumped it up to, say, .. 80fps? :)

Driber
29th Aug 2014, 15:47
Resolution on consoles aren't a big deal and is marketing hokum

Exactly! :p

And FYI, we are talking about consoles here in this discussion. So move along Ma chere :rasp:

Weemanply109
30th Aug 2014, 17:31
Exactly! :p

And FYI, we are talking about consoles here in this discussion. So move along Ma chere :rasp:

Hey, you're the one making ze place look crowded. :rasp:

I'm talking about consoles too. ;) I think framerate should always be important regardless of platform. I think it's good that people want to focus on having a smooth gameplay experience on consoles now. You guys have suffered for too long! :p

Murphdawg1
31st Aug 2014, 00:30
They say 60fps is the frame rate of real life. So what would happen if we bumped it up to, say, .. 80fps? :)

Real life doesn't have a frame rate as it is not displayed in a series of images but rather in real time. Nobody looks at a car driving by and says "That car is only driving at 30fps, totally undriveable." because well the human doesn't see things in fps.

motoleo
31st Aug 2014, 01:37
Real life doesn't have a frame rate as it is not displayed in a series of images but rather in real time. Nobody looks at a car driving by and says "That car is only driving at 30fps, totally undriveable." because well the human doesn't see things in fps.

But if you're recording real life, you can convert it to fps. Real life has to have an fps.

Murphdawg1
31st Aug 2014, 05:41
But if you're recording real life, you can convert it to fps. Real life has to have an fps.

Recording isn't the same thing as seeing though. Also the fps probably depends mostly on your equipment.

Driber
31st Aug 2014, 22:21
Hey, you're the one making ze place look crowded. :rasp:

Lamest. Comeback. Ever.

:p


I'm talking about consoles too. ;) I think framerate should always be important regardless of platform.

"Resolution on consoles aren't a big deal and is marketing hokum" ~ © 2014 Weemanply109

:D


I think it's good that people want to focus on having a smooth gameplay experience on consoles now. You guys have suffered for too long! :p

Since I stopped giving a flying fudge about resolution and framerate aeons ago and decided that it's really not worth obsessing about (like some people here :p) I have actually been enjoying my gaming experiences quite nicely, thank you very much :rasp:

Lord Martok
1st Sep 2014, 01:37
Well, I like a balance.
Graphics, gameplay, and framerate.

Ultimately, it's all a matter of taste. Some folks like one particular aspect of video gaming, others like more. Doesn't mean anyone's tastes are better or more refined than others.

WinterSoldierLTE
1st Sep 2014, 02:16
Since I stopped giving a flying fudge about resolution and framerate aeons ago and decided that it's really not worth obsessing about (like some people here :p) I have actually been enjoying my gaming experiences quite nicely, thank you very much :rasp:

It seems like one of those Generational Argument things. Like when your parents say "Bah! That band you like so much doesn't hold a candle to anyone who was around when I was your age!". Now, I'm not calling you or anyone else old here, I'm just using your quote as a starting point of sorts.

The reason why I say it's a Generational Argument type thing is because way back when, was anyone talking about the FPS of Super Mario Bros. or Metroid? Or any classic game pre 1996? I think some people are used to a good game or system being a good game or system because of what it is, and some people are used to a good game or system being a good game or system because of the advanced technologies it utilizes.

Myself personally, I'd never even thought about FPS until the PS4 was announced and the wonders it can do (Not trying to stoke that console vs. console debate again. I grew up on Nintendo and Sega Genesis and remember them well. The PS4 IS wonderous for me.) were detailed.

Again, not trying to stoke a fire or start an "old gamers vs. new gamers" war here, just stating an observation.

motoleo
1st Sep 2014, 02:59
When TR comes out..

.. it's going to recover!

Because this game is Tomb Raider's chance to shine.

We know that it'll have all the bells and whistles. Whether Fps or resolution it all comes with the territory. Especially the CGI like models they touted about. Cause when it comes to the best type of visuals, even what's that game... Oh yeah Advanced Warfare. Even in a game like that the visuals just aren't quite there yet.

Murphdawg1
1st Sep 2014, 03:39
You could? How much?



Sure, if your game is driven by graphics, but then you're doing something wrong as a dev.

I would welcome it if devs learn the hardware quicker so that we can get better looking games sooner. If you ask me, all this chest pumping about resolution, framerate, etc is all BS. Let's focus on what's really important - gameplay and game contents.

The sooner the devs get through the learning curve and get the graphics nonsense out of the way, the better!

Would you not agree though that framerate does have an impact on gameplay? The better the framerate the smoother the gameplay will be and more responsive the controls are.

Driber
1st Sep 2014, 07:36
It seems like one of those Generational Argument things. Like when your parents say "Bah! That band you like so much doesn't hold a candle to anyone who was around when I was your age!". Now, I'm not calling you or anyone else old here, I'm just using your quote as a starting point of sorts.

The reason why I say it's a Generational Argument type thing is because way back when, was anyone talking about the FPS of Super Mario Bros. or Metroid? Or any classic game pre 1996? I think some people are used to a good game or system being a good game or system because of what it is, and some people are used to a good game or system being a good game or system because of the advanced technologies it utilizes.

Myself personally, I'd never even thought about FPS until the PS4 was announced and the wonders it can do (Not trying to stoke that console vs. console debate again. I grew up on Nintendo and Sega Genesis and remember them well. The PS4 IS wonderous for me.) were detailed.

Again, not trying to stoke a fire or start an "old gamers vs. new gamers" war here, just stating an observation.

For me it's not a generational argument. Yes, I grew up with the NES and SNES, but I'm also playing the latest games, and I'm perfectly capable of seeing the difference between 30fps and 120 fps. The thing is - I don't care. I really don't give a flying fudge, because anything above 30fps is not worth getting worked up about. Unless you're a competitive gamer who plays COD games for a living on their PS/Xbox, it's all just unnecessary chest pumping.


Would you not agree though that framerate does have an impact on gameplay? The better the framerate the smoother the gameplay will be and more responsive the controls are.

Sure. No one likes a 10 fps shooter game.

Lord Martok
1st Sep 2014, 19:08
Sure. No one likes a 10 fps shooter game.

Like Goldeneye N64. :D

Driber
1st Sep 2014, 20:43
OUCH! :lol:

Valenka
1st Sep 2014, 21:16
Who doesn't like GoldenEye?!

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lv5bkkxO6t1qib2im.gif

Lord Martok
1st Sep 2014, 21:31
Lol Driber and Valenka. :)

I loved Goldeneye, but to go back and play it now....it hasn't aged well. :)

The updated Goldeneye, with Daniel Craig is a pretty cool game for the now.

motoleo
2nd Sep 2014, 02:33
Maybe the decision to stop offering TR on Playstation and PC was due to the illegal copies downloaded on PC and the game trading with PS4...

Lord Martok
2nd Sep 2014, 06:06
Maybe the decision to stop offering TR on Playstation and PC was due to the illegal copies downloaded on PC and the game trading with PS4...

No disrespect, but you're grasping at straws now, I'm afraid.

No...M$ did it strictly to try and force Xbone console sales. They didn't have anything to compete with the likes of Uncharted and The Last of Us (known console sellers for the PS3), and their console sales were well below that of PS4. And with TLoU Remastered out for PS4, with Uncharted 4 on the way, they made a desperate move....one that has cost SE/CD/Eidos a bit of respect (and support, I might add) in the eyes of those gamers who supported TR in the majority on PS and PC platforms for many years.

If a friend of mine wants to borrow a disc of one of my PS3/4 games, I should feel free to let him borrow it (so long as I get it back, of course :) )

This is where Sony smacked Xbox in the family jewels...especially with Sony's quick shot video of "How to share a video game".

Elliot Kane
2nd Sep 2014, 07:48
Maybe the decision to stop offering TR on Playstation and PC was due to the illegal copies downloaded on PC and the game trading with PS4...

You think there are no XBox pirates? Really? :D

Tecstar70
2nd Sep 2014, 09:05
Maybe the decision to stop offering TR on Playstation and PC was due to the illegal copies downloaded on PC and the game trading with PS4...

No. For a start they haven't STOPPED offering it on those platforms, they just haven't announced a release date yet. There is just as much disc copying and game trading on the Xbox so that isn't a factor.




If a friend of mine wants to borrow a disc of one of my PS3/4 games, I should feel free to let him borrow it (so long as I get it back, of course :) )

This is where Sony smacked Xbox in the family jewels...especially with Sony's quick shot video of "How to share a video game".

Any plans Sony had to become like Apple/iTunes were definitely put on the back-burner after E3 2013. I bet they were furiously redoing their powerpoints after the MS presentation! They did what any company would have done in any marketplace - exploited the weakness of their main competitor. And that video WAS funny!

kWSIFh8ICaA

FWIW there was a body of people who actually liked a lot of MS's ideas for digital distribution, family sharing etc but they were in the minority.

motoleo
2nd Sep 2014, 12:29
No disrespect, but you're grasping at straws now, I'm afraid.

No...M$ did it strictly to try and force Xbone console sales. They didn't have anything to compete with the likes of Uncharted and The Last of Us (known console sellers for the PS3), and their console sales were well below that of PS4. And with TLoU Remastered out for PS4, with Uncharted 4 on the way, they made a desperate move....one that has cost SE/CD/Eidos a bit of respect (and support, I might add) in the eyes of those gamers who supported TR in the majority on PS and PC platforms for many years.

If a friend of mine wants to borrow a disc of one of my PS3/4 games, I should feel free to let him borrow it (so long as I get it back, of course :) )

This is where Sony smacked Xbox in the family jewels...especially with Sony's quick shot video of "How to share a video game".

So you're saying that they needed Tomb Raider to sell their console? Hm. I think if Microsoft needed a good game to sell their console, they would've made their own. I mean, Tomb Raided isn't that prestigious.

Square Enix needed them more than they needed Tomb Raider.

Tecstar70
2nd Sep 2014, 13:29
So you're saying that they needed Tomb Raider to sell their console? Hm. I think if Microsoft needed a good game to sell their console, they would've made their own. I mean, Tomb Raided isn't that prestigious.

Square Enix needed them more than they needed Tomb Raider.

I think you are incorrect. If we are being generous, you could say that they need each other equally but I think that is not the case. MS need to attach USP's to the XB1 and the build up to Christmas 2014 AND 2015 will be an opportunity to drive sales. Autumn/Winter 2015 see's the release of Halo 5 which is a big MS exclusive title and with the next Uncharted game hitting the PS4 at the same time adding RotTR as an XB1 exclusive at this time of year could sway console buyers at Christmas. ( and you have to remember console buyers are not all "gamers" - they are mums, dads, grannies, grandads etc who don't give a stuff or know about hardware specs etc)

While SE may have received a nice fee from MS to delay the other platforms release I think it is MS who will benefit more. Wait until the build up to Christmas 2015 and you will see XB1, Halo and TR plastered everywhere.

Elliot Kane
2nd Sep 2014, 13:43
If both sides don't think they get as much as the other from the deal, neither would agree...

BridgetFisher
2nd Sep 2014, 16:10
So you're saying that they needed Tomb Raider to sell their console? Hm. I think if Microsoft needed a good game to sell their console, they would've made their own. I mean, Tomb Raided isn't that prestigious.

Square Enix needed them more than they needed Tomb Raider.

Hmmm I dont think any "one" game no matter what can really sell a console. Better to have LOADS of games, and they all kinda suck at that lately. Thats heavy, Its like we've gone backwards.

WinterSoldierLTE
2nd Sep 2014, 16:52
I think if Microsoft needed a good game to sell their console, they would've made their own.

One could say they tried that with "Titanfall". Remember the loads of hype surrounding that game up until it's launch. And of course, they also relied on Master Chief as usual.

Lord Martok
2nd Sep 2014, 17:23
So you're saying that they needed Tomb Raider to sell their console?


It's not like they've been doing particularly well with any other game....be it a third party title or original IP.

Yes, M$ is desperate right now.

However, that said, I do agree with the notion that apparently SE/CD/Eidos needs M$ as much as M$ needs them. But, given gamer reaction from those who supported TR largely via PS or PC, it looks like a marriage made in the backside of hell. If the game bombs during the timed exclusivity, then only the hardcore/die hards that actually had the patience to wait it out will buy it....and that's not going to be near the number it would've been if the game had been simultaneously released on all platforms.

motoleo
2nd Sep 2014, 17:40
That's a good question. What's going to happen if it doesn't sell?

WinterSoldierLTE
2nd Sep 2014, 18:20
That's a good question. What's going to happen if it doesn't sell?

Karl Stewert wets himself laughing





just kidding.

a_big_house
2nd Sep 2014, 20:45
That's a good question. What's going to happen if it doesn't sell?

We shall just have to live off of the LC games... (Which isn't a bad thing imo) :D

Tecstar70
2nd Sep 2014, 23:51
That's a good question. What's going to happen if it doesn't sell?

This will only happen if its a bad game. its not like there are many AAA titles scheduled for then. (at the moment anyway)

Lord Martok
3rd Sep 2014, 05:14
This will only happen if its a bad game. its not like there are many AAA titles scheduled for then. (at the moment anyway)

That could be very well what helps it. If it is a really good game, then everyone who would normally buy a AAA title (COD, Battlefield, etc) would likely wish to buy RotTR (especially if it were a simulticonsoletaneous release....how's that for wordsmithing? :D ).

But if it is released amidst highly anticipated AAA titles....generally only the TR gamers/fans will likely buy it, and they likely only represent a small niche of the overall gamer population.

motoleo
4th Sep 2014, 02:47
Ok, well let's go with your thought that Microsoft is the sole beneficiary of the deal, moreso than Square Enix.

I don't think it's like Microsoft just said, "Oh, we can't sell this console! We some exclusive games. Darn, what can we get? Let's get Tomb Raider!"

No, I don't think it went down like that.

Lord Martok
4th Sep 2014, 06:19
Exclusives can be a funny business....but after what M$ tried to pull before the launch of Xbone, and then their pretentious backpedaling, I'm just not inclined to think it was anything other than trying to force console sales on those they figured might be desperate when it came to Tomb Raider.


When in desperation (M$), go to work on those who might be just as desperate (long waiting TR fans/gamers).

Tecstar70
4th Sep 2014, 08:25
Ok, well let's go with your thought that Microsoft is the sole beneficiary of the deal, moreso than Square Enix.

I don't think it's like Microsoft just said, "Oh, we can't sell this console! We some exclusive games. Darn, what can we get? Let's get Tomb Raider!"

No, I don't think it went down like that.

I think actually it probably went a lot like that! While SE will benefit from the deal it's MS who have paid them for it.

How do you think it played out then?

Driber
4th Sep 2014, 10:49
Ok, well let's go with your thought that Microsoft is the sole beneficiary of the deal, moreso than Square Enix.

I don't think it's like Microsoft just said, "Oh, we can't sell this console! We some exclusive games. Darn, what can we get? Let's get Tomb Raider!"

No, I don't think it went down like that.

You're putting it a bit simplistic, but that is indeed what most people seem to be thinking.

And for the lack of a better theory, that one does seem to most logical. I mean, if MS didn't get into the deal to push xbox console sales, what other reason is there, really?

Elliot Kane
4th Sep 2014, 11:22
It's actually pretty easy.

You are Microsoft. You are not selling as many consoles as you like, so you want to create a more attractive line up that will cause people who are thinking about getting a console to buy yours instead of the competition's. You don't think a single game will sell loads of XBones - you are not that foolish - but you do know that when gamers choose a console, they will go with the one that has the most games they want to play. You want to tilt that decision in your favour, and Tomb Raider is a well known, highly established brand with a strong fan base. Getting an exclusive will surely help tilt that buying decision the way you want it to go.

On the other hand, you are Square Enix. Your finances are not exactly where you want them to be, because you've been vastly over-estimating your expected sales recently and scrabbling to break even as a result. Microsoft comes along with a massive pile of money and says, 'look, here's how we can help each other. We will help you with the costs of the new TR game, making it far easier for you to make a profit from it, but we'll want a head start on the other platforms'.

Microsoft get what they want, SE get what they want. Everyone is happy (Except TR fans, but you can't have everything, right?).

It the whole deal did not go down a lot like that, I'd be very surprised.

Tecstar70
4th Sep 2014, 12:23
^^^^ This. :thumb:

Driber
4th Sep 2014, 17:04
(Except TR fans, but you can't have everything, right?).

I hope that was sarcasm.

Elliot Kane
4th Sep 2014, 17:24
I hope that was sarcasm.

More of a dig than sarcasm. It certainly wasn't intended to be in any way approving.

motoleo
4th Sep 2014, 18:23
But yet it's coming out on Xbox 360 as well I mean you would think that Microsoft would be taking all appropriate measures to get the Ones shipped out. Somethings just not adding up to me.

Elliot Kane
4th Sep 2014, 19:01
But yet it's coming out on Xbox 360 as well I mean you would think that Microsoft would be taking all appropriate measures to get the Ones shipped out. Somethings just not adding up to me.

No mystery there, either. MS are maximising their advantage from the deal. XBone may be their newest console, but the majority of people with XBoxes probably still have 360s. We're in the changeover period, when the newer console slowly replaces the old - a process that takes a few years. A lot of people will stick with their old consoles until they can afford new ones, after all.

So MS are maximising their advantage from the timed exclusive by making sure as many customers as possible can get the game on XBox, whether it's the current system or the last.

motoleo
4th Sep 2014, 19:23
What about PS3?

a_big_house
4th Sep 2014, 19:32
I'm sure if Sony were currently in a position to discuss which gen Rise is released on, they would do the same.

Elliot Kane
4th Sep 2014, 19:35
^ I'm sure ABH is right.

As it is, we don't even know that Rise will have a release on any other system but XBox, yet. No-one has given official word either way.

motoleo
4th Sep 2014, 19:53
Now I'm really curious. How are they going to manage an Xbox 360 version of a next gen game? Not even the Definitive edition came to the 360....

Elliot Kane
4th Sep 2014, 20:29
Now I'm really curious. How are they going to manage an Xbox 360 version of a next gen game? Not even the Definitive edition came to the 360....

Really strip back most of the graphics will be my guess. It IS only a guess, of course, as I can't know, but most of what needs the power is the graphics, IIRC.

Driber
4th Sep 2014, 20:51
^ Yup.


Not even the Definitive edition came to the 360....

Say what now? Uhm... of course the DE didn't come to PS3/360. That was the whole point of the DE - a next gen version of the game :nut:

motoleo
4th Sep 2014, 21:40
Ohh lol.

DamianGraham
4th Sep 2014, 23:34
^ Yup.



Say what now? Uhm... of course the DE didn't come to PS3/360. That was the whole point of the DE - a next gen version of the game :nut:

So, the sequel should be a next gen game as well then, no? :scratch: seems like Microsoft is REAAALLLLLYYYY desperate to me, or maybe it's Crystal/SE that are the desperate ones. Either way, this whole mess smells of :whistle:

motoleo
5th Sep 2014, 00:32
The only information is Rise of Tomb Raider coming to Xbox 360, and One holiday of next year. Once time has passed, then it will be great to see just what the outcome will be ultimately.

a_big_house
5th Sep 2014, 08:56
So, the sequel should be a next gen game as well then, no?

That is what they originally announced it as...
So, it could be that MS funded an old gen version, for some crazy, insane, waste-of-money reason :lol:

Mick2412
6th Sep 2014, 12:57
CD are letting us all down by not just the deal but not telling us about the other versions. Ain't no way I will get an Xbox console for one game.

Tecstar70
6th Sep 2014, 13:25
^ Yup.



Say what now? Uhm... of course the DE didn't come to PS3/360. That was the whole point of the DE - a next gen version of the game :nut:

jzcoki_peekaboo_3ef209_640992.jpg

motoleo
6th Sep 2014, 15:51
Well, I always said that if I knew what I know now, I would've just bought the DE version and not touched the PS3 version. But there are to be no more DE versions, right? I don't know one way or the other.

Tecstar70
6th Sep 2014, 19:47
Well, I always said that if I knew what I know now, I would've just bought the DE version and not touched the PS3 version. But there are to be no more DE versions, right? I don't know one way or the other.

Well for last gen they released the Game Of The Year edition which included all DLC. I don't think you can rule that out as a possibility going forward.

The Definitive Edition, as with other titles like The Last Of Us, provides a bridge between last and new gen that allowed people to replay a new-gen experience on console and also any new console owners or people who didn't get it on last-gen could get it too.

I don't think there will be a Definitive Edition in this style until the next generation of consoles. You might like to wait for a year to see if a RotTR GOTY edition comes out though.

It also provided a good game to play in the initial drought of new-gen titles which I am sure provided some extra cash for SE. Also it allowed some development exposure to the new consoles which I am sure helped/is helping with the development of RotTR.

DamianGraham
6th Sep 2014, 20:08
That is what they originally announced it as...
So, it could be that MS funded an old gen version, for some crazy, insane, waste-of-money reason :lol:

okay, I thought I remembered the announcement saying "our next generation game" or something along those lines. One step forward, two steps back eh? :mad2: in all honesty, I don't care so long as we get a good port to the PS4 (which isn't difficult considering both consoles are almost identical when it all comes down to it).

motoleo
7th Sep 2014, 00:24
I don't know what to think about it coming to the 360. I mean the new consoles have been out for a while now.......

Driber
7th Sep 2014, 14:17
okay, I thought I remembered the announcement saying "our next generation game" or something along those lines. One step forward, two steps back eh? :mad2:

I'm not sure I follow what you mean by "two steps back"? :scratch:


I don't know what to think about it coming to the 360. I mean the new consoles have been out for a while now.......

Okay, so let us know when do know, so that we can debunk your assumptions :p :D

DamianGraham
7th Sep 2014, 16:36
I'm not sure I follow what you mean by "two steps back"? :scratch:



Okay, so let us know when do know, so that we can debunk your assumptions :p :D

Do you mean, what do I mean by using that in this context or what does that phrase mean at all? It is a popular phrase (at least in the US) which I used because essentially for every good thing the company does, they make some sort of mistake that overshadows that and knocks them down a peg. So when you announce a next Gen sequel, you expect it to be only on next gen. Releasing it last Gen (while I have no complaints) makes your original announcement look misrepresentative about what will be produced. Much like the word choice in the xbone exclusivity deal. CD/SE get something right, then do something wrong. It's not the end of the world nor am I as upset about a last Gen launch for the game, but if it comes out for last Gen hardware and not even the current t generation of consoles, then it'll be an issue for me. Not sure how much sense that made as I have been typing on my phone, hopefully I clarified where my word choice came from though :D

Driber
7th Sep 2014, 19:08
Do you mean, what do I mean by using that in this context or what does that phrase mean at all?

The former.


[..] when you announce a next Gen sequel, you expect it to be only on next gen. Releasing it last Gen (while I have no complaints) makes your original announcement look misrepresentative about what will be produced. Much like the word choice in the xbone exclusivity deal. CD/SE get something right, then do something wrong. It's not the end of the world nor am I as upset about a last Gen launch for the game, but if it comes out for last Gen hardware and not even the current t generation of consoles, then it'll be an issue for me. Not sure how much sense that made as I have been typing on my phone, hopefully I clarified where my word choice came from though :D

Thanks for explaining what you meant :)

Okay I think you're confused about the terminology. When CD said that they are working on a next-gen sequel, they meant that they are working on a game for (presumably) the platforms PS4, XB1 and PC at a bare minimum. This doesn't necessarily exclude releasing the game on any non next-gen platform. After all, they didn't say "next-gen ONLY". So now when they are working on a 360 and XB1 version, they are still staying true to their statement of working on a "next-gen sequel".

So it's absolutely incompatible to the wording of the xbox exclusive announcement.

DamianGraham
8th Sep 2014, 00:50
The former.



Thanks for explaining what you meant :)

Okay I think you're confused about the terminology. When CD said that they are working on a next-gen sequel, they meant that they are working on a game for (presumably) the platforms PS4, XB1 and PC at a bare minimum. This doesn't necessarily exclude releasing the game on any non next-gen platform. After all, they didn't say "next-gen ONLY". So now when they are working on a 360 and XB1 version, they are still staying true to their statement of working on a "next-gen sequel".

So it's absolutely incompatible to the wording of the xbox exclusive announcement.

I guess it's the lack of clarity on CD/SE's parts then that has gotten me confused. I assume when one says "next gen game" it is next gen only, like Assassin's Creed Unity for example, with a separate release for last-gen. I wish Meagan would come back, because since she's left it has been hell on the communication front with CD. We haven't even had any Dev. questions or anything. I know I sound like a psycho, and I apologize to you all, but I am really passionate about this.

motoleo
8th Sep 2014, 02:03
It must mean that they're making 2 versions of the game. Rise is going to be next gen, you don't have to worry about that, with graphics even better than what we got in the DE. But at the same time, now that there's a 360 version, it undoubtedly must be being ported- they might even get another company to do it.

Next gen is being developed first and foremost.

What do we know about other titles that get these dual releases?

DamianGraham
8th Sep 2014, 02:08
It must mean that they're making 2 versions of the game. Rise is going to be next gen, you don't have to worry about that, with graphics even better than what we got in the DE. But at the same time, now that there's a 360 version, it undoubtedly must be being ported- they might even get another company to do it.

Next gen is being developed first and foremost.

What do we know about other titles that get these dual releases?

Haha, watch them PORT the PS4 version from the Xbox 360 port... Wouldn't surprise me at this point :p with as much blatant disregard already shown, it'd be just the cherry on top. Here's the thing. Porting between XBone and PS4 is easy; the specs support that. CD has absolutely NO reason to deny PS4 fans after the deal has ended.

motoleo
8th Sep 2014, 02:16
Haha, watch them PORT the PS4 version from the Xbox 360 port... Wouldn't surprise me at this point :p with as much blatant disregard already shown, it'd be just the cherry on top. Here's the thing. Porting between XBone and PS4 is easy; the specs support that. CD has absolutely NO reason to deny PS4 fans after the deal has ended.

They might do that. :naughty:

Driber
8th Sep 2014, 10:22
I guess it's the lack of clarity on CD/SE's parts then that has gotten me confused. I assume when one says "next gen game" it is next gen only, like Assassin's Creed Unity for example, with a separate release for last-gen.

Wut? How is that an example of a "next gen ONLY" game? :nut:


I know I sound like a psycho, and I apologize to you all, but I am really passionate about this.

I don't think you sound like a psycho :)


Haha, watch them PORT the PS4 version from the Xbox 360 port... Wouldn't surprise me at this point :p with as much blatant disregard already shown, it'd be just the cherry on top.

Oh c'mon now.


Here's the thing. Porting between XBone and PS4 is easy; the specs support that. CD has absolutely NO reason to deny PS4 fans after the deal has ended.

If you truly believe that it's such a piece of cake, then you shouldn't worry about it not happening ;)

Lord Martok
8th Sep 2014, 13:00
Yes. Just remember...it is as Gandhi said one time: "That is how you eat muli."

Er.... Wait.....

:D

DamianGraham
8th Sep 2014, 15:05
Wut? How is that an example of a "next gen ONLY" game? :nut:



I don't think you sound like a psycho :)



Oh c'mon now.



If you truly believe that it's such a piece of cake, then you shouldn't worry about it not happening ;)

I only worry about it not happening cause it didn't for Dead Rising 3, which Phil Spencer made a point to compare this game to. Perhaps the exclusivity is timed, but who is to say that he didn't forbid them from a PS4 release in it? That's the only thing driving my anger, I understand from a marketing and legal perspective why you can't discuss the details, but c'mon don't we deserve more clarity than what's been given?

Also, that was a joke obviously haha, I wouldn't expect a port of a port, but still. Microsoft's way of taking hits on Sony? :p wouldn't surprise me.

And AC: Unity is only coming out for the PS4 and Xbone, whereas they've developed a separate game for last gen and they've marketed both games accordingly. I guess word choice boils down to everything.

Driber
8th Sep 2014, 15:36
I only worry about it not happening cause it didn't for Dead Rising 3, which Phil Spencer made a point to compare this game to. Perhaps the exclusivity is timed, but who is to say that he didn't forbid them from a PS4 release in it?

"What CD does with the game after our exclusivity deal expires, that is entirely up to them" ~ Phil Spencer.


And AC: Unity is only coming out for the PS4 and Xbone, whereas they've developed a separate game for last gen and they've marketed both games accordingly. I guess word choice boils down to everything.

Then I guess I don't understand why you brought up AC Unity and how it is relevant to the situation with TR10.

motoleo
8th Sep 2014, 22:58
Lol, it's funny how PS4 owners just got thrown under the bus! :lol: :rasp:

Murphdawg1
8th Sep 2014, 23:14
Lol, it's funny how PS4 owners just got thrown under the bus! :lol: :rasp:

How's that funny? What if Batman Arkham Knight wasn't coming to Xbox or was a timed exclusive for Playstation?

motoleo
8th Sep 2014, 23:27
So far I think Sony & Microsoft have only sold new consoles to about a quarter of the total market for gamers. And now it's round two. While Sony had a good head start, Sony's lack of exclusive titles are what's going to contribute to the PS4's poor sales for the upcoming quarter.

Murphdawg1
8th Sep 2014, 23:33
So far I think Sony & Microsoft have only sold new consoles to about a quarter of the total market for gamers. And now it's round two. While Sony had a good head start, Sony's lack of exclusive titles are what's going to contribute to the PS4's poor sales for the upcoming quarter.

I doubt it, people will still buy the PS4 simply because multiplats are better on PS4.

motoleo
8th Sep 2014, 23:43
The people that think that games play better on the PS4 are probably the same people that wouldn't support the Xbox One even if the Xbox had better specs (even though they're already comparable.)

Murphdawg1
8th Sep 2014, 23:52
The people that think that games play better on the PS4 are probably the same people that wouldn't support the Xbox One even if the Xbox had better specs (even though they're already comparable.)

What about the parent who is trying to decide which console to get their kid or themselves for Christmas? If Walmart, Target, Best Buy employee says "Well this game is at 1080p on the PS4, and 720p on Xbox One", guess which one most people will likely pick up even without really any knowledge of technology

Driber
8th Sep 2014, 23:57
Back to xbox fanboyism, are we, motoleo...

motoleo
9th Sep 2014, 00:39
^ :)


What about the parent who is trying to decide which console to get their kid or themselves for Christmas? If Walmart, Target, Best Buy employee says "Well this game is at 1080p on the PS4, and 720p on Xbox One", guess which one most people will likely pick up even without really any knowledge of technology

But who would say that? The Xbox One is 4K ready, due to its 4.1 HDMI cable. Not even the PS4 has that. If the game can't run at 1080p on an Xbox, then it was the game makers fault.

Murphdawg1
9th Sep 2014, 00:44
^ :)



But who would say that? The Xbox One is 4K ready, due to its 4.1 HDMI cable. Not even the PS4 has that. If the game can't run at 1080p on an Xbox, then it was the game makers fault.

For movies maybe but how many movies are actually going to do 4K anytime soon? 4K as a mainstream thing is still a ways off, also know it's not the makers fault, the Xbox One hardware is weaker than the PS4, it has slower RAM and it's GPU is weaker than that of the PS4.

motoleo
9th Sep 2014, 03:35
For movies maybe but how many movies are actually going to do 4K anytime soon? 4K as a mainstream thing is still a ways off, also know it's not the makers fault, the Xbox One hardware is weaker than the PS4, it has slower RAM and it's GPU is weaker than that of the PS4.

True. Can't argue with that.

Lord Martok
9th Sep 2014, 17:59
Aye, I think it's going to take quite a while for 4K to really take off. The players and tv's required for such playback are so expensive that only affluent early-adopters will even bother to get it. I know it is usually that way for most new technologies. Hell, I bet they said the same thing about Compact Disc players so long ago.

Charlie.T.Raider
27th Sep 2014, 12:30
If CD start thinking only about the 1/4 to 1/3 of it's fanbase that have Xbox consoles then the series will be trouble. Sending out a message that you don't value most of your fans is as the title says terrible PR. All the cryptic answers in CD's PR and patronising the rest of us who care when the game is coming out on our own consoles is doing big damage to perseptions of CD.

Leon S. Kennedy
28th Sep 2014, 10:06
If CD start thinking only about the 1/4 to 1/3 of it's fanbase that have Xbox consoles then the series will be trouble. Sending out a message that you don't value most of your fans is as the title says terrible PR. All the cryptic answers in CD's PR and patronising the rest of us who care when the game is coming out on our own consoles is doing big damage to perseptions of CD.

Funny thing is I don't care any more. Apathy is probably worse than anger for t u is situation. This forum seems to have really slowed down. Side effect of alienating over 2/3rds of your audience?

WinterSoldierLTE
28th Sep 2014, 16:46
This forum seems to have really slowed down. Side effect of alienating over 2/3rds of your audience?

I think it's just part of a forum cycle. When a new game is announced, shedloads of people sign up new to the forums. We all speculate and debate for a few weeks/months, and I think eventually some people just find they have nothing left to say they've not already said before. Look how many people just enrolled on the day of the exclusivity announcement just to voice their disdain.

medievil
28th Sep 2014, 17:59
^ :)



But who would say that? The Xbox One is 4K ready, due to its 4.1 HDMI cable. Not even the PS4 has that. If the game can't run at 1080p on an Xbox, then it was the game makers fault.


ummm 4.1 is just a spec...the PS4 as long as it can process the signal can send 4k out it's hdmi port and as long as the tv supports it and the cable is decent quality, it will work just fine...
people made the same claims about 3d and needing a special hdmi port, it was all rubbish though cause 3d works just fine on any hdmi port

Driber
28th Sep 2014, 20:33
I think it's just part of a forum cycle. When a new game is announced, shedloads of people sign up new to the forums. We all speculate and debate for a few weeks/months, and I think eventually some people just find they have nothing left to say they've not already said before. Look how many people just enrolled on the day of the exclusivity announcement just to voice their disdain.

Yup. We see these periods of low activity often when there's no news coming out for a while. Things will pick up again when the next batch of assets will be released, don't worry. It's normal :)

Flintmelody
6th Oct 2014, 17:59
We have to hope now our great community rep is back that CD start getting more feedback relayed back to them. I have to wonder how much CD knew what was going to happen when the announced the deal and did it anyway or if they made a real miscalculation on the response. if it's the latter we are okay but if it's the first then that terrible Spector of the permanent exclusive is much more a danger.