The Issue With Tomb Raider Situation...

  • 77 results
  • 1
  • 2
#51 Posted by turtlethetaffer (17198 posts) -

@mesomorphin: yup

#52 Edited by Mesomorphin (864 posts) -

@firefox59 said:

@mesomorphin said:

@Lulu_Lulu: The first season of Pokemon and Yu-gi-oh Fucking rocked man!

Pokemon was good for the first season. Some of the Johto stuff was good like the big tournament at the end. Most of the people I know stopped watching it because Ash kept releasing all of his pokemon, like fricken Charizard. I stopped watching Yugioh somewhere before the end of the Marik Saga. I enjoyed it but seemed like it has run it's course.

As for DBZ, it's just something you have to get when you watch it. If you don't get behind the characters the show does seem bland and repetitive. It does bother me when people say only Vegeta underwent character development. Gohan and Buu experienced massive changes. The biggest problem was that Toriyama was supposed to end it twice but kept it going cause of the rabid fanbase. I still think he did a good job with it though. My favorite part of the series is the moments though. There are some anime that are good overall but don't have powerful impact moments. DBZ has so many of those. While FMA: Brotherhood may have had bigger woah moments, it had about 5 or 6. Where as DBZ had somewhere around 12 and that's not just because the series is longer.

I think thats reason why alot of people love DBZ as much as they do, myself included. DBZ has those powerful/inspirational moments that print themselves in your head for life. And as a fan I'am glad the series didn't end at freiza or cell. And whilst I loved the first season of Yu-gi-oh, the second was really bad IMO, so I stopped watching.

@Lulu_Lulu said:

@Mesomorphin

They are better as games... Especially Yu-gi-Oh.

Yeah I would say the PKMN games where good up until Black and White, from there it was all down hill for me.

#53 Posted by Mesomorphin (864 posts) -

@turtlethetaffer said:

@mesomorphin: yup

So long as they keep pumping out awesome games, sustain their awesome network and give us free games every month, I'am happy ;)

#54 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (18502 posts) -

@Mesomorphin

Agreed... Even though I don't like RPGs.

#55 Posted by sukraj (23975 posts) -

@turtlethetaffer said:

Microsoft sucks anyways.

don't say that dude

#56 Edited by Mesomorphin (864 posts) -

@sukraj said:

@turtlethetaffer said:

Microsoft sucks anyways.

don't say that dude

I wouldn't worry about him Sukraj, the guy is clueless.

@Lulu_Lulu You don't like RPG's? damn dude! what kind of games you into?

#57 Edited by BranKetra (49862 posts) -

Demon's Souls is a PlayStation 3 exclusive. Dark Souls and Dark Souls 2 are multiplatform. There is nothing with wrong returning to the company which the first game was successful with. I say that because many non-PS3, but Xbox 360 owners during the last generation could be among those who purchased the PlayStation 4 since launch.

http://www.lazygamer.net/xbox-360/former-xbox-fans-are-buying-ps4-says-sony/

With that possibility presented, the reality of the situation could be that former Xbox 360 Dark Souls players already own the video game console needed to run Bloodborne for a number of reasons.

#58 Posted by turtlethetaffer (17198 posts) -

@mesomorphin: Ironic that a Microsoft fan is the one calling me clueless.

#59 Posted by Mesomorphin (864 posts) -

@BranKetra said:

Demon's Souls is a PlayStation 3 exclusive. Dark Souls and Dark Souls 2 are multiplatform. There is nothing with wrong returning to the company which the first game was successful with. I say that because many non-PS3, but Xbox 360 owners during the last generation could be among those who purchased the PlayStation 4 since launch.

http://www.lazygamer.net/xbox-360/former-xbox-fans-are-buying-ps4-says-sony/

With that possibility presented, the reality of the situation could be that former Xbox 360 Dark Souls players already own the video game console needed to run Bloodborne for a number of reasons.

But then is also a large percentage of people who also went from a xbox 360 to a Xbox one....which still doesn't justify anything. Thats like saying its okay for all those PS fans of Tomb raider because some of them may of bought a Xbox one instead....

@turtlethetaffer said:

@mesomorphin: Ironic that a Microsoft fan is the one calling me clueless.

Ironic how I don't single my views to one piece of plastic, unlike some primitive ones out there.

#60 Posted by firefox59 (4493 posts) -

Just thought I should add that MS addressed this more directly. I think the fact that it's timed makes it alright in terms of fairness. I really don't think enough multi-console owners will buy it for Xbox One rather than wait, if they prefer PS4, but whatever.

http://www.ign.com/articles/2014/08/18/why-microsoft-wanted-rise-of-the-tomb-raider

#61 Posted by sukraj (23975 posts) -

@mesomorphin said:

@sukraj said:

@turtlethetaffer said:

Microsoft sucks anyways.

don't say that dude

I wouldn't worry about him Sukraj, the guy is clueless.

@Lulu_Lulu You don't like RPG's? damn dude! what kind of games you into?

that's a fair comment bro.

#62 Edited by Lulu_Lulu (18502 posts) -

@Mesomorphin

I'l play anything that doesn't place an emphasis on Memorization. But I'm a total whore for Co-Op games.

#63 Posted by bezza2011 (2720 posts) -

@mesomorphin said:

@bezza2011 said:

No your completely wrong. you cannot even compare the 2 as much as you want to say that dark souls and demon souls are sequels and dark souls 2 just come out and o now there is another but it's exclusive and that's so bad and shame on you Sony, it isn't a Sequel it is a brand new game, like Dark Souls was to Demon Soul's, there 2 different games it just so happens From Software make the same genre games, it did not follow the story on. Plus Demon Souls was Exclusive to Sony and that was the first game, so it really isn't the same as Tomb Raider. There not Sequels Demon Souls is a different game to Dark Souls, BloodBourne is a totally different game as well New IP

Now take Tomb Raider, it started it's life back on PS1,PC, Sega Saturn, it has always been a Multiplat game, it is rich in history of being this, Tomb Raider Reboot was brought out for PS3/PC/360. The Definitive Edition was brought out for PS4/Xbox1, it sold 69% better on PS4.

The Rise Of The Tomb Raider is a direct sequel to the reboot, it is a continuation of the story everyone who played the reboot, it is not just a similar game from the same company, it is not a new IP, it is a direct sequel which was always going to be a multiplat, it is in an elite group of games which should never be anything but that. But Microsoft who have no quality in house developers to create a unique and fresh new IP to compete with Uncharted next year or anything for that matter, so all they do is rob the next best thing, and that to me is what is wrong with Microsoft esp in console gaming, it's the easy way out for them.

Now that we know it's a time exclusive, for me it makes Microsoft look even worse, It shows you right there that they knew they could not compete with Uncharted and needed something next year to help them out because they probably have nothing lined up, so now they have Tomb Raider to compete and then a couple months later I believe once sales of Uncharted have died down then it will be released for all consoles and of course it will be better on PS4 and PC it's another reason for it as well esp on Crystal Dynamics side, for them they get compensation for not going on all consoles, and plus they will get a lot of money from sales while Uncharted does it's business for Sony.

Did you ignore what I said? Demon souls and Dark souls are in a line of games known as "the soul games" which also includes Bloodborne, regardless of whether story matches up. Infact Dark souls 1 and Dark souls 2 had completely different stories, on different worlds altogether! Any demon/dark soul fan can easily pick up that Bloodborne is a soul game, there is no denying it! and regardless of whether its a direct sequel or not, that doesnt change the fact that xbox/PC soul fans, are feeling ripped on!

What are you talking about that MS has nothing lined up for next year? um hello, Quantum break, d4, Fable legends, Crack down, Scalebound, Phantom dust, ScreamRide and not to mention their monster release...Halo 5, which will wipe the floor clean in terms of sales next to Uncharted, plus not to mention Tomb raider now. As I mentioned earlier I dont want to turn this into a console fight, I respect both systems and their releases/quality, as should you.

" and of course it will be better on PS4 and PC "

According to who? your mum? how would the ps4 version be any different? At the very least the xbox one version MAY run at 900p, and anyone with an actual brain can identify that the difference between 1080p and 900p is like so bar minimal, you literally need to set up two monitors and stare directly for like 5 minutes before you notice the most minimal detail. PS4 and the Xbox one are identical. You want strong performance? you want 4k? then yes jump on a PC. Otherwise dont ever put a PS4 next to a PC like that.

But the fact that Demon Souls it self started it's life as a PS3 Exclusive and has never been released on any console, takes away the merit that it's anything like the situation of Tomb Raider which has been a multiplatform game since it began, it may be in a line of games called the souls games, but dark souls and demon souls are different series, seeing as there is dark souls 2 which dark souls is a multiplat series, just because bloodbourne is the same type of game is made by the same developers, it is still a new IP which is a Sony Exclusive. where as Tomb Raider has a deep and rich foundation in all systems and should never of been brought to just one console, which it doesn't even matter now anyway as it's just a time exclusive.

I'm not saying X1 has no games, it has no game which competes in the same genre as Uncharted so instead of getting a first party developer to make a fresh new IP to rival Uncharted at the same time in the year, they just decided to take Tomb Raider off the market and for me that just shows what MS do and that's buy timed exclusives and take third party games from all over platforms just to make money, it is business but it's still not a clean business decision, it's peed off alot of people.

Of Course Tomb Raider will run better on PC, did you see that game at maxed settings, and the PS4 Version of it ran a lot smoother and looked sharper, it may be a small margin in looks and performance but anyone who has a PC and PS4 will be thinking well i'll just wait it out and get the better version, seeing as it's only timed exclusive, these sorts of deals just don't work, i'm not going to hand over a load of money to buy a console just to play Tomb Raider when i know it's coming out for other systems within a year.

The way I see it, is I have a PS4, I have a PC, I'm still waiting to find something which makes me interested in Xbox One, but considering alot of the Exclusives except the 4 major fanchises seem to be going to PC as well, I'm not trying to have a system war, i'm just still trying to see a reason for the Xbox One,

I wouldn't say the Xbox One and PS4 are identical when the PS4 is running a mid range graphics card and the Xbox One is using a Level entry card, there are differences and on a few games it's clear as day, plus the PS4 is using GDDR5 Ram to play games which in the long run is going to show the difference, the problem people still cant get there head around is the Xbox One was made around media and games second, that's not even me being a fanboy that's the designers of the Xbox One saying they didn't want a powerhouse game console, just because phil spencer has come out and put the focus back on games doesn't change the fact, the Xbox One was designed with more in mind than just games.

#64 Posted by yukushi (317 posts) -

Microsoft is just pissing money away again like they normally do, if titanfall could not move xbox one units then tombraider is not going to help them sell more units and it was not even a big seller on ps3 and xbox 360.

#65 Posted by firefox59 (4493 posts) -

@Lulu_Lulu said:

@Mesomorphin

I'l play anything that doesn't place an emphasis on Memorization. But I'm a total whore for Co-Op games.

So memorization is the key? Lol, so that's why you don't like the Souls games.

#66 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (18502 posts) -

@firefox59

The Soul's games are just the tip of the IceBerg.

#67 Edited by ryangcnx-2 (1300 posts) -

Or as a true gamer, I own all 3 plus a PC capable of playing games. So once the new Tomb Raider comes out, I will buy it on the X1. I loved the first game, so the sequel is a day one purchase. I buy any exclusive I want and decide what platform I would rather play a multiplat on.

#68 Posted by ryangcnx-2 (1300 posts) -

Also, I have noticed a in a few threads, people keep saying Tomb Raider bombed sales. No it didn't, it sold around 3 million at launch. Squares ridiculous expectations only made it a failure. Most companies would love their game to sell 3+ million. Tomb Raider did very well and if I remember correctly has reached 7 million world wide, and that was when they were promoting the Definitive Edition so who knows how much it has sold now

#69 Posted by BabyPulpFiction (99 posts) -

Well I am a HUGE TR fan. so I am a little bummed that I will have to wait until it comes to PS, but oh well :(

#70 Posted by dakan45 (18724 posts) -

I dont like sony, with ps3 they became trash to me, naughty dog makes great games, although i didnt like TLOU and i think uncharted 4 is unessary. Insomniac is now on xbone. Never cared about infamous or killzone those games didnt sell well either, yet sony keeps making them..stop making those, make new games.

Now on tomb raider?

The franchise started on pc, ported to saturn and then to ps, it has ALWAYS been on pc and ps.

Then crystal dynamics ruined the gameplay making it more cinematic and less about the tomb raiding gameplay.

Tomb raider costed 100 million to make 100 million gone to marketing and hollywood crap like motion capture and scripted nonsene. Instead of that they could make a less cinematic and graphically impressive game that focused on nonlinear maps and traps.

But as usual square enix over compensates with polish and graphics rather gameplay.

There were far better prototypes for the game like having a little girl as a sidekick and travel around with a motorbike. Having horseriding and big maps with big bosses like shadow of the colossus and a swamp like sillent hill setting with monsters. But they ditched it for the generic brown and grey rocky hobbo killing game that will apaprently appeal to a larger audience.

At this point it has sold over 6.5 milion copies Yet they thought that making it exlusive to the system with the smaller fanbase that tomb raider always sold less is the right movie.

Makes you wonder just how much money ms gave them? Ms paid 50 million for timed exlusivity on gta v dlcs. So if they gave them say 30 milion for timed exlusivity, they basicly funded most of the development of the game.

What pisses me off is the delivery of this news. So you invested on a game, supported them as they say and the game leaves you with a sequel promise, slowly establishing a fanbse and then they put it on xbone and ps4 and then BOOM you cant have it its xbone exlusive...no world about exlusivity. Atleast phil spencer is a nice guy and said its timed instead of posting bs like crystal dynamic did.

It kinda gives you an idea how money are making the industry go around and switch sides. It scares me of what we gonna see in the future and how those corperations will screw us over. Thankfully by the looks of it this is the last gen, then it will be a streaming subscription service.

My problem with sony is that they own every exlusive they got. Meaning no other platform will ever see it. It would make sense to release an old game say resistance 1 on pc, since they wouldnt lose any money, just make money. Infact yoshida said only 4/10 sony exlusives sell, yet they keep making them. So it makes sense to do what ms does and make them timed so devs can sell them to other platforms and make money...but they dont.

Sony is basicly buy our system or gtfo. Now i dont care at all about dark souls or bloodborne, but its not like there is any shortage of those games, you got dark sousl 2 and lords of the fallen.

Sony however is really good at "owning" franchises,eg the reason sunset overdrive isnt on ps4 is because sony wanted to own the ip, while insomniac wanted to keep it, so they gone to ms and ms let them keep it.

Interesting factoid, bungie is done with the ms contract so they are free to make games for other platforms, however naughty dog are wholly owned by sony and they are unable to make games unless its on playstation.

So it kinda gives you some perspective on sony and how they do business.

I dont think there is any point to exlusive titles anymore. They cost too much to make and they dont sell well, infact exlusives dont really sell consoles as people think, if you take a look at the sales you will see that they are a small fraction of the console userbase The 10 million playstations were not sold becase 1 million something bought infamous. Infact you could say that 2 million people bought xbone for titanfall which was not a exlusive was more influenetial than sony exlusives.

That being said as a pc gamer mostly who likes playing old games through backwards compability, i really think this exlusive bs should just end and put games on pc so they can be played by everyone thanks to backwards compability. If you want an old game that is on pc, you can just go and get it thanks to steam if you want an old game on consoles, say a ps2 game...good luck finding a remaster, if the game is not famous then you are screwed.

Seriously at this point i dont see why we need consoles, get a steambox, plug whatever controller you want and play any game you want.

But ofcourse the only division of sony that makes money is playastation so to avoid going bunkrupt they got to support it.

Ms makes xbox because????????? The xbox brand was never profitable, so why they keep making them? I dont know they care about gaming maybe?

and nitendo is stuck in the 80s, no one wants a nitendo console, just make your game multiplats and enjoy the profit. Infact everyone is begging for emulators on smartphones so they can play nitendos classics..that would make them craploads of money... but hey nitendo is stuck in the 90s.

I was reading a research saying kids nowdays are used to tablets and smartphones so they dont really enjoy games on consoles. It makes sense, when your phone can do a bazillion things and play games, why do you need a portable console? So expect nitendo's portable consoles to die in 5 years.

#71 Edited by Black_Knight_00 (19114 posts) -

I don't see the problem with waiting 6 months to play a standalone expansion of a game you already played. You have a backlog, you won't die.

#72 Posted by dakan45 (18724 posts) -

@Black_Knight_00: expansion didnt they say it will be bigger and more open?

Funny thing, we havent even seen any gameplay

#73 Posted by starwolf474 (980 posts) -
@b-u-r-r-o-w-s said:

I think what most Sony fans are pissed about(myself included) is that Sony made Tomb Raider popular ( Tomb Raider 1996 , Tomb Raider 2 1997 , Tomb Raider III: Adventures of Lara Croft 1998 , Tomb Raider: The Last Revelation 1999 , Tomb Raider Chronicles 2000 , Tomb Raider: Angel of Darkness 2003 , and then in 2006 xbox released there first game and its been multiplat since so for them too say we might never play the new one is a kick in the teeth , saying that Im sure its a timed exclusive.

It's not like the same thing hasn't happened before in Sony's favor. Take a look at Final Fantasy, it was made popular for many years on Nintendo consoles and then all of a sudden, it is exclusive to PlayStation and Nintendo fans can't play it anymore. Final Fantasy VII was even originally supposed to be released for Nintendo just like Rise of the Tomb Raider was originally supposed to be released on PS4 and PC, but then got cancelled and released exclusively for PlayStation instead.

Personally, I think going crazy over a game being exclusive to one platform is silly. If you really want to play a game that is exclusive to another console bad enough then you should just buy the console that it is on instead of harassing and making death threats to the developers.

#74 Posted by Jag85 (5347 posts) -

If Microsoft is funding the development of Rise of the Tomb Raider, then they have every right to request an exclusivity deal in exchange for the funding. Same goes for Sony funding the development of Bloodborne, and Nintendo funding the development of Bayonetta 2. In Tomb Raider's case, considering the financial troubles that Square Enix was facing last year, I'm sure they'd gladly take Microsoft's money in exchange for some temporary exclusivity.

#75 Edited by Black_Knight_00 (19114 posts) -

@dakan45 said:

@Black_Knight_00: expansion didnt they say it will be bigger and more open?

Funny thing, we havent even seen any gameplay

It's going to be mostly recycled assets, like FarCry 4. Which is fine. More of the same is good in my book. Just nothing to go nuts over for a 6 months delay.

#76 Posted by dakan45 (18724 posts) -

@Black_Knight_00: What game doesnt? Thats how sequels are nowdays.

Infact the mp5,the colt , the goblin, those guns in watchdogs are ripped straight from far cry 3. Ubisoft does that often in their games, some weapons in future soldier are from conviction and some from conviction are ripped from vegas 2.

The thing is that fc3 kinda missed the point of fc2. The missions were linear and scripted they didnt gave you much freedom and the open world was empty. This time they seem to be getting it and they give you stuff like bait and removing the brakes from cars and they say the world will be more dense.

So if fc4 plays better i couldnt care less if it looks samey. more time spend on fixing the gameplay than rebuilding the whole game.

#77 Edited by Black_Knight_00 (19114 posts) -

@dakan45 said:

@Black_Knight_00: What game doesnt? Thats how sequels are nowdays.

Infact the mp5,the colt , the goblin, those guns in watchdogs are ripped straight from far cry 3. Ubisoft does that often in their games, some weapons in future soldier are from conviction and some from conviction are ripped from vegas 2.

The thing is that fc3 kinda missed the point of fc2. The missions were linear and scripted they didnt gave you much freedom and the open world was empty. This time they seem to be getting it and they give you stuff like bait and removing the brakes from cars and they say the world will be more dense.

So if fc4 plays better i couldnt care less if it looks samey. more time spend on fixing the gameplay than rebuilding the whole game.

Sure, we are saying the same thing. Hence why I say, why go nuts over the delay of a game we already know is just more of the (great) same. It will be great, but its a game we have played before, we can wait a few months without suffocating.

#78 Posted by dakan45 (18724 posts) -

@Black_Knight_00: I agree on fc4, from what i read it has 4 fortresses in the map just like watchdogs and you have to melee vip targets just like watchdogs and fc4.

Rakyat-Kyrat.... they use the same letters..wtf ubi?

But tomb raider is said to be more open with more tombs..anyway its not like we have seen any gameplay yet.