Rise of the Tomb Raider is (timed) Xbox Exclusive

#551 Posted by stereointegrity (10902 posts) -

wonder how much microsoft paid for it

#552 Posted by resevl4rlz (3312 posts) -

lol its timed exclusive

#553 Posted by RpgGamer23q (241 posts) -

I was hoping to pick it up on PC but w/e will just buy it on the X1.

#554 Posted by Heirren (19398 posts) -

Tomb Raider was overrated.

#555 Posted by Legend002 (8701 posts) -

@ninjapirate2000: TR was amazing. Much better than Uncharted and that's coming from a huge Sony and naughty Dog fan.

#556 Posted by Seabas989 (11367 posts) -

This was unexpected.

#557 Posted by mems_1224 (49016 posts) -

@StrongBlackVine said:

@freedomfreak said:

Yup. That sealed the deal.

Playstation 4 is gonna have to wait.

Tomb Raider is probably my favorite IP too, but I'm not buying a Xflop to play it. Crystal Dynamics and Square Enix just took a shit on the majority of their fanbase.

dat butthurt

#559 Edited by GrenadeLauncher (6256 posts) -

So now we've established Silent Hills exists and that this is a timed exclusive, just how much of a flop of an announcement was this on a scale of 9.5-10?

#560 Posted by bigboss5ak (2900 posts) -

@Gaming-Planet:

If pot of gold means money then well, money helps cure cancer so your statement is an oxymoron.

#561 Posted by LJS9502_basic (153045 posts) -

@magicalclick said:

Cows are very jelly right now. It really isn't a big deal. 3rd party switch side on exclusive games all the time. Of you think that's wrong, then, FF should have stayed on Nintendo console, along with most of Japanese games prior.

Bad analogy. FF moved to the PS because of storage issues. Square didn't want to use cartridges. Had the N64 adapted to cd then FF would have been on there.

#562 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (19072 posts) -

you know why I hate Microsoft more than the other two.... Relax its a rhetorical question.

Atleast when Sony and Nintendo come up with exclusives, the majority of them Are made internally, by studios they either aquired early or built from the ground up......

Those lazy Fuckers at Microsoft on the hand, their 1st Instinct is to get a 3rd Party or Indipendent studio to make these exclusive for them, then they send them packing this particularly annoying with Epic Games since Gears of War didn't completely belong to Microsoft, Epic Owned it too, now that ship has saled.

Anyway to those of you who got Xbox One's.... Happy Hunting, and to everybody else..... I'l see you in Lara Croft and The Temple of Osiris.

#563 Edited by General_Solo76 (284 posts) -

I believe it's just a timed holiday 2015 exclusive. Xbox One owners shouldn't get too upset over this though. The native 900p version will be exclusive to them for eternity! :D

#564 Posted by hehe101 (690 posts) -

@GrenadeLauncher said:

So now we've established Silent Hills exists and that this is a timed exclusive, just how much of a flop of an announcement was this on a scale of 9.5-10?

silent hill? oh dear, TR seems to have more fumes than Silent hill anyway

#565 Posted by SolidTy (46322 posts) -

@RpgGamer23q said:

I was hoping to pick it up on PC but w/e will just buy it on the X1.

It's also available on 360. Just FYI.

@general_solo76 said:

I believe it's just a timed holiday 2015 exclusive. Xbox One owners shouldn't get too upset over this though. The native 900p version will be exclusive to them for eternity! :D

It's also available on 360 as well. Cross Generational games continue to curse next gen machines.

#566 Edited by santoron (8375 posts) -

@SolidTy said:

It's also available on 360 as well. Cross Generational games continue to curse next gen machines.

It kind of got glossed over in all the raging, and whooping, but isn't that freaking terrible?

We now know two full years into this gen we'll still be dealing with major titles going cross gen. That's crap.

So I guess the original HD Twins hold back gaming for yet another gen. Hell, maybe they'll just keep supporting them forever!

#567 Edited by EnviousEyezOnMe (262 posts) -

#568 Posted by Bruin1986 (1458 posts) -

@chronoschris said:

This is truly a mind boggling move by Square-Enix. What the hell? They obviously caved in to greed and accepted a nice fat cheque from MS. Must of been a desperate move indeed. Maybe SE aren't doing so great in the money department.

"caved into greed"...

You mean a company, whose only function is to make money, acted in a fashion that it believed would make it money.

Hmm, shocking.

Anyway, this meltdown is quite epic. It'll long echo in the halls of great System Wars battles. As for the people, with their laser sharp insight, illuminating the fact that reducing the potential market pool for their game by going exclusive has the chance to negatively effect sales...

Are you serious? Do you actually think a company that has teams of market experts/consultants hasn't thought about this? It was never mentioned? There is a reason they decided to go exclusive. Somehow, it was determined it made financial sense for them to do so. How exactly may be harder to nail down other than "drrr, M$ droves big truck of monies to der front door". They likely got something else as well. Marketing? Licensing? Who knows...

As for MS, this is a potentially great move. With a release window coinciding with Uncharted 4's likely release date, they are providing an alternative for gamers that like that genre.

#569 Posted by rjdofu (9171 posts) -

@Legend002 said:

@ninjapirate2000: TR was amazing. Much better than Uncharted and that's coming from a huge Sony and naughty Dog fan.

Yep, much better than Uncharted, but nothing compared to Uncharted 2.

#570 Posted by EPaul (9907 posts) -

Must of been a huge money hat, i'm thinking around 50 million

#571 Posted by Evo_nine (2115 posts) -

haha look at all the butthurt tomb raider fans

Microsoft sure stuck it right up em lol

#572 Posted by edwardecl (2239 posts) -
@Evo_nine said:

haha look at all the butthurt tomb raider fans

Microsoft sure stuck it right up em lol

Yep they sure did, great PR suicide hope the money is worth it.

#573 Posted by GrenadeLauncher (6256 posts) -

I think it's worrying that MS had no new projects to show off. Thought about that, lems?

#574 Posted by charizard1605 (62779 posts) -

It appears the game actually will be timed exclusive:

@ghostwarrior786 said:

Like most predicted, except lems, tr is indeed timed exclusive

Xbox boss Phil Spencer has confirmed to Eurogamer that Microsoft's controversial exclusivity deal for Rise of the Tomb Raider "has a duration".

#575 Edited by ghostwarrior786 (5811 posts) -

Oh u already quoted me. Well suddenly cows will be interested in tr again and lems dont care about it anymore. The joys of sw

#576 Posted by SecretPolice (23917 posts) -

@ghostwarrior786 said:

Xbox boss Phil Spencer has confirmed to Eurogamer that Microsoft's controversial exclusivity deal for Rise of the Tomb Raider "has a duration".

Need to know the "duration" to know how important this all is since if it's like 3 years then who cares, I know, likely a year or so but just sayin.

#577 Posted by Heil68 (48469 posts) -

@charizard1605 said:

It appears the game actually will be timed exclusive:

@ghostwarrior786 said:

Like most predicted, except lems, tr is indeed timed exclusive

Xbox boss Phil Spencer has confirmed to Eurogamer that Microsoft's controversial exclusivity deal for Rise of the Tomb Raider "has a duration".

Already a mulit plat and timed for another thus securing the SONY gen 8 leading PS4 domination...INTACT.

#578 Posted by bezza2011 (2726 posts) -
@7mdma said:

That sucks... TR was a great game on my PC.

At least Sony builds their own exclusives instead of taking away games already touted for other platforms.

Oh, well I'm guessing timed exclusive +- 6 months and console exclusive.

see this is which is Peeing me off, MS instead of using money to fund in house exclusives with fresh new ip at the quality of Sony's they go out and buy out a third party game which has rich history on every single console and PCs alike, they have honestly peed off a lot of fans doing this, it may seem to be a great business deal but it isn't good for us consumers, doesn't matter if it was Sony or MS or anyone who took it from loyal fans, it's just an out of order practise, no third party game should be allowed to be purchased, in my opinion, goes against everything in my eyes, all i see in this deal is greed, I don't think Tomb Raider is even big enough to seel Xbox One's the fact is, it didn't sell that well first time it came out, and when it came back out on XBOX1 PS4, it actually shold 69% more on PS4 so i don't get it. shame. I guess if your an xbox one fan you won't care, but 2/3 of fans of the game will not be able to play it.

#579 Posted by Giancar (19076 posts) -

@charizard1605: Told you chaz. =P

#581 Posted by charizard1605 (62779 posts) -

@Giancar said:

@charizard1605: Told you chaz. =P

Don't blame me that Microsoft announced 'exclusivity' in such a shady way >.>

#582 Posted by Sollet (7617 posts) -

Lulz Microsoft and their timed exclusive shenanigans.

#583 Posted by cainetao11 (20293 posts) -

@bezza2011: see this is which is Peeing me off, MS instead of using money to fund in house exclusives with fresh new ip at the quality of Sony's they go out and buy out a third party game which has rich history on every single console and PCs alike, they have honestly peed off a lot of fans doing this, it may seem to be a great business deal but it isn't good for us consumers, doesn't matter if it was Sony or MS or anyone who took it from loyal fans, it's just an out of order practise, no third party game should be allowed to be purchased, in my opinion, goes against everything in my eyes, all i see in this deal is greed, I don't think Tomb Raider is even big enough to seel Xbox One's the fact is, it didn't sell that well first time it came out, and when it came back out on XBOX1 PS4, it actually shold 69% more on PS4 so i don't get it. shame. I guess if your an xbox one fan you won't care, but 2/3 of fans of the game will not be able to play it.

Did you feel this way during the ps2 gen? Not that we will truthfully know.

#584 Posted by Effec_Tor (478 posts) -

Its a timed exclusive..

Wow..

#585 Posted by freedomfreak (44563 posts) -

Did anyone seriously expect this not to be timed?

#586 Edited by hehe101 (690 posts) -

@freedomfreak said:

Did anyone seriously expect this not to be timed?

it's not timed

#587 Posted by LJS9502_basic (153045 posts) -

Exactly what I said yesterday....the wording was just too precise. I guess that will make some people happy.

#588 Posted by Effec_Tor (478 posts) -

@hehe101 said:

@freedomfreak said:

Did anyone seriously expect this not to be timed?

it's not timed

Yes it is.

#589 Edited by cainetao11 (20293 posts) -

@ghostwarrior786 said:

Like most predicted, except lems, tr is indeed timed exclusive

Xbox boss Phil Spencer has confirmed to Eurogamer that Microsoft's controversial exclusivity deal for Rise of the Tomb Raider "has a duration".

If I remember correctly the first didn't sell all that well and only got a sequel after fans asked. Well, we gotta do more than cry, we have to buy. It probably wasn't that hard to ensure exclusivity and I doubt it will be forever.

*my first post from page 2*

#591 Posted by freedomfreak (44563 posts) -
@hehe101 said:

it's not timed

Was just posted:

"Xbox boss Phil Spencer has confirmed to Eurogamer that Microsoft's controversial exclusivity deal for Rise of the Tomb Raider "has a duration"."

#592 Posted by bezza2011 (2726 posts) -

@cainetao11 said:

@bezza2011: see this is which is Peeing me off, MS instead of using money to fund in house exclusives with fresh new ip at the quality of Sony's they go out and buy out a third party game which has rich history on every single console and PCs alike, they have honestly peed off a lot of fans doing this, it may seem to be a great business deal but it isn't good for us consumers, doesn't matter if it was Sony or MS or anyone who took it from loyal fans, it's just an out of order practise, no third party game should be allowed to be purchased, in my opinion, goes against everything in my eyes, all i see in this deal is greed, I don't think Tomb Raider is even big enough to seel Xbox One's the fact is, it didn't sell that well first time it came out, and when it came back out on XBOX1 PS4, it actually shold 69% more on PS4 so i don't get it. shame. I guess if your an xbox one fan you won't care, but 2/3 of fans of the game will not be able to play it.

Did you feel this way during the ps2 gen? Not that we will truthfully know.

How do you mean???

The thing with the PS2 gen was there was pretty much only the PS2 out at the time, it had no rivals, no one even knew Xbox was coming, PC but it had it's own market and games, N64 was still using cartridges and once Xbox came out, it slowly started gaining the third party games.

#593 Edited by darkangel115 (2371 posts) -

@SolidTy said:

@darkangel115 said:

@SolidTy said:

@darkangel115 said:

@SolidTy said:

Sony had a strong 1st party and had many 1st party studios in the PS2 generation. What you stated was literally incorrect. It's a revisionist attempt to equate Sony's 1st Party Playstation strategy to the Xbox 1st Party/Buying Timed deals strategy. It's very apologetic as well. Sorry you weren't paying attention, but they released many 1st party games in the PS2 generation. I was here in SW during the Gamecube, Xbox, PS2 era. You were not here with this account. I'll just use one of my old posts to show a list (not even complete) of 1st party games from Sony in the PS2/PS1 era.

You are completely wrong when you said, "They didn't have many (if any) 1st party studios really." There is no truth to that as I'll prove with a tiny 1st Party Sony list in a second.

The PS1 and especially the PS2 had an amazing 1st party and I think it's just indicative of age or where you were in your gaming life that would lead you to believe that their 1st party was non-existent until the PS3. Basically, I just don't think you were paying much attention to their 1st party in those eras. Here's an example of some high quality games from their 1st party (only PS2/PS1 era games):

  1. Twisted Metal 1/2,
  2. Gran Turismo 1-4,
  3. Twisted Metal: Black,
  4. Primal
  5. Mark of the Kri,
  6. Sly Cooper 1-3 series,
  7. Jak & Daxter 1-3
  8. Jak X,
  9. Parappa 1/2,
  10. Rogue Galaxy,
  11. Intelligent Cube,
  12. Wild Arms 1-5,
  13. Ratchet and Clank (4 games on PS2),
  14. Crash Bandicoot (PS1 era),
  15. Spyro the Dragon (PS1 era),
  16. Legend of Legaia 1/2,
  17. Dark Cloud 1-2,
  18. Champions of Norrath 1/2,
  19. Arc the Lad series,
  20. Hot Shots Golf Series,
  21. MediEvil series,
  22. ICO,
  23. Shadow of the Colossus,
  24. Drakan: The Ancients' Gates,
  25. Amplitude,
  26. Frequency,
  27. ATV Offroad Fury Series,
  28. Jet Moto Series,
  29. SOCOM PS2 series,
  30. Ghost Hunter,
  31. Destruction Derby Series,
  32. Syphon Filter series,
  33. War of the MONSTERS!,
  34. God of War 1/2,
  35. Rise of the Kasai,
  36. Tourist Trophy,
  37. Genji: Dawn of the Samurai
  38. Siren 1/2,
  39. Mr. Mosquito,
  40. Formula 1,
  41. MLB The Show,
  42. Legend of Dragoon,
  43. Singstar,
  44. and many more.
  45. I skipped over games I didn't care for like Fantavision, Okage, or The Getaway but they exist too.

Sony's 1st party was VERY "existent", in fact, it was pretty awesome and only improved over the years. I loved Dark Cloud 2 and spent hours upon hours with Champions of Norrath 1/2 both online and locally with friends. Jak & Daxter was great. Sly Cooper, Ratchet & Clank, Rogue Galaxy, Twisted Metal: Black, Legend of Dragoon, War of the Monsters, Singstar, God of War 1/2...some great Sony 1st Party games and all existed before the PS3. I would also argue for Gran Turismo 1-4, but I'm not into racing, although I can't deny the series was a critical and consumer darling when it came out in the PS1 era.

I would certainly argue that that they improved over the years, but the PS2 was where I noticed as a gamer in that era how strong and relevant their 1st party was. I wasn't sure if the PS1 was a fluke, but the PS2 solidified Sony as a contender in the 1st party space...and I was a Xbox and Gamecube gamer which really spoke volumes to me how good some of those PS2 1st party games were.

well off the top of my head

sly cooper, jak and daxter, spyro, franchises were all 3rd party.ND didn't become 1st party until the PS3 era. The rest were by insomniac which is still 3rd party. I'm sure if i actually looked up the studios, at least a few more are 3rd parties. and since the PS2 had way more exclusives then that, it shows it was a very small %. The big franchises from that era weren't exclusives (outside god of war and GT) MGS, FF, GTA, DMC were the franchises that were the huge draws on the PS2

and yes i wasn't here back then, But the fact you try to relate it to MS in anyway is your mind not mine. I'm a multiplatform gamer. always have been always will. I have a PC, PS4, and X1 and will probably wind up getting a wii u as well. I have 2 kids and was thinking about getting them one for xmas. Last gen had a PS3, 360 and wii, before that a PS2, xbox and gamecube. Before that a dreamcast, PS1 and N64 and i can keep going lol.

Hmmm...perhaps you are trolling as you like to waste other users time, but I know for sure you are very misinformed. Let me proceed with some gaming education.

You need to do some research. I gave you answers and instead of researching them, you are making things up. That's really strange behavior. Those games were all 1st Party titles. Some were developed by second party devs, some by 1st party devs. Regarding Systems I buy, I buy all the main systems at launch for decades now. I don't buy a Wii/360/PS3 later in the gen. I bought the original Dreamcast, PS2, Gamecube, and Xbox at those launches. Same for N64, Saturn, and PS1. Other people tend to buy one machine at launch, heavily support that machine, and later pick up an additional machine, like you are doing with the Wii U and many people did with PS2, Xbox, PS3, etc. Buy the machine later, well after launch. In any event, that's off subject.

One thing is certain, you don't know much about PS2 era Sony 1st Party games...it may be related to the fact you didn't buy PS2 1st party games as perhaps you didn't buy a PS2 at launch in Oct 2000.

Sly Cooper, Jak and Daxter, and the first three Spyro games are under the Sony 1st Party banner. They were not 3rd Party and as such you have not seen those particular games ported to competitive consoles. Later sequels to Spyro yes, but not those games. Forget PS1 generation as your comment was, and I quote, "When the playstation was in its prime (PS2 era) Sony was buying up exclusives like crazy. They didn't have many (if any) 1st party studios really."

That's a false statment. Sony had a lot of 1st party games during that generation. The PS2 1st Party was strong.

Sony owns the Sly Cooper, Jak and Daxter, and Ratchet and Clank IPs, just like M$ own the Halo IP and Nintendo owns Zelda IP. Bungie left, but the Halo IP stays behind with Xbox. Halo is Xbox. Sly cooper is PS. Jak is Playstation. Ratchet is Playstation. Sly Cooper is Playstation. Insomniac is free to make other games like Sunset Overdrive for Xbox, but Ratchet and Resistance stay behind.

Secondly, you really don't know what you are talking about when it comes to ND. Naughty Dog became 1st Party in the early, early PS2 generation back in the Jak and Daxter 1 time frame. Around the time, give or take a year, Xbox picked up Bungie. I have no idea why you posted that a second time.

My entire point was to point at 1st party games that you said Sony didn't create and you were incorrect.

Here's a post from from some time ago that might hopefully explain to you 1st Party, 2nd Party, and 3rd Party games and those companies creation of only 1st party games and 3rd Party games. There are no 2nd Party games, just 2nd Party developers.

I didn't say they were 1st party (as I've owned and played their games since PSOne and I've met Ted Price twice in my life), but since I'm here I'll go ahead and educate you a little bit because many young gamers get this point confused all the time.

No, Insomniac is not 1st party developer but this game will be a 1st party product paid for by Sony like many other 1st party Ratchet games. Sony owns the Ratchet IP and can hire whoever they want to create these games. Insomniac has proven to be a great resource to Sony, although they remained independent and recently released the lower scoring FUSE game with EA proving they can go and do what they please. The partnership Sony + Insomniac has given gamers much higher metascoring games, but it's nice that Insomniac can work with EA, or even the upcoming product they have Sunset Overdrive with Microsoft. Insomniac wants to own more IPs which is why they created FUSE and are now making Sunset Overdrive. Another example of this is EPIC games who own the GeoW (Gears of War) IP. [EDIT: This post was made before M$ bought the GeoW IP]. They do deal with Microsoft, but the GeoW franchise EPIC can do what they want with it, like Unreal.E

There is no such thing as Second Party games, just second party developers. A game is owned either by a 3rd party or 1st party.

Capcom for instance, a 3rd party hired many outside studios to work on their properties from Bionic Commando to Dead Rising. The product although made by an outside company, is still a Capcom game. Capcom isn't alone. Nintendo, Konami, Activision, EA, and more have deals of this nature.

The final products will still belong to Capcom, Nintendo, Konami, or in this case Sony. Upcoming Sunset Overdrive, depending on who owns the IP will also either be a 1st party or 3rd party game for the next Xbox. This is how it works. According to my research for Sunset, it's a Insomniac owned IP, but it will be published by Microsoft (like Ninja Gaiden II, Braid, or Mass Effect 1 was). It's not depending on who publishes the game, but rather who owns the IP.

This Ratchet game is a 1st party game, still a Sony game paid for and commissioned by Sony, although clearly Insomniac is a 2nd party developer in this case.


I'm not going to research everything, but insomniac made spyro and ratchet. and they are 3rd party. not 1st party not 2nd party. Sony owns the IPs but they were made by a 3rd party. just like gears for MS. they were made by epic a 3rd party. Not a 2nd party or 1st party. as far as ND goes (the studio was acquired by Sony Computer Entertainment in 2001.) and the PS2 (The PS2 was launched in October 2000 in North America and November) so yeah ND did get aquaired during the PS2 you are correct. but ratchet was never 1st party. I can really care less to make a whole list. I was just making the point that Sony did during the PS2 era buy a lot of 3rd party exclusives. and even now with the PS4. all these indies they purchased like resogun, and bloodborne. its normal practice. Yeah MS does it more, I don't think anyone would say otherwise, but both do it to help push their system. and 2nd party doesn't really exist. its a made up term that people used to describe a company that makes a game that isn't 1st party but the IP is owned by the 1st party. By that theory bluepoint would be a 2nd party dev for titanfall which isn't the case

Insomniac is a 3rd Party developer, but were acting as a 2nd Party when they made Ratchet and Clank for Sony. That product, Ratchet, was a 1st Party product. I suspect you don't know what a 2nd Party is.

Capcom, EA, Activision, Konami, SE, and more hire 3rd Party developers all the time, but the product in the end is a Capcom, EA, Activision, Konami, etc product/game.

2nd Party teams are commissioned by 1st Party companies to create games with their existing IPs. The end product, like a Ratchet and Clank (Insomniac), Excite Bike 64 (Left Field Productions), F-Zero GX (SEGA Amusement Vision), Starfox Assault (Namco), Metroid Other M (Tecmo), and many other games are still 1st Party games. Those I games I listed above are still Nintendo titles, they aren't 3rd party games. It works the same for Sony. The game is only for that platform holder and they can do whatever they want with the title. The Sly Cooper Developer is now owned by Sony and make InFamous games.

There are 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Party developers. HOWEVER, there are only 1st and 3rd Party games. It's really simple, a game falls under one umbrella or the other upon release. The game is either a 1st party game or a 3rd Party game.

Forget Spyro, that's PS1 era and your quote was about PS2 era. While the first three Spyro's are a 1st Party product (and therefore you won't find them on other competing platforms), I don't want to get into that as it is more complicated with Universal and besides, your quote was entirely about the PS2 era. I'll quote again:

"When the playstation was in its prime (PS2 era) Sony was buying up exclusives like crazy. They didn't have many (if any) 1st party studios really."

That statement is incorrect and I took the time providing proof. If you aren't willing to look it up and you aren't willing to understand you are misinformed, there isn't much I can do. I posted links and tried my best to explain it. What else is there to say? It's good that you know that Naughty Dog was acquired a long ass time ago in 2001 as I said (kudos for you looking that up), but you are wrong about the above statement with regards to Sony's 1st Party not having any 1st party studios.

You seem to have an issue with 2nd Party developers, so here is some internally developed Sony products for PS2:

Sony gave gamers Gran Turismo 3, Gran Turismo 4, God of War 1, God of War 2, Twisted Metal: Black, War of the Monsters, Jak and Daxter, Jak II, Jak III, Jak X, MLB: The Show, ICO, Shadow of the Colossus, Rise of the Kasai, Primal, Mark of the Kri, Parappa 2, Hot Shots Golf Series, MediEvil series, Singstar , Syphon Filter, SOCOM, The Getaway 1, The Getaway 2, Tourist Trophy, Genji, Siren, etc.

That's a lot of internally developed 1st party games that Sony provided gamers with in the PS2 era. You said they didn't have many, if any, 1st Party studios. That was incorrect. Without Sony making games, we would never have got Gran Turismo 3 and GT4, Twisted Metal: Black, God of War 1 and 2, ICO, Shadow of the Colossus, Jak and Daxter, Jak II, Jak 3, Jak X, MLB: The Show, and more.

There was a VAST difference between 1st party output on the Xbox and PS2, and you likened them as similar when that wasn't the case. Sony creates a LOT more 1st party games internally than Xbox. This was especially true in the PS2 vs. Original Xbox era. Sony also hires more 3rd parties to become a temporary 2nd party to create more 1st Party games as they did with Ratchet 1st party games created by the free Insomniac.

The companies are very different in their approach to gaming. My point has nothing to do with buying exclusives, but to do with the misinformation when you said:

"When the playstation was in its prime (PS2 era) Sony was buying up exclusives like crazy. They didn't have many (if any) 1st party studios really."

I wanted to correct this notion, not talk about buying exclusives, especially for games we can't prove. I wanted to deal with the facts, and one fact is that PS2 had a lot of 1st party support, whereas you posted that Sony didn't have many, if any, 1st party studios in the PS2 generation, which was untrue.

Dude why are you trying to defend sony when i'm not even attacking them. cows are getting absurd these days lol. Listen ratchet isn't 2nd party. it is 3rd party. very simple. IP ownership =/= 1st party or 2nd party. 1st party is in house studios. everything else is 3rd party. and insomniac created the IP. it wasn't like sony had created it with a 1st party then hired someone to do a sequal, it was a new IP created by insomniac who is 3rd party. Your trying to lump in the fanboy made up usage of "2nd party" how about this, why not just give me a list of all sony studios during the era?

#594 Edited by jhonMalcovich (5536 posts) -

AMD has already confirmed Mantle support for the next Tomb Raider, so basically it's already confirmed for pc. The only question remains will it be released on ps4 or will it be another case of Titanfall exclusivity.

#595 Posted by LJS9502_basic (153045 posts) -

@bezza2011:

Your post......didn't feel like editing the quote chain....would you guys please learn how to do that....

Dude why are you trying to defend sony when i'm not even attacking them. cows are getting absurd these days lol. Listen ratchet isn't 2nd party. it is 3rd party. very simple. IP ownership =/= 1st party or 2nd party. 1st party is in house studios. everything else is 3rd party. and insomniac created the IP. it wasn't like sony had created it with a 1st party then hired someone to do a sequal, it was a new IP created by insomniac who is 3rd party. Your trying to lump in the fanboy made up usage of "2nd party" how about this, why not just give me a list of all sony studios during the era?

/quote

Ratchet and Clank is Sony's IP. It's NOT a third party game. Sony published the games which means they put the money up. Damn...

#596 Edited by Opus_Rea-333 (1149 posts) -
@Heil68 said:

@charizard1605 said:

It appears the game actually will be timed exclusive:

@ghostwarrior786 said:

Like most predicted, except lems, tr is indeed timed exclusive

Xbox boss Phil Spencer has confirmed to Eurogamer that Microsoft's controversial exclusivity deal for Rise of the Tomb Raider "has a duration".

Already a mulit plat and timed for another thus securing the SONY gen 8 leading PS4 domination...INTACT.

if is true that PS4 "might" be getting TR2

then PS4 will definitely have a great 2016 lineup with Uncharted 4 aswell (gran turismo 7 is 2022 release)

but i think the duration is related to a PC release instead PS4 lol.

#597 Edited by 2Chalupas (5397 posts) -

@Lulu_Lulu said:

you know why I hate Microsoft more than the other two.... Relax its a rhetorical question.

Atleast when Sony and Nintendo come up with exclusives, the majority of them Are made internally, by studios they either aquired early or built from the ground up......

Those lazy Fuckers at Microsoft on the hand, their 1st Instinct is to get a 3rd Party or Indipendent studio to make these exclusive for them, then they send them packing this particularly annoying with Epic Games since Gears of War didn't completely belong to Microsoft, Epic Owned it too, now that ship has saled.

I see nothing wrong with getting a 3rd party studio to do an exclusive game. So long as it's a real exclusive, as well as a new IP. The Gears of War model is fine for exclusives, and MS did end up purchasing the IP making it a fully proper exclusive (finally).

Not sure how early Titan-fall became exclusive, but that one made sense to me. It was actually surprising that MS did not attempt to make that game their next Gears of War like franchise (maybe this was wise of them, since Titanfall was a relatively under-performing game). I just find this Tomb Raider thing a bit bizarre. It could backfire in the end, with fans being pissed at both Crystal Dynamics and Microsoft (as well as Square).

#598 Posted by Solid_Max13 (3550 posts) -

@hehe101 said:

@freedomfreak said:

Did anyone seriously expect this not to be timed?

it's not timed

Yes it is lol. Phil Spencer himself said it, MS is so shady they made you think it was an exclusive everyone knew it wasn't.

#599 Posted by Bread_or_Decide (19127 posts) -

I wish they would change the title. Didn't she already RISE in the first one? This is just like DAWN OF THE PLANET OF THE APES. It's the same title twice.

Get new title ideas please. What's wrong with TOMB RAIDER 2? or TOMB RAIDER: AMONG THIEVES?

#600 Posted by shawn30 (4367 posts) -

@2Chalupas said:

@Lulu_Lulu said:

you know why I hate Microsoft more than the other two.... Relax its a rhetorical question.

Atleast when Sony and Nintendo come up with exclusives, the majority of them Are made internally, by studios they either aquired early or built from the ground up......

Those lazy Fuckers at Microsoft on the hand, their 1st Instinct is to get a 3rd Party or Indipendent studio to make these exclusive for them, then they send them packing this particularly annoying with Epic Games since Gears of War didn't completely belong to Microsoft, Epic Owned it too, now that ship has saled.

I see nothing wrong with getting a 3rd party studio to do an exclusive game. So long as it's a real exclusive, as well as a new IP. The Gears of War model is fine for exclusives, and MS did end up purchasing the IP making it a fully proper exclusive (finally).

Not sure how early Titan-fall became exclusive, but that one made sense to me. It was actually surprising that MS did not attempt to make that game their next Gears of War like franchise (maybe this was wise of them, since Titanfall was a relatively under-performing game). I just find this Tomb Raider thing a big bizarre. It could backfire in the end, with fans being pissed at both Crystal Dynamics and Microsoft (as well as Square).

Money. Its always about and will always be about money. Fans being pissed online is an everyday occurrence, especially in our entitled society. Ultimately MS bought timed exclusivity for the Holiday 2015. They will have Halo 5, Rise of the Tomb Raider, and Quantum Break headlining their season. Its a smart move. But they should have said timed up front.