PDA

View Full Version : TR10 development started before TR9 launch



Driber
25th Feb 2015, 10:29
I've seen a lot of speculation on when development of TR10 began exactly, in various threads here and in the TR9 section, so I thought I made a thread for this for reference.


That said, Gallagher says, Crystal Dynamics and Square Enix didn’t wait to see sales numbers of Tomb Raider before starting work on the sequel. The studio and publisher both felt confident about the quality of the game and began planning the next one prior to launch

source (http://www.siliconera.com/2015/02/24/square-enix-talks-rise-of-the-tomb-raider-exclusivity-sales-and-more/)

d1n0_xD
25th Feb 2015, 11:54
I'm glad they're taking their time with these games, I seriously don't want the Call of Duty and Assassin's Creed treatment in this franchise. 2-3, even 4 years between each games is more than great, it gives you time to speculate and get hyped and excited, and developers can make a great game. Because, seriously, I want this franchise to go forever, to rip a hole in time and space and become a constant in our universe, TOMB RAIDER ALWAYS WAS AND ALWAYS WILL BE! And it becoming a franchise that comes out yearly would not give it the eternity it deserves :3

Tecstar70
25th Feb 2015, 16:34
I'm glad they're taking their time with these games, I seriously don't want the Call of Duty and Assassin's Creed treatment in this franchise. 2-3, even 4 years between each games is more than great, it gives you time to speculate and get hyped and excited, and developers can make a great game. Because, seriously, I want this franchise to go forever, to rip a hole in time and space and become a constant in our universe, TOMB RAIDER ALWAYS WAS AND ALWAYS WILL BE! And it becoming a franchise that comes out yearly would not give it the eternity it deserves :3

I can't see this happening to be honest.
COD has three different studios working on separate games releasing in 3 year cycle and they are lucky enough that people will buy it because its COD and not necessarily for any other reason.
AC was a total disaster and I sincerely hope that Ubisoft and other studios take note.
Battlefield is suffering the same fate IMO with the disastrous BF4 and thelukewram BF:Hardline. I sincerely hope they redeeem themselves with Star Wars Battlefront!

DamianGraham
25th Feb 2015, 20:56
I'm glad they're taking their time with these games, I seriously don't want the Call of Duty and Assassin's Creed treatment in this franchise. 2-3, even 4 years between each games is more than great, it gives you time to speculate and get hyped and excited, and developers can make a great game. Because, seriously, I want this franchise to go forever, to rip a hole in time and space and become a constant in our universe, TOMB RAIDER ALWAYS WAS AND ALWAYS WILL BE! And it becoming a franchise that comes out yearly would not give it the eternity it deserves :3

Pure poetry :') I agree, Tomb Raider has been a constant in my life and I don't want to see the day where the franchise disappears or gets swept under the rug. I do hope that the game returns to multiplatform and that the money from this deal is enough to keep it multiplat next release. I know it's nice to have free advertising- but hopefully they only needed it this one time to "establish" the game further. I hate exclusives they're so pointless. If I ever get an xbox? cool, but for now while I can't afford to? no.

I think if this game returns to all platforms, it'll stick around for even longer.

WinterSoldierLTE
26th Feb 2015, 00:22
I agree with Dino. I'd much rather wait for 3-4 years and have a fully finished, bug & glitch free game that is exactly what the devs set out to create as opposed to a "Bah! No time to fix that! We'll put a patch out later!" mentality that seems more and more commonplace nowadays.

Plus too much too soon creates overkill. Look at 'Guitar Hero' and 'Rockband'. You could argue those were 1 trick ponies, but still. And to an extent, that's already happened to TR with the first 5 games so it's good to see CD learned from observing that.

Honestly I'm surprised '"Assassin's Creed" has kept on going as often as those are put out. I'd have thought people would've been sick of them years ago.

DamianGraham
26th Feb 2015, 02:24
I agree with Dino. I'd much rather wait for 3-4 years and have a fully finished, bug & glitch free game that is exactly what the devs set out to create as opposed to a "Bah! No time to fix that! We'll put a patch out later!" mentality that seems more and more commonplace nowadays.

Plus too much too soon creates overkill. Look at 'Guitar Hero' and 'Rockband'. You could argue those were 1 trick ponies, but still. And to an extent, that's already happened to TR with the first 5 games so it's good to see CD learned from observing that.

Honestly I'm surprised '"Assassin's Creed" has kept on going as often as those are put out. I'd have thought people would've been sick of them years ago.

I truly think this trend is whats really hurting the gaming industry. So many times developers are forced to pump out sequel after sequel to meet some sort of twisted demand that publishers *think* there is- and it burns everyone out on them. CoD as well as Assassin's Creed haven't brought too much innovation to each release enough to justify my getting excited over them anymore. While I'm glad that Crystal isn't following this trend, I don't agree with Square's business practices either in handling the series. One way or another it's not good. You can have too many releases, or limit yourself to nothing, and risk being forgotten.

d1n0_xD
26th Feb 2015, 08:29
^ Yeah, innovation is really important in sequels, and when devs have time, they can come up with all sorts of things and make them happen, and not just rehash old mechanics with a new story. One other thing I like to see when it comes to TR devs is how excited they get when they talk about it and their little smiles, it shows to me that they are working hard on these new ideas and they can't wait for us to play the game :D

Error96_
26th Feb 2015, 22:35
I'm glad they're taking their time with these games, I seriously don't want the Call of Duty and Assassin's Creed treatment in this franchise. 2-3, even 4 years between each games is more than great, it gives you time to speculate and get hyped and excited, and developers can make a great game.

Rushing the release of AOD was what ended Core's role in TR as AOD had really amazing ideas and story just unfinished with the control system. I would rather they took time and make a better game.

WinterSoldierLTE
27th Feb 2015, 00:20
You can have too many releases, or limit yourself to nothing, and risk being forgotten.

It's a delicate balance for sure. Especially if it's a 'Duke Nukem Forever' that takes forever to come out and by the time it does has no way of living up to hype or expectations of the people who didn't forget about it and are still interested. (I personally enjoyed 'DNF' tho. It was exactly what I wanted from a Duke game, but that's me. Worth the wait? Nah, but still fun.)

A better example could be Guns 'N Roses and their "Chinese Democracy" album. If it had come out 7 years earlier it probably would've sold millions. But since the audience either grew up or just didn't care anymore after waiting so long, it suffered. I got my copy of it for $5 brand new a month after it came out. And there were still loads of copies of it on the shelf with that price. They (Best Buy) couldn't even sell it for next to nothing at that point.










And the G'NR record was terrible...

Gitb97
27th Feb 2015, 16:01
^ Hahah I couldn't help but find the Guns n Roses bit of your post funny.

But I agree! It's like Mirrors Edge 2 - I'm obsessed with the original but i'm worried about the fact it's taken a long time. Will it be as good as I want it to be? Or will it be a let down? It was 2008 when it came out so it's been 7 years!

WinterSoldierLTE
27th Feb 2015, 23:53
^ Hahah I couldn't help but find the Guns n Roses bit of your post funny.

I'm glad someone got a kick out of it. Normally when I mention that album and my opinion of it either A) people have no idea what I'm talking about or B) they fire back with "It's just ahead of it's time! In 10 years it'll be the next 'White Album!'"

And I've proof...

width=150

AlexWeiss
28th Feb 2015, 00:36
That actually kind of makes me sad because a large handful of the artists I listen to make great content and then they're like "Oh, it's okay guys, we don't know when we're making more," and then release a new one about five years later...

Gitb97
1st Mar 2015, 15:09
I used to obsess over quite a lot of musicians but I don't like the whole waiting 5,6,7 years for a new album that sounds like it was produced on an iPad, I haven't had a favourite band or singer in about four years because of this reason.

Tihocan
1st Mar 2015, 22:17
Especially if it's a 'Duke Nukem Forever' that takes forever to come out and by the time it does has no way of living up to hype or expectations of the people who didn't forget about it and are still interested. (I personally enjoyed 'DNF' tho. It was exactly what I wanted from a Duke game, but that's me. Worth the wait? Nah, but still fun.)
Duke Nukem Forever... "DNF" - that about sums it up for me. "Did Not Finish".


But I agree! It's like Mirrors Edge 2 - I'm obsessed with the original but i'm worried about the fact it's taken a long time. Will it be as good as I want it to be? Or will it be a let down? It was 2008 when it came out so it's been 7 years!
Flashback: The Quest For Identity came out in 1992, and it was the game of my childhood until Lara came along. Ubisoft/VectorCell released a remake in 2013 that was basically the "dumb shooter version". I was just short of devastated.

Imagine the pressure behind something like Half Life 3. If it's even just good, it will endure such incredible harshness in critique for as long people are alive to remember it.

WinterSoldierLTE
1st Mar 2015, 23:53
I used to obsess over quite a lot of musicians but I don't like the whole waiting 5,6,7 years for a new album that sounds like it was produced on an iPad, I haven't had a favourite band or singer in about four years because of this reason.

Ya know the only band that I got tired of waiting on is MetallicA. They took so long in between "St. Anger" & "Death Magnetic" that I just couldn't get excited for new music from them anymore. Then "Death Magnetic" came out and it was what it was and I just gave up. Not on MetallicA, but on new music from them. Definitely a band who'll never top their older material for me.

Most times I don't mind a 4-5 year wait tho. It's been years since their last studio record, but I'm still in anticipation of a new Porcupine Tree record. I've done some time in bands and done some productions for local bands in my area and I kind of get that sometimes band members need to just get the hell away from each other for awhile for the sake of the band staying together. People get on your nerves very easily when you've been with them practically 24/7 for a few years and you're not in a romantic relationship with them. Which you pretty much are (and really have to be) if you're in a band nowadays and you're starting out and working your way up. So I can wait if it's for "the greater good". That being said tho, I don't think I've waited 10 years or more for one of my fave bands to put a record out. Well, maybe MetallicA. I forget what years "Anger" & "Magnetic" came out.

Then there are bands for me that just need to cool it for a bit and take some time away because it feels like a non-stop barrage of records. Like Dream Theater. I love those guys, but they need to stop putting records out once every 2-3 years. They all pretty much sound the same so it gets to a point where I think: "Why buy the new one? I've already bought it 4 times now.". They need a breather to re-adjust a couple of things and change it up a bit I guess. For me.

Or you get a DevilDriver who put out a new album once every 2 years for 10 years straight and ended up losing their core songwriters because they got burnt out. That was a bummer.


Duke Nukem Forever... "DNF" - that about sums it up for me. "Did Not Finish".


Flashback: The Quest For Identity came out in 1992, and it was the game of my childhood until Lara came along. Ubisoft/VectorCell released a remake in 2013 that was basically the "dumb shooter version". I was just short of devastated.

Imagine the pressure behind something like Half Life 3. If it's even just good, it will endure such incredible harshness in critique for as long people are alive to remember it.

Yeah, I will admit it took me awhile to finish 'DNF'. It's definitely one of those games where you gotta be in the mood for its humor, which for me is the biggest appeal of it.

I had no idea there was a remake of 'Flashback'! I loved that game as a kid! That's a shame it's been dumbed down. I remember it being very challenging to the point where it was like 'Ecco The Dolphin' in that you just had to figure it out and see it through. Could've been due to my being 1o at the time tho. Man, it's been ages since I played that game.

'Half-Life 3' is one that I think that if it's going to happen it should happen soon so that it doesn't get built up and anticipated anymore than it already is to the point that it'll never live up to what people expect. Good, bad, or indifferent, I say Valve should either release it now, or put out an official statement saying: "Nope. It's not gonna happen. We just can't make it good enough for you at this point." and end the anticipation/hope and save loads of disappointment from people have waited and will wait along time for a game that never comes out.