Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Rise of the Tomb Raider

Options
12467…15

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    Interested Observer
    Registered Users Posts: 13,028 ✭✭✭✭Interested Observer


    I don't think there's any issue with games like Ryse, which probably wouldn't even be a game without MS, being exclusive to the XBox platform. I own a PS4, don't own an XOne, and I would have liked to be able to get Ryse but I can't, so be it, that's how it goes.

    This Tomb Raider thing is a completely different situation. The previous game released on every platform it possibly could have, and it was a very good game imo. MS have quite obviously thrown bags of cash at SquareEnix for this deal (or else someone at SE has taken leave of their senses) and not that I matter in the grand scheme of things but it's left a very bad taste in my mouth. MS have once again completely botched things too, there has been a huge negative reaction from what I can see.


  • Options
    #93
    The Chocolate Thunder
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 21 ✭The Chocolate Thunder


    DARK-KNIGHT wrote: »
    what ad??????

    i sold the console to cex.... they did a stern test of console and no problems in the two hours they had it. i bought a console from cex before and it was faulty so its my way of getting even with them.

    People can click on your Adverts profile under your username. Nonetheless, you were still willing to fob off your PS4 to a person knowing full well that it was faulty. Even if what you say is true and it was indeed sold to CEX, it will undoubtedly be sold on to some other person who may well be **** out of luck when the HDD goes to crap on him. Nice.


  • Options
    #94
    DARK-KNIGHT
    Registered Users Posts: 10,206 ✭✭✭✭DARK-KNIGHT


    The Chocolate Thunder wrote: »
    People can click on your Adverts profile under your username. Nonetheless, you were still willing to fob off your PS4 to a person knowing full well that it was faulty. Even if what you say is true and it was indeed sold to CEX, it will undoubtedly be sold on to some other person who may well be **** out of luck when the HDD goes to crap on him. Nice.

    Not worth it


  • Options
    #95
    Gamer Bhoy 89
    Registered Users Posts: 3,616 ✭✭✭Gamer Bhoy 89


    Isn't Tomb Raider great, lads???............. :cool:


  • Options
    #96
    .ak
    Registered Users Posts: 30,308 Mod ✭✭✭✭.ak


    tok9 wrote: »
    I forget if I mentioned it, but it's seriously disappointing that it's being developed for last gen too.

    Why? Not being smart or anything, just seen this mentioned a few times before, what's the issue with that?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    abbir
    Registered Users Posts: 770 ✭✭✭abbir


    .ak wrote: »
    Why? Not being smart or anything, just seen this mentioned a few times before, what's the issue with that?

    It can't really use all the features of the current gen if it also has to work on last gen consoles. The levels and scope could be restricted as they have to also work in much more limited memory.


  • Options
    #98
    Otacon
    Registered Users Posts: 6,721 ✭✭✭Otacon


    .ak wrote: »
    Why? Not being smart or anything, just seen this mentioned a few times before, what's the issue with that?

    Developing a cross-gen game inherently adds restrictions to what you can do in the newer gen version as the developer will want people who buy either version to have roughly the same experience.

    For instance, rather than try to push Destiny to 60FPS on newer gen consoles, Bungie have kept both limited to 30FPS to keep it consistent with the game-play experience on old gen. The PS4 and XBO versions get a resolution bump and some additional texture quality and effects.


  • Options
    #99
    .ak
    Registered Users Posts: 30,308 Mod ✭✭✭✭.ak


    Right, but surely it'll just be a case of the current Tomb Raider PS3 vs PS4, high turning it from 'medium' to 'ultra settings'; higher texture res's, longer draw distances, more particle efx, ... long hair efx :P, 60fps @ 1080 etc Wouldn't bother me that much so long as the next gen has those sort of improvements available.


  • Options
    #100
    Otacon
    Registered Users Posts: 6,721 ✭✭✭Otacon


    .ak wrote: »
    Right, but surely it'll just be a case of the current Tomb Raider PS3 vs PS4, high turning it from 'medium' to 'ultra settings'; higher texture res's, longer draw distances, more particle efx, ... long hair efx :P, 60fps @ 1080 etc Wouldn't bother me that much so long as the next gen has those sort of improvements available.

    Undoubtedly there will be improvements in the current gen version of ROTTR, but if CD had forgone an old gen version, they would have been free to really push the current gen hardware.


  • Options
    #101
    tok9
    Registered Users Posts: 7,160 ✭✭✭tok9


    It might be me being a little selfish. Right now I can totally understand cross gen games .

    Tomb Raider isn't due to release until the end of 2015, that's about 13-15 months away.

    I would like to think by that stage there would be a big enough install base to justify developing for current gen only.

    On top of that it also makes the timed exclusivity that little bit more confusing for Microsoft in the same way with Titanfall and to a much lesser extent Forza Horizon 2.

    They are looking to increase sales for the Xbox one but they decide to release the Xbox one exclusives on the 360 also. That just doesn't seem like a major incentive to upgrade to the One.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    gizmo
    Registered Users Posts: 8,405 ✭✭✭gizmo


    Well in the case of Tomb Raider, the cross generation version makes complete sense, logically at least. The last entry in the series cost a purported £60m to make. A large chunk of that could be chalked up to the engine work which was carried out to make the game while further explanation would be a protracted development period with lots of prototyping as they tried to find the best way to reboot the series. As reported in the follow up sales article here, a budget like this is one of the primary reasons for such high sales expectations, it's simply required in order for the project to make its money back. In the end it obviously did, but it took far longer than most publishers would like.

    After release, they then invested more engineering time in getting the game to work on the next-gen platforms and presto, they now have an engine and game which works on both generations of consoles without the huge costs needed to licence a new one or, worse, build one. It may not be fully optimised for the new platforms but from most reports I've read, it works pretty damn well.

    They've now given themselves around a year and a half to work on a sequel using this updated tech and are in a position where they can still make some pretty nice looking games which work across both platforms. As Otacon said, while it's something of a shame that they won't be fully optimised for the new consoles given the above facts, it's not particularly surprising this is the path they're going for the next iteration. Following that release I'd imagine they'll begin pushing their tech in a direction which the previous gen consoles simply won't be able for.


  • Options
    #103
    CatInABox
    Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 10,268 Mod ✭✭✭✭CatInABox


    I have to admit, exclusive deals and the like aren't something that annoy me too much these days, perhaps I'm just older and wiser than I was a few years ago.

    I also try to understand the different points of view regarding the realities of a situation. From a consumers point of view, this isn't a consumer friendly result, however, from the point of view of the developers and the publishers? It's a different story.

    Tomb Raider was a great game, released on as many platforms as possible, and it didn't meet it's sales targets at all in the first few months. By the time it did meet it's sales targets, eight-nine months later, the price of the game had already been slashed several times. While this has meant that the game has achieved profitability, it most likely has not resulted in investors in Square-Enix being thrilled with it's performance.

    As everything in a company revolves around making profit for shareholders, a sequel to Tomb Raider was not automatically a given. With the cost of developing both current and next gen versions of a game increasing the risk, anything that could defray the expense of developing a AAA game was probably considered. In this case, Microsoft, being desperate*, probably struck a deal that either provided cash for development, or reduced the license fee for each game sold. Either way, from Square-Enix point of view, that's a great thing.

    *Just as a side note, Microsoft are clearly losing this generation, and I can't think of a worse thing to happen to the games industry than for one company to completely dominant a generation within the first two years. Personally speaking, I'm glad that Microsoft is pulling out all the stops to compete, otherwise we'll have Sony as a monopoly dictating how things should be. Competition is not just good, it's GREAT. It's the reason that the Xbox One is so much cheaper and better than when it first came out, it's the reason PS+ exists and it's the reason I'm ok with this exclusive.


  • Options
    #104
    Shiminay
    Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 28,633 Mod ✭✭✭✭Shiminay


    Yea, gizmo's on the money I think, the things that Tomb Raider engine can do are impressive if perhaps a little silly (the infamous TressFX for hair for example). However, this means that the boat can be pushed out for decent hardware whilst it can still stay in the safety of the bay for the old consoles. The 2 big consoles have AMD graphics hardware, so you can see that they played something of a long game with the project. I wonder if it's an engine they plan on using or licensing out for other games in the Square Enix family? Hitman maybe, there's a new one of those in the works and it seems like the sort of game an engine like this would be appropriate for.


  • Options
    #105
    NTMK
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,575 ✭✭✭NTMK


    Shiminay wrote: »
    Yea, gizmo's on the money I think, the things that Tomb Raider engine can do are impressive if perhaps a little silly (the infamous TressFX for hair for example). However, this means that the boat can be pushed out for decent hardware whilst it can still stay in the safety of the bay for the old consoles. The 2 big consoles have AMD graphics hardware, so you can see that they played something of a long game with the project. I wonder if it's an engine they plan on using or licensing out for other games in the Square Enix family? Hitman maybe, there's a new one of those in the works and it seems like the sort of game an engine like this would be appropriate for.

    All square enix engine have AMD features even the previous hitman. the engines they've been using the last 2 years have been developed with Next gen in mind (albeit may need a bit of tweeking)


  • Options
    #106
    gizmo
    Registered Users Posts: 8,405 ✭✭✭gizmo


    Shiminay wrote: »
    Yea, gizmo's on the money I think, the things that Tomb Raider engine can do are impressive if perhaps a little silly (the infamous TressFX for hair for example). However, this means that the boat can be pushed out for decent hardware whilst it can still stay in the safety of the bay for the old consoles. The 2 big consoles have AMD graphics hardware, so you can see that they played something of a long game with the project. I wonder if it's an engine they plan on using or licensing out for other games in the Square Enix family? Hitman maybe, there's a new one of those in the works and it seems like the sort of game an engine like this would be appropriate for.
    The engine itself is an iteration of Crystal Dynamics' own Crystal engine which is not only used internally at the studio but also at Eidos Montreal for Deus Ex: Human Revolution. Meanwhile Thief was eventually developed using a modified version of Unreal Engine 3. IO have their own custom tech, the Glacier engine, so they're well taken care of on that front.

    So yea, Square Enix appear to be fairly loose when it comes to internal studios sharing tech. If you remember back at E3 2012, they showed off their Luminous Engine which was purported, or maybe just assumed, to be their main engine for future development. That, it appears, has since died or perhaps has just been earmarked for future FF entries.



  • Options
    #107
    lertsnim
    Registered Users Posts: 9,728 ✭✭✭lertsnim


    Timed exclusive? Considering I only started the last one this week on the PS3 I think I can wait.


  • Options
    #108
    ems_medic
    Registered Users Posts: 83 ✭✭ems_medic


    Magill wrote: »
    Honestly I seriously think they did themselves a disservice as there is pretty much no positives to come out from how they announced this and tried to fool dopey gamers into buying an xbox.

    In fairness this isn't limited to MS. Sony done worse making a massive big deal about your friends being able to play Farcry 4 even if they dont own the game and hyped it to hell.

    The end result was 10 , 2 hour trial keys for you to give your friends. More of a misrepresentation than MS tried IMO


  • Options
    #109
    Otacon
    Registered Users Posts: 6,721 ✭✭✭Otacon


    ems_medic wrote: »
    In fairness this isn't limited to MS. Sony done worse making a massive big deal about your friends being able to play Farcry 4 even if they dont own the game and hyped it to hell.

    The end result was 10 , 2 hour trial keys for you to give your friends. More of a misrepresentation than MS tried IMO

    ...only for them to then announce Share Play, the equivalent to the service you say they hyped, which grants you this functionality for all games.

    I think discussion of what the term 'exclusive' actually means deserves its own thread really.


  • Options
    #110
    Generic Dreadhead
    Registered Users Posts: 10,870 ✭✭✭✭Generic Dreadhead


    ems_medic wrote: »
    In fairness this isn't limited to MS. Sony done worse making a massive big deal about your friends being able to play Farcry 4 even if they dont own the game and hyped it to hell.

    The end result was 10 , 2 hour trial keys for you to give your friends. More of a misrepresentation than MS tried IMO

    Yeah, god forbid you offer upwards of 20 hours of gameplay for free for a game thats maybe gonna be 40 hours long. Damn you free-half-of-a-game, damn you to hell :mad::mad::mad:


  • Options
    #111
    ems_medic
    Registered Users Posts: 83 ✭✭ems_medic


    Cormac... wrote: »
    Yeah, god forbid you offer upwards of 20 hours of gameplay for free for a game thats maybe gonna be 40 hours long. Damn you free-half-of-a-game, damn you to hell :mad::mad::mad:

    Sony can do no wrong I guess.

    If MS tried to pull the same stunt you can be sure as hell there would be righteous indignation


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #112
    CatInABox
    Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 10,268 Mod ✭✭✭✭CatInABox


    Otacon wrote: »
    ...only for them to then announce Share Play, the equivalent to the service you say they hyped, which grants you this functionality for all games.

    Isn't share play limited to just an hour?


  • Options
    #113
    ems_medic
    Registered Users Posts: 83 ✭✭ems_medic


    CatInABox wrote: »
    Isn't share play limited to just an hour?

    From what I have read I do believe that is the case , it's just one hour. Hopefully, for Playstation users this is a pre-curser to similiar game sharing on the MS platform.

    If both are doing game sharing for unlimited time that can only be a good thing for consumers


  • Options
    #114
    CatInABox
    Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 10,268 Mod ✭✭✭✭CatInABox


    ems_medic wrote: »
    From what I have read I do believe that is the case , it's just one hour. Hopefully, for Playstation users this is a pre-curser to similiar game sharing on the MS platform.

    If both are doing game sharing for unlimited time that can only be a good thing for consumers

    Yes, I do think that digitally bought games will soon be part of a "Share Library" on both systems, can't wait for that!


  • Options
    #115
    Generic Dreadhead
    Registered Users Posts: 10,870 ✭✭✭✭Generic Dreadhead


    I was referring to the 10 game keys for 2 hours each in the Far Cry 4 video (see the relevant thread), sorry i should have specified


  • Options
    #116
    Otacon
    Registered Users Posts: 6,721 ✭✭✭Otacon


    CatInABox wrote: »
    Isn't share play limited to just an hour?

    Nothing confirmed yet, but a limit is inevitable. They are hardly going to allow people to share games indefinitely.

    Have they implied that there wouldn't be a limit somewhere?


  • Options
    #117
    ems_medic
    Registered Users Posts: 83 ✭✭ems_medic


    Otacon wrote: »
    Nothing confirmed yet, but a limit is inevitable. They are hardly going to allow people to share games indefinitely.

    I don't see why they wouldn't as it can currently be done on the Xbox, if Sony were to limit sharing it would be bad for consumers IMHO


  • Options
    #118
    CatInABox
    Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 10,268 Mod ✭✭✭✭CatInABox


    ems_medic wrote: »
    I don't see why they wouldn't as it can currently be done on the Xbox, if Sony were to limit sharing it would be bad for consumers IMHO

    Well, it's different to "Home Sharing" on the Xbox One, in that you can just invite anyone in at any time, rather than having to set an Xbox as your home Xbox, etc.


  • Options
    #119
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Lol thread could be renamed ps4 v Xbox1 part deux. Unreal


  • Options
    #120
    Generic Dreadhead
    Registered Users Posts: 10,870 ✭✭✭✭Generic Dreadhead


    ems_medic wrote: »
    I don't see why they wouldn't as it can currently be done on the Xbox, if Sony were to limit sharing it would be bad for consumers IMHO

    Well we've gotten by for 30 years without it on consoles so i'd say we'll manage :rolleyes:


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #121
    CatInABox
    Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 10,268 Mod ✭✭✭✭CatInABox


    Otacon wrote: »
    Nothing confirmed yet, but a limit is inevitable. They are hardly going to allow people to share games indefinitely.

    Have they implied that there wouldn't be a limit somewhere?

    Actually, I only questioned it because you made it sound as if it wasn't. Apologies if I pick you up wrong, but the below exchange reads like it to me.
    Otacon wrote:
    ems_medic wrote:
    In fairness this isn't limited to MS. Sony done worse making a massive big deal about your friends being able to play Farcry 4 even if they dont own the game and hyped it to hell.

    The end result was 10 , 2 hour trial keys for you to give your friends. More of a misrepresentation than MS tried IMO

    ...only for them to then announce Share Play, the equivalent to the service you say they hyped, which grants you this functionality for all games.


Advertisement