Jump to content

Rise of the Tomb Raider


Hexx
 Share

Recommended Posts

Rise of the Tomb Raider FAQ

Thank you for sending us your comments and questions. We looked through the posts on several channels and collected the questions you asked the most into the following FAQ.

What does exclusive to Xbox mean? It means that Rise of the Tomb Raider is coming Holiday 2015 exclusively on Xbox One and Xbox 360.

Does the exclusive to Xbox have a duration? Is it timed? How long is the duration? Can we expect a PlayStation 4 or PC release in the future? Yes, our deal with Microsoft has a duration. We aren’t discussing details of the deal, and are focused on delivering a great game on Xbox One and Xbox 360.

Did Crystal Dynamics know about this deal? Yes, Crystal Dynamics is excited to be partnering with Microsoft to make the best game possible. As Darrell mentioned in his message, we have a long history with Microsoft and they have been a very strong supporter of the franchise. They will help us grow and nurture the Tomb Raider franchise more than ever before.

Were the fans considered when making this decision? Are Crystal Dynamics and Square Enix aware of the franchise history with PlayStation and on PC? Of course. We did not make this decision lightly. Our goal is to build the best game that we possibly can, and our relationship with Microsoft will help us realize our vision for the game.

Why didn’t Microsoft, Square Enix or Crystal Dynamics say upfront it was a timed exclusive? Why all the indirect language? We certainly didn’t intend to cause any confusion with the announcement. The Microsoft Gamescom stage was a great place to make the initial announcement, but not necessarily to go into details.

http://tombraider.tumblr.com/post/95495143805/rise-of-the-tomb-raider-faq

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something bothers about this whole thing... Why did people care so much about this? So what if Microsoft had this as an exclusive forever? Does it really matter in the grand scheme of things? Why was this being exclusive different to something like Bloodborne being exclusive? I don't get it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something bothers about this whole thing... Why did people care so much about this? So what if Microsoft had this as an exclusive forever? Does it really matter in the grand scheme of things? Why was this being exclusive different to something like Bloodborne being exclusive? I don't get it.

Isn't it obvious? Bloodborne is a platform exclusive sequel to an exclusive game. Rise of the Tomb Raider is a (timed) exclusive to a multiplatform title and, as Boozy said, was originally multiplatform as well. Microsoft paid money to stop Square releasing it at the same time on other platforms as they originally intended. That's not cool.

I find it baffling that in an effort to boost sales of a struggling console (in relation to the PS4 sales, and something that happened largely because of a huge PR disaster at the reveal event), they decide to pull another dodgy PR stunt and try to deliberately mislead people into thinking this isn't just a timed exclusive (and the act of making it a timed exclusive in the first place is a dick move). Given the amount of times we heard "coming to console first" it's obvious that neglecting to say that for the RotTR announcement was intentional.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is it not cool?

Did you really just ask that? You know exactly why.

Bloodborne is a spiritual successor to Demon Souls, the PS3 exclusive. Edit: Demon Souls was co developed by SCE Japan Studio and Sony own the license to Bloodbourne (SCE Japan Studio are again co developing and this time also publishing). You don't think that's different to Microsoft paying Square some money so they don't release it on other platforms at the same time?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even if we attempt to indulge the folly of the comparison, Bloodborne isn't actually a sequel to Demon's Souls. A collaboration between the same two developers (yes, this is developed in conjunction with SCE Japan Studio)? Yes. Spiritual successor? Quite possibly, but less so than Dark was to Demon's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was it announced as multiplatform? Genuine question. The original reveal was at the Xbox E3 conference and there's nothing in this thread nor the original Eurogamer article stating what platforms it was coming to. Was it just assumed that it was coming to ask platforms?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, it was posted on the Official PlayStation Magazine as coming to next gen consoles but I think the biggest thing is that nobody spoke about exclusivity, so the deal obviously wasn't in place then. Multiplatform titles (e.g. Witcher 3) are shown at specific E3 events all the time, but that doesn't make them exclusive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you not getting the whole this was announced as multiplatform whereas Bloodborne wasn't thing?

Except at E3 it wasn't officially announced for any platform except Xbox which was quickly and quietly removed from Xbox press apparently.

This deal has been in the works prior to E3 but wasn't made official until GC.

http://youtu.be/OyTeEpnuxhY

It doesn't really matter anyway unless people need another reason to fling some shit at the Bone/MS while they are waiting for Sony's network to get fixed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, the difference is that games like Bayonetta 2 and Bloodborne wouldn't exist if they weren't single format titles, due to Nintendo and Sony funding, publishing and and in Bloodborne's case co-developing the games. It would obviously be great if they were multiformat titles, but it's better than nothing. Sony and Nintendo are adding value to their platforms by funding game development, while Microsoft are just removing value from their competitors (and, err, Windows), albeit temporarily. If Microsoft had done nothing, the exact same game would still be available on the 360 and Xbox One at exactly the same time, so Xbox owners gain nothing from the deal.

That said, I don't begrudge Microsoft for doing this. If I were in their place I'd be trying to get all the exclusives I could as I'd want people to buy my console, and it's not like Microsoft don't make their own first party stuff too. It's just the deception that leaves a bad taste, and the way they announce this kind of stuff like they're doing their customers a favour.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They have to go after something big 3rd party since their first party stuff is either limited or not due for years. TR makes perfect sense.

I would really like to see Microsoft would widen the scope of its first / second party development. That's the area in which they're lacking diversity compared to Sony, and is, I think, the best way to accrue the litany of permanent exclusives that make your platform as desirable as possible. I also think it's the best way to ensure that your console is used to the best of its ability; Naughty Dog, for instance, are going to be far more invested in getting as much as possible out of the PS4 than a team bringing a single entry of what is ostensibly a multi-format series to your console before any other platform.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

343 vs Guerrilla Games

Polyphony vs Turn 10

Playground vs Evolution

Naughty Dog vs Black Tusk

But since Gears of War got bought they needed at title to go up against Uncharted. Hence the deal.

Well, they're not the only studios and Sony's quality content has been decidedly more varied over the few years; that's a simple fact, not a knock on the quality of the content the Microsoft teams do produce. You'd be hard pressed to argue that Killzone comes close to Halo - even without Bungie - or that Forza can't compete with Gran Turismo. I think Xbox would benefit greatly if Microsoft diversified quality first/second party software further than they have beyond the stalwart shooting / racing genres.

I believe Microsoft as a company has a greater number of studios but fewer dedicated to Xbox than Sony's PlayStation counterparts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now Spencer's running the show you can bet that there's plenty of first party development on the table that we're not privy to (it's his area after all), but like he said in that interview a few pages back, these things take a lot of time and they needed to plug the gap for next year.

I don't know why people keep talking about this as if they've finished the PS4 version and it'll just be sitting on the shelf, though. By the time this comes out Crystal Dynamics will have spent at least year and half exclusively developing the game for the Xbox. It's pretty close to a bona-fide exclusive, whether it eventually gets ported a year down the line or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Read Spencer's interview from a few pages back. He's not funding them to make a game for his competitors, he'd be a pretty shoddy director if he was.

I'm sure they do have extremely early pre-alhpa engine stuff running on the PS4, but we haven't even seen a single screenshot yet. They've got the lion's share of development still to go, and they're putting all their resources into a single platform. Sounds pretty much like a de-facto exclusive to me.

If they'd suddenly signed this deal next September then sure, that would be paying for them to not release the PS4 version. As it is, they're being paid to develop it for the Xbox.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.