GameSpot may receive revenue from affiliate and advertising partnerships for sharing this content and from purchases through links.

Rise of the Tomb Raider PS4 Release Date Confirmed, Has PlayStation VR Support

New version of game will be available on Xbox One and PC too.

404 Comments

Square Enix has announced Rise of the Tomb Raider will launch on PlayStation 4 on October 11 in a new 20 Year Celebration edition. This version of the game will feature "a completely new story chapter entitled Blood Ties."

In addition to this, it will have new co-op Endurance gameplay, PlayStation VR support for the new Blood Ties chapter, all previously released DLC, extra outfits, weapons, and Expedition Cards. A limited edition art book will also be included.

Please use a html5 video capable browser to watch videos.
This video has an invalid file format.
00:00:00
Sorry, but you can't access this content!
Please enter your date of birth to view this video

By clicking 'enter', you agree to GameSpot's
Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

Now Playing: GS News Update: Rise of the Tomb Raider PS4 Release Date Confirmed

All this content will be available for free to Xbox One and PC to players that own the season pass. This, however, won't include VR support. The season pass will be updated to include this content going forward.

A season pass does not exist for PS4 as all the extra content is included in the new version of the game.

Click image to view in full screen
Click image to view in full screen

"[Crystal Dynamics] is celebrating with all Tomb Raider fans, thanking them for being on Lara's 20 year journey with us," said Scot Amos, co-head of the studio. "The team has packed in surprises, new story, and the top-requested special features into this 20 Year Celebration edition.

"Blood Ties, a new premium DLC, beckons players to explore Croft Manor in a new story mode; then defend it against a zombie invasion in Lara's Nightmare. When Lara's uncle contests ownership of the Manor, Lara must explore the estate to find proof that she is the rightful heir, or lose her birthright and father's secrets for good.

"Players can then test their zombie-killing skills in the replayable Lara's Nightmare mode: a haunted Croft Manor where players have new challenges and must rid the Manor of an evil presence."

According to a press release, the PlayStation VR support lets players "unlock the mysteries of Croft Manor in first-person, while the new co-op Endurance mode lets fans team-up in the wilderness.

"Two players must team up to survive the harsh elements by day, as well as lethal threats from enemies by night. Fire takes fuel, food restores health, and every resource must be hunted, collected, or crafted. Battle to the top of the leaderboards, as others try to beat your longest survival run."

To celebrate the history of Tomb Raider, a re-envisoned version of the cold-weather outfit and the Hailstorm pistol Lara used in Tomb Raider 3 will be available in the mode. A classic Lara card pack will let players play as various iterations of the character from over the years, including the original Lara model that started it all in 1996.

Finally, the game will have a new Extreme Survivor difficulty: "This new difficulty level takes the toughness of Survivor and ratchets it up several notches starting with all checkpoints being stripped out of the game. The only way to save the game is forage enough resources to light campfires."

Take a look at the infographic below to see everything included in the Rise of the Tomb Raider 20 Year Celebration release.

No Caption Provided

Got a news tip or want to contact us directly? Email news@gamespot.com

Join the conversation
There are 404 comments about this story
404 Comments  RefreshSorted By 
GameSpot has a zero tolerance policy when it comes to toxic conduct in comments. Any abusive, racist, sexist, threatening, bullying, vulgar, and otherwise objectionable behavior will result in moderation and/or account termination. Please keep your discussion civil.

Avatar image for Atzenkiller
Atzenkiller

4977

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Why don't all games come out on PS4 a bit later but with all dlc and extra stuff included? I sure wouldn't mind.

It might even feel like back before there was dlc, when games were released finished and only sometimes got a big expansion that was worth the money. Anyone remember those times?

Upvote • 
Avatar image for olddadgamer
OldDadGamer

3532

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

OldDadGamer  Moderator

@Atzenkiller: Dude, some of us are so old that we remember a world where there was no internet to download anything from.

2 • 
Avatar image for Jdzspace
Jdzspace

1163

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

@Atzenkiller: you mean before Microsoft joined the console game?

Since they started they maddening trend.

Those were the good old days

3 • 
Avatar image for Atzenkiller
Atzenkiller

4977

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@Jdzspace: Yeah, I don't know if the dlc trend wouldn't have happened in the same way without them but I guess they did play a role in getting more pc games released for consoles, and with that bring the trend of releasing unfinished games as well.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Jdzspace
Jdzspace

1163

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

@Atzenkiller: hate to say it, but I guess you gotta take the good with the bad.

It's just a crippling bad we have to absorb for a good that......I'm not sure was worth it

Upvote • 
Avatar image for olddadgamer
OldDadGamer

3532

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

OldDadGamer  Moderator

@Jdzspace: Strangely, I think there is another good.

DLC means that publishers want us to play and play and play, right? I mean, if we've moved on and played four more games before the DLC hits, then when it does hit we'll be all "Oh yea......I remember that.....I think....." and we'll go back to playing whatever it is we're playing.

You know what makes people stop playing games real quick? Bugs. When a game is buggy, we get frustrated, we sut it on the shelf, we move on.

So now publishers have more incentive than ever to keep an eye on bugs and patch them like mad. I mean, way back in ye olden times, games were BUGGY. I STILL shiver when I think about Fallout 2. And sure, you could plow through news groups to find patches, but Interplay wasn't exactly rushing. Today something like that happens, you get that "blah blah blah version 1.92 installed" and it improves without you having to think about it, and a big reason for that is that publishers don't want us getting frustrated....until the DLC comes out, anyway.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Atzenkiller
Atzenkiller

4977

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@olddadgamer: Fallout 2 was a pc game, which always had patches, and it was developed on a smaller budget. You sure picked a good example but most good games weren't full of bugs before patches became a thing on console.

Back then devs used to make games bug free before releasing them as they had no way of patching them, now they release them unfinished to make money as soon as possible and let the players find all the bugs, which they then slowly patch over several months. At least some of them. Yeah, thank god games like Fallout 3 and NV are possible thanks to patches.

2 • 
Avatar image for deactivated-5a1d4b615a3a3
deactivated-5a1d4b615a3a3

1423

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

@Atzenkiller: Games back then were also considerably less complex, limited to no AI, no physics, more linear etc. If developers had to release completely bug free games these days then they would either have to lower their ambitions or double the dev time, both prospects would be poor for gamers.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for oshishinobu
oshishinobu

62

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

I wonder whats the price tag?

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Jdzspace
Jdzspace

1163

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

@oshishinobu: $60

Upvote • 
Avatar image for jvconroy
jvconroy

145

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@oshishinobu: Was wondering the same thing myself. I'm really interested, but not sure I'm interested enough to pay something like $120...

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Atzenkiller
Atzenkiller

4977

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@jvconroy: $120 for what? The art book? GOTY editions that include all dlc usually cost 60 bucks or less.

2 • 
Avatar image for jvconroy
jvconroy

145

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@Atzenkiller: Yeah, I get that. I'm just thinking that GOTY Editions are usually a re-release on the same platforms with all the DLC included. In this case, we're releasing the game on a new platform with all the DLC included and some that's just getting released now. But yeah, I see how $120 could be a lot, and I agree.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Atzenkiller
Atzenkiller

4977

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@jvconroy: Same thing happened with Mass Effect 2, which was a Xbox exclusive as well but then got released a year or so later for PS3 with all DLCs and running on ME3's engine. And as far as I know that version is still not available for Xbox.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for oshishinobu
oshishinobu

62

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@jvconroy: For some reason am feeling it might be $90, same price for the current Deluxe edition.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for jvconroy
jvconroy

145

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@oshishinobu: $90 wouldn't be too bad. I can do that.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for crusaderprophet
CrusaderProphet

449

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 27

User Lists: 5

Amazon doesn't have it listed yet, and there better be a steelbook available as well.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Atzenkiller
Atzenkiller

4977

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@crusaderprophet: There are people who actually prefer steelbooks? I mean it looks like a tin can mixed with some plastic. What's the appeal?

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Jdzspace
Jdzspace

1163

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

@crusaderprophet: it's probably only available on square enix site.they have been doing that a lot lately. Final fantasy and star oceans collector's editions were both only on their site.

Disturbing trend since they kill you on shipping.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for fanboyman
FanboyMan

1627

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By FanboyMan

LOL I thought the PS4 version was canceled!? The Internet rumors were wrong, shocking : /

3 • 
Avatar image for Jdzspace
Jdzspace

1163

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Hey look, it's the "we are sorry we backed the wrong horse, please help us make back some of the money we lost on this terrible decision to basically flip off 2/3 of fans" edition.

I'll pass

18 • 
Avatar image for mprince131
mprince131

406

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

Edited By mprince131

@Jdzspace: What an idiot. "I'll show them by not buying their product. Exclusive games are a thing get over it and stop acting like someone skinned your pet cat. Your username is throughout the entire commemt section of this article crying to everyone who will listen. Get over it. Its been a year. They did not back the wrong horse, theY backed the horse that gave them money.

2 • 
Avatar image for GTABlueKid
GTABlueKid

43

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@mprince131: So he's not allowed to be angry that a company and game he supported was kept away from his console of choice? He said hea not buying it. Hes allowed not too. How about you get over it? Im actually not buying it for the same reason. Who knows maybe they will think twics next time.

4 • 
Avatar image for mprince131
mprince131

406

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

Edited By mprince131

@GTABlueKid: I encourage people to speak with their money but you are not entitled to get a game first. I supported the previous game and therefore I feel like I should get it before you on Xbox. You see how ridiculous that sounds? Your money paid for the previous game that you bought and received. You didn't pay for the right for the company to make every decision based on your preference.

I hate it when gamers try to hold a company hostage about a non-issue simply because they previously purchased something. This is not an anti-consumer. They didn't charge twice the amount for a game or create some evil DLC. They chose a platform that you are not on. That is not evil. So my issue is not with people choosing not to buy a game. My issue is with people veiling their decision as some sort of reaction to an injustice. The game was still available to you if you bought an Xbox. And spoiler alert, exclusive deals happen.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for GTABlueKid
GTABlueKid

43

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@mprince131: I have an Xbox1, and I got it after they announced this, but not for this game specifically.

When they announced this game as an Xb1 exclusive I was confused on why they would choose to screw over their most recongnized and best supporting fanbase? If this fanbase has literally given you much more money then why are you screwing them over? It could only be money, and that made it even worse. When it came out, I rented it. It seemed good but didnt get very far into it at all. I didnt buy it because I didnt want to support their decision, I wanted them to think twice before they did it again. Thats what your supposed to do, speak with your money. If the PS4 version wouldve come out 5 months ago maybe...but $60 for this after that shit? I dont know man...

2 • 
Avatar image for mprince131
mprince131

406

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

Edited By mprince131

@GTABlueKid: I can agree with the price tag and of course I don't have a problem with users feeling like they were betrayed but I said the same thing when Bungie (through Activision) gave PS4 exclusive content for Destiny. It's not the same exact thing but the idea is the same. Simply supporting a company in the past does mean you own them or the business moves they feel are best for them. Who knows if they approached both Sony & Microsoft and Microsoft simply had more money to offer. The point is this is how the industry works (unfortunately) because games are expensive to create and we've seen countless publishers and devs die because they didn't make the best decisions. That's not an approval for companies to be outright evil but it is to say that they have to take into account, financials.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Jdzspace
Jdzspace

1163

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By Jdzspace

@mprince131: actually no, exclusives from studios that are directly funded and controlled or in part owned by the console maker is a thing.

But taking the second part of a game whose previous game was available on all consoles, isn't normal, and it isn't acceptable.

That is a practice all gamers should speak out against.

This isn't halo or uncharted, established exclusives.

This is a game everyone played, and then 2/3 of fans were unceremoniously discarded at the alter of Microsoft.

HUGE difference.

9 • 
Avatar image for olddadgamer
OldDadGamer

3532

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

OldDadGamer  Moderator

@Jdzspace: This was pretty close, though. Crystal Dynamics was pretty clear that they didn't have the money in the bank to develop it at all without a big investment from someone, and SE wasn't ponying up enough money. Basically, if Sony or MS hadn't stepped in, then the game wouldn't have been made at all. Indeed, Crystal Dynamics was pretty apologetic. They knew that they weren't doing right by the fans, but money, man. Games aren't cheap. The reboot barely made money, and games cost more all the time.

4 • 
Avatar image for mprince131
mprince131

406

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

@Jdzspace: Actually there is not a difference. An exclusive game is a game only available on a certain platform which is what happened here for a year. You adding your opinion about how a game is funded and adding your 2 cents about how you feel you should be entitled to play the sequel to a game that was available for you is irrelevant at best. You're mad because you didn't get to play it.

Don't try and create some altruistic sentiment as if you care. If you can prove that you posted the same about Street fighter V being console exclusive to PS4, i may listen. But it likely did not happen, why? Becuase you either don't care about that game and/or it was available on a console you prefer. That's why youre mad about Tomb Raider. Don't act as though you care about a consumer's entitlement.

2 • 
Avatar image for Jdzspace
Jdzspace

1163

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

@mprince131: well I hate to tell you, but I did say the same about street fighter 5. Because it was a direct response to what Microsoft did, but it was just as wrong. And that's why I don't have street fighter.

It's a very bad anti gamer policy, and it needs to stop.

Period, it's not a console thing, it's bad for EVERYONE

3 • 
Avatar image for deactivated-5afeea4d8be41
deactivated-5afeea4d8be41

1666

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

@Jdzspace: Were you upset when tomb raider 2 didn't appear on the saturn. Or Resident Evil 4 didn't appear on Sony or Microsoft consoles for years on end.

It wasn't a particularly long wait and all the new DLC in package is a good deal, especially with the new stuff coming too.

It's a great game, my personal Game of the Year last year.

2 • 
Avatar image for Jdzspace
Jdzspace

1163

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By Jdzspace

@graffitiheart: I never owned a Saturn, and I was too young to really understand things that wee going in at that point. But I do recall getting RE4 on launch day.....But it was a long time ago, maybe I'm misremembering.

But I will get it, at some point,probably used or free on plus in a year or so.

My gripe isn't with the game, only with the decision to punish so much of the fan base.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for deactivated-5afeea4d8be41
deactivated-5afeea4d8be41

1666

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

@Jdzspace: It's coming now, the delay wasn't long and there's a bunch of new content and all the DLC on the disc. It's a pretty good deal.

It certainly could be worse. I'm part of the fan base (I adore Tomb Raider) and I luckily bought an Xbox one over a PS4, had I not have done I likely would have been pissed off, but we all knew it was coming. I just see it as the Xbox players got early access, now everyone can enjoy it.

2 • 
Avatar image for mprince131
mprince131

406

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

@Jdzspace: So you think the game was in development for Xbox One and Sony not only paid for the game to be exclusive but also paid for Capcom to scrap all that development they did for an X1 version of the game months before it was to be released? That's not how game development works. Capcom's game dev method has literally been to shop around certain franchises to be exclusive. We see it with Dead Rising and we see it with SF.

You not having a game is not really proof that you cared about this situation with Street Fighter. You may not have a lot of games. That's anecdotal to the situation. Unless you can show posts in which you sat in a thread this outraged about Street Fighter you are proving my point that you don't care about the practice so much as you only care about the fact that you could not play Tomb Raider before someone on Xbox. Granted, you don't have to prove anything to me.

Gonna copy and paste what I wrote to someone else to explain this to you: "I hate it when gamers try to hold a company hostage about a non-issue simply because they previously purchased something. This is not an anti-consumer move. They didn't charge twice the amount for a game or create some evil DLC. They chose a platform that you are not on. That is not evil. So my issue is not with people choosing not to buy a game. My issue is with people veiling their decision as some sort of reaction to an injustice. The game was still available to you if you bought an Xbox. And spoiler alert, exclusive deals happen."

2 • 
Avatar image for Jdzspace
Jdzspace

1163

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By Jdzspace

@mprince131: @mprince131: there IS a huge difference. And your premise is asinine. Do you think that Microsoft announced the exclusivity and street fighter was already done?

You do realize that Sony knew about the exclusivity long before we did, especially since square and Sony are both Japanese companies with a long standing relationship that includes games and country.

If you are so naive as too to think Microsoft hid it from everyone until street fighter was done and THEN Sony finds out and buys exclusivity,I don't know what to tell you.it is a business, that is not how it works.

And fortunately for me, the burden of proof is on the accuser, not the accused. Gamespot tracks comments, feel free to search out my comments and see how erroneous your accusations are.

And as gamers, it's not entitlement, it's extremely deceptive to have one game release, then demand you bbuy a different console to play the sequel.

It's akin to a bait and switch.

Is it a crime? No.

But it is VERY anti consumer, and as a customer we have the right, see, RIGHT not entitlement to vote with our wallet when we don't agree with a practice.

You should really look up the difference between a right and entitlement. Entitlement is perceived right. As consumers, it is 100% our right to vote with our wallets and not blindly agree with any company.

Don't you realize that these companies have no power except what we give them? Would you cede that without ant regard to practices you don't agree with?

If so, you are a sheep. And we simply have a difference of view on life.

And we'll agree to disagree

All the best

3 • 
Avatar image for mprince131
mprince131

406

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

@Jdzspace:You saying that SF was made an exclusive in response to Tomb Raider is baseless and gamer conjecture and group think. There is literally nothing pointing to that and so your use of that as an excuse was failed from the start.

The only thing that going through your posts made me realize is that you are typically never on the side of Microsoft and usually comment against them in articles. So that implication that you are somehow fair is garbage and just a show for anyone reading these response so I am happy to clear that up.

And you spent a lot of time harping on my use of the word entitlement but perhaps that time would have been better spent re-reading what I wrote for context. I never used the word entitlement in relation to a gamer's right to vote with their money. Entitlement is the feeling YOU have for a game to be made available for PS simply because the previous one was available on day one. YOU feel entitled because you bought the previous game and YOU feel as though somehow your money for that game entitles you to having the next game on DAY ONE. You could have had it on day 1 with an Xbox One. Were you being forced to buy an X1? Nope. Or did Square say "Anyone with a Gamespot username beginning with 'J' can not buy Tomb Raider?" Nope. It was available to you, you were just upset that with the terms which is fine. You voted with your money. Great.

A sheep is not the worst thing someone has called me and you're ENTITLED to your opinion. I actually don't blindly agree with any company but I also won't pose my disapproval of that company as something that it's not. Which is what you've been doing this entire time.

2 • 
Avatar image for Jdzspace
Jdzspace

1163

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

@mprince131: I find it funny that you see my perspective here, and look at my past posts. And think my rhetoric comes from just plain not looking Microsoft instead of reading what I say and realising that Microsoft's anti gamer policies, and things they have done to make gaming worse IS where the ire comes from.

It's not about being pro Sony, it's being pro gamer.

I'm not mad Sony didn't get, I'm mad it was available to all the first time, and

Practically none for the sequel....unless of course...

And that doesn't jive with me. I'm not going to say something that isn't true against anything regardless of who does it.

And I didn't mean sheep as an insult, mearly a descriptor. It's fine to be a sheep, it's safe, it's comfortable, you don't have to actually think for yourself which could go well or not, you can just go along with things. You don't have to believe in anything, stand for anything, just trot along. I don't think you are bad for being one,I was simply pointing out that means we think different. You think it's cool for whoever to do whatever, I respect that. But sometimes, I just have to say something. And as a life long gamer, I have that right.

Just a difference of opinion, nothing more, nothing less.

2 • 
Avatar image for mprince131
mprince131

406

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

@Jdzspace: What anti-gamer policy were they violating when you told someone "whatever you have to tell yourself to validate your misplaced purchase" after telling someone "They [Microsoft] should've never tried to break into consoles, they just don't belong." That comment taken as a fact does not hold up from them selling millions of consoles across 3 generations and if taken as an opinion you've proved my point. And that's just one instance, reading thru your posts there are many. If I were you I would not continue the idea that you don't actively post against Microsoft or that you only call them out on their "anti-gamer policies" when I can clearly go through your posts to see this is not the case. It makes you look foolish and just shows how you have continued to try and shift the discussion in an attempt to convey your point.

If Microsoft's move was anti-gamer then shouldn't Sony's retaliation be the same? You say you were against that too and your proof was that you don't own Street Fighter. Seems weak. When you deflect to the anti-gamer narrative please let us know what you are referring to. I'd love to hear it. Is it Play Anywhere (which you posted about and spun into them being a copy cat and desperate) Is it letting consumers know their console road-map a year out so that they could make an informed choice vs eeking out every PS4 sale until right before NEO? Was it native backwards compatibility vs PS NOW where you re-purchase games you already own? Was it allowing users the choice of EA Access vs making the decision for the consumer? I could go on. What's more anti-gamer about Microsoft than Sony? I'd love to know but it seems those with that narrative are those holding on to the 2013 Xbox One. We're in 2016. You call me a sheep and yet ignore what's in front of you.

2 • 
Avatar image for Jdzspace
Jdzspace

1163

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By Jdzspace

@mprince131: good job getting me off topic, but they just concedes that punishing square for their actions is perfectly just and right.

If you wish to continue a console war-esque conversation, this is not the space for it. But u I think I dispelled your points to where that won't necessary.

It was fun, all the best

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Jdzspace
Jdzspace

1163

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

@mprince131: again, the reason I said they don't belong is because they are not, nor have they EVER been a hardware company. Best software (non gaming) on earth, that was so well done the government had to break it into smaller pieces so others can compete.

They have no place in a hardware driven industry, and I saw it then as assign I'll advised money grab. But seeing as how they have lost hundreds of millions of dollars on the console branch alone (and appear to still be doing so, if you read the newest story on gamespot).

It is a fact, they had no business in the industry. We got the original xbox when we should've gotten a dreamcast 2 (I'm sure you know the relationship there). That is objective, fact driven viewpoint. Not "my dad can beat up your dad", like you are trying (and failing) to make it out to be.

And I've said whenever asked that what Sony did it's just as wrong. You keep trying to make it a Sony thing, why is that? There is more to the gaming world you do realize that right?

Since you seem to enjoy seeking out my comments,I find it hard to believe you didn't find the ones announcing the sf5 exclusivity where I said it was just as wrong. I said it was retaliatory, that Microsoft threw the first punch but Sony is just as wrong.

Which leads me to believe that you saw the comment, but since it doesn't support the narrative you are painstakingly trying to establish, just ignored it in turn. Which is what it is.

And I won't deny Microsoft has tried to do some good things since being exposed a few years back with unquestionably anti gamer policies and practices. I just find it odd how their focus seems to be looking backwards (bc obviously), halo remaster, halo. And moving away from consoles (play anywhere....which is questionable at best), and giving the same heaping helping of the usual.here is halo, here is gears, and nothing else of note. Quantum was a great idea, just poorly executed. Which is the hall mark of a standard Microsoft exclusive.

Again, not conjecture or bias.that is backed up by reviewers and more importantly sales, is why so many are left to rot.

I ignore nothing, I just don't look at the world as Sony vs Microsoft. Maybe for a minute I did, like everyone did.But that was long ago.it's long since over.

And judging from the company making moves away from consoles, not really trying to bring new and exciting content (which they are capable of, as I said they are the best software company on earth). Instead it's retreads,fps and multiplayer. Shows they really don't care.

And it shows in the hundreds of millions of dollars the company continues to lose on the console game in general.

Basically proving my point that you try to use against me.

I'm far from anti Microsoft, almost all my high end tech is Microsoft and my surface book will soon add to that.

But with gaming, they just make very poor anti gamer decisions, and they are paying for it.

Which is how it should be.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for mprince131
mprince131

406

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

Edited By mprince131

@Jdzspace:Yep, because they did not create hardware before, they don't belong. That's ridiculous. Whether they lose money (Which you conveniently left out that PS3 loss a ton of money for Sony) is irrelevant to any point. The measure of "belonging" in a market is measured by how people view and receive your product not financials. And I'm sorry (not really) but over 100 million people over 15 years have chosen Xbox. We got an Xbox instead of a Dreamcast 2 because nobody bought the Dreamcast. I'm sure you know that, but maybe chose to disregard that point....

Well I didn't see your SF5 post because I couldn't spend my entire afternoon looking through your post history. Luckily enough, it was quite easy to see the narrative for as far back as I went which was quite a ways back. Feel free to provide the link to the post that you made (though you won't, you'll just claim that the burden of proof is on me, a poor excuse if this post does exist)

You're so biased you can't even compliment Microsoft without it be begrudging. And I'm bringing up Sony specifically to prove your bias. Because in all the ways that I listed Microsoft as "less anti-gamer" than Sony, you chose to respond to none of them. You claim you dispelled points but you dispelled nothing. Instead you chose to deflect with the excuse that I'm making it all about Sony. Microsoft is looking back by offering backwards compatibility? Yet not only does Sony offer backward compatibility but they literally have the most anti-consumer version of backwards compatibility.

It's almost as if you don't think about the logic of what you post.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Jdzspace
Jdzspace

1163

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

@mprince131: back for more?....why not one more time for old times sake.

Again, I don't have anything to prove. You are making the claim, so you prove it. The fact that you don't want to do so really loses validity when you are responding at 1am, clearly you have the time and this had has been your head all day.

The reason you won't produce it, is because it crushes your narrative. Which is why you put it on me, which is a poor attempt at debate for the record.

And no, popularity doesn't determine anything. Hell, Charles Manson was popular, does that mean he should be allowed back into society?

Microsoft has done some good, but mostly bad things for gaming as a whole. They have proven they don't belong with their actions, the market has shown they don't belong with their failures to turn a profit.

And I didn't mention Sony because it's not relevant, and 2nd because it's not true.

Sony did lose money at first with the PS3, until they released the smaller versions.which is also when they passed Microsoft in sales for the record. Despite it having a full year head start.

And backwards compatibility is a meh feature. That's why Sony didn't do it, it had it on the ps2 and 3. But nobody used it, so they trashed it.

Notice how since Microsoft added the feature their sales have shown no positive motion? maybe because it's just a meh feature.

But since Microsoft has nothing new or exciting to bring all it can do is say "get, play games you used to like."

Sony is offering it to those who want it mostly because nobody really used it in the past. Makes sense, if customers don't want or need the feature, why offer it (cough..Kinect)?

I'm sorry, your argument has done nothing but prove you are in the tank for Microsoft gaming, and don't care the company loses hundreds of millions (unlike Sony and Nintendo for the record) for the company.

You have shown your a sheep which is why your arguments are loosely based on what your talking about, and more centralized attacks at someone you don't know from Adam.

I get it,I upset you because I don't like Microsoft as a gaming company. But look at sales, gaming accolades, exclusives......not many do.

But that's not going to stop me from supporting their computers,OS, tablets or laptop hybrids :)

You can go to sleep now, all the best

Upvote • 
Avatar image for mprince131
mprince131

406

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

Edited By mprince131

@Jdzspace:Nope, I'm not gonna flip the site looking for a post from you. If it exists, perfect. Until I see it, I won't believe it. So, you can say that I am marginalizing my own argument by not searching Gamespot for your comment. I'll turn it around and say it simply does not exist and you know it. If it did exist you would have already proven it as you've spent quite a bit of time debating this. Now that that point is dead....

Your arguments have proven to be more desperate as time goes on. You equate a company seeing an opportunity in hardware and consumers agreeing, to whether a murderer should've been set free. Telling of your opinion at best, pathetic at worst. Even better you talk about popularity not being important and yet your way of detracting Microsoft is by saying sales have not shown positive growth since back compat was implemented. Wait, I thought you said sales and popularity was not a metric for viability and success? Which is it? LOL, this is too easy.

Just to be sure, should a company put it's profit at the top of it's importance as you seem to be talking about Microsoft losing money an awful lot? Because earlier you said that Square's decision to go X1 exclusive first with Tomb Raider was a bad decision for those who supported the franchise. But they got paid for it and did not have to spend marketing dollars. They made an effort to increase their bottom line. So Microsoft losing money is significant but Square's attempt to make money is bad? Again, you have no stance and change your argument just for the post you are writing.

I really couldn't care less whether you like Microsoft or not because I think you made a pretty good case all on your own that your point of being fair and consistent is null and void.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Jdzspace
Jdzspace

1163

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

@mprince131: well if your aren't willing to prove it, you don't get to make baseless accusations. And if you are going to call someone a liar, you better back it up.

The fact that you can't, and talk around it thinking it stands says a lot about you and why you have failed to make any real argument.

Actually it's called using the absurd to illustrate the absurd. The reason you see it as desperate is because that is how your argument sounds.

It's called exposing a logical fallacy. That's all.

It is easy to argue when you have no basis in reality or logic.

As a business the ONLY thing that determines validity is the free market.

That's why the Wii dominated, and Microsoft finished 3rd. It's also why Nintendo has been irrelevant until PGO dropped.

And the market has decided that Microsoft doesn't belong in gaming.

Don't like it? Take it up with the market.And I've been pretty consistent on that.

Your lack of comprehension is astounding. Microsoft losing money add a company proves it doesn't really belong.

What square did wrong was spitting in the face of their fab fan base. The money they got for it isn't the issue, never was, at least I never made that argument. Stop reaching because your points are falling flat.

Actually I've been nothing but fair and consistent. Everything I've said is supported by numerous reports and facts.

My views are based on the trends of the industry and company.

The only thing null and void is your attempted character attacks.

You lose all credibility when you make a baseless claim on the others credibility, then refuse to back that up with anything other then the fact that I'm making you look silly in a debate to the point where I'm starting to wonder if you still in school or not.

But I hope you've taken note, maybe you learned something tonight.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for mprince131
mprince131

406

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

@Jdzspace: Let me just be clear, I'm not calling you a liar. I'm saying I have not seen the post of which you speak and will not spend my time searching for it . It's really that simple. Not sure how else I can explain that to you.

Enlighten me of the reports and facts that you have listed that you say your views are based on? Because of all the things I read, you've listed opinions. You spoke of how anti-gamer Microsoft and when I destroyed that point you moved on to a different subject of business moves.

And may I ask what of my argument is absurd? Or will you continue to speak in generalizations? So Microsoft sold 80 million consoles with the Xbox 360 and that's a failure because another console sold more? More evidence of your claim that you are objective but failing to give credit where it's due. 80 million sales of a device and they don't belong and it's a failure in your mind? Bro, You said Dreamcast 2 didn't happen because of the Xbox. Hmm, so the Dreamcast 2 belonged despite the Dreamcast not selling? You have no consistency and it's laughable at best.

The only thing you're holding on to is the fact that I won't search for your silly post. Deflection at its best. I don't need to attack your character, it's on display.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for BKO3000
BKO3000

72

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By BKO3000

@Jdzspace: Cool. I'll still buy it because I'm not a child who gets upset when the other kids get their toy before I'm able to play with it.

2 • 
Avatar image for Jdzspace
Jdzspace

1163

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

@BKO3000: no, you are just a push over who allows companies to marginalize and mistreat you because you think it's not that important.

You vote with your wallet, I don't approve of what they did. How I show then that is not buying the game.

You clearly don't care and will support them even if they do something shady, corrupt and anti gamer.

To each their own

9 • 
Avatar image for joshrmeyer
JoshRMeyer

12577

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@Jdzspace: Just buy the game used... that way you can play it and still screw over SE.

6 • 
Avatar image for Jdzspace
Jdzspace

1163

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

@joshrmeyer: that's most likely how it will go down.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Thisguywhokills
Thisguywhokills

67

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By Thisguywhokills

@Jdzspace: RESPECT ????

4 • 
Avatar image for cboye18
cboye18

4119

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 20

User Lists: 0

Edited By cboye18

Zombies? In a Tomb Raider game? How unoriginal. You know how you can actually improve the game? Add acrobatic maneuvers and dual wield pistols, mechanics that should've been included since the first reboot. Oh, and get rid of stealth; it doesn't fit the franchise.

These developers are as generic as they come these days. As of now the franchise has become very similar to the Uncharted series but the latter is still superior in almost every way.

5 • 
Avatar image for deactivated-5afeea4d8be41
deactivated-5afeea4d8be41

1666

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

@cboye18: Stealth was in Angel of Darkness and mildly in Chronicles as well. The game is more grounded in reality so she isn't going to be flipping about everywhere, plus the platforming was pretty good in Rise, twin pistols may be in the next game and hopefully will fundamentally change the gameplay (not just in combat).

And the zombie mode is just an extra mode, it has nothing to do with the main campaign. Stop complaining about what you don't have and concentrate on what you do have.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for snugglebear
snugglebear

5015

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 17

User Lists: 0

Time to update mah preorder! Can't wait for all the extra goodies!

Upvote •