Tomb Raider 2: Rise of the Tomb Raider

[Sanji Himura]

Here is Sickboy to explain why you shouldn't just take Microsoft's PR department at face value:



The underlying story here is that Microsoft chose their words carefully to boost sales of XBO.

 

[Tyger]

True, but the thread title is just misleading just like a Sky/Fox news headline.

Don't get me wrong, I think it's a stupid ploy that will harm MS more than it'll help - but that still doesn't alter the fact that the thread title is wrong.

Changed, it wasn't misleading at the time though when few sources were available. Have now changed it to "announced as XBox exclusive" because it was. And the rollout to other platforms is still conjecture, non?

 

[MeanElf]

Cheers. From what I read elsewhere, MS themselves admitted it would only be a timed exclusive, thereby confirming other platforms' inclusion, just in not so many words

 

[chromatic9]

http://www.kotaku.co.uk/2014/08/13/xboxs-phil-spencer-responds-tomb-raider-exclusivity-questions

When you read the interview in full here, you get the sense it's one of those classic "one console and PC deals". Exclusive for 2015 could mean PC version will be 2016.

If MS is helping out in a big way like is stated then it wouldn't make sense to let this go to Playstation in the near or medium term.

These deals happen a lot like Titanfall, Dead Rising, all the way to Tomb Raider II and III when Sony paid to not appear on the Sega Saturn but allowed the PC version.

 

[Sanji Himura]

That dumb [censored] Phil Spenser is lying to you, @chromatic9. He can only hold back a title in a timed exclusive for however long the agreement is for, and by all signs, it is only for 8 short weeks. Square Enix knows that there is a 3:1 market share of PS4s to XBOs, and the only reason why they signed the exclusivity agreement is so that they won't have to compete with Uncharted 4 for PS4 owner's gaming dollars. SE would be stupid as [censored] to make Rise of the Tomb Raider a complete Xbox exclusive.

Keep in mind that this was the same company that announced that Metal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes was going to be a Xbox exclusive, and it wasn't true. These [censored censored] will do or say anything to come out on top, and so far nothing is working.

 

[phillgt2002]

Business is business, if they feel as if they can pay for an exclusive, then let them. MS and Sony buy out studios all of the time to keep them developing for them. Shouldn't you all be glad that they're getting paid decent money by Microsoft? Looking at the problems these developing companies are having, I bet they're rather excited by their offering, I know I would be.

SE would be stupid as [censored] to make Rise of the Tomb Raider a complete Xbox exclusive.

Dumb to SE? Not exactly. Some companies make more money from the publishers than they do on sells on games. I don't even think Tomb Raider will sell much.

The way people act with video games is seriously just lame.

 

[Sanji Himura]

Business is business, if they feel as if they can pay for an exclusive, then let them. MS and Sony buy out studios all of the time to keep them developing for them. Shouldn't you all be glad that they're getting paid decent money by Microsoft? Looking at the problems these developing companies are having, I bet they're rather excited by their offering, I know I would be.

I think that you are misunderstanding the whole topic of discussion here. The issue isn't that MS offered SE a butt load of money to make Tomb Raider 2 a timed exclusive. The issue is that the rubbish Microsoft PR machine that is Phil Spenser and Major Nelson was trying to pass off that the game was a complete exclusive when it isn't. It is when he got called on the [censored] that Spenser admitted that there was a timed exclusive, and not a complete exclusive. He chose his words carefully to sell Xbox Ones, that is what PR people do. If the facts don't lead to a reasonable conclusion as to why a game should be an exclusive, and market saturation of 3 PS4s to every 1 XBO sold is reason enough to doubt why the game needs exclusivity. Three to one! Sony recently claimed that there are 10 million PS4s sold worldwide. If Sony is outselling Microsoft three to one, and I'll even grant you that the ratio is probably much closer to 1:1 in the US, at 10 million PS4's in homes world wide, how many XBO's are in homes world wide? 5 million? Try 3.3 million, and most of their sales have been in traditionally strong Microsoft market the US.

Square Enix would have been much better off had they rejected the Microsoft money and actually tried to compete with Uncharted 4 on the PS4. The first Tomb Raider is selling like hot cakes, unrealistic goals aside, and the sequel would have been better on superior hardware.

 

[MeanElf]

That's what I find funny: as it's an adult game, adults will tend to get both. Maybe the kids will be all over Uncharted 4, but they shouldn't really be getting TR 2 - I know they probably will, but the adults will likely be getting both, so no conflict really.

 

[Ddrizle]

 

[Tyger]

Looking forward to this. I'm hoping for a much less linear experience this time, with more emphasis on open-world exploration. And more solitude, I always loved the old games for their sense of loneliness. I want to feel I (as Lara) am the first to clap eyes on a lot of things, not have other people running about or talking to me through a headset. That teaser reminds me of the first game's intro somewhat, where she scales a mountain, then enters a cave.

 

[Ddrizle]

 

[Jawehawk]

The title of this thread really needs to be renamed

 

[Ddrizle]

 

[Ddrizle]

 

[Robin]

The title of this thread really needs to be renamed

Yeah it's not an exclusive, it's a timed exclusive.

Also not a fan of how Lara looks in this one. Last time she looked like herself was Underworld.

 

[Tyger]

The title of this thread really needs to be renamed

Fixed

Yeah it's not an exclusive, it's a timed exclusive.

That wasn't clear when I created the thread.

 

[CAMAROBOY69]

I truly enjoyed the last TR so I am looking forward to this.

 

[Ddrizle]

 

[Ddrizle]

Off-screen gameplay

 

[Ddrizle]

 

[prisonermonkeys]

I have mixed feelings about this. I enjoyed the first game, even if it was pretty brief. But this looks and feels like a retread - Lara is separated from her companions and needs to find shelter and make a fire, but there are wolves and armed men nearby. And that Cold War facility sounds a lot like the World War II installations.

 

[Brend]

It looks like more of the same, really. Avalanche trailer didn't do anything, almost seemed like a rehash of the final climb at the end of the first game. Also, in regard to the way Ms has handled the 'exclusivity', it isn't just Microsoft who act this way. The entire of Sony's conference was littered with 'first on playstation' and 'console exclusive'. Its a shame things have got the way that both companies need to try and be more outright with consumers in the future.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

It looks like more of the same, really. Avalanche trailer didn't do anything, almost seemed like a rehash of the final climb at the end of the first game.

That's not necessarily a bad thing - Rise really should pick up where Tomb Raider left off, so having some overlap between the last and first sequences is fine by me. But now Lara has lost all of her skills and equipment and has to start over. Sure, there are a few new abilities, like climbing trees, but with the snowbound setting, it feels just like Assassin's Creed Rogue.

 

[Brend]

Good comparison, knew there was a certain vibe I was getting from it.

That's not necessarily a bad thing - Rise really should pick up where Tomb Raider left off, so having some overlap between the last and first sequences is fine by me. But now Lara has lost all of her skills and equipment and has to start over. Sure, there are a few new abilities, like climbing trees, but with the snowbound setting, it feels just like Assassin's Creed Rogue.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

I do like the set-up, with Trinity covering up the events in the Devil's Triangle; their existence was foreshadowed in the first game (assuming that you collected all of the GOS caches), if not their nature or their intentions. But it's the same writer on-board, and she wasn't great the last time around - it was very predictable and the support characters were very shallow (but it's good to see Jonah is back; he was probably the most interesting).

 

[Robin]

Does anyone think Crystal Dynamics will ever stop doing prequels and reboots and actually make a game which continues the story? I really want a game which continues on from Underworld. I'm not a fan of the whole origins thing because we have gone back through Lara's past again and again and again!

 

[prisonermonkeys]

I'm not a fan of the whole origins thing because we have gone back through Lara's past again and again and again!

Can you really fault Crystal Dynamics for wanting to take the franchise in their own direction rather than being a slave to somebody else's continuity? Sure, Eidos didn't really wrap things up, but they did mismanage the franchise at the end there - especially in the way they tried to manipulate reviews for Underworld. At least Crystal Dynamics is making the effort to tell a brand new story.

 

[GranTurismo guy]

Does anyone think Crystal Dynamics will ever stop doing prequels and reboots and actually make a game which continues the story? I really want a game which continues on from Underworld. I'm not a fan of the whole origins thing because we have gone back through Lara's past again and again and again!

We have only gone backwards once, with tr 2013.

 

[Tyger]

Eidos/Core already did though with Tomb Raider 5 Chronicles, CD saw fit to rejig that part of Lara's life story, not really sure why. The whole thing about her parents dissappearance was kind of cool, not sure if that was ever fully played out?

 

[Robin]

We have only gone backwards once, with tr 2013.

But we have gone into her past in pretty much every Tomb Raider, especially the Crystal Dynamics ones. So many flashbacks. It's just with the new ones they are doing it all in more detail with slightly more creative licence.

Can you really fault Crystal Dynamics for wanting to take the franchise in their own direction rather than being a slave to somebody else's continuity? Sure, Eidos didn't really wrap things up, but they did mismanage the franchise at the end there - especially in the way they tried to manipulate reviews for Underworld. At least Crystal Dynamics is making the effort to tell a brand new story.

I don't suggest they do it purely to fulfil someone else's continuity, which Eidos threw in the drain anyway with Angel of Darkness. I'm saying there could be all new game set after Underworld which they tell an equally brand new story, it doesn't have to be set in the past.