By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Xbox One and Tomb Raider - An admission from MS that they cannot compete with Sony and Nintendo First party?

celador on 12 August 2014
gergroy said:
celador said:

Titanfall, Sunset Overdrive, Dead Rising 3, Ryse, Scalebound - All 'exclusives' all made by other studios with no input from MS other than money.  Now Tomb raider can be added to the list.


Ok, this is a silly argument for a couple of reasons.  First of all, most of the games you just mentioned, except for titanfall and tomb raider, are all published by microsoft.  That means they had a lot of input on those games.   Also, games published by a console maker are considered first party.  Doesnt matter who the developer is.

second of all, who the freak cares if the developers are owned by the console maker?  What matters is what the library of games are on the consoles.  To that end, I would have no issues with console makers enlisting other studios to make games for them.  To try and twist that into a negative thing just seems incredibly silly to me.  

MS are not paying CD to make a game for them, they are paying them to not release a game on other platforms



Around the Network
celador on 12 August 2014
Anfebious said:
Is your body part that you use to sit down on a chair hurt by any chance? Because after this announcement I feel you might need to see a doctor. Health is life so you better consult with a doctor quick.


MS fans have filled these forums with butthurt every weekly hardware and NPD thread.  Maybe Sony fans want in on some of the action too

- Moderated, Carl



gergroy on 12 August 2014
celador said:
gergroy said:
celador said:

Titanfall, Sunset Overdrive, Dead Rising 3, Ryse, Scalebound - All 'exclusives' all made by other studios with no input from MS other than money.  Now Tomb raider can be added to the list.


Ok, this is a silly argument for a couple of reasons.  First of all, most of the games you just mentioned, except for titanfall and tomb raider, are all published by microsoft.  That means they had a lot of input on those games.   Also, games published by a console maker are considered first party.  Doesnt matter who the developer is.

second of all, who the freak cares if the developers are owned by the console maker?  What matters is what the library of games are on the consoles.  To that end, I would have no issues with console makers enlisting other studios to make games for them.  To try and twist that into a negative thing just seems incredibly silly to me.  

MS are not paying CD to make a game for them, they are paying them to not release a game on other platforms


So... You are claiming that the game has already been made for other systems?  



mutantclown on 12 August 2014
celador said:
Burek said:
When some people occasionaly call for Microsoft to abandon XBox, there is always one counter-argument: Competition is good for gamers.

Sure, it's good when competitors strive to be better, more innovative, more competitive, more diverse.

Right now, competition obviously means that over 50% of gamers get screwed over by a corporation with too much money and no ideas at all.

I completely agree with the last point.  Why another third person shooter, it is hardly filling a gap in the Xbox portfolio is it?

+1.  And in 2015 they also get Quantum Break which looks pretty much as a cover-shooter nothing else, and Halo 5. All shooters.



Raziel123 on 12 August 2014

Nothing new, always been that way.



Around the Network
celador on 12 August 2014
gergroy said:
celador said:
gergroy said:
celador said:

Titanfall, Sunset Overdrive, Dead Rising 3, Ryse, Scalebound - All 'exclusives' all made by other studios with no input from MS other than money.  Now Tomb raider can be added to the list.


Ok, this is a silly argument for a couple of reasons.  First of all, most of the games you just mentioned, except for titanfall and tomb raider, are all published by microsoft.  That means they had a lot of input on those games.   Also, games published by a console maker are considered first party.  Doesnt matter who the developer is.

second of all, who the freak cares if the developers are owned by the console maker?  What matters is what the library of games are on the consoles.  To that end, I would have no issues with console makers enlisting other studios to make games for them.  To try and twist that into a negative thing just seems incredibly silly to me.  

MS are not paying CD to make a game for them, they are paying them to not release a game on other platforms


So... You are claiming that the game has already been made for other systems?  

I don't know the timeline of the game's development, it may only have a PC build right now.  The game was most certainly planned for other systems until recently, otherwise it would have been revealed as an exclusive at E3



Zekkyou on 12 August 2014

It's just good business. Sony or Nintendo would do exactly the same thing if they had the opportunity.

It's pretty disgusting of SE though. They've essentially given the middle finger to the majority of the TR fanbase. They deserve every bit of the shit storm that's about to slap them silly.



true_fan on 12 August 2014

As an XBOX gamer, I'm not complaining. Sony was buying up exclusive content for all the early next gen games and even have 1 year exclusive dlc, MSFT just took it one step further. This is the benefit of being backed by a juggernaut. Crystal Dynamix already said the last TR wasn't as successful financially, and now they have some guaranteed money, win-win for both parties.



wary-wallaroo on 12 August 2014
DerNebel said:
It's more of an admission that they want something to counter Uncharted.


Which is weird since UC will absolutely crush this. Heck, I think it'll do better than Halo 5.



ABTR on 12 August 2014

Ms Halo Nintendo Mario Sony Uncharted Gow Socom Sly Ratchet LBP ...etc