Rise of the Tomb Raider

gizmo · 14-08-2014 11:36am

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.

CatInABox · 14-08-2014 12:16pm

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.

Shiminay · 14-08-2014 12:24pm

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.

NTMK · 14-08-2014 12:32pm

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)

gizmo · 14-08-2014 12:59pm

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.

lertsnim · 14-08-2014 2:05pm

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

ems_medic · 14-08-2014 3:05pm

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

Otacon · 14-08-2014 3:10pm

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.

Generic Dreadhead · 14-08-2014 3:11pm

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:

ems_medic · 14-08-2014 3:33pm

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

CatInABox · 14-08-2014 3:34pm

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?

ems_medic · 14-08-2014 3:36pm

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

CatInABox · 14-08-2014 3:39pm

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!

Generic Dreadhead · 14-08-2014 3:47pm

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

Otacon · 14-08-2014 3:49pm

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?

ems_medic · 14-08-2014 4:11pm

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

CatInABox · 14-08-2014 4:17pm

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.

14-08-2014 4:20pm

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

Generic Dreadhead · 14-08-2014 4:20pm

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:

CatInABox · 14-08-2014 4:21pm

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.

Generic Dreadhead · 14-08-2014 4:22pm

Wouldn't this thread be better off in the X-Box Forum?

johnny_ultimate · 14-08-2014 4:22pm

Please keep the discussion on topic, thanks.

Magill · 14-08-2014 4:40pm

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

Not really the same thing though is it ? One tried to pass off a game as exclusively on xbox, while the other did no such thing... I thought it was pretty clear what sony where offering with the Farcry thing, not for a second did I think it was anything other than free share passes.

(I miss the xbox/ps4 thread... plzzzzz bring it back

).

14-08-2014 4:43pm

Just got email from amazon that my preorder for tomb raider has been cancelled. In fact I preordered 6 copies (just to make total cancellation number larger) :cool:

ems_medic · 14-08-2014 4:43pm

Cormac... wrote: »

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

You can rolleyes all you like but 30 years ago gaming was a lot different to what it is now including buying and playing patterns :rolleyes:

ems_medic · 14-08-2014 4:47pm

Magill wrote: »

Not really the same thing though is it ? One tried to pass off a game as exclusively on xbox, while the other did no such thing... I thought it was pretty clear what sony where offering with the Farcry thing, not for a second did I think it was anything other than free share passes.

(I miss the xbox/ps4 thread... plzzzzz bring it back ).

Like I said both Sony and MS are guilty of that one (few e3 announcements from Sony)

Anyways back on topic has it been confirmed that the next TR is timed exclusive or is it that the IP is exclusive for the next game release which is what I've been hearing in press circles

DARK-KNIGHT · 14-08-2014 7:18pm

I like ham

cloud493 · 14-08-2014 7:19pm

So we all get to play this, awesome

CastorTroy · 14-08-2014 10:58pm

DARK-KNIGHT wrote: »

I like ham

Well he was a cool character

ems_medic · 15-08-2014 2:01pm

Otacon wrote: »

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

60mins in total I think and another complete misrepresentation by Sony to boot

www .eurogamer.net/articles/2014-08-15-playstation-4s-share-play-feature-limited-to-60-minute-sessions

There is no game sharing or "share play". It is basically remote desktop viewing and while your "sharing" with your friend, you yourself cannot play

lertsnim · 15-08-2014 2:29pm

Is thread about Tomb Raider?

15-08-2014 2:33pm

ems_medic wrote: »

60mins in total I think and another complete misrepresentation by Sony to boot

www .eurogamer.net/articles/2014-08-15-playstation-4s-share-play-feature-limited-to-60-minute-sessions

There is no game sharing or "share play". It is basically remote desktop viewing and while your "sharing" with your friend, you yourself cannot play

It's not really a misrepresentation as Sony and any developer would want something in place to make sure that gamers didn't just invite a friend to play the game and then head out while their friend played the game for free. All the 60 minute limit means is that once an hour you'll have to re-invite your friend to play, hardly all that much of an inconvenience.

15-08-2014 2:40pm

lertsnim wrote: »

Is thread about Tomb Raider?

Yes, so what they are talking about some limit of shared gameplay, 60 minutes isn't bad, considering that with Rise of the Tomb Raider it is going to be 0 minutes.

But we all know Uncharted is going to be much better than Rise of the Tomb Raider so the loss doesn't hurt so much .. It would be different if xbox one owners would play it and we would have dark screen to look at (like they do as we play The Last of Us and they .. ehm .. what do they play at the moment?)

ems_medic · 15-08-2014 3:22pm

Deleted User wrote: »

It's not really a misrepresentation as Sony and any developer would want something in place to make sure that gamers didn't just invite a friend to play the game and then head out while their friend played the game for free. All the 60 minute limit means is that once an hour you'll have to re-invite your friend to play, hardly all that much of an inconvenience.

Well we will have to agree to disagree giving the fact that you cant actually play with your friend at the same time and all you can do is watch him play the game for 60 mins and then reinvite him so you can watch another 60 mins of them play the game.

Wouldnt be my cup of tea but each to their own and definitely not how they presented it at Gamescom

15-08-2014 3:31pm

ems_medic wrote: »

Well we will have to agree to disagree giving the fact that you cant actually play with your friend at the same time and all you can do is watch him play the game for 60 mins and then reinvite him so you can watch another 60 mins of them play the game.

Wouldnt be my cup of tea but each to their own and definitely not how they presented it at Gamescom

The playing with a friend is a different thing entirely. Far Cry 4 is the first that will allow gamers to invite friends who don't own the game to play co-op. What this is, is an option for gamers to allow friends to play any title at all that they own and their friend doesn't.

johnny_ultimate · 15-08-2014 3:31pm

Final warning, folks, please keep this thread for discussion about the game itself. Any subsequent off-topic posts will be deleted.

If you wish to discuss features of any of the consoles, please use the relevant console forums.

ems_medic · 15-08-2014 3:51pm

Anyway, getting back to on topic discussion does anyone know if Tomb Raider is going to have full co-op or will it just be the same as last time with multiplayer pvp

tok9 · 15-08-2014 3:53pm

I would hope they don't waste any resources on MP at all this time.

Definitely won't be co-op anyway. They already have a tomb raider game for that.

FAILSAFE 00 · 10-12-2014 6:09pm

interesting development today,

Rise of the Tomb Raider will be Published by Microsoft

Its looking like this will be exclusive to Xbox One and not just a timed exclusive.

Apparently Microsoft have funded a vast amount of the development costs for this game.

http://www.gamespot.com/articles/rise-of-the-tomb-raider-will-be-published-by-micro/1100-6424104/

Magill · 10-12-2014 6:55pm

FAILSAFE 00 wrote: »

interesting development today,

Rise of the Tomb Raider will be Published by Microsoft

Its looking like this will be exclusive to Xbox One and not just a timed exclusive.

Apparently Microsoft have funded a vast amount of the development costs for this game.

http://www.gamespot.com/articles/rise-of-the-tomb-raider-will-be-published-by-micro/1100-6424104/

How did you get that conclusion from the article ? It doesn't mention anything about funding ?

The deal has a duration...

Our partnership with Microsoft on ‘Rise of the Tomb Raider’ does have a duration, but we aren’t discussing those details at this time and are focused on collaborating to deliver a great game on Xbox One and Xbox 360,”

a Square Enix representative told us via email. For those of you on PC and PlayStation systems, your hope of playing Rise of the Tomb Raider on other systems lives on.

If the duration was long enough to matter, you'd have no doubt Microsoft would be blasting the roof off with it. I'm guessing 3-6 months after the XB version until the PS4 version is released.

FAILSAFE 00 · 10-12-2014 7:07pm

Magill wrote: »

How did you get that conclusion from the article ? It doesn't mention anything about funding ?

The deal has a duration...

If the duration was long enough to matter, you'd have no doubt Microsoft would be blasting the roof off with it. I'm guessing 3-6 months after the XB version until the PS4 version is released.

GameSpot wrote:

A representative for Square Enix has told GameSpot that Microsoft is providing support across the entire development and publishing pipeline for Rise of the Tomb Raider. The publisher has not yet commented on whether this affects plans for a PlayStation 4 version.

Its very strange that both companies release a statement exactly when its announced that Microsoft are publishing Tomb Raider. There is defintely something happening with this deal behind closed doors.

They are a publisher themselves so to have Microsoft publish this game is quite a statement.

Square Enix wrote:

Our partnership with Microsoft on ‘Rise of the Tomb Raider’ does have a duration

That duration could be for the lifespan of just this Tomb Raider game.

COYVB · 10-12-2014 8:10pm

FAILSAFE 00 wrote: »

That duration could be for the lifespan of just this Tomb Raider game.

That's not what that means at all.

Reati · 10-12-2014 8:14pm

The big assumption everyone is making is that the time exclusive means it's coming to PS4 after the period is up, but If Microsoft are publishing, it might only go to PC after the time exculsive period. Didn't that happen with Ryse?

COYVB · 10-12-2014 8:16pm

Microsoft are publishing the Xbox One version.

Squenix will be publishing the PS4 version

FAILSAFE 00 · 10-12-2014 8:17pm

COYVB wrote: »

That's not what that means at all.

It could be, Titanfall went down that road before.

COYVB wrote: »

Microsoft are publishing the Xbox One version.

Squenix will be publishing the PS4 version

Is there a statement saying that?
I have only seen the announcement that Microsoft are publishing Tomb raider.

Has there been any offical statement from Square Enix saying that its coming to PS4?
I have just seen the statement "Coming exclusively to Xbox One holiday 2015" before but where it gets released after Xbox One seems a bit of a mystery.

COYVB · 10-12-2014 8:18pm

FAILSAFE 00 wrote: »

It could be, Titanfall went down that road before.

It's not. If that's what it meant the wording would not have been

"Our partnership with Microsoft on ‘Rise of the Tomb Raider’ does have a duration"

It would have been:

"Our partnership with Microsoft on the Tomb Raider franchise does have a duration"

COYVB · 10-12-2014 8:18pm

FAILSAFE 00 wrote: »

Is there a statement saying that?
I have only seen the announcement that Microsoft are publishing Tomb raider

There is not

johnny_ultimate · 10-12-2014 8:28pm

FAILSAFE 00 wrote: »

There is defintely something happening with this deal behind closed doors.

I would imagine that is true of almost every business deal in the history of business deals.

FAILSAFE 00 · 10-12-2014 8:29pm

COYVB wrote: »

It's not. If that's what it meant the wording would not have been

"Our partnership with Microsoft on ‘Rise of the Tomb Raider’ does have a duration"

It would have been:

"Our partnership with Microsoft on the Tomb Raider franchise does have a duration"

I am not talking about the franchise, we are talking about the game itself.

They never mentioned a franchise with Titanfall either. It was mentioned first in an EA investors meeting that It was going to be exclusive for the lifespan of the title on Xbox One.

There is a massive amount of corporate speak from both sides which is telling me there is definitely something more going on with this deal. Why not announce months ago that Microsoft is publishing the game?

FAILSAFE 00 · 10-12-2014 8:36pm

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

I would imagine that is true of almost every business deal in the history of business deals.

Indeed,

With this deal there is definitely some thing more going on when you compare it to other exclusivity deals.

I find it strange that there still hasn't been anything saying its coming to PS4, and now we find out that MS are publishing the game.

Maybe this will be XB1 and PC only.

Rise of the Tomb Raider

Comments